Well my name isn’t Steve but I will accept your emotional response.
Calling something "emotional" doesn't make it emotional.
Open Carry is circular argument on THR. Most of the arguments against it like yours is based on emotion.
Let's take
all emotion out of this and look at this as a scientific experiment. Several years ago, as people began OC'ing as either a tactical choice or a political statement, there was a hypothesis put forward by OC proponents.
OC Hypothesis: More open carry in retail/non-rural conditions will desensitize the general public and will lead to greater and broader acceptance of gun rights generally, and carry rights specifically.
This hypothesis was a factual assertion about what
would happen in the real world. Like all such assertions, it's
subject to testing. And we did test it. People have been OC'ing in retail/non-rural conditions.
Unfortunately, the test results are now in and the hypothesis has proven untrue. Many major retail chains that resisted calls from anti-gun activists to ban
all gun carriage in their stores have begun caving, in huge numbers. Thus, in mainstream chains like Kroger or Wal-Mart, someone who is CC'ing a gun must worry that, if their gun is recognized or inadvertently exposed, they will be directed to leave the store as a matter of policy (not a request that can be lawfully refused in most circumstances).
So we have tested the OC-will-help-gun-rights hypothesis. It's not true. The converse is true. This is not a matter of principle or morality or philosophy. There's a factual proposition, it has been tested, and it turned out to be wrong.
You state that by Open Carrying I am hurting “our cause” without saying what your position on gun ownership is.
My position on "gun ownership" is that the 2nd amendment is a constitutional right worthy of the same level of respect and protection as any other constitutional right. I am deeply skeptical of "gun control." I am very much in favor of people being allowed to carry
anywhere they want with the exception of places that truly provide their own
real security. I am
not in favor of "gun free zones." I am not in favor of "assault weapons bans." I am not in favor of "universal background checks" that serve as de facto registries. Indeed,
I am not in favor of laws against OC.
I am just against people doing stupid stuff that will harm our rights, and most OC in retail environments is precisely that... which we now know for a fact thanks to the testing we have been doing.
I respect your right to do whatever is legal. Why can’t you do the same for me?
Oh, I respect your
right to do all kinds of silly things. You can tattoo a swastika made of guns on your face, even though that's both stupid and will falsely tie guns and nazism/fascism/white supremacy (all
horrible things) with guns in the minds of observers.* So I would urge you not to do that. That would be dumb, and potentially harmful to my rights via the political realities of people's reactions. .
It is now very evident to anyone viewing things objectively that OC - especially of long guns, but handguns too - in most non-rural/retail environments is harmful to the general public perception of gun owners, gun carriers, and "gun culture." I can't stop you from doing this. I can only ask you whether your views on OC are testable, factual views, or articles of religious faith. If they're the latter, there's literally nothing to talk about. If they're the former, though, please look at what is happening and consider whether the OC-is-good-for-gun-rights hypothesis can possibly be squared with the evidence.
*No, I am not saying that OC is nazism or anything like that.