Open carry is setting us back. IMO

[mongoose33]

Sonier said:

mongoose what are you doing to promote the second amendment? im noticing you dont like ti be confronted or confront others so how can you be helping when you dont want to confront and how can you teach if you dont confrontpeople passively? maybe i missed what you were doing through these 6 pages.

What difference does it make to you what I do to promote the second amendment? Do you think the quality of my argument relates in any way to what I do or don't do? Arguments stand on their own merits.

Fact is, I do a number of things, including publicly. Including addressing gun control in a newspaper column that I wrote about 18 months ago, as part of a regular weekly column I wrote for 12 1/2 years. The fact that I haven't listed them here for you is of no consequence.

I find it interesting that several of the more...aggressive-appearing people here missed the main point along the way. Very gentle exposure to open carry may well, over time, work. In your face, daring you to object, in groups with the intent of making a scene open carry is an entirely different thing.

And it is the second, in-your-face approach I'm referring to here.

Surely that's apparent, is it not?

 

[mongoose33]

SBrenner said:

The two State that do not have CCW have the highest

rates of crime.

The two states, presumably, are Wisconsin and Illinois (I live in Wisconsin).

Nothing I can find suggests the two are even near the top in crime rates. If you want to see for yourself, google "2009 crime rate state rankings" and see what you get.

Wisconsin is actually a fairly safe state by rank; Illinois a bit lower than midpoint.

Not a good argument to make, when the data doesn't actually match the argument. All that has to happen is a person points out that the evidence used in an argument is actually wrong, and all the other statements made are called into question as well.

Here are two of the many indications of crime rate rankings:

http://os.cqpress.com/rankings/CrimeStateRankings_2009.pdf

The above table is referenced here:

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2009/03/25/99012.htm

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States (Look at the map of the US about 2/3 of the way down the page).

Darker states have higher crime rates.

 

[inSight-NEO]

Very gentle exposure to open carry may well, over time, work. In your face, daring you to object, in groups with the intent of making a scene open carry is an entirely different thing.

I agree. I personally am all for open carry (as my previous posts imply). However, IMHO, gun related issues should always be handled delicately.

Regardless, to me, whether or not to open carry is not the main issue here. Heck, even whether or not we are allowed to CC is not the main issue. The main issue revolves around the idea that simply too many individuals out there still fear guns and see them as nothing more than malevolent objects. This needs to change.

To me, a similar mentality exists with those who think killing any shark they see will make the oceans more safe; all while completely ignoring the multitude of ways one can be injured or killed at sea. And what are the odds of a fatal shark attack? Next to nil. It is narrow minded thinking such as this that really pisses me off.

Now, there are several approaches to such a dilemma. One, cram your opinions down the throats of others and tell them that they are stupid for thinking otherwise or two, resolve the issue through patient (yet deliberate) and rational argument. I vote for the latter.

Only time will tell if such an approach works.

 

[Guillermo]

Mongoose,


After reading your posts, where you attack every argument, including by those with a lot more knowledge in OC areas. Of course you haven't come up with one single, solitary solution other than "continue to conceal" which is not a solution. That is giving into the antis...in which case, they win.

Interestingly enough, the tone of your rants are that of an anti. A troll? Quite possibly.

The bottom line is that your whining and attacking while offering nothing is useless and not very HighRoad.

As for me, I am going to avail myself of the delightful device provided by the wonderful people that run this outstanding board...the ignore button.

 

[230therapy]

Hiding guns in the closet makes the anti-rights morons bold.

We have the terrible laws in place because gun owners do NOT stage protests and marches. They are quiet and don't make demands.

The lack of participation in the 2A March in DC is an example of that attitude.

Open carry is a form of demand for respect for the right. I think it is going to be the defining action by gun owners since it's something they can do on an individual basis. Heck...it already is in many states. Many police departments have had their leashes yanked because of OC...it's about time.

California is a lost cause anyway...OC there does not matter. There is no RKBA in that state and its citizens are subject to the legislators' whims. It's long past for California gun owners to rise up and start making demands...they have not done so and probably won't ever do so. I have yet to hear of any serious problems because of the recently passed ammunition limit law.

 

[loneviking]

Mongoose:

I find it interesting that several of the more...aggressive-appearing people here missed the main point along the way. Very gentle exposure to open carry may well, over time, work. In your face, daring you to object, in groups with the intent of making a scene open carry is an entirely different thing.

And it is the second, in-your-face approach I'm referring to here.

Surely that's apparent, is it not?

I have to disagree. The anti's have screamed plenty loud enough over just one person carrying, such as the Pennsylvania lady who had her permit revoked for OC'ing to a soccer game. They also, obviously, have hollered over groups OC'ing to Starbucks. You can't win with folks like this, and there is no 'gentle' involved--they simply go into orbit at the sight of anything like a gun.

And yes, in some cases such as unloaded OC in Cal., there is certainly comfort in numbers. Making a scene? So? Even one makes a scene, so why not several?

California has turned into an anti gun cesspool. I grew up in the central valley, and in the area where I and several other neighborhood kids used to run all over the place with 22's and shotguns, now the sight of a BB gun induces panic. And the reason things got that way is because the gun community didn't, wouldn't and maybe couldn't fight the nuts in Sacramento that did this. OC is one way of fighting back and reclaiming or preserving our rights as gun owners.

 

[mongoose33]

Guillermo Opined:


Mongoose,


After reading your posts, where you attack every argument, including by those with a lot more knowledge in OC areas.

A lot more knowledge? Of what? Social Change?

To be an expert in OC you have to....OC. Big deal.

Of course you haven't come up with one single, solitary solution other than "continue to conceal" which is not a solution. That is giving into the antis...in which case, they win.

You must not have read the things I posted then. I've never said "Continue to Conceal" is a solution.

And when, Guillermo, you say I said things I never said, you call into question your entire argument. You're making things up. I don't appreciate that--not very High Road if you ask me.


What I've said--and you'd know this if you were more interested in what I said than in dissing me--is that the in-your-face approach to Open Carry carries great costs.

There are other approaches, and I've written about them. Did you read them or just put in some kind of box simply because you don't agree?

Here are two posts which explain some of it, from the "How to Convert Your Liberal Friends" thread:

http://thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=6268764&postcount=145

and

http://thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=6268793&postcount=146

Interestingly enough, the tone of your rants are that of an anti. A troll? Quite possibly.

Or quite possibly someone who has given this more thought than the knee-jerk "I know my rights and I'll jam them into anyone's faces who objects" reactors we've seen here.

I teach social change. I do it. I'm good at it. I'm what you might consider to be an expert at it. And when it comes to reaching the people in the middle, an in-your-face approach typified by large groups of people open carrying as a protest is exactly the kind of thing--were I actually an anti--I'd exploit the devil out of.

I'm really surprised at your vehemence here. It almost makes me think you're an Anti plant, trying to get gun owners to do stupid things so they look immoderate and push more people over to the anti-gun side.

The bottom line is that your whining and attacking while offering nothing is useless and not very HighRoad.

Wow. I'm discussing tactics; that changes nothing I've said into either whining or uselessness.

This kind of reaction, Guillermo, is exactly what I'd do if I were trying to spur gun-rights people into doing stupid things.

Sort of like what has been done w/ the Tea Party protests.

As for me, I am going to avail myself of the delightful device provided by the wonderful people that run this outstanding board...the ignore button.

The universal plaint of those who've lost an argument.

That's fine. I can't reach you. I can continue to contribute, however, to a discussion with the thoughtful members of THR who won't stick their fingers in their ears and repeat "La, La, La" so they can't hear anything which is counter to their own carefully constructed beliefs.


That said, now that Guillermo isn't listening, let me note something again I said in a previous post: Open Carry, per se, isn't bad; the odd person here and there, doing prudent OC, not jamming it in others' faces, not being threatening (and to understand what is threatening means one has to look at the "threat" from the others' point of view); that, I think it's clear, can be effective. Over time, not a bad tactic.

Groups of gun owners doing protests? I'm wondering if this truly is the work of anti-gun activists, looking for pretense to create a social protest against Open Carry, which can then translate into more efforts in congress.

I find it difficult to believe the in-your-face group-carry approach to be the work of thoughtful gun owners. I'd almost think it has to be the work of anti-gun plants stirring up people to do things that are not in their long term interests. It's certainly consistent with that kind of approach, and certainly the kind of tactic I'd employ were I on that side.

 

[hso]

I advise everyone to review the rules section from time to time.

To stay on the high road while having a civil debate of controversial issues the participants are required to attack the argument and not the individual making it. Insults, name calling, ad hominem and personal attacks are easy traps for lazy thinkers to fall into and are not acceptable.

 

[M&PVolk]

While I myself have not open carried, I appreciate those that do. The fact is that no stigmatized behavior, activity or right has ever been normalized through quiet compliance with publically accepted norms. Acceptance is always gained through vocal and public activism.

In the war to KABA, open carry is our closest parallel to demonstrations, marches, and refusing to be treated as abnormal. Encourage it.

 

[bigfatdave]

A person can't do any better than their best. As has been pointed out, there are definitely people who won't be convinced and won't find OC reasonable under any circumstances. Those folks are a loss--can't do much about them.

Well, there is one thing you can do for them, which is to make them look like ninnies quivering in fear of something on the belt of a perfectly reasonable person.

I'm not big on the concept of forcing confrontations with OC, but I'll defend the right to my last breath. Prudent OC is better, but even the most provocative OC shows the (generally uninterested and uncommitted) public that guns don't cause violence on their own, and that the rabid anti-arms groups are generally not to be trusted due to their irrational bias and phobias.

 

[danez71]

Although I strongly support the right to open carry.

Just think for a moment.

It provides tremendously easy to exploit fodder for the anti gunners.


It makes people on the fence and the antis scared and intimidated, and that’s just where the antis want them, so they’re easy to manipulate.

You’re not going to win-over anyone over who’s on the fence with open carry.
You’re not going to convert the mildly anti.

The only upside I see is people you see all the time (like your barber, or coworkers) and who know you by name may eventually see that you have a gun and know that it’s ok that you have a gun, and you're not a nut, but that's just you not everyone else.


But other than that only downsides.


And if you still insist on doing it
If you’re slinging a gun over your shoulder make it a
Bolt action rifle (without a scope) or a double barrel shotgun, not an AR15, AK pattern or some other easily vilified gun.

And don’t wear BDUs, or a beret, or a boonie hat, or other clothing that makes you look like some kind of Soldier of Fortune wanabe you should look like everyone else.

And openly show your support for something everyone else supports, like a pink breast cancer pin.
So that you have a common goal with other non-open-carriers.



Anyway rant over.

The part I made bold is why I think you're wrong.

Think of it this way. If people such as store clerks, your barber, your doctors office were all OC, it would demonstrate that its the state of mind that is dangerous.... not a gun, knife, hammer, screwdriver.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Welcome to THR, Steve B.!

 

[Big Boy]

I no longer understand what is being argued about in this thread.

The two that are posting against open carry keep saying over and over again, "It must be done prudently". There is no one is this thread who has even attempted to disagree with that. In fact every one on the OC side has been discussing being "at the grocery store, the hardware store, laundry mat, gas station." Normal, every day, "prudent" activities.

So what are we still arguing about? Unless you are completely against ANY one open carrying in ANY fashion. Which, if you are, is fine. Argue to that point. Everyone who is just repeating themselves is getting no where.

The other thing that has been said is that we are shoving our guns in the faces of the people and making them deal with it. No. Maybe people who aren't "prudently" OC'ing are doing this. With AK's and AR's in the middle of rallies. However, rallies are meant to be over the top to prove a point anyhow, so I don't necessarily disagree with that either. What it seems the people against OC in this thread are trying to tell us, is that the average citizen (all of us in this thread who OC) that goes and shops for his groceries, checks out, is nice to the cashier, gets in his car and goes home is some how hurting the gun movement.

We are not in their faces. Our guns are on our hips, they can look at them if they want. Mongoose, you have even stated in your own posts "that OC can scare people because of what the media has shown guns to be like." Yep. It can, because that's how they believe guns to be. That's why we are out there. That's why we OC. Is so that people can see an average citizen with a gun, watch him shop and go home, and then wonder why they were scared of that gun.

We aren't running around the store going up to people and saying "HEY! Look at my gun! Do you agree with this?!" The only time I've discussed my OC'ing is when someone comes up to me and asks me about it. Generally in one of only a few manners, "Are you a cop? Do you have a permit for that? Is that real?" And they are generally always calmly asked. That is when I have the chance to discuss with them the in's and out's of gun ownership and OC. It's never an argument, and the person generally ends that conversation with "Huh, I had no idea that was legal." That, is again, why we OC. To show people the rights they have, to show them that guns are not frightening unless in the hands of a criminal, and that normal people with normal families own and carry guns.

You say we shouldn't be OC'ing because it could scare someone who is frightened about a gun, and they could vote against guns later. If they are already scared of guns because of the media's portrayal they are going to vote against them whether they've had an encounter with an OC'er or not. They're scared of them, why would they vote for them? The only thing that could change these people's minds is interaction. Knowing that guns aren't scary because they see "Joe" come through their check out line once a week with a gun and no one has died. Because they see "Bob" Pump gas into his car every Tuesday and Thursday, with a gun strapped to his hip, and no one died. It is this normal, practical, prudent interaction that changes people's minds.

I believe snakes are one of the scariest deleted -- <Sam> things on this earth. That's the truth. I know a lot of people own them as pets, and I don't care <edited -- Sam>. I want all of them dead and gone. What is the only way you could change this in me? Slowly, and calmly introduce me to snakes, and let me learn first hand that they can be calm, fun creatures to own. I can guarantee you that would take a good amount of time, and I would be scared as hell at first, but I will never ever learn to even consider the concept of a snake as something normal or not scary until introduced to them.

 

[sarduy]

if they allow open carry in FL i would do it... but down here no body is doing nothing ;(

 

[JohnKSa]

The two that are posting against open carry keep saying over and over again, "It must be done prudently". There is no one is this thread who has even attempted to disagree with that. In fact every one on the OC side has been discussing being "at the grocery store, the hardware store, laundry mat, gas station." Normal, every day, "prudent" activities.

I've been saying "it must be done prudently" but I am not posting against open carry. I'm saying, rather, that it must be done prudently. The reason I've said it over and over is in an attempt to get the point across that I am NOT POSTING AGAINST OPEN CARRY but only saying it should be done prudently.

Second, I have gotten a lot of responses that easily qualify as disagreement.

Third, it's not the "activities" that need to be prudent, it's the person carrying. A person can OC while doing something "prudent" like going to the hardware store and still not be OC'ing prudently if their attitude, actions or appearance is out of line--if they're not being a good representative for gun owners.

I'm not big on the concept of forcing confrontations with OC, but I'll defend the right to my last breath. Prudent OC is better, but even the most provocative OC shows the (generally uninterested and uncommitted) public that guns don't cause violence on their own, and that the rabid anti-arms groups are generally not to be trusted due to their irrational bias and phobias.

I will defend the right to OC but I will not support the actions of people who don't OC in a prudent manner. By definition they're being unwise and I don't support people who do unwise things with firearms.

 

[Barbara]

Anyone who objects to a gun that they can see objects to guns they can't see..you're just allowing them to live under the illusion that guns aren't all around them.

 

[Sauer Grapes]

I have to disagree. I've had some very positive encounters with people curious about openly carrying a handgun. I always take the time to explain the laws of Pa. and explain if need be that I do not advocate anyone being able to buy or posess firearms that are prohibited by law.

I will also explain on ocassion that, if just one person had been armed during a horrific crime it could have saved lives. I've been doing this for a couple years now and haven't had any negative feedback to date.

It's silly for the government to keep making it harder and harder for law bidding citizens to protect themselves from criminals. Guns aren't the problem, it's the idiots that spend their whole life trying to exploit the majority that are hard working people.

 

[AdamJaw89]

i open carry all the time and i don't give a damn what people think or say, most people don't even notice there's a gun on my hip and the people that do just look and look away and go about their business. i figure if its legal to do then why not do it and exercise my right to open carry it

 

[Nutgun]

With all the biased news reporting today unfortunately the picture of the sterotyped redneck, Rambo, loose cannon will be the one in the paper. It will be used against the regular people to exploite their agenda. I completely understand the OP and the reason for it. You can't give them any ammo to use against us.

 

[Zoogster]

I completely disagree.

Seeing responsible firearms in public shows people who don't carry firearms that firearms are around them every day causing no problems. It goes a long way towards severing a mental connection with people simply having a firearm and the evening news report of crimes involving firearms. Making the distinction between most good gun users and the few bad gun users clear.
No longer are the only carriers of firearms in the minds of the public the bad guys in the stories, but regular people they walk by.

Concealed firearms are hidden, and antis and fence sitters or those who simply do not carry never know how many are around them, unless one is misused. So as far as they know the only firearms in public tend to be the ones being misused they become aware of or make the news.


Far from giving ammo to use against us it typically shows that the ammo they do use against us (criminals committing crimes with guns) has nothing to do with many people who responsibly carry firearms on a regular basis.

A concealed firearm is a statistic, known only to those who research the number issued, and is still just an impersonal number. Open carried firearms are more than a statistic, you see them, you know they are there, and you know nobody is being shot with them. That is a personal statement no fence sitter misses.

It also means if they are a victim of crime they realize how many thousands of guns carried every day were not involved. Their only experience with a gun in public is not looking down the barrel or watching a robbery of someone else.

 

[Nutgun]

Fence sitters and antis are setting us back.

People that don't know or remember history are setting us back. People with pitch forks and brooms are going to do whatever they are told.

Our country, our freedoms we have now are because of guns. Not wrist smacks or pitch fork jabs.

The history of the years right before & right after Hitler took power are repeating right here, right now. The German people and the rest of the world didn't see it coming either. You see what happened after it was too late.

 

[bigfatdave]

People with pitch forks and brooms are going to do whatever they are told.

What about pitchforks and torches?

 

[Dashunde]

I think the OP is right about this.

From my geographical view, its an extra distraction and a viable tool used by the anti's.
I'm in the very liberal infested area of St. Louis where CCW is now a solid daily thing, OC would freak these people out and ruin CCW.

And while it would be nice not to care about what other people think the fact is that those other people are voters too.
If they're spooked, they vote against, ignorance to our CCW is bliss for them, why jerk their chains with OC?

I have no idea why any of us would want the looks and attention that open carry brings with it anyway.
More importantly OC removes your tactical element of surprise and makes you the first target to ambush just prior to a conflict.
I just dont see the point of it within the confines of "civilization".
Out in the mountains or on a hunt is different, of course.

Yes, I do understand and agree with "shall not infringe", but unfortunately that concept versus reality and implementation are very different.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Open Carry tends to unnecessarily spook the anti's and promotes a "wild west" persona in their minds.

Let's put the blame where it belongs, shall we? The anti-gun propaganda pushed by the Brady Campaign and other anti-gun groups unnecessarily spooks the anti's and the same propaganda promotes the "wild west" persona in their minds. And without any visible evidence presented to the public to the contrary, they are simply going to continue to believe it, because that is all they are going to see and hear on the issue.

You know, people didn't get where they are today by the actions of the pro-gun crowd. They got where they are today because of the actions of the vocal anti-gun minority coupled with the inaction of the pro-gun crowd. Continued inaction by the pro-gun crowd is going to do nothing to change the situation.

 

[Dashunde]

First, if you look at your post time and my edit time above you'll see that I didnt care for that sentence either, and that I removed it almost an hour before your post hit.
But since you grabbed it...

TV and movies featuring Jesse James and all of the other famous bad guys have reached far more people and have permanetly tied open carry to outlaws, gunslingers and dusty crusty sherrifs more than anyones campaign ever will.
There is no way that open carry will ever be separated from the Wild West, its just not going to happen. Worse yet, to some degree it is part of our factual history - cant change that.
As far as the vast majority of the population is concerned 2 types of people (will) open carry:
1)Outlaw wannabe's, Wild West Sherrif wannabe's, and far Right gun nuts who think its cool.
2)Police with appropriate uniform.

One is simply not going to get the vote, and two doesnt need the vote.

48 states now have CCW laws on the books and I'm thrilled about it.
Why continue to push guns (literally) into the face of people who simply do not want to see them, or know that they are around guns?
It will only serve to irritate the currently quiet anti's who have been keeping a "out-of-sight-out-of-mind" mentality about guns.
Waking them into activism would be downright stupid.

Believe it or not, like it or not, open carry is not even acceptable to all gun-loving folk.
Among the people I have spoken with about it, several view it it as socially impolite, aggressive, silly, unnecessary, brash, and tactically foolish.
I compare legalized open carry to a loud fart in a crowded room... It might be legal, but very few are going to like it.

Maybe after (hopefully after I'm long gone) our citizens are forced to take back our country in some form of anarchy open carry will be a acceptable and steady warning to the government that we are still in control. But until then...

I think we should stop wasting our time, money and resources to push open carry (to our own detriment) and instead use those resources to diligently protect the progress that we have made so far.
Maybe we should work on CA or IL first? How about going after those pesky FOID cards?

And for the record..
Do I think we should have the right to open carry? Yes.
Do I think we should actually do it? No.