| Author | Post |
|---|
kingmonkey
Activist Member
| Joined: | Thu May 29th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 30 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 06:43 pm |
|
I'm working on a handout that I can give to people as part of my own little educational campaign to drum up support for open carry in Texas. What points would you bring out to help people understand the benefits of open carry?
|
DopaVash
Founder's Club Member
| Joined: | Fri Apr 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | Houston, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 259 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 06:58 pm |
|
Well the obvious of course:
Its a constitutional and god-given right.
It deters would-be criminals from acts of violence.
It is very functional for carriers in the Texas heat.
I think the beautiful thing about OC is that it and all of it's benefits are so obvious. I think it would be prudent to include a Frequently Asked Questions of all the common anti's counter-arguments and how we address them. And of course links to this site and TXCDL.org too.
|
Felid`Maximus
Activist Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | Reno, Nevada USA |
| Posts: | 531 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 07:10 pm |
|
I heard a police officer say he likes open carry because it allows him to know in advance that someone is armed.
|
DopaVash
Founder's Club Member
| Joined: | Fri Apr 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | Houston, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 259 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 07:17 pm |
|
Felid`Maximus wrote: I heard a police officer say he likes open carry because it allows him to know in advance that someone is armed.
I thought about that too, but I'm not sure that Texans would appreciate that part, not as a selling point anyhow. Texans are typically (and justly, I would say [I'm a Texan haha!]) are atleast somewhat paranoid of their government taking their guns.
I think the probably the FIRST thing to be on the Faq would be "So, what, you want to go back to the 'Old West'? Answer that by saying how the 'Old West' was actually a much, much safer place than modern-day city life, and then go on to say that it's not what we're looking for. Rather that we want to exercise our rights as Americans to Bear the arms that we Keep openly, as a deturrance from crime. Cite how an estimated 2.5 million times a year firearms are used in self defense, most of the time the mere presence of a firearm in the right hands fends off a criminal act, without ever firing!
|
Mokarov_9mm
Member
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26th, 2008 07:26 am |
|
It's hard to imagine the great state of Texas having an open carry problem....
One would think it had been taken care of long ago while G.Bush was Gov.
We're all pullin for you folks there to be brought onboard...good luck.
|
icode
Member
|
Posted: Tue Aug 26th, 2008 10:32 pm |
|
Crime deterrant
Public display of a God given right
Statement of having taken on the responsibility for your own safety
2A activism
Crime deterrant
Accessibility to the most useful selfdefense tool
|
Ebeye
Member
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27th, 2008 03:37 am |
|
| Keeps crazies from killing more people at restaurants, in front of their families.
|
Ebeye
Member
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27th, 2008 03:55 am |
|
Only free men can protect themselves (and other innocents). Slaves aren't allowed to.
Because this is America, not China or Russia.
|
Bookman
Member
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28th, 2008 10:26 am |
|
Luby's Cafeteria in TX
McDonald's in San Ysidro, CA
Tacoma Mall, Tacoma, WA
|
irfner
Activist Member
|
Posted: Sun Sep 7th, 2008 03:33 am |
|
| I posted this on another thread but it fits. "Thieves and other bad guys will usually size up an opportunity before they act. An openly carried firearm may deter a robbery or assault. Even when armed themselves bad guys don't like to get shot. So they will just shop elsewhere since there is an abundance of sheeple available for the picking. A firearm carried CC only reacts after the assault has begun. To pull or show it sooner is brandishing. CC is great for stopping an assault but it does little in the way of prevention. Then of course not carrying at all leaves you completely at the mercy of the BG. Good luck on that. So you are left with the following three choices. OC for prevention. CC to stop a crime in progress. Don't carry and be a victim. Choose your own comfort level."
|
Phoenixphire
Activist Member
|
Posted: Mon Sep 8th, 2008 04:58 am |
|
I have an issue with the "It's Your Right" line as the primary point on an informational flier.
It tends to imply one should do something because they can, not because they desire to do so.
It is also your right to go stand in front of the local courthouse, and say "hippy biibbity boob-ul-nuts" while dancing Riverdance, as each person walks by. After all, such an action would be protected under the First Amendment.
But just because you can, doesn't mean you do.
My point is this: Think of it from the perspective of the person receiving the flier.
What would you think if a group of four persons were outside the Post Office, two singing "hippy biibbity boob-ul-nuts" while doing the Riverdance, while two others handed out fliers letting you know that it is your natural RIGHT to do so?
My response would be along the lines of: "Ok, then... Thanks for letting me know." But, by no means, would I be convinced that next Tuesday, I need to head on over to the local park, and do some Riverdancing.
A flier should contain, primarily, information about WHY one should carry a firearm.
My favorite is the ole' health insurance / spare tire / seatbelt arguement.
Why do you have/use (insert from above)? Not because you want to pay for it/use it, but it would be foolish not to have/not to use.
Additional information would be local police response times, specific citations of violence in your community where everyone was helpless, information on local clubs and saftey instructors, etc.
The key is MAKE IT PERSONAL. Give the person information that shows the problem, and the solution.
Including information on your local, county, and state laws is helpful. Including information on rights guaranteed by your State Constitution and the Federal Constitution is important. Just don't make it the FOCUS of the flier, but rather a PART of the overall picture.
|
Phoenixphire
Activist Member
|
Posted: Mon Sep 8th, 2008 05:09 am |
|
Also, Mr. Oleg Volk has provided the RKBA community with incredible imagery to support activism.
A copy of my correspondence, by email, with him:
My initial letter:
Dear Mr. Volk:
I would like to find out about obtaining permission to use some of your very compelling imagery as educational materials.
I am active in the right to keep and bear arms fight, and I love the simple way your work conveys a point, much more effectively than I can.
Please let me know what I need to do to use your materials.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
(Name Removed For Forum Purposes)
His reply:
As long as you are using them to promote RKBA, you are welcome to use any of the posters and gun-related illustrations. Only commercial uses require a discussion because of a few images that have restrictive model releases.
|
Tess
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Thu Sep 11th, 2008 02:47 am |
|
kingmonkey wrote: I'm working on a handout that I can give to people as part of my own little educational campaign to drum up support for open carry in Texas. What points would you bring out to help people understand the benefits of open carry?
More rapid access to the firearm in the unthinkable event it was needed.
Deterrent. Criminals choose the weak and defenseless. The fact they can see you are neither keeps them away.
Concealment is difficult or impossible in some circumstances, seasons, or clothing.
|
Sidekick
Member
|
Posted: Mon Sep 15th, 2008 05:43 am |
|
Felid`Maximus wrote: I heard a police officer say he likes open carry because it allows him to know in advance that someone is armed.
This is what I've been told by 2 or 3 LEOs.
|
Loneviking
Member
|
Posted: Wed Sep 17th, 2008 04:29 pm |
|
| I'll add another one thats not on the list---safety! A gun in a belt or a shoulder holster is about the safest way to carry. With a deep concealment or IWB rig, there is always the chance of an accidental discharge, which can do considerable damage to you!
|
Diver_59
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jul 5th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 44 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18th, 2008 06:35 pm |
|
DopaVash wrote: Well the obvious of course:
Its a constitutional and god-given right.
It deters would-be criminals from acts of violence.
It is very functional for carriers in the Texas heat.
I think the beautiful thing about OC is that it and all of it's benefits are so obvious. I think it would be prudent to include a Frequently Asked Questions of all the common anti's counter-arguments and how we address them. And of course links to this site and TXCDL.org too.
I wouldn't go so far as to say it was a "GOD" givin right....but it is a right of ours in the constitution.
|
icode
Member
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18th, 2008 06:39 pm |
|
Diver_59 wrote: DopaVash wrote: Well the obvious of course:
Its a constitutional and god-given right.
It deters would-be criminals from acts of violence.
It is very functional for carriers in the Texas heat.
I think the beautiful thing about OC is that it and all of it's benefits are so obvious. I think it would be prudent to include a Frequently Asked Questions of all the common anti's counter-arguments and how we address them. And of course links to this site and TXCDL.org too.
I wouldn't go so far as to say it was a "GOD" givin right....but it is a right of ours in the constitution.
You don't think that God has given you the right to protect the very life that he gave you?
|
DanM
Member
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18th, 2008 07:32 pm |
|
icode wrote: Diver_59 wrote: I wouldn't go so far as to say it was a "GOD" givin right....but it is a right of ours in the constitution.
You don't think that God has given you the right to protect the very life that he gave you?
I don't think Diver is saying that God gave you life, but not necessarily the right to protect it. I think Diver is saying to leave the "God" premise completely out of the argument.
From a logical and practical standpoint, I think leaving God out has more merit than leaving him in.
Logically, by leaving God in as a premise, you open up your argument to more avenues of attack. Opponents may argue against your gun rights by arguing that you must substantiate your premises:
1)God exists.
2)God gave man life.
3)God gave man the right to defend the life given in #2 (yes, this is a separate step you would have to substantiate, if challenged).
From a practical standpoint, leaving God out broadens the appeal of the argument to those who don't believe that gods exist. Without God, the argument for gun rights is still solid and encompasses not only the religious but the non-religious as well.
|
icode
Member
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18th, 2008 07:38 pm |
|
DanM wrote: icode wrote: Diver_59 wrote: I wouldn't go so far as to say it was a "GOD" givin right....but it is a right of ours in the constitution.
You don't think that God has given you the right to protect the very life that he gave you?
I don't think Diver is saying that God gave you life, but not necessarily the right to protect it. I think Diver is saying to leave the "God" premise completely out of the argument.
From a logical and practical standpoint, I think leaving God out has more merit than leaving him in.
Logically, by leaving God in as a premise, you open up your argument to more avenues of attack. Opponents may argue against your gun rights by arguing that you must substantiate your premises:
1)God exists.
2)God gave man life.
3)God gave man the right to defend the life given in #2 (yes, this is a separate step you would have to substantiate, if challenged).
From a practical standpoint, leaving God out broadens the appeal of the argument to those who don't believe that gods exist. Without God, the argument for gun rights is still solid and encompasses not only the religious but the non-religious as well.
Understood, I believe this is why many have begun using the term "nature given right". Even if "you" don't believe in God "you" must believe that we have certain "natural" rights. Of course if "you" don't then the argument is pointless 
|
VonKonig
Member
| Joined: | Wed Sep 17th, 2008 |
| Location: | Lynnwood, WA |
| Posts: | 7 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18th, 2008 09:02 pm |
|
| I posted here http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum55/10996.html something along the lins of the topic being discussed in this thread. I will go there, copy and paste it here for you. I would be interested to hear from you.
|
Current time is 09:39 am | Page: 1 2   |
|
