Open carry is setting us back. IMO

[mljdeckard]

Johnska keeps calling the civil rights comparison a false dichotomy, but it isn't. It's the exact same thing.

The problem with taking a 'reasonable' or 'under favorable circumstances' approach to open carry is that these idea are very subjective. Even if you do your best to exercise judgment to make sure you don't offend anyone, you never know when you will bump into someone who would be offended by your gun no matter what the circumstances are. It's impossible. should we wait forever to do it when we aren't offending anyone? I posted an example of when I carried in an appropriate time and place, and I still heard whispers about it.

One person exercising a right isn't FORCING another person to do anything. This is why it's a right. There are people whose minds will not be changed. I'm not trying to change them. I will settle for letting them be surprised that someone is carrying a gun, and asking someone; "Isn't that illegal?" finding out it isn't, and learning to live with it.

 

[Guillermo]

To some of us OC is too confrontational at all

That is where I disagree...when you say that a regular guy, just going about his day, open carrying, is "confrontational" or "shake people up"

BTW
On the west bank of the Mississippi across the river from New Orleans their used to be a wine store and everyone carry cocked-and-locked 45s.

Certainly I am not going to suggest that I am the one to judge if it was strange or scary, because obviously I was MORE comfortable with those guys armed.

But they did a brisk business and the hundreds of customers that came and went every day didn't seem to notice the lovely customized guns.



So all of you total OC prohibitionists, what is your solution? throw away the right?

How do we get there? (and don't say "education" without offering who and how it is coming from)

 

[ArmedBear]

A quote from Glenn Reynolds (Instapundit): "Those who have no backbone will do the bidding of those who do."

OC is legal and, while not practiced by most people in the city, common enough that you see people carrying guns in the grocery store and the park, now and again, here in Idaho.

You know what? It's no big deal. I usually CC, but failing to HIDE your gun at all times is not a big deal. It only seems like a big deal if you imagine it to be, in your own mind.

Ever been to a nude beach? When you're talking about it, it sounds freaky. But... if you ever try it, after a minute or two, it's really no big deal. You feel normal, when you're the same as everyone else. In fact, because the sorts of people who frequent such places can be a rather open and accepting lot, it can be less unnerving than going to a beach where everyone is looking around and evaluating how everyone else looks in their swimsuits and trunks. And that's something that a lot of people would consider to be a lot more of a "big deal" than OC.

So many of our fears and inhibitions are complete constructs, with no basis that survives a real-world test. A fear of carrying a handgun in a belt holster is one of them.

 

[mongoose33]

Mongoose, the problem is that you are assuming that you are going to change the mind of one (or more)anti gun liberals. I sure don't see much chance of that happening.

I agree--I don't think I'm likely to change the mind of any really rabid, anti-gun liberal. The people I'm after are the ones in the middle. They are the ones who decide every election.

They're the ones who, if they feel threatened by guns, will run to the left for protection, not to the right.

We're not going to convince everyone. I'll settle for 70 percent.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Mongoose, the problem is that you are assuming that you are going to change the mind of one (or more)anti gun liberals. I sure don't see much chance of that happening. There is a huge, well defined divide in this country between 'liberal' and 'conservative' that has hardened into concrete.

I think one of the roots of our problem is this: it is only the hardcore, in your face MINORITY of the population that gets any attention, and I think that is evident in the discussions here. We all seem to be fixated on the 10% outlier on both sides of the issue. We are fixated on the crying and moaning, foaming at the mouth anti-gun propaganda pusher that we see in political rallies and on TV, and we are fixated on the screaming, camo-wearing, rifle slung, two-pistol wearing gun pusher that we also see at political rallies and on TV.

Some of us seem to be unable to grasp the idea that 80% of the population is between those two. 80% of the population is just going about their everyday lives trying to scrape out a living. IMHO, we really need to focus on that 80% and go about our normal daily lives and let the 10% outliers on both sides "shoot it out" amongst themselves...

 

[Guillermo]

So many of our fears and inhibitions are complete constructs, with no basis that survives a real-world test. A fear of carrying a handgun in a belt holster is one of them.

Standing on my chair cheering (typing with my toes)

 

[mongoose33]

So many of our fears and inhibitions are complete constructs, with no basis that survives a real-world test. A fear of carrying a handgun in a belt holster is one of them.

So what? People don't act on the basis of reality, they act on the basis of their perception of reality.

Maybe that fear is irrational. But it is what it is, and you can't dismiss it just because you don't understand it yourself.

I see some response here that completely discounts the validity of the anti position. From our point of view, it's not valid. But here's the key to understanding this: From their point of view, it is valid.

You don't address their concerns by simply shouting your position at them. That's what an in-your-face approach to RKBA or to Open Carry does. Nobody has ever been convinced by threats, and the problem is, such things are viewed as threatening.

People can cheer til they're blue in the face, but it doesn't change that. It's the same kind of mind-set that celebrated Charlton Heston as the voice of the NRA. He may have rallied the troops, but he rallied the opponents as well.

In fact, I think Charlton Heston did as much or more damage to the RKBA movement as Columbine did. The only people convinced by his approach ("They can have my gun when they pry it from my cold, dead hands") were the people already predisposed to agree with him.

In fact, I think the NRA is having more success these days precisely because there is not a lightning rod like Heston at the controls.

 

[Guillermo]

Mongoose

You are sooooo sensitive to the addlepated. And that is the EXACT wrong approach if you want to teach someone.

As one who has trained dozens of retrievers, student athletes and self defense students (many who are survivors of sexual assault) I can tell you that the way to help someone overcome fear is to help them face it.

 

[ArmedBear]

So what? People don't act on the basis of reality, they act on the basis of their perception of reality.

Look in the mirror. You are acting on what you believe that others believe. 2nd-order delusion.

My point is that OC becomes NO BIG DEAL after a couple minutes. While you will always have people on the ends of the bell curve, and, for that matter, people with mental illness even, MOST people aren't afraid of things after a short period, when they find out that nothing bad happens. If we didn't do that, we would all go crazy. That's how the human mind works.

My point isn't that there aren't antis. My point is that we construct a lot of our own fears. Those who fear those who fear those who OC are doing the same.

In general, OC activists are NOT saying, "Screw you!" to antis. What they're demonstrating is: "See. People carry guns, and nothing bad happens."

 

[Guillermo]

AB

You are absolutely correct

Also, you are barking up a tree.

The anti-OC folks on this thread are not willing to take real life examples

 

[sonier]

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.

 

[sonier]

armed bear WELL PUT!!!

 

[mhodge]

As a GFL (GA Firearms License) holder, I prefer to CC. I have no problem with someone OC'ing. I was at a wedding last weekend and there was a guy OC. I have to admit that it was weird, considering I wasn't packing(it was only as far away as the truck). I don't like being around others with guns, including cops, if I'm not armed. It's nothing personal, just an instinct sort of thing. I don't know if I'm the only one who feels that way? I once heard a quote that an armed society is a polite society and couldn't agree more. I feel everybody ought to legally be able to carry however they want too. Period.
As far as any one side, OC v. CC, setting anyone back, why should we oppose either one? That's the wrong question. It should be the ones who would deny either the right to exercise self defense in any manner that we should be together against.

 

[inSight-NEO]

In general, OC activists are NOT saying, "Screw you!" to antis. What they're demonstrating is: "See. People carry guns, and nothing bad happens."

I agree. The hard part is convincing the anti-gun and/or the "on the fence" majority of this very idea.

Leaving the pure anti-gunners aside, the other folks seem to have developed a certain idea about weapons via Hollywood and the various newscasts, etc., etc., ad nauseum. This to the point where merely seeing a gun (in public...if not strapped to a badge carrying officer) seems to incite images straight from a Martin Scorsese film. Of course, the solid, hardcore anti-gun crowd realizes this and uses such fear as a weapon...more often than not for mere political gain.

How can this be combated? The reasonable choice is through "education" (via various means) and of course, the pro-gun community (whether while wearing or not) showing a solid level of maturity; NOT the usual anti-government (and often radical) rhetoric most "on the fence" people are subjected to. Unfortunately, this message is not getting through to enough people. Why? Heck...I am not sure. Hollywood? The government? Or the mere idea that even the well meaning "pro gunners" seem more concerned with winning over the politicians than the public? I just do not know.

Either way, until certain levels of structured, well-thought communication are implemented, I feel topics such as "open carry" will always be viewed with skepticism and simply dismissed as "pro second amendment"/militant style rhetoric.

Public awareness of the whole idea that "guns can indeed be used for good and can serve a positive role within the civilian community," seems paramount. Several pro-gun establishments have done a decent job at pushing such an idea within the political realm. Now, it is time to begin really focusing on passing such a message to the civilian community. It is not near enough to merely fall back on the old "second amendment" argument. This means nothing to anti-gunners or on-the-fencers. A different approach is needed, IMHO. Will this be easy? I am betting not. But, since when has that ever been a real excuse? Winning the political battles is indeed important when it comes to the concerns of those who already own weapons. However, it does little to persuade those who fear them to begin with.

Of course, this has been covered before. I guess it bears repeating as it often becomes quite frustrating that topics such as this seem to always require such dissection and certainly result in controversy.

I will say, in closing, that the whole idea of "you will take my gun when you pry it out of my cold, dead hands" philosophy just does not cut it in the current world we live in. It is crap like this that only keeps us where we are....on the slippery slope.

 

[JohnKSa]

Johnska keeps calling the civil rights comparison a false dichotomy, but it isn't. It's the exact same thing.

No, what I'm calling a false dichotomy is the repeated assertion that it's got to be all or nothing. That the only alternative is not OC'ing at all.

I agree that the civil rights parallel is a good one. The point I was making is that the biggest advances in the civil rights were accomplished in a prudent manner. That is, making a clear statement but in a very calculated manner.

The problem with taking a 'reasonable' or 'under favorable circumstances' approach to open carry is that these idea are very subjective.

People are very subjective. If you want to effectively influence them you're going to have to learn to deal with this challenge constructively.

It's impossible. should we wait forever to do it when we aren't offending anyone?

It's not impossible and again, no one is saying to STOP or WAIT FOREVER, but rather to be prudent in the way one exercises this right.

I will settle for letting them be surprised that someone is carrying a gun, and asking someone; "Isn't that illegal?" finding out it isn't, and learning to live with it.

Except that they don't have to learn to live with it. They can begin a campaign to change the laws and if there is sufficient support then they will very likely accomplish their goals.

Even if you do your best to exercise judgment to make sure you don't offend anyone, you never know when you will bump into someone who would be offended by your gun no matter what the circumstances are.

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. But that doesn't mean that we should assume that everyone is a loss. The hardcore antis aren't going to be convinced but there are folks out there who CAN be convinced and their attitude will be affected by the confluence of circumstances. Whether the venue is appropriate and whether the attitude, actions and appearance of the OC'er are good or bad.

So all of you total OC prohibitionists, what is your solution? throw away the right?

THIS is exactly the false dichotomy I'm talking about. First of all, there aren't many "total OC prohibitionists" on this thread. I'm certainly not one. Second, it's not an "all or nothing" kind of situation. Saying that folks should be prudent in the exercise of the right is NOT the same thing as saying we have to "throw away the right".

The anti-OC folks on this thread are not willing to take real life examples.

First of all, there aren't many anti-OC folks on this thread. It's counterproductive to keep pretending that this discussion is pro-OC vs. anti-OC when it's really about PRUDENT OC vs. folks who don't like the sound of that. Second, scenario busting is an endless endeavor. For every scenario one works out there are 10 more. You are correct that no one is willing break this down into a binary decision tree and the reason is that it's impossible to find the bottom of that deep pit.

But that doesn't mean there's not an answer for when to OC and when not to. It's really very simple. Be prudent. Be aware of the circumstances. Be careful about your attidude, actions and appearance. Be a good representative for gun owners.

I can tell you that the way to help someone overcome fear is to help them face it.

Again, this is ALMOST right. For a person who WANTS TO OVERCOME THEIR FEAR, the best way to help them is to help them face it and IN A CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT.

What you're ignoring is that the average person on the street isn't trying to overcome their fear of OC (to the extent they have such a fear), they're just going about their business. You don't help a person overcome fear by putting them face to face with their fear without warning, on the street.

 

[AKElroy]

I think that is called "concealed"

Yeh, but only kind of, in the same way Stephen Tyler is fully heterosexual.

 

[ArmedBear]

be prudent in the way one exercises this right.

That seems blatantly obvious, to me, but then again, I live in a place that still has a culture of politeness and respect that many places seem to have lost.

 

[inSight-NEO]

Be a good representative for gun owners.

You are hitting the nail on that proverbial head here. Too many people are being exposed to the "dark side" of weapon ownership (thanks to the often narrow minded, politically motivated media). Showing the "silver lining" is what is needed. Being a "good representative" is a start.

All of this talk about open carry being good or bad is really just a footnote when compared to the real issue at hand; simply too many people out there fear weapons...period. This fear, while understandable, is often based on misconception.

If I walk in to an establishment carrying a screwdriver in my back pocket, nobody would even notice. If they did, they probably would not think anything of it. Yet, this very item could become a deadly weapon at any time of my choosing. It is my hope that, one day, guns will become liken to the screwdriver...an item of utilitarian purpose; mainly used for good, but with the knowledge that it can be used for evil. This very idea being based on understanding and respect....not fear.

Aside from the fear of death and taxes (a bit of humor here), barring psychological illness, the genesis of fear seems to be culturally stimulated.

 

[Zoogster]

Open Carry is one of the greatest ways to educate the public that firearms carried in public do not lead to bloodshed.

Concealed carry does not do this in the same way because nobody ever knows they are standing next to someone with a gun in the checkout line.
The only thing concealed carry is to all except those who are exercising it is a statistic. Somewhere out there some people have some guns, and make up .__ percent of people.
Criminal use of firearms on the other hand makes the news regularly. So everyone is well aware of that, leading to lopsided representation.

Open carry is right there in front of people, and makes the statement that normal people with guns around you does not automatically cause problems.
This may initially cause some to be nervous, but that is a phase, and once you progress passed that phase it becomes normal and actually causes firearms and the carrying of firearms to be seen more or less as normal as carrying something like a cell phone.

In fact one of the only negatives I see with the passage of AZ's bill that allows everyone to conceal freely is there may be less open carry. Arizona is currently a place you can walk down the street open carrying and people won't even remark or notice most of the time. It is like walking down the street with a cell phone.
It could make the public less aware of firearms and their presence and cause them to be more anti over years.


I would cite many examples that support OC and go into more details, but I doubt most people will even read to the 6th page, so will end with that.

 

[ArmedBear]

Concealed carry does not do this in the same way because nobody ever knows they are standing next someone with a gun in the checkout line.

Exactly. If 50% of the population were to be carrying, the Brady Bunch and their ilk would still be in the position to convince the remaining 50% that, IF regular citizens carried guns, all hell would break loose. Even SOME of the carriers might believe that MOST people can't be trusted, because they wouldn't know how many guns are around, either.

Obviously, if one really wishes to educate, one must be polite, respectful, a good representative, friendly, and probably clean-cut and respectable-looking, too. Yes, that's a hell of a burden to bear at times. Some people are willing to. Let them (sometimes "them" includes me).

 

[inSight-NEO]

It could make the public less aware of firearms and their presence and cause them to be more anti over years.

I guess I am missing the logic here. You mentioned, prior to this statement, the idea that openly carrying a weapon [in Arizona] is very commonplace. Yet, these two ideas seem to conflict.

If the general public [given a particular state] is used to seeing hip strapped weapons, then how would this lead to them becoming more "anti" over the years? If anything, I would think that the residents of such a "pro gun" state would think nothing of it..i.e., guns being, for the lack of a better phrase, par for the course; in other words, they would be less inclined to understand why others are making such a big deal out of nothing! If the "fear"/lack of understanding is not there, then what is left to truly complain about?

Let me pose a scenario. We all drive a car everyday. Yet, do we fear cars? No. Heck, we see hundreds, if not thousands, of them a week. Does this mean that every car we see is being driven by a responsible individual? Hell no. That is what "defensive driving" and awareness is all about. Ditto with those who ride motorcycles. Why should guns be any different? Nothing wrong with being aware, defensive and/or cautious..take your pick. But, allowing oneself to be overcome with abject fear? That is due to a lack of understanding, knowledge and to a large degree, exposure. I apologize if I seem to be hung up on the whole "comparing vehicles to guns" thing...but, to me, there is a direct correlation involved. Almost anything I can think of can be both dangerous (or fatal) and yet, utilitarian and so forth...I firmly believe guns should fall within this category vs merely being construed as instruments of death and destruction. Hell, even the plastic surrounding the toilet paper I buy comes with a printed warning.

To me, the more exposure individuals have to weapons, not just through visible exposure but also via weapon education and the responsible, peaceful and mature attitude(s) of law abiding gun owners/carriers, the better. Think "positive reinforcement."

 

[sbrenner]

Open Carry of Handguns...

I have been a Concealed Handgun Instructor

for the State of Texas since the start in 1995.

All the United States of America have seen crime go down

when citizens have started CCW of firearms in their States.

48 of the 50 States have some form of CCW.

The two State that do not have CCW have the highest

rates of crime.

The next step is Open Carry of Firearms.

I have 21 years as a LEO in Texas.

Some Cities the LEO's open carry with their badges.

I have done that and most people do not notice the firearm or

badge.

People dressed in normal clothes and going about their business

will not be noticed or even a problem.

When people go OCing they should just be nice and normal.

I can see no problems. Unless someone goes out of their way

to cause a problem.

This is my first post. Looks like a very nice place to be.

Thank you all and the administration.
Steve Brenner

 

[Guillermo]

Welcome to the HighRoad Steve

 

[inSight-NEO]

Yes...welcome to the forum Steve. Good to have you aboard!

 

[mongoose33]

Guillermo said:

Mongoose

You are sooooo sensitive to the addlepated. And that is the EXACT wrong approach if you want to teach someone.

As one who has trained dozens of retrievers, student athletes and self defense students (many who are survivors of sexual assault) I can tell you that the way to help someone overcome fear is to help them face it.

First, people aren't retrievers.

Second, I think you're dealing with people who want to overcome their fears, not people who don't want that.

Big difference.