Why I Think Open Carry Isn't Wiser than Concealed Carry (In Most Instances/For Most People)

[JohnKSa]

But I also take issue with the "if a bad guy sees your gun they'll take you out first argument." Think this through: you and your buddy are going to rob a gas station. You take a quick look around and see a police officer walk in. Do you shoot him in the head as your first move, or complete your purchase, walk outside, reassess, and maybe try again in 10 minutes?

Depends. I think the average criminal probably doesn't want to tangle with a cop. But this thread isn't really about whether uniformed cops should open carry or not.

What if that isn't a cop that walked in but a biker with a 1911 on his hip, or a trucker with a big 'ol revolver. What changes?

Could be the criminal decides they don't want to carry through, could be they decide that getting a gun in the deal is a bonus. Either way, the criminal knows something that the defender doesn't and has the option to use that knowledge to put the defender at a disadvantage if they choose.

Your goal is to "make crime pay," and that means not getting into a gunfight when all you want to do is steal $700 easy dollars.

Oh, certainly. They don't want a gunfight. But since they know who is armed in advance, there won't be one. From what I see on videos of robberies, even people who have a gun tend to give up and then give up their possessions when you screw a gun barrel into their ear or show them a closeup of the tip of a bullet by letting them look down the barrel. And if you just hit them hard enough on the head with an appropriate object, they give up involuntarily.

Some things to think about.

1. It's always a mistake to assume you're the craziest person in the room. We tend to predict the actions of others based on what we would do. We assume that they would reason things out the way we would. You don't want to bet that a criminal would reason things out like you would. The guy may need some cash for his next bag of meth and if that's the case, how close he is to needing it will probably have a lot more to do with what he does than any sort of rational thought process you would go through when planning a robbery.

2. A lot of robberies are performed with fake guns. I gotta think someone who's so brilliant that they would take a fake gun to a potential gunfight might be really pumped by the idea that they could upgrade by taking someone's gun in a robbery.

Respectfully, I am not sure where this thread is even going at this point.

People should have freedom to do as they choose. I think the government should intervene by creating laws and restrictions only when it is absolutely necessary. However, that does not mean that everything a person should have the freedom to do is equally wise/beneficial/advantageous.

If a person came to me and said, "I have $50 a week of spare income, what should I do with it?", I would suggest that they start some kind of savings/investment plan as opposed to spending it on the lottery. Not because I'm opposed to lotteries or think they should be restricted/illegal or because I think buying lottery tickets is stupid, but because I think it's generally more advantageous to save/invest the money than it is to buy lottery tickets with it. If the person gave me more information, "I already have a $15,000 emergency fund in savings as well as a 401K where I'm maxing out the contribution each year." then the advice I give him might be very different because circumstances matter.

The general idea is that different strategies have different value that is inherent to the strategy and the circumstances of the situation. As such, it's worthwhile to discuss the value of different strategies and how the circumstances of a situation might change the value of those strategies.

 

[LookAtYou]

You're saying this in post #2, but then you're asking people to justify their reasoning or willingness to open carry. Asking why you open carry here and not there. That sort of thing.

It's like you're chasing/fishing for an opposing view to debate.


I think that's where the "live and let live" crowd gets off the bus. Respectfully, I am not sure where this thread is even going at this point.

That may be how you, and/or others are taking it, I'm not 100% sure. But what I can tell you is my thought process/motives/intentions, or whatever is the best word to use. I don't remember even once asking someone to justify why they open carry, I remember only asking a few commenters what prompts them to switch from open carry to concealed carry. I'm especially curious about this if someone prefers to open carry. What makes them just not open carry all the time, if it's more comfortable, easier for them, or whatever other reason they seemingly prefer open carry? This helps me potentially gain knowledge.

This post from the beginning was listing my perceived risks/disadvantages of open carry, and why I think it's not wiser than concealed carry. Could that foster different opinions, or people that disagree? Sure. Pretty much any opinion can do that.

If people want to legally open carry, that's a choice they can make. I never said that I think open carry should be made illegal, never said that I hate open carry, nor involved governmental politics, talks of "anti-gunners", etc. Just a few things that popped into my mind regarding what I view as potential risks/disadvantages to open carry.

 

[LookAtYou]

I didn't say any of that, those are words you are putting in my mouth. Despite your urging, I don't see any reasons whatsoever to be "careful" with my response. What I was attempting to say, is that folks that I encounter, have more reactions of concern from seeing other certain stereotypes in a gas station, than when they see me carrying openly. Whether it is politically right or wrong, it is real life. No different than how folks react when they see a Rottweiler or Pit Bull running at them as compared to a Dachshund or Beagle. Nor did I try to induce any image of what the "average open carrier" looks/would be thought to look like. I am far from average and am not an example of anything. Only real examples I see here, are of ignorance.

I didn't put any words in your mouth. I didn't say you said any of those things. Notice the question marks, I was asking if you were saying those things.

 

[LookAtYou]

Depends. I think the average criminal probably doesn't want to tangle with a cop. But this thread isn't really about whether uniformed cops should open carry or not.

Could be the criminal decides they don't want to carry through, could be they decide that getting a gun in the deal is a bonus. Either way, the criminal knows something that the defender doesn't and has the option use that knowledge to put the defender at a disadvantage if they choose.

Oh, certainly. They don't want a gunfight. But since they know who is armed in advance, there won't be one. From what I see on videos of robberies, even people who have a gun tend to give up and then give up their possessions when you screw a gun barrel into their ear or show them a closeup of the tip of a bullet by letting them look down the barrel. And if you just hit them hard enough on the head with an appropriate object, they give up involuntarily.

Some things to think about.

1. It's always a mistake to assume you're the craziest person in the room. We tend to predict the actions of others based on what we would do. We assume that they would reason things out the way we would. You don't want to bet that a criminal would reason things out like you would. The guy may need some cash for his next bag of meth and if that's the case, how close he is to needing it will probably have a lot more to do with what he does than any sort of rational thought process you would go through when planning a robbery.

2. A lot of robberies are performed with fake guns. I gotta think someone who's so brilliant that they would take a fake gun to a potential gunfight might be really pumped by the idea that they could upgrade by taking someone's gun in a robbery.

People should have freedom to do as they choose. I think the government should intervene by creating laws and restrictions only when it is absolutely necessary. However, that does not mean that everything a person should have the freedom to do is equally wise/beneficial/advantageous.

If a person came to me and said, "I have $50 a week of spare income, what should I do with it?", I would suggest that they start some kind of savings/investment plan as opposed to spending it on the lottery. Not because I'm opposed to lotteries or think they should be restricted/illegal or because I think buying lottery tickets is stupid, but because I think it's generally more advantageous to save/invest the money than it is to buy lottery tickets with it. If the person gave me more information, "I already have a $15,000 emergency fund in savings as well as a 401K where I'm maxing out the contribution each year." then the advice I give him might be very different because circumstances matter.

The general idea is that different strategies have different value that is inherent to the strategy and the circumstances of the situation. As such, it's worthwhile to discuss the value of different strategies and how the circumstances of a situation might change the value of those strategies.

Very nice comment, Mr. JohnKSa

 

[LookAtYou]

In North Carolina OC is legal, but I don't see it much.
Especially in the city.
I did it a time or two...

It is kind of like those couple of days where I wore a Burger King crown around town all day just for the heck of it. People will treat you differently, and not always in the way you might expect (or welcome).

I couldn't be mad; I elected to wear the crown and had therefore "signed up" for whatever.



One pretty big difference, I have to say - nobody is going to snatch your BK crown off your head and end your life with it...

So, out of curiosity, how were you treated differently due to open carrying? I see you said people will treat you differently, and not always in a way you might welcome. Was your treatment negative in any way, from your perspective?

 

[LookAtYou]

I guess Rosa Parks should have just followed the bus driver's directions.

The ownership and carrying of arms is an inalienable right. Simple as that. Same as the First Amendment. Some people say stupid stuff it is their right to say stupid stuff and the public's right to ridicule them for saying stupid stuff.

Just because OC scares the anti-gunners, WHO CARES.

They don't want you to carry or own arms, PERIOD. appeasing them by staying in the closet and hiding ain't gonna win them over.

Stop being afraid and start being loud and proud as a gun owner.

This post wasn't made focusing on the right to open carry or not, on politicians, on "anti-gunners", on gun-control, etc. But rather, my personal opinion on what I view as disadvantages/risks regarding open carrying. With, discussion on the pros and cons of open carry expecting to be had in the comments. I think that's about as honest/transparent as I can get.

The fact is open carry is a thing, that is surely legal in many states/places. Open cary being a right/legal/a choice people can make does not change the fact that there are potential consequences (whether good or bad), and perceived pros and cons to it.

My making of this post was not intended to bash/shame open carriers. I already made that known from the get-go.

So to stay on topic, I'll ask you this, do you see any cons to being a visibly armed individual in public? Aka, open carrying. "Public" includes, well, potentially all sorts of people. Men, women, teenagers, children, thief's, thugs, confrontational/rowdy/testy people, criminals, etc.

Or maybe you don't see any cons to open carrying? Not tactically, socially, emotionally, etc.? No increased risks when compared to proper/effective (no-printing) concealed carry, aka not being visibly armed, yet still armed.

This isn't a trap, just questions and discussion.

 

[Kleanbore]

So to stay on topic, I'll ask you this, do you see any cons to being a visibly armed individual in public?

Yes indeed.

 

[jar]

Touching on stereotypes of that kind of person.

I belong to a high risk of being a target class.

I'm old.

I'm visibly out of shape.

I am most often alone.

I am most at risk during events when I will have my hands filled and attention elsewhere; pumping gas, at the mailbox, sitting in the car at a light or parked picking up groceries.

Lately there have been quit a few robberies, purse snatching and car jackings at local gas stations and grocery store parking lots.

I recently stopped to pump my monthly half-tank of gas.

It was early and as I pulled up to the pump I saw two men standing next to the display of bottled water in front of the station. They exchanged looks as I turned off the car and just as I was getting out of the car started walking towards me. As I closed the door my revolver in its holster were clearly visible and it was obvious that I was also looking at them.

They seemed to realize I was not the friend they were waiting to see and turned and headed off into the parking lot of the row of shops adjacent.

So the gist seems to be that you should never think ill of people simply waiting for a ride from a friend who happens to drive a car just like yours and needs to buy gas the same day as you and chooses the same gas station.

Or something like that.

A old person is an easy target.

An old person not on his cell phone or wearing ibuds is not quite as easy a target.

An old person not on his cell phone or wearing ibuds with his head on a swivel and aware of his surroundings is even less desirable a target.

An old person not on his cell phone or wearing ibuds with his head on a swivel and aware of his surroundings who is also armed might be a target best left for another day.

 

[Barmcd]

For those who carry, open or concealed, under your state's Constitutional carry authority, I highly recommend you take your state's concealed carry license/permit course. Just tell the instructor not to register you as a student with the state authorities. The purpose is to ensure you are fully aware of laws on carry location prohibitions that affect you, It is your choice to carry into prohibited locations, but you should do so with full awareness.
For open carriers, please consider the level of retention your holster has. Getting disarmed by a miscreant because he sees your easy-draw open carry holster would just suck, eh?

The reason I still maintain my concealed carry permit in Texas, even though they passed constitutional carry some years ago, is because of reciprocal gun laws. I can carry in some non-constitutional carry states because I have a permit.

 

[bearcreek]

Now, how about whipping up another list of the stories about those that saw a gun and didn't care.

That's obviously impossible. It also has no relevance to the discussion.

 

[Kleanbore]

An old person not on his cell phone or wearing ibuds with his head on a swivel and aware of his surroundings who is also armed might be a target best left for another day.

Unless the perp sneaks up, and happens to want the gun.

 

[Ignition Override]

Anything is good, if it reduces the desire for somebody to club me in the back of the head with a very fast-moving hard fist.

The ground impact (we know, don’t we?) so often is fatal.

 

[Old Dog]

Don't really have much to add, other than this seems to be the same old tired circular discussion, but I do live in a state in which open carry is not uncommon (even on the West side, though admittedly rare in King or urban Pierce Counties). I can't recall but only a couple anecdotes where open carriers caused any sort of stir, apparently due to Karen Syndrome. Guy up in Bellingham (near Canada border) a few years back encountered a couple local cops who apparently were unaware OC is legal in this state, so a bit of a ruckus ensued, but the OCer was vindicated and a LE advisory bulletin went out to all the departments in the state to remind patrol cops of the legality.

While it's not something seen every day, in my little village, at least once a week I'll see an OCer or two in a local Wal-Mart, Fred Meyer, Home Depot or Lowes... lots of young military types or older redneck dudes, sometimes couples.

So to stay on topic, I'll ask you this, do you see any cons to being a visibly armed individual in public?

If someone presents themselves well (neatly dressed and groomed), is quiet and courteous, has a good holster/belt combination, demonstrates a modicum of situational awareness, my answer is no (so long as the locale is not one in which any carry of a firearm is illegal/prohibited).

But when I see some obese (especially if it's a younger guy) man who starts panting after bending over to tie his boots, with a cheapo floppy nylon holster, no retention device, on a thin belt, looks sloppy and is very loud and rude, calls attention to himself... well, not a good representative of the RKBA community.

One can discuss the presumed tactical disadvantage of open carry should bad actors arrive on the scene, but the fact is that there are seemingly relatively few documented instances (@bearcreek's list notwithstanding) where folks intentionally open-carrying have been robbed of their firearms or victims of gun grabs.

Ever seen a report (and not in Brazil, please) of an OCer who became the first victim in a mass shooting, armed robbery or assault? That would seem to belie the supposition that an OCer is begging "shoot me first."

My making of this post was not intended to bash/shame open carriers.

Call it what you will. Yet you go to some lengths to state that you don't think open carry is "wise," while presenting multiple statements to support your contention that open carry is not tactically sound and that there are any number of bad things that can result if one does engage in open carry. So what you have concluded, without coming out and stating so, is that all of those who open-carry just are NOT smart, tactical and have not considered the myriad disadvantages to open carry.

 

[Miami_JBT]

This post wasn't made focusing on the right to open carry or not, on politicians, on "anti-gunners", on gun-control, etc. But rather, my personal opinion on what I view as disadvantages/risks regarding open carrying. With, discussion on the pros and cons of open carry expecting to be had in the comments. I think that's about as honest/transparent as I can get.

The fact is open carry is a thing, that is surely legal in many states/places. Open cary being a right/legal/a choice people can make does not change the fact that there are potential consequences (whether good or bad), and perceived pros and cons to it.

My making of this post was not intended to bash/shame open carriers. I already made that known from the get-go.

So to stay on topic, I'll ask you this, do you see any cons to being a visibly armed individual in public? Aka, open carrying. "Public" includes, well, potentially all sorts of people. Men, women, teenagers, children, thief's, thugs, confrontational/rowdy/testy people, criminals, etc.

Or maybe you don't see any cons to open carrying? Not tactically, socially, emotionally, etc.? No increased risks when compared to proper/effective (no-printing) concealed carry, aka not being visibly armed, yet still armed.

This isn't a trap, just questions and discussion.

Different tools for different jobs. Open Carry has its place and is an effective deterrent. My wife for example works in commercial real estate as an agent. She conceal carrys as required by law. But at the later hours, when she's leaving a property, it isn't unusual for a vagabond to size her up and approach her in a parking lot.

Open carry would act as a deterrent and tell said vagabond, "I'm armed, I'm not worth your time, go elsewhere."

Instead, since by law, her rights are restricted. She instead has to deal said vagabonds, she has to get defensive, become assertive, etc...

But if she could open carry, it would be vastly different. Much like nature. The rattlesnake rattles to warn others of, "don't mess with me, I'll kill you."

She's drawn once from concealed and other times have had to get in defensive posture and become very aggressive. Open carry would have prevented that.

It tells criminals to move along. As we saw during the "Summer of Love" when riots were happening across the country. Home owners and business owners stood their ground, defended their livelihoods, and did it by openly carrying. You had business owners stand on their roofs and in parking lots, openly carrying. You had home owners face down mobs who wanted to bum rush their house, and stopped it because they were openly carrying.

Politically, open carry is a very valuable tool. It allows the public to exercise their First Amendment rights to protect their Second Amendment rights. When you get a group of gun owners, openly carrying, it sends a strong political message to lawmakers and gun grabbers. It says, "we aren't afraid. We're proud, we're loud, we will not be silenced."

In TX, open carry protests laid the foundation for their constitutional carry, NFA nullification law, and Second Amendment protection act.

When I travel to GA and AL, I open carry all the time. No one bats an eye. Women, kids, cops, etc... no one cares. 45 states have open carry.

it doesn't hurt tourism in those states. TX, TN, GA, AL, NM, AZ, etc.... they all have open carry and their tourism related industries are perfectly fine. It does not scare people away. It doesn't shock folks. It is simply part of life.

In FL, it is a crime to open carry. As such, a number of people simply don't carry at all because of the ban. Spend a day in FL during summer and try to conceal something that isn't a Ruger LCP without melting. The need to keep concealed and not print limits the options out there.

Some folks don't carry micro-compacts because they don't like the recoil, others simply can't afford another gun. In the end, the hassle of trying to keep things concealed makes it a bother and some just say, "screw this, it is a pain in the butt to try to conceal a GLOCK 19 in this heat. I'll just leave it in the car/home."

As for you claiming your post isn't to bash, admonish, curtail, etc folks who open carry. You're wrong that.

Your post is what fuels gun grabbers. Your post is no different than folks who say things like, "I'm pro-gun, I'm for folks owning a Winchester 30-30 for deer hunting. But those dirty ARs with those icky 30rd mags need to be banned. And carrying handguns? Heck no! No one needs to carry a handgun!"

I fight anti-gun lawmakers for a living. It is my job. Prior to that I was a cop and I saw the abuses that otherwise law-abiding gun owners went through in FL. And I'm telling you from personal and professional experience. Your post and attitude helps fuel the gun grabbers and helps them continue to violate the people's Second Amendment rights.

It is real simple when it comes to dealing with other folks.

Does it pick my pocket or kick my shin? Does it hurt kids? Does it infringe on my rights or others? No? Then why make it an issue? You don't like open carry? Fine. Don't do it. Stop trying to force your mindset on others.

Your actions, and more importantly, your mindset doesn't help the cause. It doesn't preserve freedom. It doesn't help secure the Second Amendment for future generations.

 

[jar]

Unless the perp sneaks up, and happens to want the gun.

Of course. There are always examples that simply cannot be countered and any ambush for any reason gives the advantage to the attacker. But honestly the risk of that is similar to the risk of being trampled by a wild bison.

 

[silicosys4]

I have zero interest in the practice of open carry. As has been said many times, I am for the right, against the practice.

 

[Hartkopf]

Lots of posts claiming how you look and present yourself matters when open carrying. As long as it’s not racial, I agree.

 

[Kleanbore]

But honestly the risk of that is similar to the risk of being trampled by a wild bison.

Hah!

Well, if one does not carry openly, yeah.

But so few people so carry openly that sufficient data to compare the frequency of occurrence with exposure.

To evaluate the risk would require an extensive scientific experiment.

But I'll just avoid the exposure.

 

[Kleanbore]

Open Carry has its place and is an effective deterrent

Can be an effective deterrent--or not.

Politically, open carry is a very valuable tool. It allows the public to exercise their First Amendment rights to protect their Second Amendment rights. When you get a group of gun owners, openly carrying, it sends a strong political message to lawmakers and gun grabbers.

Hogwash! That is naive wishful thinking.

I am aware of no instances in which "exercising" rights has protected them.

The legalization of open carry in Texas made concealed carry off limits in a lot of places where it had been permitted before.

Persons carrying openly in urban areas in Missouri resulted in the passage of many local ordinances prohibiting it, but state law allows it for concealed carry permit holders. There is an alarmingly large movement pushing the legislature to eliminate the state preemption law at this time.

In New York State, SCOTUS rulings permitting concealed carry have made much of the state where concealed carry had been permitted off limits.

I know of no examples to the contrary.

it doesn't hurt tourism in those states. TX, TN, GA, AL, NM, AZ, etc.... they all have open carry

Yes, in Phoenix, a tourist entering a restaurant may be the only person carrying openly. But in Texas, open carry is extremely rare.

In FL, it is a crime to open carry.

Yep.

As such, a number of people simply don't carry at all because of the ban.

I know and correspond with quite a number of people who carry concealed in Florida.

Has anyone whom you know who does not carry in Florida attributed that to the ban on open carry?

As for you claiming your post isn't to bash, admonish, curtail, etc folks who open carry. You're wrong that.

Your post is what fuels gun grabbers. Your post is no different than folks who say things like, "I'm pro-gun, I'm for folks owning a Winchester 30-30 for deer hunting. But those dirty ARs with those icky 30rd mags need to be banned. And carrying handguns? Heck no! No one needs to carry a handgun!"

I disagree completely.

Your post and attitude helps fuel the gun grabbers and helps them continue to violate the people's Second Amendment rights.

Just how do you think it does that?

Your actions, and more importantly, your mindset doesn't help the cause. It doesn't preserve freedom. It doesn't help secure the Second Amendment for future generations.

Actually, it may do all of those things, by making people aware that the best way to cause protest, and adversely influence legislators is to worry and inflame anti-gunners by carrying openly in places where it is socially unacceptable.

 

[GEM]

Exactly, well said! In TX, the open carry advocates almost sunk the much more important campus carry and parking lot laws.

BTW, the OC types I saw in TX were all of the big belly, crap holster paradigm. The competent OC types were FBI agents and a set of female detectives, nicely dressed with gold badges, quality holsters, extra mags, etc. - doing lunch in upscale restaurant. The OC big bellies - no spare mags, implying no real knowledge of semi carry.

 

[buck460XVR]

Call it what you will. Yet you go to some lengths to state that you don't think open carry is "wise," while presenting multiple statements to support your contention that open carry is not tactically sound and that there are any number of bad things that can result if one does engage in open carry. So what you have concluded, without coming out and stating so, is that all of those who open-carry just are NOT smart, tactical and have not considered the myriad disadvantages to open carry.

^^^ well said my friend.

by making people aware that the best way to cause protest, and adversely influence legislators is to worry and inflame anti-gunners by carrying openly in places where it is socially unacceptable.

I've yet to see anyone here make the point of intentionally carrying openly in places where it is socially unacceptable. I certainly wouldn't OC to my grand-kid's soccer game. Here in Wisconsin, I certainly wouldn't open carry a weapon within 1000 feet of any school. This is just responsible gun ownership. Yet, the focus on the majority of these types of threads, is that it is irresponsible to open carry at all.....unless you are in the woods hunting. Folks that have no clue as to what is "socially unacceptable" where others live, trying to make the claim it is. Telling tales of woman and children screaming and running away at the mere sight of a exposed weapon. "Real" men looking down their noses in disdain. Basically trying to make those actions....socially acceptable. So many times what I see here, are folks that are our own worst enemy. They trash talk about FUDDS, but are in reality, FUDDS themselves. You either support legal and responsible gun ownership or you don't. While you may not embrace how others practice their 2nd Amendment rights, as long as they do it legally and responsibly, what's the issue. So many of these threads are all about trying to get folks to reinforce the authors own opinion. Let's start a thread that I know the majority of folks feel a certain way and go with it. The ol' "preachin' to the choir" thingy. As has been said, this topic has been hashed over so many times here, that unless you just joined yesterday, you already know where it is going.

 

[Miami_JBT]

^^^ well said my friend.


I've yet to see anyone here make the point of intentionally carrying openly in places where it is socially unacceptable. I certainly wouldn't OC to my grand-kid's soccer game. Here in Wisconsin, I certainly wouldn't open carry a weapon within 1000 feet of any school. This is just responsible gun ownership. Yet, the focus on the majority of these types of threads, is that it is irresponsible to open carry at all.....unless you are in the woods hunting. Folks that have no clue as to what is "socially unacceptable" where others live, trying to make the claim it is. Telling tales of woman and children screaming and running away at the mere sight of a exposed weapon. "Real" men looking down their noses in disdain. Basically trying to make those actions....socially acceptable. So many times what I see here, are folks that are our own worst enemy. They trash talk about FUDDS, but are in reality, FUDDS themselves. You either support legal and responsible gun ownership or you don't. While you may not embrace how others practice their 2nd Amendment rights, as long as they do it legally and responsibly, what's the issue. So many of these threads are all about trying to get folks to reinforce the authors own opinion. Let's start a thread that I know the majority of folks feel a certain way and go with it. The ol' "preachin' to the choir" thingy. As has been said, this topic has been hashed over so many times here, that unless you just joined yesterday, you already know where it is going.

Thank you....

 

[Kleanbore]

I've yet to see anyone here make the point of intentionally carrying openly in places where it is socially unacceptable.

Nor have I, personally, but people who do it have created real problems for gun people.

Telling tales of woman and children screaming and running away at the mere sight of a exposed weapon.

That did happen to me. Would you prefer the I not point out? If so, why?

You either support legal and responsible gun ownership or you don't.

I do.

While you may not embrace how others practice their 2nd Amendment rights, as long as they do it legally and responsibly, what's the issue.

IT IS VERY SIMPLE! I am not one of them, but there are a lot of people who react very poorly to the sight of a firearm. They protest, the demonstrate, they write letters, they put up art signs, and they travel to state capitals.

They endanger the right to keep and bear arms.

They put current laws at risk, they delay the passage of new ones. That's not speculation--that's history and current events., shown on tV whenever it happens.

Let's start a thread that I know the majority of folks feel a certain way and go with it.

Oh, come now!

 

[buck460XVR]

Nor have I, personally, but people who do it have created real problems for gun people.

...and so have folks who have never OCed in their life. I see many instances of it here with folks pounding their chest, stating that CWC means concealed, so they can and will carry any where they want, even where it's illegal or posted otherwise. How about the CWC that has to go online and brag about his "WalMart walk"? Prime examples of preaching to the choir, but when it's echoed outside of these types of forums, how much help does it do to the "cause".

That did happen to me. Would you prefer the I not point out? If so, why?

....are you claiming you OCed somewhere "socially unacceptable"? Was it the woman and children's fault or yours? Sorry about your bad luck, but as I have stated, I have had numerous positive experiences, doesn't that carry as much weight as your one?

IT IS VERY SIMPLE! I am not one of them, but there are a lot of people who react very poorly to the sight of a firearm. They protest, the demonstrate, they write letters, they put up art signs, and they travel to state capitals.

They endanger the right to keep and bear arms.

They put current laws at risk, they delay the passage of new ones. That's not speculation--that's history and current events., shown on tV whenever it happens.

....and there are a lot of people out there that do not react very poorly to the sight of a firearm. Even those folks who have never seen an OC scenario will write letters, put up signs and travel to state capitals, endangering the RKBA. Reading/hearing examples from so called "gun advocates" that OC is wrong or "socially unacceptable", is just adding fuel to their fire. Thanks for that.

Oh, come now!

Been here longer than you. See it all the time. Like making sure you pick a fight in a bar with someone you can easily whip. As I said in my previous post, these threads always end up the same as folks jump on the bandwagon. They always start out with a "I'm not bashing anyone", but then it soon gravitates in that direction as the author attempts to justify his opinion. No different than the "I always use factory ammo in my SD/HD guns!". Yet, that one has calmed down severely over the years as more and more folks are getting into reloading. Same with MIM parts. They were the bain of the gun world and bashed by fanboys of makers who had not yey started to use them....until. Both of those, like this type of thread were started by folks that knew at that time, what the majority was going to say. Now.....not so much. Just a casual observation. Bet at some time, these types of threads will go down the same road.

 

[Kleanbore]

...and so have folks who have never OCed in their life

So what?

....are you claiming you OCed somewhere "socially unacceptable"?

No. An inadvertent, momentary, and perfectly lawful display of a firearm carried IWB occurred in a store.

Was it the woman and children's fault or yours?

What are you talking about?

Sorry about your bad luck, but as I have stated, I have had numerous positive experiences, doesn't that carry as much weight as your one?

No. Think about it. they cannot and do not influence public opinion.

....and there are a lot of people out there that do not react very poorly to the sight of a firearm.

Nor do they.

Even those folks who have never seen an OC scenario will write letters, put up signs and travel to state capitals, endangering the RKBA.

I suggest not encouraging them, wither to promote unfavorable legislation or to have more privately-owned premises marked off limits, a la Texas..

Reading/hearing examples from so called "gun advocates" that OC is wrong or "socially unacceptable", is just adding fuel to their fire.

How? Do you think that they frequent THR?

Yet, that one has calmed down severely over the years as more and more folks are getting into reloading. Same with MIM parts. They were the bain of the gun world and bashed by fanboys of makers who had not yey started to use them....until.

WAY off topic!

. Both of those, like this type of thread were started by folks that knew at that time, what the majority was going to say. Now.....not so much. Just a casual observation. Bet at some time, these types of threads will go down the same road.

Actually, there are very good reasons for that, both tactical , or which there are pros and cons to open carry, and sociopolitical.

For my part, if we could eliminate the sociopolitical factors and their potential to work against the right to keep and bear arms, and there are places in Arizona and Missouri where that would likely happen, I would love to be able to carry my five inch 686+, or a Python, if had one. I would have to carry it openly.

I would not carry it into an entablishment in which I would shop from shelves or stand in line at a counter, or at an ATM or a gas pump. Under the aforementioned assumption, the reasons would be purely tactical.