Target Store: Moms 10,000 sign Petition to Ban Guns

[TennJed]

When is the last time we've seen this much disdain and lack of respect for fellow legal gun owners, of any stripe?

Respect is a 2 way street and these OCT guys are showing NONE. No respect to gun owners. No respect to the 2nd amendment and especially no respect to guns. They do not deserve my respect

It is absurd to think one should support irresponsible behavior just because guns are involved. It is like a beer lover condoning drinking and driving.

Open carry involves being responsible. It is not tha that hard of a concept for mature people to grasp

 

[barnbwt]

Note: I'm referring to the planned demonstrations not going about normal daily activities.

For aforementioned reasons, they are one and the same in Texas due to the legal situation, and because long guns apparently can only be carried in protest (since they apparently have no other justification being borne).

It is absurd to think one should support irresponsible behavior just because guns are involved. It is like a beer lover condoning drinking and driving.

It's more like a beer drinker drinking from a bag in a place where open-containers are barred (or, the metaphorical opposite, rather). I've yet to see one piece of evidence saying anything that's been done by these fools was reckless, let alone dangerous. I agree it is politically reckless (at the very least, tactless), but few seem to be making that distinction here, and it matters greatly.

I personally think they were brandishing by holding the guns at ready, and should be prosecuted for it; I honestly do not know why some lip-licking DA is not pursuing this.

Open carry involves being responsible. It is not tha that hard of a concept for mature people to grasp

I'm not saying you are by any means, but this language is disturbingly close to what the anti's tell us daily. We always rag on them for telling us to be whatever their unsubstantiated version of 'responsible is' and to stop being 'immature' and that their ideas are so obvious they constantly need to remind us of their obviousness.

I would suggest we instead say "we deplore the presentation of arms in a manner intended to alarm others for political reasons," "we deplore firearms being brandished in public, since mishaps occur when hands are near triggers and carriers look increasingly close to active shooters." Those are legitimate reasons for opposing what they did, and keep our argument centered; "we do not support them; their actions were illegal, why do you not prosecute them?" If these guys were busted by the cops from the Facebook pictures, no one would emulate them (okay, maybe one other idiot in their group might, but that would be it)

"Because it's obvious" and "because that's just stupid" are not arguments.

TCB

"Respect is a 2 way street and these OCT guys are showing NONE"
Game Theory would suggest that the best way to restore respect and balance would be to offer it to the other side first in such a case; i.e. "we will welcome you guys to help our side and cheer your activity so long as you act within these guidelines." They get their moments in the sun as pro-gun heroes, which so many (all ) activists thrive upon; we get two more guys motivated enough to actually get out and do something to promote the cause themselves, which is a lot more than any of us posters can or will offer. Honestly, by denouncing them so harshly, we threaten to send these guys down the Zealotry Spiral in which they get more and more radical to justify the enormous criticism upon them (that, or they'll just commit suicide)

 

[barnbwt]

so how is the OC protest working for you guys? Any examples where it achieved something?

Sarcasm aside...how did you get the impression I support the alarmist protest methods? As far as recent achievements; the recent brou-ha-ha down in San Antonio in which OC'ers were allowed in the Alamo despite being barred from operating in the city by ordnance got the issue in the spotlight (which was mostly positive aside from the predictable hue and cry of skeptical-of-open-carry-no-matter-what's out there), and the Chipotle Twins were actually quite effective in exposing a deep rift in the RKBA community that would eventually get exploited to divide us if left untended. Probably not their intention (I'm not sure they are capable of having intentions) but I appreciate having this rift revealed so clearly for me; I thought we were all of a single mind on most issues, even open carry, and that the disagreements over it were tactical and not philosophical in nature.

We actually have quite a bit of time to come to an understanding and heal our wounds before anything really important happens (elections, vote on OC in Texas, etc. We're kind of in a political dead-spot since primaries are over and the main event is still months away)

 

[benEzra]

When is the last time we've seen this much disdain and lack of respect for fellow legal gun owners, of any stripe? This lack of civility, the shouting, the name calling, the slander, the giant, caps, bright blue, bold text?

That's because gun owners with a clue have been trying to politely get the in-your-face attention seekers to stop "helping" for more than a year now. I remember the discussions. I remember when a guy carried a 12-gauge pump into a public library (either on a front sling or in his hands...I think the latter) a year or two ago and IIRC got the premises posted no-guns. The latest idiocy isn't the first time this stuff has happened, it's just having worse repercussions now because of the phenomenally bad choices of venue, and because the attention seekers have gotten more organized, more brazen, and have started focusing on national chains, which unlike the library stunts and whatnot directly harms gun owners nationwide.

I swear, if they were trying to kill the Texas open carry bill in the legislature and advance Daddy Wallstreetbux's nationwide anti-gun crusade, they would be doing exactly what they are doing now. Which suggests that either some of them are working for Bloomberg, or else that they are too close-minded and arrogant to see the results of their actions. Either way, if gentle persuasion worked, they'd have stopped this buffoonery a long time ago.

And yeah, if they get Target to post no-CCW nationwide, then I will darn sure have some things to say about it. Millions of gun owners nationwide are bearing the consequences for the behavior of a dozen or two arrogant selfie-shooting "protesters".

 

[TennJed]

We actually have quite a bit of time to come to an understanding and heal our wounds before anything really important happens (elections, vote on OC in Texas, etc. We're kind of in a political dead-spot since primaries are over and the main event is still months away)

You do bring up a good point. How do we get the OCT extremist to quit their destructive behavior. Right now I am for making it clear that they do no t represent me and my ideals as a gun owner. I would prefer to have them stop. I am at a lost on how to do that, so unfortunately my only beneficial alternative is to be vocal against them.

Any suggestions on how to talk some sense into them?

 

[george burns]

They have a great name for a reverse campaign, TARGET, we could capitalize on that.

 

[BullfrogKen]

And I think you need to back off of statements like this -

You cannot think open carry should be lawful, and simultaneously claim moral outrage when people do. You can ignore them, you can reprimand them, you can even disown them as they have rightfully been disowned by OCT; but the level of attack I've seen is nothing less than a clear opposition; that open carry should not be tolerated. I'm sorry; you cannot effectively support open carry while condemning it. It is flagrantly disingenuous.

None of the recent outrage you're feeling is about exercising the choice to carry your handgun openly displayed if that's your preference.

It is about people choosing to be obnoxious. It's obnoxious to stage "protest" events at private businesses and use handguns for political displays. It is unsafe to pull handguns out in Starbucks to pose for a group selfie around the table. It's not normal, everyday, just-going-about-my-business behavior to walk around with rifles in three point slings as you run errands and get lunch in Downtown, USA.

If it were normal behavior, people wouldn't be taking photos of it for posterity. Stop trying to sell it to me like is it.

Neither is legal in Texas. People seem to keep forgetting this, or pretend like the presence of guns at a protest for guns is a completely unimportant aspect of the whole issue. We can't carry handguns openly. We can't protest with them concealed, since revealing you are carrying is a crime. Basically, we cannot show anyone guns in public is not the horror its claimed with anything other than rifles. Our hands are tied. Telling us to keep our hands behind us even as the bonds are cut makes the whole endeavor moot, and pointless to fight for.

This makes no sense. The presence - or absence - of firearms for a rally/protest/educational event isn't critical for the event to be a success. The message is. And the message sent is more than what you say.

Ever hear the expression, "its not what you say its how you say it?" Image is really important when you want to change attitudes and make progress. The image being sent by these open carry provocateurs is harmful to the cause. It is not necessary to flash guns around to get an effective message across.

But because its not possible to do it lawfully, taking this "our hands are tied" approach and carrying a long gun as the only permissible firearm just so you can be armed during your event is a strained logic to be sure. Regardless, it sours the message and the noise people see - the image - drowns out the message you want people to hear.

They [businesses and restaurants] could allow a place for people to exercise open carry . . .

Do you not know how unreasonable a statement like that comes across?

Let those of us who do not approve of these protests do something else to advance the cause, instead of whining about what others are doing

Vern, I can do more than one thing at a time. I can engage in productive efforts while at the same time distancing myself from those who insist on detrimental behavior. It's not an either/or proposition.


TennJed, I'm not sure you can stop the people on the radical fringe from doing this. If after the latest round of negative press; the once neutral restaurants and businesses being forced to take sides; the setback of support for open carry in the Texas legislature . . . I think the best thing we can do is make it clear they do not represent the mainstream and don't speak for the movement.

 

[barnbwt]

This makes no sense. The presence - or absence - of firearms for a rally/protest/educational event isn't critical for the event to be a success. The message is. And the message sent is more than what you say.

And I disagree. At some point, merely claiming that the presence of guns won't harm others no longer suffices; they will never believe guns are acceptable based on argument alone. So what do you propose to normalize them? Because if we want to keep OC/CC, we've got to normalize the practice. Is only CC suitable to be normalized? I would disagree with such a statement as being historically ignorant, but I would appreciate an open candor on the matter.

I agree the message is what's important. I also think the message itself can only go so far, and at some point (perhaps not now, but at some point) you've got to exercise an activity if it is to remain legal. I just don't see open carry staying legal for decades of demographic/political change if no one actually does it. If you think it's too early for that phase, fine. But it has to happen sooner or later, and if you believe it will never be acceptable, why the hell are we fighting to repeal the law? That's the disingenuous part.

It's obnoxious to stage "protest" events at private businesses and use handguns for political displays.

It's also obnoxious to stage "protest" events at private businesses and use picket signs for political displays, but whatever. I agree it's less than helpful politically. I don't agree it calls for legal restriction. I think the real solution is to find a more palatable alternative (i.e. give the motivated idiots a soap box in exchange for some responsible behavior; that, or get the cops called in, as responsible gun owners would if one of us was acting illegally)

Ever hear the expression, "its not what you say its how you say it?" Image is really important when you want to change attitudes and make progress. The image being sent by these open carry provocateurs is harmful to the cause. It is not necessary to flash guns around to get an effective message across.

What is our message? Because I don't think it's actually as clear & focused as you seem to think. I think there's about three or so different camps that all want separate end-goals for open-carry, and that's what is throwing our game so badly. That's where the mixed messages are coming from. We have to decide amongst ourselves which is the most cohesive with the body of our "gun rights philosophy" of personal responsibility and freedom from restriction within the bounds of others' rights.

BTW, excellent use of the word "provocateur;" it's the perfect term to use for these fools, in lieu of 'jackass' and 'idiot' and whatnot. Historically, it can be shown these people, of all stripes, don't accomplish much through their individual actions, but if they get traction with the right group of people or promoters, their avante garde baloney becomes accepted by society. No, I don't expect some redneck antics be given art-scene approval like some agit-prop comedy troupe would, but you get what I mean.

TCB

 

[barnbwt]

I can engage in productive efforts while at the same time distancing myself from those who insist on detrimental behavior. It's not an either/or proposition.

Absolutely. It's a necessary task, no less. We'll wander from our message and become ineffective, otherwise.

I'm not sure you can stop the people on the radical fringe from doing this.

Oh, yes we can...We use our contacts with them (I highly doubt they'd do this if abandoned by their own kind) to find out where they'll be doing this, and call the cops over if they get too rambunctious. Same as we'd do at any 'legitimate' protest where some idiot of ours gets drunk off a hidden flask and starts waving his CCW around (multiple entendres, I'm sure). The guys at Chipotle were blatantly carrying so as to illicit a fearful response, "to cause alarm," so I don't know why charges aren't being pressed by Chipotle, the customers offended enough to beef to MDA about it, the MDA, or even the local cops based on the visual evidence. Open-carry without brandishing is very feasible as a protest maneuver (obviously needs proper care, grooming, and screening of participants, though, just like the most tense of civil rights protests). I'm not sure if I'd find a bunch of armed rednecks or armed business-suited guys more alarming, though . I think polo's/slacks would be the way to go

TCB

 

[arizona_cards_11]

Wow.....I can see how a place called 'thehighroad' turns into a den of pretentiousness where 'progressives' and 'common sense gun-control' gun owners can walk hand-in-hand criticizing those dirty, inbred rednecks for their activism.

'If only those ignorant, trashy open carriers could be as civilized and as highroad-ish as we are........why, the moms against guns and the bureaucrats would see how reasonable we all really are.'

 

[kwguy]

It is about people choosing to be obnoxious.

Yup, and people who may be neutral on a topic may find themselves against it. People don't like obnoxious behavior thrown into their faces, and will push pack.

 

[DNS]

Yeah Arizona's right. HighRoad maybe needs to change to MiddleRoad, CompromiseRoad, Don'tAffendTheSheepleRoad or KeepItUnderYourShirtRoad. Besides real men shop at Walmart so take that Moms.

Might just grab my rolling block and join them next walk. I'll be the one with the chair cane.

 

[BullfrogKen]

barnbwt, very tough to follow your logic here. I'll leave you with a piece of related history and a question.

Back in the 90's homosexuality was still a lifestyle to openly ridicule, and those who were gay and lesbian not tolerated well at all. There were also several competing philosophies as to how to change people's attitudes towards it. The movement had its share of radical provocatuers, and among their favorite tactics were to attend amusement parks in large groups. They'd dress outrageously and perform over-the-top public displays of affection with each other, seeking out places where people would be captive audiences - long lines for popular rides and such.

That tactic only succeeded in angering families towards them and the parks which allowed it. It kept the movement - and the people themselves - from being thought of as normal or mainstream. It was only after they abandoned those in-your-face demonstrations and sought more sympathetic forms of protests and rallies did they begin to make progress. Of course having a sympathetic media helped out, too.


Question - in a state that does not permit openly carried handguns - like Texas - articulate why you feel you must be visibly armed with something in your demonstrations/protests to get your message across.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

so how is the OC protest working for you guys? Any examples where it achieved something?

Because if you do it over and over again - and it always leads to the same outcome (= chains banning OC on their premises) ... then MAYBE it's time to rethink the strategy

You think sitting on our duffs and whining about what others are doing is a better strategy?

 

[barnbwt]

Bullfrogken,
My logic is that we are fighting for exactly the ability to carry openly, thus, at some point we're going to have to start carrying openly. Don't think the same stuff and reaction won't happen with pistols "just because it's legal" next session. Now, when and how to start this process, that's open for debate; but it's gotta happen eventually or we won't have won anything.

TCB

 

[Ky Larry]

All rights come with responsibilities. I don't know who is right in this debate but let's look at this issue from a business owners perspective. If a restaurant manager starts making less money after the open carry guys start coming to their restaurant, how long before the management banns all carry at their restaurant? I have no evidence of this happening but it seems common sense to me. I'm not defending Target or any other business, but they will not take a chance on losing money.If 2 guys in camos and EBR's show up at Target and Target gets a thousand complaints about them, who do you thinks Target will listen to?

 

[Doc7]

All rights come with responsibilities. I don't know who is right in this debate but let's look at this issue from a business owners perspective. If a restaurant manager starts making less money after the open carry guys start coming to their restaurant, how long before the management banns all carry at their restaurant? I have no evidence of this happening but it seems common sense to me. I'm not defending Target or any other business, but they will not take a chance on losing money.If 2 guys in camos and EBR's show up at Target and Target gets a thousand complaints about them, who do you thinks Target will listen to?

What if target gets complaints from 100 million gun owners?

 

[benEzra]

Wow.....I can see how a place called 'thehighroad' turns into a den of pretentiousness where 'progressives' and 'common sense gun-control' gun owners can walk hand-in-hand criticizing those dirty, inbred rednecks for their activism.

'If only those ignorant, trashy open carriers could be as civilized and as highroad-ish as we are........why, the moms against guns and the bureaucrats would see how reasonable we all really are.'

So, you think activism doesn't need to be smart?

That rampantly, outrageously counterproductive tactics need to be embraced, rather than criticized?

That if the Texas OC bill is killed by these tactics (and it will be if they don't stop, even though it had been a shoe-in), and national chain after national chain takes anti-gun positions, it was all worth it in the name of idealogical purity and being "in your face" to the "sheeple"? What do such tactics gain you?

These tactics do not normalize open carry; they do exactly the opposite. They are not advancing the open carry bill in Texas; they are jeopardizing it, as stated by the bill's own sponsors and chief advocates. They do not advance gun rights; they are resulting in *fewer* gun rights nationwide.

The guys carrying out these tactics are the most effective tools the gun control movement has, and they need to wise up and get smarter about what they are doing....assuming they are not Bloomberg fronts to start with.

 

[Ky Larry]

Doc7, if we could get 100 million gun owners to just go vote, we'd have very little to worry about.

 

[BullfrogKen]

barnbwt, that's the best rationale you can come up with?

 

[Sol]

barnbwt, very tough to follow your logic here. I'll leave you with a piece of related history and a question.

Back in the 90's homosexuality was still a lifestyle to openly ridicule, and those who were gay and lesbian not tolerated well at all. There were also several competing philosophies as to how to change people's attitudes towards it. The movement had its share of radical provocatuers, and among their favorite tactics were to attend amusement parks in large groups. They'd dress outrageously and perform over-the-top public displays of affection with each other, seeking out places where people would be captive audiences - long lines for popular rides and such.

That tactic only succeeded in angering families towards them and the parks which allowed it. It kept the movement - and the people themselves - from being thought of as normal or mainstream. It was only after they abandoned those in-your-face demonstrations and sought more sympathetic forms of protests and rallies did they begin to make progress. Of course having a sympathetic media helped out, too.


Question - in a state that does not permit openly carried handguns - like Texas - articulate why you feel you must be visibly armed with something in your demonstrations/protests to get your message across.

Apples to Oranges.

Fast forward to present day, here in Cleveland, there is a gay street party, once or twice year, that stretches almost a mile down a main road, that is blocked off. Police work security. One can observe, from outside the exact same thing you described. Crossdressers and people with mechanical marital aids strapped to their heads isn't uncommon by any stretch of the imagination.

The old adage "All publicity is good publicity" is only true for actors, popstars and mainstream ideologies.

 

[Old Fuff]

Here in Arizona we are noted for the fact that we have almost no firearms related statutes at all. So far as handguns are concerned anyone who reaches their 18th birthday with a clean record can buy (from a private sale only, not an FFL) one and carry it openly or concealed without a permit or license of any kind. With the exception of buying guns, we even extend these conditions to visitors. While this lack of regulation sometimes worries some, the fact is we have no extraordinary problems because of it.

It wasn't always like this, in fact not too long ago concealed carry was prohibited for all except law enforcement officers. This was not because of a law, but nothing less then an amendment in the Arizona State Constitution.

What changed this was not because of in-your-face demonstrations, but getting organized to become a meaningful political force. When our legislators realized that we could make or break many of them at election time a whole lot of perceptions changed, and it ceased to be a Republican v. Democrat issue.

It didn't hurt that the warfare conditions going on in Mexico made more and more residents concerned about being able to protect themselves in an environment where an officer or deputy sherrif isn't always available to make a quick response.

 

[benEzra]

Fast forward to present day, here in Cleveland, there is a gay street party, once or twice year, that stretches almost a mile down a main road, that is blocked off. Police work security. One can observe, from outside the exact same thing you described. Crossdressers and people with mechanical marital aids strapped to their heads isn't uncommon by any stretch of the imagination.

Do they dress up like that and go crash church services, conservative local businesses, national-chain department stores, or national-chain family restaurants in groups while taking selfies and posting them on Facebook?

If they did, do you think it would tend to advance equal rights for GLBT's, or do you think it might tend to undermine their acceptance in society?

Comparing a gathering of like-minded individuals in a blocked-off area to flamboyant "protesting" inside restaurants that just want to sell people dinner reveals a bit of the logical disconnect here.

Not many people will complain if you hang a shotgun or rifle from a tac sling at a 3-gun match, on the firing line at a shooting range, rough camping, or even at a gun show (though the action will be shown-unloaded at the latter). We're talking about in-your-face grandstanding in local businesses that don't want such grandstanding on their premises, in front of other customers who will largely take their business elsewhere if the business doesn't kick the showoffs out.

There is a HUGE difference between simple OC of a holstered firearm as you go about your daily business, and "IN YER FACE, SHEEPLE, IMMA SHEEPDOG!!!" open carry, particularly of long guns. The latter is demonstrably unhelpful and counterproductive, is the topic of the current backlash, and is threatening to kill the Texas OC bill that these guys say they support.

 

[BullfrogKen]

Apples to Oranges.

No, it is a very fair comparison.


The closed-off, well-announced gay street party you tossed out is something I know is occurring, and can choose whether or not to participate in or be involved with. It's on public property.

What you described is not a fair comparison.


When families take vacations to Disneyworld, paying a few hundred dollars for entry tickets, they don't expect to walk into a gay party parade. It's inappropriate - even if one supports gay rights, or is gay himself - to see dozens of dudes dry humping each other and performing other lewd, sexually provocative behavior at a family theme park.

That behavior doesn't make people sympathetic to the lifestyle. It alienates, and if the park tolerates it, makes guests angry at the park and decide to go someplace else for vacation.

Its also why they abandoned that "in your face at the amusement park" campaign.


Now, if that is considered acceptable behavior at the gay day street party . . . I guess its just a commentary on a whole different, sidebar topic.

But at least that political/social protest is not being forced upon private property owners, and shoved in the faces of people who don't want to be annoyed by it.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

My logic is that we are fighting for exactly the ability to carry openly, thus, at some point we're going to have to start carrying openly. Don't think the same stuff and reaction won't happen with pistols "just because it's legal" next session. Now, when and how to start this process, that's open for debate; but it's gotta happen eventually or we won't have won anything.

This reminds me of Eula Mae Suggs.

We have ice storms here in the Ozarks. Sometimes they knock out power for weeks. After the last storm, Eula Mae's friends were telling her, "I tried to call you, but your phone doesn't ring."

Well, her phone did ring -- but not nearly as often as it used to. And each time it rang, she'd hear a moaning noise just before the ring. So she contacted the Telephone Company.

A lineman went up the pole next to her house, attached his test unit and dialed her number. And HE heard that strange moaning noise just before the phone rang.

It seems the ice storm broke the ground wire. She had a dog named Gomoramy, and he was chained by the house. Sometimes his chain would touch the ground wire, and if a call came through, he'd get an 80-volt shock, which would cause him to moan and urinate, which would make the connection and the call would go through.

Now, guys, this is the ONLY time in history pissing and moaning has solved a problem.