Open Carry

[hatt]

It's done enough that a trend, if there, would be observed.

Let's leave OC out of the discussion. When did criminals start seeking out hard targets?

 

[gamestalker]

I prefer to carry concealed, but in the extreme summers of Arizona, I carry open most of the time. When ever possible I will pull my short over the weapon, but it's not always a comfortable option. It's so wonderful to have this legal right. And yes, I do wear a retention holster.

I've been OC-ing for more than 40 years. But then again, in Arizona it has been legal for many, many years. Folks out here see it every where, every day, so rarely does someone freak out.

I have had one incident since carrying OC, in which a gang banging thug tried to relieve me of my weapon in a convenience store. Could have gone terribly bad if not for the retention holster, and my actions.

GS

 

[CoalTrain49]

And conversely, its "just a perception" of those in favor of OC as well. Folks here are just pondering the relative merits. As the OP's original question went, is there a "reasonable" argument ... so the discussion goes. Everyone has an opinion. Some are different.

The OP didn't have a question, just an observation. The "reasonable" argument is your definition of this discussion, not mine or the OP's.

Even if someone was, saying that people should only carry CC is a heck of a lot different than an anti saying nobody should carry at all, or even own firearms.

Why is it different? It would be someone's perception that CC is a better way to carry and because it is, it should be the only way. No different than some AG liberal's perception that people shouldn't carry a firearm in any manner. You either have a right to bear arms or you don't. Your perception, or my perception on how one does that doesn't matter. Personally, I like CC and have a permit to carry concealed, but it is also legal in this state to OC without a permit. I don't care how people carry, I don't care what church they go to or how they raise their kids either. It really is none of my business. The state legislators make the rules and the only responsible requirement, socially, legally or tactically (whatever that is), is you abide by those rules.

CC and OC is a distraction and people that advocate one or the other are only confusing the issue of a constitutional right to bear arms. Please note that there are no federal (constitutional) restrictions on open carry unless you are a restricted person. The SC is leaving up to the states to screw it up.

 

[Lord Teapot]

So we have something that we seem to agree:

A) should be legal, regardless of prudence

B) isn't common enough to matter very much, statistically

C) if it was more common, wouldn't be as big a risk.

Is there much more that can be said? I guess I'm wondering what each of you hope to prove by arguing this topic.

you've got it spot on for me

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by CoalTrain49:

The state legislators make the rules and the only responsible requirement, socially, legally or tactically (whatever that is), is you abide by those rules.

I don't know what a tactical "requirement" might be, but there are such things as practices that are more wise or less wise in terms of safety and security, and the acts of state legislatures have nothing to do with that subject.

And don't forget that the legislatures make laws under constitutions, and constitutions grant to property owners the right to make their rules. In some instances, persons abiding by legislative rules, but behaving offensively, have caused some property owners to bar patrons who carry concealed.

I don't choose to patronize them now, but I certainly would have preferred less exhibitionistic behavior on the part to those who brought about that result.

 

[jcwit]

Boils down to this as far as I'm concerned.

If it's legal, and I wish to open carry, so be it!
If it's legal and I choose to conceal carry, so be it!

To what others think I could care less!

As our local Sheriff told us at one of our monthly meetings, "In Indiana we have a license, not a permit, we may carry in any way we choose, if someone wishes to duct tape their handgun to their forehead, so be it. Not really recommended, but it is their choice."

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by jcwit:

To what others think I could care less!

Personally, I do not think it wise to influence others negatively.

"Others" can pressure businesses, pressure legislatures, and influence elections. "Others" can choose to employ you, or patronize your business, or invite your child to an event---or not.

"Others" arranged to end a long held right to carry openly in the Washington capitol.

"Others" prevented the carrying guns on Beale Street in Memphis.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by jcwit:

To what others think I could care less!

Personally, I do not think it wise to influence others negatively.

"Others" can pressure businesses, pressure legislatures, and influence elections. "Others" can choose to employ you, or patronize your business, or invite your child to an event---or not.

"Others" arranged to end a long held right to carry openly in the Washington capitol.

"Others" prevented the carrying guns on Beale Street in Memphis.

 

[CoalTrain49]

I don't know what a tactical "requirement" might be, but there are such things as practices that are more wise or less wise in terms of safety and security, and the acts of state legislatures have nothing to do with that subject.

And don't forget that the legislatures make laws under constitutions, and constitutions grant to property owners the right to make their rules. In some instances, persons abiding by legislative rules, but behaving offensively, have caused some property owners to bar patrons who carry concealed.

I don't choose to patronize them now, but I certainly would have preferred less exhibitionistic behavior on the part to those who brought about that result.

Again, a "more wise" or "less wise" practice is someones opinion or perception. An example; I think it less wise to ride a Harley without a helmet and protective clothing. The state has no opinion about it (no statute) so I do as I wish. An opinion or perception has no real meaning except to you until it becomes law or a court's decision.

The fact that there is a state statute that says a property owner has a right to post no carry signs and prosecute people who do is in fact a requirement that you are subject to by state statute. Otherwise people would just ignore the signs and the police would never show up. If the statute exists it doesn't matter weather the patron is behaving offensively or not, it depends on the property owner and how they feel about weapons on their property.

Granted, some new laws regarding carry have shown up because some folks demonstrated. It happened here. And I know that public opinion and perception can change the law. I just don't like gun owners giving testimony to an idea that OC isn't the way to carry because it isn't "socially responsible" or "tactically responsible". I have a very strong feeling that people who do that are trying to appease a liberal group that would plow us all under if they could just find a way. Any statute to prohibit OC, or CC for that matter is in direct conflict with our RKBA.

 

[buck460XVR]

Posted by jcwitersonally, I do not think it wise to influence others negatively.

Just as I don't think it's wise for fellow gun owners to lump all OCers into a "show off for soccer moms" stereotype and then talk trash about them. Some day they just might need them on their side(we are all on the same side supposedly) instead of alienating them. While I agree there have been a few instances of irresponsible OCers making fellow gun owners look bad, the same can be said for a few CWCers, hunters and others in the shooting sports. One cannot take the bad behavior of a few and slap it on all of us. Seems that what the anti's have been doing for years. We don't need to follow their lead.

 

[Lord Teapot]

Again, a "more wise" or "less wise" practice is someones opinion or perception. An example; I think it less wise to ride a Harley without a helmet and protective clothing. The state has no opinion about it (no statute) so I do as I wish. An opinion or perception has no real meaning except to you until it becomes law or a court's decision.

The fact that there is a state statute that says a property owner has a right to post no carry signs and prosecute people who do is in fact a requirement that you are subject to by state statute. Otherwise people would just ignore the signs and the police would never show up. If the statute exists it doesn't matter weather the patron is behaving offensively or not, it depends on the property owner and how they feel about weapons on their property.

Granted, some new laws regarding carry have shown up because some folks demonstrated. It happened here. And I know that public opinion and perception can change the law. I just don't like gun owners giving testimony to an idea that OC isn't the way to carry because it isn't "socially responsible" or "tactically responsible". I have a very strong feeling that people who do that are trying to appease a liberal group that would plow us all under if they could just find a way. Any statute to prohibit OC, or CC for that matter is in direct conflict with our RKBA.

it is tactically foolish to reveal your capability to the enemy

 

[X-Rap]

There was a map of OC states and ranking/friendliness in the Texas thread and it got me to thinking about the posters here and noticing that a few "non pro" OCers are from non friendly or soon to be converted OC states.
I'm from what I've always considered an OC friendly state, Colorado, I'm wondering where the rest of you are from since I believe it does affect how ones opinion is formed and may add insight to how this debate is viewed and ultimately concluded.

 

[Lord Teapot]

There was a map of OC states and ranking/friendliness in the Texas thread and it got me to thinking about the posters here and noticing that a few "non pro" OCers are from non friendly or soon to be converted OC states.
I'm from what I've always considered an OC friendly state, Colorado, I'm wondering where the rest of you are from since I believe it does affect how ones opinion is formed and may add insight to how this debate is viewed and ultimately concluded.

colorado is turning dark blue...gun rights there are going to be a thing of the past in not too many election cycles. i'm from florida, we buy/sell guns legally here with a handshake, open carry almost passed last year but was turned into a 'concealed but if it pops out it's ok' bill, which passed.

 

[mrdemal]

Fellow Arkies's

Is our state, Arkansas, an open carry state? I feep hearing different things about it.
T%hank you

 

[X-Rap]

I'm not trying to turn this into a which is the best state argument, what I'm pointing out is my belief that having not been exposed to the act one is possibly not agreeable with it.
Much the same happens with non NFA, so called assault rifle prohibitions, game baiting, states that allow LE or former more rights than others, you get the drift and if you've been here reading this forum for long you surely have picked up on that vibe from time to time.

 

[Lord Teapot]

I'm not trying to turn this into a which is the best state argument, what I'm pointing out is my belief that having not been exposed to the act one is possibly not agreeable with it.
Much the same happens with non NFA, so called assault rifle prohibitions, game baiting, states that allow LE or former more rights than others, you get the drift and if you've been here reading this forum for long you surely have picked up on that vibe from time to time.

to think that you must not be reading the posts of people who are arguing for concealed over open carry. the argument is almost purely tactical, no one is 'not exposed' to the carrying of guns, all of us here are exposed to guns all the time or we would not be here on this forum.

 

[Ed Ames]

I come from California, currently in Texas, so zero history of living anywhere OC was legal (though I have seen it passing through AZ and NM) and am pro other people open carrying. I don't especially want to do so myself (though I like not having to conceal perfectly and may try OWB CC next year) but I think it should be a choice for everyone.

 

[X-Rap]

Ed, I'm in Texas as well and find the OC and 51% laws oppressive and have carried less here than anywhere in years due to threat of prosecution.
My biggest complaint in some CC only states is the requirement under threat of prosecution to keep the gun hidden or not printing in some cases. My time full OCing is rare if take away the time carrying IWB without a cover but even without that I'd say I CC 75% of the time.

 

[2dswamp]

I'm in Southeastern Va. I see OC quite frequently. Doesn't seem to arouse the attention of others. I'm always looking to see the expression or body language of others when they see an OC. I am of the suspicion that most people believe that most OC individuals are "off-duty" LEO, if they look the part...but could be wrong.

I prefer to CC, but just my personal preference.

 

[Snyper]

I won't reread the whole thread but at least consider this in your appraisal, if I were to say CC was detrimental to the cause, dangerous to the carrier and those around him, should require special training and equipment would you assume that I was just a live and let live kind of guy?

"Live and let live" doesn't mean you cannot have a differing opinion

No one has mentioned "banning" other than the ones making accusations of such mention

 

[GAMEOVER44]

People open carry as a way of a wolf showing its teeth. Open carrying alone can make a criminal think twice before approaching you.

As far as liberals, yeah the concensus are anti-gun but there's a few who love their guns. Im anti-liberal, im from Detroit and see them every day but I DO see pro 2A liberals here. Maybe its because im from Detroit.

 

[2dswamp]

Good point, GAMEOVER44. But if I find myself somewhere where evil is going to happen regardless of an OC citizen, I want to be the guy that goes un-noticed until I decide to make a move...not the one with the bulls-eye on my back.

To each his own, there is no wrong choice here...only bad luck.

 

[TimSr]

I don't care how somebody carries as long as the weapon is secure on their person, and their hands aren't on it, and aren't required to be on it. Carrying long guns for person protection is both obnoxious and not a very safe choice for those around you.

 

[hatt]

Carrying guns for personal protection is both obnoxious and not a very safe choice for those around you.

Fixed it for you.

Not sure what's obnoxious or dangerous about long guns. I guess you hated The Rifleman

 

[CoalTrain49]

it is tactically foolish to reveal your capability to the enemy.

That may be true. It may also be tactically foolish to try to rob a bank while waving a gun around. The difference is people have decided that armed robbery is socially unacceptable and made it universally illegal. In some states where OC is legal, I live in one, nobody has found a good reason to make OC illegal, because well, there just isn't one.

You may declare it tactically foolish, as many here have, but until the state takes that right away then your opinion doesn't amount to much except to you.

If you feel strongly about it become active and see if you can get some legislation passed to prohibit open carry if you have it. Get a bunch of people together and demonstrate against open carry. Make sure it doesn't pass if people in your state are trying to get it. I'm sure you could find lots of folks who feel the same way you do. The problem with that is most of them are going to be liberal and anti-gun. Who knows, they may even give you some money to get an initiative on a ballot in the next election if you live in one of those states, and I think you do.