Quantcast

Open carry is setting us back. IMO

Discussion in 'Activism Discussion and Planning' started by G.A.Pster, Apr 21, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    Concealed carry sometimes has a negative influence.

    Bad self defense shootings sometimes have a negative influence.

    GOOD AND LAWFUL self defense shootings sometimes have a negative influence.

    Gun shows sometimes have a negative influence.

    Gun stores sometimes have a negative influence.

    Seeing a pattern? Anti's find negatives in anything we do. So at the end of the day OC isn't any different than any other gun related activity. Some people are simply anti gun, most are not.

    That's not really a new revelation to anyone is it?
     
  2. X-Rap

    X-Rap Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,657
    I think I will start OC more often in more public places. I also think that on occasions the carrying of a long gun should be done. If this gets Keith and Rachels thongs in a knot then so be it.
    We gun owners owe a debt of gratitude to those OC protesters that have put peaceful gun carrying in the news.
     
  3. mljdeckard

    mljdeckard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    13,007
    Location:
    In a part of Utah that resembles Tattooine.
    I pointed out an example of where I wouldn't do it because it might have a negative influence. Does that mean we stop supporting others who do it? No. Does that mean we stop taking chances because people might be offended? Not a chance.
     
  4. One-Time

    One-Time Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    498
    Location:
    Florida
    Synopsis: So we shouldnt excercise our rights, lest we offend someone and lose our rights?

    Please tell me people are smarter than that
     
  5. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    That's what it sounds like many are saying, yep. And no, I'm not sure that people are smarter than that.
     
  6. jmortimer

    jmortimer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    Messages:
    404
    Location:
    South West Riverside County California
  7. JohnKSa

    JohnKSa Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    15,618
    Location:
    DFW Area
    Three true statements. Unfortunately they are stated together as if they somehow form a cohesive stream of thought when instead they are just a string of non sequiturs.

    It is true that antis find negative in anything we do. That doesn't mean we can ignore them. They are constantly looking for ways to restrict firearms and if we provide them with fodder (via ANY gun related activity--including OC) it can come back to haunt us.

    It is true that OC isn't any different than any other gun related activity. But that doesn't follow from the fact that antis find negatives in anything we do nor does it have anything to do with the fact that some folks are anti-gun and some aren't.

    More importantly, the fact that it's just another gun related activity doesn't mean we can ignore what other people think of it. Just as my gun range has a restriction on firing early in the mornings to prevent offending the neighbors, we need to be prudent in how we exercise our rights. The range has been there for years. Much longer than some of the neighbors. Nevertheless, if it becomes a bad neighbor, if it begins to be a source of irritation to those who live nearby, they can make trouble that the range can ill afford.

    Some people are anti-gun and some are not. True. It's also true that there are fence sitters and there are occasionally folks who change camps. The goal of every gun owner should be to push the fence sitters in our direction and to get folks to change camps from the antis to the pros. OC can do that. It can also do the reverse if it is not done prudently.
    This is what is called a false dichotomy. In a false dichotomy a person presents two choices as if they are the ONLY choices when there are actually other choices available.

    You want to make it look like there are only two choices.
    1. Don't ever exercise your rights, it might offend someone.
    2. Always exercise your rights no matter who it offends.

    There are also some other choices.

    Randomly exercise your rights (sometimes do it, sometimes don't--flip a coin to decide when)
    Prudently exercise your rights (think about the confluence of circumstances to decide if it's a good idea or not)

    In case it's not obvious, the last choice (the underlined one) is the one I'm advocating. ;)
    If they are not prudent in their choices then I do not support their actions.

    Same applies if to a person who intentionally wakes up his neighbors in the middle of the night legally doing target practice on his land for the simple reason that he can and that he doesn't care who he offends. He's not being prudent, he's not being a good representative for gun owners and for that reason I would not support his actions.
    It means we should be smart about what we do as gun owners. That encompasses a wide range of activities including OC.
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2010
  8. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    The alternative is, as was mentioned above, to simply hide out and not participate in any activity that might irk the anti's.

    Let's stop open carrying. Let's stop going to gun shows. Let's stop having shooting in the Olympics. Let's stop reloading.

    All of those things have upset the anti's and can be spun to scare the fence sitters. I just don't see how open carrying is any different.
     
  9. Big Boy

    Big Boy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    397
    Location:
    Missouri
    Of course open carry CAN have a negative influence. Just like the recent story of the concealed carry permit holder followed a guy home and shot him. That's obviously not good for the gun community.

    ANYTHING in the world can cause negativity if done incorrectly. No you shouldn't be shoving a gun in peoples faces and saying "look at me!" but what open carrier have you ever seen doing this?

    It's as if we're being painted as loons who don't have control because our guns are out in the open.

    You are debating against exactly what we are fighting for. You say it's different to OC than it is for Rosa Parks to set up front, or whatever other situation we could dream up. You say it's different because a gun is threatening and dangerous, were a small black woman is not. That is exactly what we are against, and a small reason we open carry. OC'ing a gun is not any more threatening than carrying a broom. It won't do anything by itself. It won't be a hazard to the community unless someone is behind it pulling the trigger. This is what we are going for, it is an every day object. It is not evil, and that is what we are trying to introduce to people.
     
  10. LWYM425

    LWYM425 Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    Messages:
    128
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    there is a bit of bickering, and a bit of nitpicking of words. but I like this thread. I like that after reading it I still don't know if tomorrow I'll OC or CCW. I also very much like that I can do both whenever i dern well please.

    I would also like to note that it is my opinion that we, those that own and stand by the right to own firearms (and should probably get out and shoot more often!), need both types. If we were all about OCing, we'd loose the right to CCW and vice versa. I truley believe that.

    So instead of trying to convince other gun owners that CCW is better than OC (and vice versa), go out and convince a buddy at work who has never shot... you'll build ranks that way :) :) :)
     
  11. NavyLCDR

    NavyLCDR member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,691
    Location:
    Stanwood, WA
    The problem with using California as an example is that California was a fully loaded freight train speeding down hill on the tracks of gun control anyway. California is not representative of hardly any other state in the US. Who else has California emissions tests? What other state requires that gun dealers from outside the state obtain permission from the state government to ship handguns to Federally licensed dealers within the state? ONLY California!

    It wasn't the open carry movement that caused anything recent to happen in California - it was simply the freight train moving on it's already gained momentum. And it's going to take a huge Federal lawsuit against California to stop the train.

    Heck, look at even Connecticut coming around!

    http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-open-carry-guns-0418.artapr18,0,2346909.story

    According to Goldberg, a college-educated, occupational safety engineer, a restaurant employee, concerned by the sight of an armed customer, called the town police department. A goggle-eyed luncheon crowd watched three officers roll up, confront Goldberg and handcuff him.

    "What can we get him for?" Goldberg, 32, says one of the officers asked his colleagues.

    The answer, as it turned out, was nothing.

    A state Superior Court judge dismissed the breach of peace charge police ultimately filed against Goldberg, forcing law enforcement experts to concede that, absent extenuating circumstances, there is nothing in Connecticut law to prohibit licensed gun owners from conducting their lives visibly armed.

    The judge's decision was treated as a vindication by some gun owners in traditionally gun-shy Connecticut. They are joining groups elsewhere in asserting, as Goldberg does, what they say is the right to carry sidearms openly, in public, for protection.

    The "open carry" movement is growing at a time when the federal courts have been looking more favorably on the rights of gun owners than on the authority of governments to restrict gun ownership.
     
  12. JohnKSa

    JohnKSa Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    15,618
    Location:
    DFW Area
    No, that is not THE alternative. It is ONE alternative--and just to be absolutely clear it is not an alternative that I advocate.
    Again this is a false dichotomy.

    There are other choices besides the two you pose and I have voiced one over and over on this thread.

    Here it is again.

    Prudently exercise your rights (think about the confluence of circumstances to decide if it's a good idea or not).
    No one has said anything like that on this thread. That is a logical fallacy called a strawman and it is not a particularly clever one.
    This assertion is not strong evidence of your well-developed skills of reasoning. ;)
    The fact that CT allows open carry, and a judge pointed that out, is not evidence that CT is "coming around." It is merely a statement of the current state of open carry laws in CT.

    What would be evidence of CT coming around would be the OC'er having lunch WITHOUT having the police called on him, or having the police called on him and the police leaving him alone because they realized he was not doing anything illegal.
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2010
  13. NavyLCDR

    NavyLCDR member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,691
    Location:
    Stanwood, WA
    I respectfully disagree. For years open carriers have been convicted of breach of peace because of openly carried firearms in Connecticut. The fact that a Connecticut court would come out and flat out rule that open carry by itself is not breach of peace is huge progress in that state. And, that ruling would never have come about without people open carrying, despite the "feelings" of their fellow Connecticut residents.
     
  14. JohnKSa

    JohnKSa Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    15,618
    Location:
    DFW Area
    That doesn't seem to have changed. The article clearly states that OC in CT can still result in arrest and confiscation if the offense constitutes a breach of peace. It appears that all that would be required for that to be true is for someone to file a complaint at the scene.
    This is a good illustration of seeing only what one wants to see. There's also another side to that coin and the article makes it very clear. In the second page there is a comment that "key lawmakers" are watching to see what happens with the pending lawsuits to determine if they're going to try to pass laws to make OC illegal. If that comes to pass then one will be able to say: "that law would never have come about without people open carrying". In other words, we don't know yet whether the outcome will be better or worse for OC. It will be interesting to see how things shake out.
     
  15. NavyLCDR

    NavyLCDR member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,691
    Location:
    Stanwood, WA
    And this is also an example of seeing only what one wants to see. The court case was brought about due to someone filing a complaint at the scene! And the court struck it down!
     
  16. JohnKSa

    JohnKSa Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    15,618
    Location:
    DFW Area
    From the second page.

    "Goldberg called his arrest an overreaction by a police department unfamiliar with state handgun laws, something he said happens regularly in Connecticut.

    "In my circumstance, no one pressed any charges, no one was interviewed," he said. "The woman who called 911 called to ask what the concealment law is in the state of Connecticut. And the dispatcher didn't know. If the dispatcher was educated or trained, and answered that you can carry openly or concealed in Connecticut, it should have ended right there. It was unfortunate that what happened to me had to happen to me.""​

    I haven't researched this incident, but the article you provided doesn't indicate that anyone filed a complaint at the scene. In fact, the article makes it sound like the lack of a complaint was the primary reason for the decision.
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2010
  17. Gouranga

    Gouranga Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2010
    Messages:
    928
    Location:
    Gaston County, NC
    The more I think about it, the more I think it is the individual OCers who may be the cause of any setting us back. Like the man who flaunts his religion out in public, an OCer represents a good or bad for the cause. He/she is out there, with the gun rights billboard on them. If the OCer acts like a normal law abiding citizen, then IMO, they help us out. They show the public that someone with a gun is no different than someone without. IF they act like a loonie, act unsafely with their firearm, act extra aggressively, etc, they do damage to the cause.

    Among other things OC makes you an open advocate for the cause, so long as those who do it, give a good example of why OC is no threat to other law abiding citizens, it is a great help to the cause.
     
  18. atomd

    atomd Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,298
    Ok, let me get this straight.

    Some people here are suggesting that open carry causes people to be offended which in turn causes more legislation to prevent open carry...so therefore we shouldn't open carry.

    So you purposely don't exercise a right because you fear losing it? What's the point of having a right that you can't use? :confused:
     
  19. One-Time

    One-Time Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    498
    Location:
    Florida
    ^ Exactly!

    No one has a right to not be offended, no one has a right to not be scared.

    "A fear of a weapon is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity" -Sigmund Freud
     
  20. NavyLCDR

    NavyLCDR member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,691
    Location:
    Stanwood, WA
    I agree 100% Gouranga. I might expand your comment, though, to say that anytime anybody does anything bad with a gun it hurts our cause. It may be the OCer, the CCer, or the criminal. If something bad or stupid happens with that gun, the anti-s are going to scream about it.

    But, what is sad, if you compare the bad and stupid things that happen because of alcohol, then clearly prohibition should be the answer.

    If you compare the bad and stupid things that happen with vehicles, then we should ban them.

    There are multitudes more bad things that happen with alcohol, vehicles and the mixture of the two than there are bad things that happen with guns, and yet it's the gun that's evil. Seems to me like the alcohol, vehicles and guns all have one thing in common - the human operators - but God knows we can't blame the people. The stupid are no longer punished.
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2010
  21. MisterMike

    MisterMike Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    758
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    That's exactly correct. This may be splitting hairs, but there's a distinction in my mind between the guy who shows up with a Sig in a belt holster, and the dude who straps on a handgun, an AK, and a few magazine pouches while wearing camo pants and a T-shirt denouncing the government. Both are exercising their rights, but the latter is trying to make a statement. It makes him look like a horse's a** and spooks those in the vast middle who might otherwise support 2A rights.
     
  22. AKElroy

    AKElroy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,425
    Location:
    Past & Future Republic of Texas
    Name anything that does not gain acceptance as it becomes more widespread.
     
  23. GojuBrian

    GojuBrian Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2009
    Messages:
    511
    Location:
    The Natural State
    Methamphetamine. :D
     
  24. loneviking

    loneviking Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,106
    Location:
    Carson City, NV.
    I don't see OC as setting gun owners back. If that were the case, you wouldn't have see OC spread acrosss the country like it has.

    OC has had an interesting effect that hasn't been talked about much in this thread, and that is the legal effect. A lot of OC'ers are what you could call 'constitutionalists', and believe in making the cops and local politicians follow their state laws (and Fed. constitution)as they are written. Look at the dozens of times that OC"ers have been confronted by cops who violated their 4th/5th amendment rights and often state rights as well. The cops or municipalities were sued and mostly the OC folks won---and that's a good thing. We live in a nation that was founded on the idea that the law applies to everyone, and that there are limits to the power of the state. OC works to reclaim that idea, and in turn spills over to other laws and rights.

    After all, should I give up my right to exercise my Christian religion because it offends an atheist? Or my right to free speech because someone finds it offensive? I don't think we are at that point in this country, and I think OC is creating a climate that won't tolerate that type of thinking.

    I do find peoples reactions to OC sometimes odd. I went into my local Grocery Outlet one day OC to grab Gatoraide before heading out hiking in the desert around me. This is a store I reguarly carry CC in. The cashier, a lady I recognize, looks at me and says 'wow! Why are you carrying that thing in here? I replied back 'I've carried this 'thing' in here many times, you just never saw it!'. She was surprised that I could legally carry OC, that I had carried CC many times in the store and wanted to know 'why?'. This is an older lady who came here from Germany some 20 year ago and she's still has some adjusting to do! The point though is that I never would have had a conversation with her about guns if I hadn't walked in without my cover garment on. I find I'm starting to OC more around town, but I do understand those who don't as it can attract a lot of attention.
     
  25. AKElroy

    AKElroy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,425
    Location:
    Past & Future Republic of Texas
    That one proves my point!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice