These guys had to know it would be an internet hit. After all by that smile you can see the little guy was expecting to swamp the net. So show some respect and at least dress nice a nice shirt and slacks or shorts. And dont keep the gun in low ready.
Chipotle vs Tools for Dissent
- Thread starter conw
- Start date
- Status
jmorris
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 24,313
I am all for having the right but do think it would be less than smart to do so almost all the time. If I am on my own property I do but that is a bit different.
The photo in #24 reminds me of the images of the pot heads in Colardo "blowing smoke" for the cameras. If I were a pot head, I would feel that they are making me look bad too.
The photo in #24 reminds me of the images of the pot heads in Colardo "blowing smoke" for the cameras. If I were a pot head, I would feel that they are making me look bad too.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Though this instance would appear to be an example of a quite different problem: Formerly neutral folks deciding to choose a side against "us" because of the actions of some ostensibly "pro gun" folks.
And then the rest of the dedicated pro-gun folks being upset because the line just shifted a hair in the wrong direction without an attendant strategic "win" to point to.
...
Worthy of consideration might be that if 95% of trained, situationally-aware armed citizens, carrying a weapon themselves, witness two fellas enter a public places where long guns are NEVER seen, holding rifles or shotguns, that's going to make every warning bell go off instantly in their heads.
The most neutral "normal" (
) people are likely to stand there gawking with their tongues bobbing in open, suddenly very dry mouths.The more competent defensive-minded folks are going to be in condition red, thinking of hard cover, and some may be out the door within seconds, dragging the wife and kids away from what looks for all the world like the next mall shooting.
Why? Is it because guns are bad and/or SHOULDN'T be acceptable in public? No, not at all.
It is because they are COMPLETELY unexpected -- out of place in this venue in our society as it currently exists. And in fact the only explanation a racing mind is likely to land on is the worst possible one -- a mass killing about to happen.
Should this perception change? Yes, I think it should. I hope someday to live in a world where a SLUNG rifle is not an uncommon sight in a public place and elicits no great concern. But we're a very long way from that in most of suburban or urban America ... and in a very great deal of RURAL America, too.
We're barely to the point that in most parts of the country a holstered handgun can be worn in public without a concealment garment and without usually causing a panic involving more than one momentarily distressed observer.
Rifles and shotguns can't enjoy that passivity without an (at least visual) explanation of their purpose in the scene. Heck, a uniformed police officer or solider walking through a store or mall or down a city street with a rifle is going to ramp up the public's agitation to a degree: They just don't DO that unless something unpleasant is going on nearby. A hunter with blaze orange and a bit of camo on could maybe enter such a place with his hunting rifle and the visual impression would probably be coherent enough to pacify the observers -- though that is still pretty unusual in most places, as 99.9% of hunters even fresh from the field don't carry their weapons into the store.
Two very average looking young chaps/blokes/dorks/kids/goobers/youngsters/"operators" walk in with black rifles? I'll be honest -- unless I can instantly resolve in my brain who/what/why/what's up (and I'm ok with the answer) -- I'm OUT OF THERE. If they are up to no good, I've got a split second, and maybe less, to enact my escape plan.
...
All that to say: Maybe someday. But not today. Gotta make sure we don't break irreparably the fragile situation we're working to improve in the very long term.
mljdeckard
Member
Part of the argument for freedom is that we are capable of making our own sound decisions about what is and isn't appropriate, and therefore, we don't need the government to make the decision FOR us.
I teach my CC students, just because something is legal doesn't make it a good idea. We CAN do harm, and we DO have something to lose.
Is Chipotle even good? Never been there.
I teach my CC students, just because something is legal doesn't make it a good idea. We CAN do harm, and we DO have something to lose.
Is Chipotle even good? Never been there.
larryh1108
Member
It's all about common sense. In a rural restaurant that OC is as common as grits, no big deal. Force soccer moms to have to watch some attention seeking yahoo shove his rights down her throat and she calls her representative and tells them if they want her money they need to address this.
A right not used is a right lost is one of those cutesy, feel good statements but the truth is a right not shoved down their throats is a right preserved. Stay under the radar.
A right not used is a right lost is one of those cutesy, feel good statements but the truth is a right not shoved down their throats is a right preserved. Stay under the radar.
I find the open carry gatherings akin to gay pride marches. There is absolutely no reason to be in the face of those who have different beliefs than you, other than to gain attention. Attention garnered by annoyance or fear of the public seldom has a positive outcome.
Some people are just not going to be comfortable when they see a gun. We know it is an illogical fear, but causing them to be more uncomfortable or panicked is not the solution. Most of them don't realize that they probably walk by dozens of people carrying concealed every day. Much like I don't care what others think about gay rights or global warming, but I will get irate in a hurry when they preach to me about it.
Some people are just not going to be comfortable when they see a gun. We know it is an illogical fear, but causing them to be more uncomfortable or panicked is not the solution. Most of them don't realize that they probably walk by dozens of people carrying concealed every day. Much like I don't care what others think about gay rights or global warming, but I will get irate in a hurry when they preach to me about it.
BSA1
member
Frank,
Good points. In response;
1. Attitudes about guns vary greatly from State to State. From what I have read Open Carry is so common in Arizona and Georgia that no one hardly bats an eye. In other States where the mere sight of a gun creates alarm then a much different approach would seem logical to me.
Like it or not ownership of guns is a hot political issue. And we are all equally condemned to the gallows by the Libs and Anti's.
2. When it comes to long guns I think it is a bit silly and tactically unwise. But then again I prefer revolvers over semi-auosso maybe I am just as looney.
3. Agreed.
H
4. We literally live on opposite sides of the rainbow (i.e. Different cultures and values. I'm just a small town rural country boy). This is why I think firearm laws are best determined by each individual state although I can understand why you West & East coast folks would disagree.
Good points. In response;
1. Attitudes about guns vary greatly from State to State. From what I have read Open Carry is so common in Arizona and Georgia that no one hardly bats an eye. In other States where the mere sight of a gun creates alarm then a much different approach would seem logical to me.
Like it or not ownership of guns is a hot political issue. And we are all equally condemned to the gallows by the Libs and Anti's.
2. When it comes to long guns I think it is a bit silly and tactically unwise. But then again I prefer revolvers over semi-auosso maybe I am just as looney.
3. Agreed.
H
4. We literally live on opposite sides of the rainbow (i.e. Different cultures and values. I'm just a small town rural country boy). This is why I think firearm laws are best determined by each individual state although I can understand why you West & East coast folks would disagree.
Last edited:
zxcvbob
Member
What makes y'all think they aren't really Brady or VPC or Bloomberg agents doing a little guerrilla warfare?
Well generally without direct proof we should not assume that, as tempting as it may be.
It is possible for sure, and if it were true it would still be a good idea to distance yourself from them carefully while deflecting the irate replies from those on the fringe of the gun community who would cast aspersions at you for doing so. Sadly the latter group probably can't be written off as agents provocateurs...
razorback2003
Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2008
- Messages
- 1,231
These guys probably don't even carry a gun everyday of the week. They have no idea that those that do carry everyday blend in with the crowd. Carrying a long gun in a business is not blending in.
It seems like an Adolescent like lack of maturity involved. They don't get the part about rights requiring responsibility. Responsibility in the sense that a public peace time family restaraunt is NOT the time to bring a long gun. A concealed weapon sure or a properly holstered, "doesn't jump out at you like your a nut" handgun sure. I agree wholeheartedly that these clowns and those like them should be called out by our side.
You will never have an honest debate on here about open carry. Given the "mission" of THR, it's all preaching to the choir.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Who, aside from "the choir" here, would you expect to have an open debate with?
oneounceload
member
The actions of a few idiots can undo a lot of hard work by many.
I am not quite sure where you stand from your reply but I'd personally love to have a discussion as to this particular issue (people who represent themselves as activists making PR blunders that impact the gun community negatively). As for a debate about "open carry," I support the right so there's no debate to be had with me as far as rights, and you could find my views on the claim that OC is an effective crime deterrence strategy in my posts earlier this month (which is totally off topic here).
Anyway like I said I'd love to discuss this incident. Perhaps we can find common ground or if not you could maybe fill me in on some things I've been wondering.
If I misread you and your perspective isn't that different from most people posting in this thread, or don't care to engage, I would still love for anyone reading who feels that open carry activism is a winning strategy to reply to a few questions.
I would be curious to know your thoughts as to whether this incident, as pertains to PR for gun owners is
-net positive
-net negative
-other (please specify)
If you agree with most of us that it's a net negative, do you think it's appropriate to have a discussion within our community and voice dissent to dissuade this sort of thing from happening (as it's now happened multiple times), or do you feel (as I have gathered from your post and also that of a few others) that to do so is inappropriate?
A common retort is that those expressing such dissent must have a hidden agenda that's incompatible with truly being pro gun. I'm not sure if that's actually the case for you but I strongly disagree with that view.
Responding only to the picture I'm seeing circulating (and saw in this thread):
If I saw those two walk in the door with "evil black rifles", I'd be in condition red in a heartbeat.
My kids would be going out the nearest exit and I'd be looking for hard cover.
Why? I see guys like this all the time at the shooting range, hammering away round after round out of whatever they want. And I'm cool with that. I even coach them on the first Sunday of the month at High Power & Sporting Rifle matches.
But when I'm out eating with the family?
Dude. Time and place for everything.
And that's neither the time, nor the place, to bring in the "big guns."
Discrete handgun, open or concealed, won't bother me as much.
Why? Because I have parity of force. You aren't carrying anything more lethal than I am.
But when you have something in your hands at low ready that'll shoot through any reasonable barrier I can duck behind within 10 yards of me?
That raises all sorts of alarm bells.
If I saw those two walk in the door with "evil black rifles", I'd be in condition red in a heartbeat.
My kids would be going out the nearest exit and I'd be looking for hard cover.
Why? I see guys like this all the time at the shooting range, hammering away round after round out of whatever they want. And I'm cool with that. I even coach them on the first Sunday of the month at High Power & Sporting Rifle matches.
But when I'm out eating with the family?
Dude. Time and place for everything.
And that's neither the time, nor the place, to bring in the "big guns."
Discrete handgun, open or concealed, won't bother me as much.
Why? Because I have parity of force. You aren't carrying anything more lethal than I am.
But when you have something in your hands at low ready that'll shoot through any reasonable barrier I can duck behind within 10 yards of me?
That raises all sorts of alarm bells.
Have you not noticed how far gay rights have come since people were first disgusted by gay rights parades? Gays have shoved their lifestyle in our faces for years, decades now. And it's paid off as they're largely accepted now.
God never said open carrying a gun was an abomination.
NavyLCDR
member
Oh well.... at the least the open carry "extremists" are in good company:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/weekly-updates/weekly-update-founding-fathers-extremists/
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/weekly-updates/weekly-update-founding-fathers-extremists/
As I stated in the other thread about this, I think those guys were really stupid. But then I'd probably also think that if they didn't have the rifles, but I digress. My point was that regardless of what or how they open carried, the great majority on here would be against it. The same crap reasons of "you'll be the first to be shot" etc., sound just like the handwringer's "They'll be blood in the streets" cries whenever CCW laws look to be loosened.
Of course everyone here is going to wail and gnash teeth about how this is going to hurt us, referring back to my comment about THR's mission, to present a reasonable face to antis thinking we can change their mind. Well, how's that working out? I've got more, but I'm sure I've already racked up an infraction.
I'm mostly concerned with fence sitters, and I actually don't bother to label people I don't know at all and haven't spoken with.
Believe it or not, not everyone has a strong emotional investment or "belief" about gun issues... Yet. If we don't engage in personal attacks or live up to stereotypes or generally let our butts hang out we can at least keep from alienating those people.
I think to claim that THR's mission concerns persuading people who fall firmly into the anti gun camp is simply false; that's moving the goal posts. The concern is often not providing fuel for their fire (I would have said "ammo" but it didn't quite work here
) rather than actually persuading. The idea of using persuasion and good public relations does and is working great for many causes and aims, including gun owners who want to be seen as inviting those who aren't currently "in" the group to be sympathetic to our cause.
So was that dude in low ready the whole time or just for the pic? This is the first I've heard about it.
As for some of the comments about bugging out if you saw these two enter, I think if I saw them walk in with rifles hanging in front of them, I'd probably be on "code orange." if they walked in with rifles slung on their backs I probably would think much of it. Walking in at low ready is a different story, not saying I'd just start shooting, but things would definitely get sorted out.
As for some of the comments about bugging out if you saw these two enter, I think if I saw them walk in with rifles hanging in front of them, I'd probably be on "code orange." if they walked in with rifles slung on their backs I probably would think much of it. Walking in at low ready is a different story, not saying I'd just start shooting, but things would definitely get sorted out.
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
IIRC, openly carried rifles may not be loaded in Texas, so I find the statement "reckless" inaccurate, if it was the case they were in fact carrying legally (if stupidly and stupid-looking)
Carrying an empty gun at "low ready" is just trying to piss people off, which is where I draw the line on these things; at that point they're entirely off message and therefore a liability. Even having the gun held in the hand, to me, carries an implication you are engaged in manipulating the weapon, which is damn close to threatening someone with it. While I would not want laws preventing it, I would expect someone to have the decency buy a damn scabbard, holster, or sling and keep their hands away from the gun while in public. That seems like common courtesy to me (for which we typically don't feel the need for criminal laws, even though it results in countless fights/deaths)
It's like walking around hunched over with balled fists in front of you. People will wonder...
TCB
Carrying an empty gun at "low ready" is just trying to piss people off, which is where I draw the line on these things; at that point they're entirely off message and therefore a liability. Even having the gun held in the hand, to me, carries an implication you are engaged in manipulating the weapon, which is damn close to threatening someone with it. While I would not want laws preventing it, I would expect someone to have the decency buy a damn scabbard, holster, or sling and keep their hands away from the gun while in public. That seems like common courtesy to me (for which we typically don't feel the need for criminal laws, even though it results in countless fights/deaths)
It's like walking around hunched over with balled fists in front of you. People will wonder...
TCB
A user posted a brilliant analogy in another thread, which I'm stealing and using. quoted below.
It isn't even a matter of not carrying openly.
Eating your lunch like anybody else...but with a holstered pistol...is different than posing with a rifle or shotgun in your hands.
I mean...geeeez.
Do we really have to tell people not to hold guns in their hands in random public (but private) places?
Apparently so.
Eating your lunch like anybody else...but with a holstered pistol...is different than posing with a rifle or shotgun in your hands.
I mean...geeeez.
Do we really have to tell people not to hold guns in their hands in random public (but private) places?
Apparently so.
Though this instance would appear to be an example of a quite different problem: Formerly neutral folks deciding to choose a side against "us" because of the actions of some ostensibly "pro gun" folks.
And then the rest of the dedicated pro-gun folks being upset because the line just shifted a hair in the wrong direction without an attendant strategic "win" to point to.
...
Worthy of consideration might be that if 95% of trained, situationally-aware armed citizens, carrying a weapon themselves, witness two fellas enter a public places where long guns are NEVER seen, holding rifles or shotguns, that's going to make every warning bell go off instantly in their heads.
The most neutral "normal" (
The more competent defensive-minded folks are going to be in condition red, thinking of hard cover, and some may be out the door within seconds, dragging the wife and kids away from what looks for all the world like the next mall shooting.
Why? Is it because guns are bad and/or SHOULDN'T be acceptable in public? No, not at all.
It is because they are COMPLETELY unexpected -- out of place in this venue in our society as it currently exists. And in fact the only explanation a racing mind is likely to land on is the worst possible one -- a mass killing about to happen.
Should this perception change? Yes, I think it should. I hope someday to live in a world where a SLUNG rifle is not an uncommon sight in a public place and elicits no great concern. But we're a very long way from that in most of suburban or urban America ... and in a very great deal of RURAL America, too.
We're barely to the point that in most parts of the country a holstered handgun can be worn in public without a concealment garment and without usually causing a panic involving more than one momentarily distressed observer.
Rifles and shotguns can't enjoy that passivity without an (at least visual) explanation of their purpose in the scene. Heck, a uniformed police officer or solider walking through a store or mall or down a city street with a rifle is going to ramp up the public's agitation to a degree: They just don't DO that unless something unpleasant is going on nearby. A hunter with blaze orange and a bit of camo on could maybe enter such a place with his hunting rifle and the visual impression would probably be coherent enough to pacify the observers -- though that is still pretty unusual in most places, as 99.9% of hunters even fresh from the field don't carry their weapons into the store.
Two very average looking young chaps/blokes/dorks/kids/goobers/youngsters/"operators" walk in with black rifles? I'll be honest -- unless I can instantly resolve in my brain who/what/why/what's up (and I'm ok with the answer) -- I'm OUT OF THERE. If they are up to no good, I've got a split second, and maybe less, to enact my escape plan.
...
All that to say: Maybe someday. But not today. Gotta make sure we don't break irreparably the fragile situation we're working to improve in the very long term.
Quoted for truth
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
