Open carry is over

I wouldn't give up so easily because with weapons detection tech they could end CC just as easily. There are at least two solutions:

Carry rights supersede property rights on private property that is a public accommodation. There is a precedent for this with speech rights.

Retail returns to public property (the streets) where it was in the past for thousands of years before the automobile and the supermarket and now the big box store, that are all relatively new phenomena.

The question that really matters is that when these places post such rules, (if they bother to do so) will the signage have the force of law? That is, would violating the posted rule be a crime or just a violation of "store rules"? Because that is what it will come down to sometimes.

The retail experience shifted to private property first for customer convenience (automobile parking and one-stop supermarkets). Then it shifted again as the same method was applied to more goods (Walmart, Costco, Sams Club, Best Buy, Cabelas, Bass Pro etc.) and retailers began to curate the customer experience further by more carefully crafting the shopping environment. Removing customers' armament is an important part of curating the experience for the unarmed who are uncomfortable around the armed. What's more, stores could potentially assume liability for harm caused to visitors by other visitors that are armed if they do nothing to ensure their disarmament.

As long as people prioritize convenience, comfort, and felt-security over liberty, OC will be in hazard wherever other people have a say.

Human beings are short sighted. Consider this:
You are in an establishment and have your jacket on over your holstered firearm. You bend over to tie your shoelaces and your jacket pulls up over your piece. As you straighten up, you cloak does no fall back in place and your gun is temporarily exposed. You are, at that instant, open carrying and subject to the consequences.
That’s why open carry bans are a conundrum.

With the internet there is no need to ever go into any B&M anymore. Even Walmart has a grocery delivery service. Problem solved!

FL-NC said:

The question that really matters is that when these places post such rules, (if they bother to do so) will the signage have the force of law? That is, would violating the posted rule be a crime or just a violation of "store rules"? Because that is what it will come down to sometimes.

Click to expand...

Here in Maine signage does not carry the force of law unless the business serves alcohol for on premises consumption. In stores that do not serve alcohol you may be asked to leave. Failure to do so can result in a trespassing charge. Went to check out a local Walmart today. They have still not posted signage indicating their new policy. An employee told me that a manager will ask a customer to leave if they are OC'ing.

Back in the 50's, a PDA between two dudes would have been scandalous. They might be arrested by the Sheriff for something like disorderly conduct or indecency. But the LGBT rights advocates have succeeded in "normalizing" their behavior and oppressing any dissent.

OC has not won such normalization. Those that carry are expected to remain concealed or "in the closet," and the "gun community" itself remains divided about whether OC is an acceptable practice.

The fact is, opponents are offended by all carry, not just open carry. Open carry draws their contempt because it is visible, but they have just as much hate for concealed carry.

The normalization of open carry is vital to more widespread acceptance of all carry in society. I do not mean the normalization or acceptance of OC stunts, but the opposite -- carry behaviors that are the most likely to be accepted as "normal." Without acceptance of OC, all carry will continue to be demonized and persecuted. But if OC is accepted and normalized, any kind of carry will be regarded as acceptable and importantly, it will not be regarded as exceptional or attention-worthy.

Trying to sidestep the intention without getting legal backing will backfire.

There is already technology deployed in many places that sees through clothing from a distance. It is used in other nations that do not care so much about privacy rights, by governments, and by those that do it anyways even in places with privacy rights if they will not be using it for evidence and merely for their own intel.
How widespread this technology is will increase, and concealed carry will be just as visible as open carry in the future. So whatever ultimately happens with open carry will likely carry over to concealed carry as well.

Open carry in really anti-gun locations scares people and can motivate them into action, as happened when people started open carrying unloaded guns in San Francisco and quickly got legislative change that banned it in that state. Now even if you care nothing about open carry it is hard to even move your firearms around, while when open carry was allowed you could use discretion to move them from point A to point B without having them boxed up and even bulkier. It also allowed for having an unloaded gun briefly for all sorts of reasons even if you were trying to keep it from being obvious. Like in between hunting locations, or moving them around on private property or between vehicle trunks etc (Real open carry had already been banned by Ronald Reagan and the legislator back then to disarm the black panthers.)
San Francisco citizens had previously voted to ban handgun ownership in the city even within the home as well as make it nearly impossible to have a gun store in the area. So they were quite decided in their views, and when people started holding open carry demonstrations it backfired quickly.
It tends to be more effective in places where people are less decided in being completely against firearms.

I found this rather interesting:

"State preemption
The Arizona legislature has largely preempted political subdivisions (counties, cities) to choose what laws that they want. Political subdivisions may regulate the carrying of weapons by juveniles or by their own employees or contractors when such employees or contractors are acting within the course and scope of their employment or contract. They may also bar the carrying of weapons at public establishments and events by those who do not have concealed carry permits. Public establishments and events where carry by non-permit holders is prohibited must provide secure storage for weapons on-site, which must be readily accessible upon entry and allow for immediate retrieval upon exit."
(Emphasis mine.)

http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/03108.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS

ATLDave said:

To quote the Spartans: IF.

That was a popular theory 3-4 years ago. "OC more to force acceptance. People will get used to it." Well, we now know it doesn't work that way. It wasn't crazy to think that might happen 3-4 years ago. But now the evidence is in.

Let it go. OC is over. It only harms the entire gun community.

Click to expand...

Sigh.

We should accept UBC because it makes us look bad not too.
We should accept forced confiscation because it makes us bad not too.
We should just get on the boxcars because we have to.

ATLDave said:

To quote the Spartans: IF.

That was a popular theory 3-4 years ago. "OC more to force acceptance. People will get used to it." Well, we now know it doesn't work that way. It wasn't crazy to think that might happen 3-4 years ago. But now the evidence is in.

Let it go. OC is over. It only harms the entire gun community.

Click to expand...

I live in Idaho which is as pro gun as it gets, and I almost never see anybody open carry around town. The few times I have seen somebody do it I could also see it make bystanders visibly uncomfortable, and honestly the guy doing it generally comes off as somebody just trying to make a point. So I tend to agree that it does more harm than good in terms of how the general public perceives guns and people who carry them. Out in the woods or in other rural areas is a different story and guns are all over, but it just isn't common in more populated areas even in a very pro gun culture. I don't do it because I tend to think all it would do is make me an obvious target and I'd rather keep the fact that I've got a gun on me a secret up until the point I need to draw it, which is hopefully and most likely never.

FL-NC said:

The question that really matters is that when these places post such rules, (if they bother to do so) will the signage have the force of law? That is, would violating the posted rule be a crime or just a violation of "store rules"? Because that is what it will come down to sometimes.

Click to expand...

It's like a "No shoes, no shirt no service" rule. It's not a law, but if you are asked to leave and refuse to, the police can be called, come in and tell you that unless you leave you're trespassing, and that IS a law. Got to watch someone get tased at an Appleby's one night because he wouldn't leave when instructed to do so by LEOs.

Kevin Keith said:

With the internet there is no need to ever go into any B&M anymore. Even Walmart has a grocery delivery service. Problem solved!

Click to expand...

Tell that to seniors living on Social Security. It's a matter of cost and "available resources".

ATLDave said:

The whole urban/suburban/retail

Click to expand...

Easy solution.. move your a*# to the country.. Butttt then you have the conundrum of Walmart being the only retailer within a reasonable driving range.

Kevin Keith said:

With the internet there is no need to ever go into any B&M anymore. Even Walmart has a grocery delivery service. Problem solved!

Click to expand...

JTHunter said:

Tell that to seniors living on Social Security. It's a matter of cost and "available resources".

Click to expand...

I buy certain things online, but I prefer to look at a package of meat, the selection of fresh fruits and veggies, etc Also, they don't usually have full labelling online. I do read labels and check ingredients. Can't do that online.

IdaD said:

I live in Idaho which is as pro gun as it gets, and I almost never see anybody open carry around town. The few times I have seen somebody do it I could also see it make bystanders visibly uncomfortable, and honestly the guy doing it generally comes off as somebody just trying to make a point. So I tend to agree that it does more harm than good in terms of how the general public perceives guns and people who carry them. Out in the woods or in other rural areas is a different story and guns are all over, but it just isn't common in more populated areas even in a very pro gun culture. I don't do it because I tend to think all it would do is make me an obvious target and I'd rather keep the fact that I've got a gun on me a secret up until the point I need to draw it, which is hopefully and most likely never.

Click to expand...

You must live in ada county (ie Idafornia) as OC happens where I’m at in Idaho and no gets weirded out.

It seems very much like being a smoker of yesteryear and going thru that social transition, from something wrong with you if you didn’t smoke to something wrong with you if you do; the table took time but it did turn. As smoking went so will the mindset toward guns and owners; we will survive but under very different rules.

people who open carry because its easier aren't the ones ruining this; its the ones doing so and parading around to ensure they are seen, walking past a business 3 or 4 times without going in just to make sure people see their gun.

I am a firm believer in rural and backwoods OC.
That said, I don't really care to be in a public place with people that are openly armed, especially when they seem inebriated or are acting a bit irresponsible.
I don't even OC on the range when I'm not on the line.
Why would I want to OC in WalMart?
Anyway, I CC wherever I go if I feel the need.
Finally, I don't want the other guy to know that I'm armed.