|
|
|
OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum > Open Carry Brigade > Why Open Carry > OPEN CARRY VS. CONCEALED CARRY
|
|
||
| OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum > Open Carry Brigade > Why Open Carry > OPEN CARRY VS. CONCEALED CARRY
|
|||
| Moderated by: jpierce | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member 
|
OPEN CARRY VS. CONCEALED CARRY Revision 1.24 Written By: Garry E. Harvey The purpose of this essay is to examine the two competing points of view within the handgun carry community and consider each one for its merits, both good and bad, from a common sense and logical point of view. INTRODUCTION "AN ARMED SOCIETY IS A POLITE SOCIETY" Weapons and firearms in particular have been personified by many in recent decades as being evil and able to impart that evil into anyone who chooses to wield the weapon. In the anti-gun community, the only ones who appear to be immune from the gun's evil are those acting under the authority of government. It has been engrained into the minds of millions that ordinary citizens cannot and should not be trusted with the ability to use firearms for protection much less carry them into the public. Anyone who advocates such action is labeled evil, dangerous, or a vigilante. This line of thinking appears to be slowing eroding away as evidenced by the fall of the once prominent and powerful anti-gun lobby. The number of people choosing to carry a weapon for self protection has been growing steadily since the first laws were enacted. The cry of anarchy and blood running in the streets by the anti-gun lobby has proven false. As this has become more and more apparent, no thinks to the main stream media, the average citizen is beginning to change their minds over the issue. Criminals in an armed society know that their actions may garner them instant peril of death should they choose the wrong victim. That old saying still proves to be as true as it ever was, "An armed society is a polite society."Carrying a pistol has been a part of my daily routine for going on four years. During that time I've taken almost every opportunity to speak with people from each end of the spectrum regarding the issue. Before I ever received my permit I remember part of a conversation I had with a party advocate for the Al Gore campaign in early 2000. Among the issues I posed to her during our conversation was that of Mr. Gore's support of gun control measures. She scoffed at me and snobbishly remarked that we didn't live in the Wild West. At the time I was not as well versed in the issue as I am now and really had no response although with her status I would have had more luck convincing a fence post otherwise. Over the next seven years I made it a point to broach the topic every chance I had with whomever I thought might have an interesting opinion on the matter. I researched the writing of the founding fathers and their predecessors with fervor. I studied the history of gun-control in America from the civil war forward, the rise of anti-gun organizations and those pro-gun organizations who rose in opposition to defend the Constitution. Having made my decision as to which side I was on I was surprised at the sometimes hateful opposition to carrying a firearm openly by members of the pro-gun rights community. It is for this reason I have undertaken to write this for everyone within that community. Before I delve into specifics let me state firstly that how one chooses to carry their weapon is their own choice and should not be subjected to harassment from others who disagree with that choice. My purpose is not to hold one method above the other but rather detail the benefits of both and leave it to the reader to decide for his or herself which they prefer. CONCEALED CARRY THE ELEMENT OF SURPRISE The most prominent reason given by proponents of carrying concealed is the element of surprise. There are many hypothetical situations which have been posed to prove this point but they all boil down to the CRIMINAL not being aware of the ARMED CITIZEN as anymore of a threat than the UNARMED CITIZEN. The result is that the ARMED CITIZEN may reserve the option to use deadly force until the situation is favorable or not, should the threat cease.What are the negatives associated with this logic and why is it not perfect in all situations? Well, one must first assume they will not be the sole primary target but rather a third party or in a group setting. The element of surprise is quickly rendered null once you are at knife or gunpoint with nothing to distract your attacker. Assuming the attacker becomes distracted sufficiently enough to attempt a weapon draw the victim must consider the risk and added time needed to draw from a concealed location. If all factors are not in the victim’s favor then the attacker is likely to win as his weapon was already in the ready position. Another reason given for favoring concealed carry is the fear or perceived risk of the weapon being taken by the CRIMINAL. In one of two versions the CRIMINAL takes the weapon after it has been drawn from the holster and pointed at him. This is commonly shown in movies where the CRIMINAL takes the gun as the ARMED CITIZEN is too afraid to shoot. Unless the attacker is suicidal or the firearm is incapable of firing for some reason, expect to see this situation stay in the movies. The second of the two concerns the CRIMINAL successfully taking the weapon from the holster before the ARMED CITIZEN can react. This has happened to police officers and so it could happen to the ARMED CITIZEN as well but consider this following difference. In all but a minority of cases, the CRIMINAL took the officer's weapon once being confronted by the officer or while being placed under arrest. The act was one of desperation as the reward of escape outweighed the risk of taking the weapon from the officer. Assuming the weapon is properly holstered in a professional manner, the ARMED CITIZEN would only pose a threat to the CRIMINAL within a self-defense situation; the risk to the CRIMINAL would be overwhelming in attempting to steal the weapon as this act would trigger the self defense reaction from the ARMED CITIZEN. Another less logical reason for not carrying openly is that one does not want to appear to be "looking for trouble." This line of thought seems to have evolved from the anti-gun accusation that everyone who carries a weapon is looking for a fight. The illogical hypothetical given for example tends to go as follows. The CRIMINAL sees the ARMED CITIZEN carrying a weapon and for no logical reason chooses to confront the ARMED CITIZEN and instigate a fight which inevitably ends with the CRIMINAL winning. Upon close scrutiny the reason and the hypothetical posed do not match up. First, why would the CRIMINAL want to fight an armed opponent for no reason? The CRIMINAL would have to lack any kind of judgment, have no fear of death and believe he is the fastest shooter on earth, not to mention invincible to bullets. Finally, how exactly is the ARMED CITIZEN the one "looking for trouble" when the CRIMINAL prompted the confrontation? Was it not the CRIMINAL "looking for trouble" by targeting the ARMED CITIZEN and pushing him into a self defense situation? This line of thinking is similar to accusing a rape victim of wanting to be raped because she was supposedly dressed provocatively. Although there are other reasons I've been given for carrying concealed, the ones discussed have been some of the most prevalent; of the three only two hold some historical basis for concern but the last one falls apart upon a logical evaluation. The real reason for concealment has less to do with a tactical advantage, I think, and more to do with a social advantage. If the ARMED CITIZEN thinks he would be better served in a temporary social environment to have his weapon concealed then by all means do so. An example might be that you're shopping at a local mall owned and operated by big city politically correct hacks that are obviously anti-gun. If you know they'll ask you to leave their property should they become aware of you exercising your rights, it would be understandable to conceal it from their view; that is if you have to shop there. Maybe you're going to church and you don't want to draw attention from the preacher and his sermon. Bottom line, you should conceal when you think it is reasonable and serves a nobler purpose, not because someone pressured you. THE CASE FOR OPEN CARRY BEWARE OF DOG/GUN A sign, be it text, picture, or symbol, is something visual which communicates a clear message to the observer. The observer can choose to disregard the sign but nonetheless they are forced to consider the message before proceeding. Examples of signs conveying an important message would be "BEWARE OF DOG", "NO SMOKING", "EMERGENCY EXIT", or the more ominous "DEADLY FORCE AUTHORIZED". Each sign aids the observer in any potential decision making. Of course, the observer may choose to ignore the warning but this choice will be made based on whether the potential reward outweighs the risk.The case for open carry is simple. I would submit that in much the same way that a sign works, when the ARMED CITIZEN carries his weapon in the open it communicates a clear message to any observer. To an observer who has no intention of causing harm or using illegal force the sign should be meaningless. However, when the CRIMINAL observes this same sign he must reconsider whether the potential reward outweighs the risk. Where the risk was simply being caught or having to physically overpower the UNARMED CITIZEN it now suddenly rises to potentially enduring great pain and death when confronting the ARMED CITIZEN. Do insane or even desperate CRIMINALS exist who would disregard such an obvious sign and follow through with an attack? As with any possibility the answer is YES but even though they exist their actions do not support the opposing view that open carry should be avoided. They can still be potentially stopped by the ARMED CITIZEN once he becomes aware of the CRIMINALS intent to present a lethal threat. With regard to the element of surprise discussed earlier, open carry actually supersedes the need for surprise. If carrying openly causes the CRIMINAL to avoid you and those around you as his victims then the need for surprise is negated. Your display of an ability to employ deadly force has avoided the confrontation before it even began, avoided the threat to your life and having to actually use your weapon. As the CRIMINAL moves on to easier prey you will likely never be aware it even happened. CONCLUSION THE REAL PROBLEM WITH OPEN CARRY What is the real reason some shy from open carry? I believe it to be fear; the anxiety of having to confront someone hostile to their choice to carry a weapon for personal defense. As a pro-carry activist I welcome it but I can understand where a large section of armed citizens do not. Are there times when it is expedient to conceal your sidearm, definitely! Should you feel ashamed to carry it openly, NO! Hundreds of thousands of people have fought state after state to pass legislation to restore that right which was once only granted at the behest of local law enforcement.Anti-gun hacks claim to have a right to "feel safe." This non-existent right has been twisted from the right to "be secure in one's person and effects" a right I exercise whenever I carry my weapon. The anti-gun crowd has the twisted perception that the weapon and not the criminal is the threat. They will and have called the police to harass the ARMED CITIZEN; I advise you show your permit and carry on. They may card you as many times as they wish as I long as you know you are legal nothing they do should stop you from carrying openly. We, the pro-carry citizens, have to stop criticizing each other. We have to stop playing footsy with the politically correct crowd and stick together. Public opinion can be swayed in our favor if we as law abiding citizens can show through open carry that we are safe, caring individuals whose only want is to be able to defend our family and ourselves from needless victimization. Ben Franklin said it best when he explained that "the very fame of our strength and readiness would be a means of discouraging our enemies; for tis a wise and true saying that one sword often keeps the other in the scabbard. The way to secure peace is to be prepared for war. Those who are on the guard and appear ready to receive their adversaries are in much less danger of attack than the secure, the supine, and the negligent." 2007, Garry Harvey. This essay may be reproduced with the condition that it be kept in its entirety and cited accordingly. Attachment: OCvsCCv1_24.pdf (Downloaded 139 times) Last edited on Fri Feb 20th, 2009 03:00 pm by fullauto223cal |
|||||||||
|
Felid`Maximus Activist Member 
|
I'm a big supporter of both. Open carry is my preferred choice. Frst of all, I'm too young to CCW, second I wouldn't want to pay the fee, and third I just like it better. However, it would be nice to CC on some really cold days where you want to wear a jacket. I think all states should allow both everywhere with no licensure required. |
|||||||||
|
WhiteRabbit22 Regular Member
|
That's how it should be anyway. No state in this country should have gone to a "permit" system. So far, Vermont and Alaska are the only states honoring the 2A to the fullest. |
|||||||||
|
FogRider Regular Member 
|
Great paper! Are you the author fullauto223cal? I would like to print/email this and give it to some other people, but I also want to give credit where it is due. If you are not the author, could you please point me in the right direction? There is only one place that I can say I don't agree with. To an observer who has no intention of causing harm or using illegal force the sign is meaningless.To someone who is anti-gun it is not meaningless, however they perceive the meaning to be "beware of the dangerous person". However wrong that line of reasoning may be, it is still there and ought to be taken into account. Last edited on Thu Jan 17th, 2008 10:52 pm by FogRider |
|||||||||
|
flounder22 Regular Member 
|
WOW! fullauto, if you are the true author of this writing, please, stand up and take a bow! Very well said. You have hit the nail straight on the head! |
|||||||||
|
Sheldon Regular Member
|
Very good write up indeed, Me I do both dependent upon the circumstances, there is a place for OC and CC, when in the wild OC is far superior access speed is your friend. |
|||||||||
|
tarzan1888 Regular Member 
|
I support both. Because of my individual situation I usually end up carrying more concealed than I do openly. What ever works best for you. Tarzan |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
Yes, I did in fact write this paper. I spent about two days while working a part time job guarding an empty state medical building. Needless to say I had a lot of time to think everything through. If you want to send it you may, my real name is Garry Harvey Jackson, TN Last edited on Sat Jan 19th, 2008 03:30 am by fullauto223cal |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
FogRider wrote: Great paper! Are you the author fullauto223cal? I would like to print/email this and give it to some other people, but I also want to give credit where it is due. If you are not the author, could you please point me in the right direction? How about "To an observer who has no intention of causing harm or using illegal force the sign should be meaningless." I think that would satisfy your just argument. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll make the nessacary changes. |
|||||||||
|
OC-Glock19 Founder's Club Member 
|
I really liked your analysis, Garry. Thanks for sharing it with all of us. I did notice one small typo though: The word "smokeing" should be "smoking". |
|||||||||
|
SouthernBoy Regular Member 
|
There are a number of grammatical errors in the text, however I am not going to make any corrections. Nice piece of work. |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
Southernboy and everyone else, I still consider this paper a work in progress. If any of you have any corrective criticism please post or send me a private message. One of my college professors once told me that “a writer cannot be his own editor”. This isn’t the first thing I’ve ever written to not be 100% perfect. I await your responses. Thanks. Last edited on Mon Jan 21st, 2008 12:49 am by fullauto223cal |
|||||||||
|
Thundar Regular Member 
|
Sometimes I conceal and sometimes I open carry. I normally prefer open carry. Sometimes the law dictates that I conceal. Perhaps a few sentences that indicate that the armed citizen does not always have a legally available choice. |
|||||||||
|
radwood Regular Member
|
You left out the common arguement that open carrying will make you the first target. It's easy enough to refute and will save time versus the millions of e-mails you'll get from the anti-OC crowd saying "AHA! I found the flaw in your analysis! OC makes you a bullet magnet!" Beyond that and a few spelling/conventions errors it's a pretty good paper. |
|||||||||
|
FogRider Regular Member
|
fullauto223cal wrote:
Cool. It just seems to me that it is not meaningless there would be no problems carrying, yet there they are. radwood wrote: You left out the common arguement that open carrying will make you the first target. It's easy enough to refute and will save time versus the millions of e-mails you'll get from the anti-OC crowd saying "AHA! I found the flaw in your analysis! OC makes you a bullet magnet!" I think that was addressed in the CC section. Last edited on Sun Jan 20th, 2008 05:50 am by FogRider |
|||||||||
|
Doug Huffman Regular Member 
|
Sheldon wrote: Very good write up indeed, Me I do both dependent upon the circumstances, there is a place for OC and CC, when in the wild OC is far superior access speed is your friend. You have been called out. Your honor is at stake. http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=7424&forum_id=30&jump_to=122105#p122105 |
|||||||||
|
Heartless_Conservative Regular Member
|
Doug Huffman wrote: Sheldon wrote:Very good write up indeed, Me I do both dependent upon the circumstances, there is a place for OC and CC, when in the wild OC is far superior access speed is your friend. For the love of the innumerable gods of darkness use the damn PM function, and stop spamming half the forum. |
|||||||||
|
Pa. Patriot State Researcher 
|
Great paper. Linked up on paopencarry.org Linked from the "FAQ" page and the "links" page. http://www.paopencarry.org/openvconcealed.html |
|||||||||
|
openindy Opt-Out Member
|
May we repost that? |
|||||||||
|
Ford Truck Regular Member
|
In my opinion, that was very well written. Thank you. |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
HEY EVERYONE!! FIRST, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE ENCOURGEMENT! I want everyone to know that this is still a work in progress. If any of you have anything you think will make this a better artical please send me a (PM) or post a reply on this thread. Keep the ideas and critisizm coming. Oh, and in case you haven't noticed I've added a Revision stamp and given credit to all who can help me perfect this article further. I've got my ears open brothers! If you guys repost it then (PM) me with a link, I'd like to see what those people say about it as well. Last edited on Mon Jan 21st, 2008 12:48 am by fullauto223cal |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
radwood wrote: You left out the common arguement that open carrying will make you the first target. It's easy enough to refute and will save time versus the millions of e-mails you'll get from the anti-OC crowd saying "AHA! I found the flaw in your analysis! OC makes you a bullet magnet!" Although I didn't state that argument verbatim, please refer to the "looking for trouble" counter argument under CONCEALED CARRY paragraph four as well as “risk vs. reward” logic in paragraph three. In summary, it is illogical that a criminal would instigate a gun fight for no other reason than to instigate a gun fight. I challenge anyone opposed to Open Carry to cite one documented case where a criminal did what they claim will happen. The behavioral evidence in support of Open Carry is well documented. If you think I should address this more specifically that’s fine, send me what your argument would be and we’ll see about inserting it. Last edited on Mon Jan 21st, 2008 05:27 am by fullauto223cal |
|||||||||
|
Pa. Patriot State Researcher
|
fullauto223cal wrote: I'd like to see what those people say about it as well. Cross-posted: http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed-open-carry-121/15157-open-carry-vs-concealed-carry-paper-garry-e-harvey.html#post186024 |
|||||||||
|
deepdiver Activist Member 
|
Well done. I do have a few comments. I'll either post them up here later or PM you. |
|||||||||
|
Schofield Regular Member 
|
Please note: I'm brand new to this forum and I've mostly been browsing various threads; I haven't seen this addressed anywhere yet. I agree completely that the idea of someone wearing a firearm to be "looking for trouble" is a logical fallacy. I'm a huge fan of OC, CC, and firearms. The essay is very well written and succinct. What about a situation where someone deranged intends to go in shooting? If they see someone standing in line wearing a pistol, they'll almost certainly decide to take out that threat first. Not in a one-on-one confrontation but the ghoul against *everyone*, you're simply in their way. Concealed carry would at least give you the few seconds of leeway, not being the first target, to draw and fire. Curious. - Schofield Last edited on Sat Jan 26th, 2008 08:50 am by Schofield |
|||||||||
|
deepdiver Activist Member
|
Schofield wrote: Please note: I'm brand new to this forum and I've mostly been browsing various threads; I haven't seen this addressed anywhere yet. I agree completely that the idea of someone wearing a firearm to be "looking for trouble" is a logical fallacy. I'm a huge fan of OC, CC, and firearms. The essay is very well written and succinct.I'm not sure that is true. If someone is going on a suicide shooting spree, they are by definition mentally deranged. I would question if they are rational enough to really think through the matter to that extent or that they are really going to be that observant. My guess would be that they are going to have tunnel vision for the most part and see everyone as a target and just be focused on shooting them. If you are shot immediately in that situation I would guess it is more going to be a matter of being one of the first victims because of bad luck of your location, rather than because you have a gun on your hip. If you think out that scenario, unless you are one of the first targets, you are going to be going for cover and have your gun in your hand regardless of OC or CC carry, so the method of carry becomes moot, except perhaps, to how quickly you can draw your weapon. And usually these guys don't stake out the place and surveil it minutes before the attack to see who is where. They have a plan, they walk in, go to their chosen firing position and start pulling the trigger. Unless you are unlucky enough to encounter them prior to their first shot, in which case maybe they would shoot you before getting to their firing position if they even notice that you are armed, I don't think someone OC is at anymore risk than someone CC. My guess is that for any individual, over years of carrying, the deterrent factor of OC on a potential BG who is just a petty thief and doesn't want to get shot by a customer over a $100 quick shop robbery, probably balances out with any enhanced risk of being a first target from a truly determined, criminal willing to commit murder or planning murder. Another side to that argument however, is the fact that several (perhaps many or even all, I haven't read all 50) state constitutions within the section protecting the RKBA, reads that such rights do not extend to the concealed carry of weapons and that the state reserves the right to regulate CC. This tells me that there has been a perception for some 200 years that CC is somehow a different, higher threat to the people or the state or law and order or something than OC. Is the fact that in at least some frontier states, where many people were armed much of the time, that such clauses were deemed necessary, prima facie evidence that CC really does give a tactical advantage despite some modern thought to the contrary? Or is it a case that with the advance of weapons this is a moot point? Or is this line of thought really just meaningless? I do find it ironic that in a state such as MO, where the RKBA is specifically protected in the state constitution whereas CC is not, that we can get licensed to CC and that such licensure is preempted (the licensure part affirming that it is not a right but instead a priveledge extended by the state much as driving), that the constitutionally protected right to OC is limited in that there is no state preemption to prevent municipalities from passing laws out right banning OC. Court arguments that such preemption is unnecessary due to constitutional protections and that such municipal laws are unconstitutional under the state constitution have been ruled against in state courts here. As the saying goes, it doesn't have to make sense, it's just the law. |
|||||||||
|
Grapeshot Founder's Club Member 
|
Schofield wrote: Please note: I'm brand new to this forum and I've mostly been browsing various threads; I haven't seen this addressed anywhere yet. I agree completely that the idea of someone wearing a firearm to be "looking for trouble" is a logical fallacy. I'm a huge fan of OC, CC, and firearms. The essay is very well written and succinct. First welcome aboard Schofield. Over they years I have heard this argument against OC many times. I have always responded the same way, "Show me one instance in modern times in the fifty states where this has been the case." No one has ever come back to point out with facts in hand where this has happened. Now mind you, I am not suggesting that it has never occurred but rather that if it has, it is a distinctly rare event. I have in my many years of reading not come across one such story. I have; however, personally heard of many times where the sight of a weapon turned potential aggressors around and have myself experienced that on more than one occasion. It is far, far better in my opinion to have not had to draw or discharge my weapon but merely let my "friend" speak for me than it would have been to deal with the aftermath of even the most righteous shooting. My thoughts - add them to the mix. Yata hey |
|||||||||
|
SouthernBoy Regular Member
|
Grapeshot wrote: Schofield wrote:The part I have bolded is the most succinct part of your response and one of the best arguments I have seen regarding OC'ing.Please note: I'm brand new to this forum and I've mostly been browsing various threads; I haven't seen this addressed anywhere yet. I agree completely that the idea of someone wearing a firearm to be "looking for trouble" is a logical fallacy. I'm a huge fan of OC, CC, and firearms. The essay is very well written and succinct. However, I do think that there is a very real possibility that if a BG or BGs commence an illegal activity and then notice you are armed, you might become the first target. If, on the other hand, they come into a place and see you first, I suspect they will leave and take their "plans" elsewhere. It really depends upon the mindset and level of anxiety of the BGs. I also suspect the reason we have not seen this reported is probably due to the fact that OC'ing across the nation is a rarity. Since I have started OC'ing last July, I have yet to see someone else doing the same thing in my little corner of the world. So we are still just not out there all that much. I will add to this that I imagine the deterent factor is significantly higher when people are seen carrying a sidearm in businesses which have a higher incidence of criminal activity. |
|||||||||
|
Grapeshot Founder's Club Member
|
I agree that OC is not nearly as prevalent as CC. We do have certain states that we can draw from nevertheless - most notably Alaska and Vermont. While the press is not prone to report things exactly unbiased - I feel reasonably sure that we would hear of an armed man assassinated in bank, restaurant or whatever prior to a robbery. On the other hand many of us on this thread and others (VCDL included) have related true stories which in our firmest belief became non-events primarily because a weapon (s) was seen. Among others. these have included banks, parking lots, dark streets and retail establishments. These occurred in Virginia. When I first started OCing, I too felt like there was a target painted on my back. I will say it did wonders for my situational/tactical awareness - an edge that I have strived to hone keenly. Personally, I think that the added danger to an OCer should be relegated to "Urban Legends." Yata hey |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
Just thought I'd bring this back to the recent list... any further thoughts anyone? |
|||||||||
|
Bravo_Sierra Regular Member 
|
I'm a big supporter of... Carry your gun. I don't care how, just do it! Psalms 144:1 “Praise be to the LORD my Rock, who trains my hands for war, my fingers for battle.” |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
I love that quote!!!! I'm going to use that one. The bottom line of the paper isn't that one is better than the other but that all those who carry should stick together and stop bashing each other. Last edited on Fri May 30th, 2008 04:18 am by fullauto223cal |
|||||||||
|
WARCHILD Regular Member 
|
fullauto223cal wrote: Yes, I did in fact write this paper. I spent about two days while working a part time job guarding an empty state medical building. Needless to say I had a lot of time to think everything through. If you want to send it you may, my real name is Garry Harvey ++infinity!! Most Excellent. May I have your permission to quote your paper on my pod cast radio show (The Saturday Afternoon Shootout)? This defines both sides of the argument very clearly and may help people understand each sides view on carrying. Understanding is knowledge and we could all use a little of both on this subject. Kudos once again, Thanks, Jerry |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
YES, OF COURSE. Please post link to show when you can.... Last edited on Wed Jun 4th, 2008 03:38 am by fullauto223cal |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member 
|
Ok, who besides me, thinks this should be pinned or something, so it doesn't float to the bottom? |
|||||||||
|
WARCHILD Regular Member
|
Big Gay Al wrote: Ok, who besides me, thinks this should be pinned or something, so it doesn't float to the bottom? ok, I admit again, I'm old and miss your point. Please explain. |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
WARCHILD wrote: Big Gay Al wrote:Ok, who besides me, thinks this should be pinned or something, so it doesn't float to the bottom? Most forums have a feature where threads can be "pinned" so they don't "float away" as they get older, if they're not posted to. In other words, if no else replies to this thread, after me, as time goes on, it will slowly float down the list of message threads, eventually to the next page and so on. If pinned, it will stay at or near the the top. |
|||||||||
|
WARCHILD Regular Member
|
Ok, now I understand. Still new to this stuff. Thanks for the explanation. Jerry |
|||||||||
|
Grapeshot Founder's Club Member
|
Does OCing one and CCing another count as having the best of both worlds?  Yata hey |
|||||||||
|
crotalus01 Regular Member
|
WhiteRabbit22 wrote: That's how it should be anyway. No state in this country should have gone to a "permit" system. So far, Vermont and Alaska are the only states honoring the 2A to the fullest. Scratch Vermont. You cannot own a silencer in Vermont. |
|||||||||
|
TheMrMitch Regular Member 
|
Full Auto...EXCELLENT summation/comparison, sir! I have a concealed permit, can carry open in Kentucky and am a sworn Corrections Officer. I reckon it's the best of all worlds. I turn my badge inward when not on duty and carry open when it's hot or I feel like it. I do NOT flaunt my badge. I carry everywhere I can. A lady doc became kinda unglued at our 1st meeting because I was armed. I simply stated that yes, I saw the sign on the door and ignored it. I asked if she wanted to examine me, or for me to find another doctor. She relented (the $$$$ probably) and even made a follow up appointment. She's a good doc, too. I had my first confrontation carrying open about 35 years ago. The Chief Of Police saw me in town and stopped me exiting town. Red lights and all. He wanted to know what I was doing wearing "That Thing" on my hip. After I convinced him it was my right and NO laws were broken, he became my friend. So, I carry any way I can as is my RIGHT, and will continue doing the same. Glad I found this site. Thanks. |
|||||||||
|
WARCHILD Regular Member
|
TheMrMitch wrote: Full Auto...EXCELLENT summation/comparison, sir! Welcome to OCDO. I have only been here a short time myself and have found it full of good people and excellent info. We're kinda kin in a way, my parents are from Hazard. |
|||||||||
|
ProguninTN Regular Member
|
Good article. "The Right to Keep and Bear Arms." We should be able to bear arms in any way we see fit. This could include open carry, concealed carry, or even long guns on a sling. -ProguninTN |
|||||||||
|
imperialism2024 Regular Member 
|
crotalus01 wrote: WhiteRabbit22 wrote:That's how it should be anyway. No state in this country should have gone to a "permit" system. So far, Vermont and Alaska are the only states honoring the 2A to the fullest. Take a look at Montana, maybe... |
|||||||||
|
irish Regular Member 
|
Great read, thank you!  |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
I found what appears to be an error. It's in the PDF file too, under the Conclusion heading:...ARMED CITIZEN; I advise you show your permit and carry on. They may card you as many times as they wish as I long as you know you are legal nothing... I think the "as I long as" should be "as long as." Not picking nits, I just thought you'd want to know. Last edited on Fri Aug 22nd, 2008 03:49 pm by Big Gay Al |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member 
|
Full Auto... You've echoed my thoughts exactly. Great piece. Where I live... it's usually too hot to wear anything that would conceal my carry weapon of choice (1911-A1). Aside from tht... I want to be able to bring it to bear w/o being constrained by 'anything' I could hide it under. Altho I'm in really good shape... my ol' can of whupp-ass has long ago exceeded it's shelf life. I OC 'cause i refuse to be a victim. Perps are not suicidal... if they see that .45 on my hip... they'll go elsewhere for a mark. I've avoided a possible shooting incident (and their attempted crime) merely by it's presence. I've shot 'human be'ins' before so I 'know' I can do that if push comes to shove w/o hesitation. I hope I don't have to. I think there's some 'stigma' against OC... simply because of the media... which forms certain opinions among certain segments of society... like it or not. Y'know... What'll people think... say? Who cares! Those that do that are generally ignorant of their own safety anyway. Sheep! |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
Thought I'd knock it back to the top for all the new folks... |
|||||||||
|
YllwFvr Regular Member 
|
Excellent work fullauto223cal! This could help those who dont understand get a better understanding of why we carry openly. Emailed to a few people that will enjoy this hugely! |
|||||||||
|
TatankaGap Regular Member 
|
deepdiver wrote: Schofield wrote:<SNIP>I'm not sure that is true. If someone is going on a suicide shooting spree, they are by definition mentally deranged. I would question if they are rational enough to really think through the matter to that extent or that they are really going to be that observant. My guess would be that they are going to have tunnel vision for the most part and see everyone as a target and just be focused on shooting them. If you are shot immediately in that situation I would guess it is more going to be a matter of being one of the first victims because of bad luck of your location, rather than because you have a gun on your hip. Well, I am one of the few people you will meet who has lived through a mass-murdering shooting spree - office building in 1993 - you can google "101 California Street Shootings" - I was unarmed then; I am armed now. If I had been armed then, or if anyone had been armed then, someone could have taken out the gunman from a cover spot before he killed so many people who were just in the office one day doing their jobs. If you are somewhere standing in line bearing arms, I believe you will be likely to draw fire and may get shot first. Of course, if you are there, your situational awareness might pick up the threat early enough to draw, get a shot off or maybe at least not get killed while you drill as many into the assailant as you have - If you live, you saved lives. If you don't make it, you saved lives. If you had been unarmed you would have been dead or lucky. Take it from some one who is lucky, it's always better to not be the dead guy and it's worth saving as many lives as you can - especially innocents. Many thanks to full auto for reposting this for a newbie to this forum like me - God Bless.  |
|||||||||
|
Grapeshot Founder's Club Member
|
Repeated from previous thread(s) on the subject. Show me one incident with a valid cite where a legal OCer was either the victim of a preemptive strike or had his/her gun snatched/stolen by a BG anywhere in the United States in modern times. LEO/security and military actions do not qualify. Understand that if one or two might be proven to exist, you will only further substantiate my contention that properly done OC is quite safe and most effective. The math would then yield a resultant fractional/per centage value of something like .00001% and I 'll take those odds any day. Yata hey Last edited on Sat Feb 21st, 2009 01:13 pm by Grapeshot |
|||||||||
|
50BMG Regular Member 
|
fullauto223cal wrote:
A sign, be it text, picture, or symbol, is something visual which communicates a clear message to the observer. The observer can choose to disregard the sign but nonetheless they are forced to consider the message before proceeding. Examples of signs conveying an important message would be "BEWARE OF DOG", "NO SMOKING", "EMERGENCY EXIT", or the more ominous "DEADLY FORCE AUTHORIZED". Each sign aids the observer in any potential decision making. Of course, the observer may choose to ignore the warning but this choice will be made based on whether the potential reward outweighs the risk. I disagree... Your display of the ability to employ deadly force (by openly carrying) makes you Target #1 with a truly violent offender... Then, when you have been neutralized with a bullet in the back of your head, your sidearm will then be taken by said felon to cause even further harm at that scene AND on the streets later on. |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
50BMG wrote: I disagree... Your display of the ability to employ deadly force (by openly carrying) makes you Target #1 with a truly violent offender... Then, when you have been neutralized with a bullet in the back of your head, your sidearm will then be taken by said felon to cause even further harm at that scene AND on the streets later on. OK... prove it. One instance... anywhere USA. Where has this happened? Note... bullet to the BACK of the head. Hello? |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
Are you sure that 50BMG even posed a question? How can you tell? The whole thing looks like quoted text. |
|||||||||
|
Grapeshot Founder's Club Member
|
On 12/11/08 50BMG stated: "The more I hang out at this site, the more I think that this OC issue is one that I am willing to FIGHT AGAINST in my state!!!!!!" http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=18982&forum_id=6&jump_to=320726#p320726 It doesn't take but a few minutes to review his posts. You may draw your own conclusions. Yata hey Last edited on Mon Feb 23rd, 2009 10:07 pm by Grapeshot |
|||||||||
|
Dustin Regular Member 
|
Felid`Maximus wrote:
Ever thought of a Drop Holster or Thigh Holster ? |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
I don't have the time to review this board as often as I like. Thanks for fighting the good fight in my absence. I somehow think that he is a drive-by poster and probably doesn't have the balls or the intellect to debate the issue any further. |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
50BMG - "Then, when you have been neutralized with a bullet in the back of your head, your sidearm will then be taken by said felon to cause even further harm at that scene AND on the streets later on." Please cite one example of this scenario taking place, then your statement will hold merit enough to debate. So far, in the states that allow open carry, no news story can be found where the scenario you outline has occurred. Please reread my risk vs. reward section. Whereas a felon, who is SURPRISED by a concealed carrier during the commission of his/her crime has no time to think about a course of action posed by the immediate threat. Let me get this right. You advising that should I be the primary target of an armed robbery i.e. gun pointed at my chest with the bad guys finger on trigger, I am better off to "SURPRISE" him with my concealed weapon? I don't think after some real reflection on what you have just claimed you could advise such a risky, dare I say suicidal action. No, I believe what I said in my paper, that the attacker will always have the element of surprise. I say the possibility that I may have to defend myself one on one are far more likely than in a group setting. It is for this reason that I will let the attacker know that there is great "RISK" of death or grievous bodily injury before he decides to make me a victim. Have you ever thought that Open Carry may acually help to INCITE violent behavior??? Actually yes, but my conclusion was that criminals are nothing more than predators. Predators do not often attack the strongest, fastest, or smartest when there are so many helpless targets. The exception being where the reward for attacking the strongest outweighs the risk, like trying to escape from police. When was the last time you walked around with a $1000 bill on your hip (which is what some good-quality handguns cost nowadays)? Do you think the fact that the $1000 bill is shaped like a gun means ANYTHING to a determined, and equally underhanded Felon??? It's that simple.... Your argument is simple but flawed in that you compare two things of the same value while omitting their capabilities. The proverbial apples vs. oranges. To answer your question. If the $1000 bill were simply shaped like a gun...no. But if the $1000 bill were actually a gun and actually capable of killing me...yes it would mean a great deal! 50BMG I actually covered folks like yourself in my paper. It was in the latter portion so if you did not get that far don't beat yourself up, I did not expect you to. Why do you disagree with open carry, "I believe it to be fear; the anxiety of having to confront someone hostile to their choice to carry a weapon for personal defense." You refuse to even consider the benefits of open carry because you rue the possibility it may be advantageous. If it is advantageous then the only reason you don't do it is out of fear of others and your not afraid of anything are you? If you don't like open carry then DON'T OPEN CARRY. Sit back and wait for that fateful day when see the news clip of the criminal telling the media "He had a gun so I figured I had to shoot him." The difference between people like you and people like me is simple. I advocate OPEN CARRY as a choice. You advocate CONCEALED CARRY as the ONLY CHOICE. Last edited on Tue Feb 24th, 2009 08:51 am by fullauto223cal |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
+1 fullauto.... There is little 'tactical advantage' in looking like the rest of the sheep unless you're a criminal. Criminals will always have the element of surprise. The visible presence of 'iron' on yer hip is an 'active' deterrent' to any BG looking to jack an easy mark. They're not gonna chance it. Of course... you may encounter some drugged out loon who doesn't care... but he's not gonna care any less if you're CC either. Nothing in life is 100%. (He who would defend all, defends nothing.': Sun Tzu) What I read in 50BMG is fear as well. There's shelter among the herd. Not a wolf in sheeps clothing but a sheep with fangs. A sheep nonetheless. A sheep not wanting to appear any different than the rest of the herd... feeling smug with it's secret. What will the rest of the sheep 'say'? 'Can't bring attention to myself... Mostly, nobody notices. In that, I see personal insecurity and self consciousness justified thru this other scenario 'stuff' that doesn't happen. I don't have ESP... I don't want'a have to shoot anybody... but I will. I will not be a victim if there's any way I can prevent it. I don't care about the periodic 'dirty looks' from the noobs here... or the snowbirds. I carry that piece by choice. It's my right. It's equally their right not to. 'Same with OC/CC... altho CC requires 'permit'. Perhaps 'permit' implies personal legitimacy? Rights do not require permission. |
|||||||||
|
Dustin Regular Member
|
Good points made by both again. IMO, I just see CC as way to passive. I'd rather keep a bad guy at bay with OC, than have him commit the crime and THEN have to do something about it. CC might indeed almost CAUSE you to HAVE to be in a situation your trying to avoid in the first place. |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
Passive... yeah. (Why didn't I think of that word...  ) OC: Active / CC: Passive (Yay!) |
|||||||||
|
50BMG Regular Member
|
fullauto223cal wrote: I don't have the time to review this board as often as I like. Thanks for fighting the good fight in my absence. I somehow think that he is a drive-by poster and probably doesn't have the balls or the intellect to debate the issue any further. No Balls or intellect??? Oh.... I'm SO hurt... You sir (and I use that term VERY lightly) are obviously just a big nonsensical buffoon, as evidently you are PROUD of by your avatar.... I thought I have been fairly "cordial" here.. Moderator... You warn me to be civil on other posts and allow this??? Full Auto 223? What's the matter? Can't you shoot well either that you need a bullet hose to hit your target??? |
|||||||||
|
protector84 Regular Member
|
I happen to enjoy carrying my gun openly in a holster. Just because BMG wants his gun in his purse doesn't mean the rest of us have to swing that way. |
|||||||||
|
50BMG Regular Member
|
fullauto223cal wrote: 50BMG - "Then, when you have been neutralized with a bullet in the back of your head, your sidearm will then be taken by said felon to cause even further harm at that scene AND on the streets later on."
My reply: I read what you wrote 100%.. So, YOUR "conjecture" is more valid than mine huh? YOU SHOW ME where your open carry hase done ANYTHING but; 1). pi$$-off the surrounding non-gun types (who will push for legislation against you AND me at one point or another); or 2).Had the already busy/understaffed police called to reprimand your arrongant a$$ for "making a point" by carrying openly...! Come on... SHOW ME!!!!! Whereas a felon, who is SURPRISED by a concealed carrier during the commission of his/her crime has no time to think about a course of action posed by the immediate threat.
My reply: Hellloooo!! McFly!!!!! The robber/felon won't waste time pointing a gun at your chest... He's gonna see you armed, want your gun, suprise you with a bullet to the back of YOUR head, and THEN rob/shoot-up the place... My point was that even an armed robber usually doesn't pay attention to "bystanders" UNLESS they represent a threat... In doing this "ignoring innocent bystanders", the felon gives the concealed carrier the tactical advantage of being able to chose the safest/best moment of interdiction in the situation.. You're already dead so great help you were.... Also, your open carry will give a felon who wants your gun IDEAS! Even in a grocery store... You carrying openly makes YOU a target, like it or not it IS true... They will find a moment when you least expect it and pounce like a "predator" from behind (there is no such thing as a "fair" gunfight on the streets you know?) One on one like you say, but the moment of the fight is the FELON'S choice, not yours!!!. BAM! Bullet to the back of your head.... Again, my "conjecture" is just as valid as yours... YOU "prove your theory"!!! Show me! Have you ever thought that Open Carry may acually help to INCITE violent behavior???
My Reply: attack the strongest, fastest or smartest!?! MAN! You ARE quite a man aren't you!?! LoL... How about attacking the most "arrogent" or "over-confident" person who fails to see that he has made his manly-self a HUGE target by carrying a probably fairly EXPENSIVE sidearm in the full view of the public and any THUG that happens by him that day??? Again, IF they want your gun, in your one on one secnario, THEY choose the moment of attack, NOT you! Predators SURVIVE by using EVERY advantage, dirty trick, CHEAT, or SURPRISE that they can!!! This is one HUGE oversight on your part, and thus is your greatest weakness.... I don't think you thought your conclusion out 100% have you? When was the last time you walked around with a $1000 bill on your hip (which is what some good-quality handguns cost nowadays)? Do you think the fact that the $1000 bill is shaped like a gun means ANYTHING to a determined, and equally underhanded Felon??? It's that simple....
My Reply: That gun on your hip is ZERO threat when YOU ARE DEAD! Get it now??? To a murderous "Predator" it's just part of the reward of the kill... And a nice, shiney expensive one that he gets to use to kill others!!! See above for the scenarios that unwravel your conclusions.... The PREDATOR chooses the time and place of the attack... YOU are the victim, and you know it when you are laying there gushing blood like a loose fire-hose..... 50BMG I actually covered folks like yourself in my paper. It was in the latter portion so if you did not get that far don't beat yourself up, I did not expect you to. My Reply: Full Auto, you have NO IDEA about what kind of man I am (I ain't no "folk" Jethro!) and I GUARANTEE that you have never written about anyone like me, EVER! To the contrary of what you "think" (again, untested-unproven!), I fear NO MAN, whether I happen to be armed or not!!! I have fighting experience as well as I also wrestled in school. I hold a BS from Michigan State University and I own my own corporation that does about $4 million/year in sales.... I have been shooting a gun since before I had pubic hair, and I am not described as a "small" guy either... I have been carrying a gun when I needed to since BEFORE my state became shall issue, because I live by the philosophy that "I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6"! I am a competitive .50BMG match shooter (see my avatar), Service Rifle shooter, hunter of many animals (deer/duck/etc...) and I own about $80,000 worth of firearms of all shapes, calibers, and functions (not kidding either!). I have written many gun-related articles that have been printed in nationally distributed firearm's magazines... I DO support open carry, I AM 100% a 2nd Amendment supporter, but I believe in Open Carry ONLY when no other means of legal carry are an option, for ALL the very valid and 100% possible points that I bring up here and in my other postings... Besides your "balls-buffoonery" above, you DO seem to be 1/2 way smart, but I have shown you MANY holes in your equally "untested" theories... For a supposedly smart guy, you really lack foresight and you seriously underestimate the evil and simplicity of ALL the scenarios that I have laid out here and elsewhere... Your "manly/toughguy" attitude will be your downfall, and if not you, it will be one of the even "more manly/cop wannabees" that this site seems to be loaded with.. You see, the problem is, that when my "theories" begin to come true, your OC idiocy will affect MY RIGHTS... Oh yea... That guy you are waiting to be interviewed to say "He had a gun so I figured I had to shoot him." Do you REALLY think that guy is going to be caught?!? NO! Who's going to identify him??? He's gonna fire one shot, you'll be dead, and he's gonna take your gun and run away! This will ALL be done when/where HE chooses... You will be his BITCH, toughguy..... You think your open gun will keep you safe? Ever heard of houses getting broken into so that the GUNS can be taken? That shoots another hole in your OC theory!!! Hey, you think my theories are impossible or outlandish??? Who would have thought that sickos would find kids under 5, even their OWN kids, to be sexually attractive and want to rape them, but they DO! Who would ever think that a mother could ever throw her child into a microwave oven and COOK IT TO DEATH for crying too much, but it has happened!!! HOW can you sit back and tell me that what I am thinking is any LESS valid because YOU haven't seen it on the evening news!!! WHO is the person that isn't thiking things out 100% here?!? (Clue: It ISN'T ME!)... This ludacris "point" that all of you vehement OCers seem to feel the need to make is 100% beyond my comprehension.... AGAIN, I SUPPORT OC WHEN YOU "HAVE TO", but otherwise you are seriously underestimating how ugly things can get for YOU AND ME!!! and I don't need any of your "need to make a point" when it comes to the defense of me OR my family!!! THANK YOU!
|
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
Holy CRAP, I really pissed this guy off. So much RED letter type I don't know if I'm reading BMG50's reply or he's quoting the NEW TESTAMENT. Settle down a second BMG50. I'd forgotten about the previous "balls" comment but I humbly retract my remarks concerning you being a "drive-by poster." You obviously have the wear-with-all to defend your position and I respect a man who does that. I hate it when people spew bull-@#$% and run away. I'll be the first to admit that Open Carry does piss off the surrounding non-gun types. Woman's suffrage pissed of the "no-women voting" types. De-segregation pissed off the "no blacks in my school" types. And no, they will not succeed in passing legislation against you and me. The stats truly are on our side regarding armed citizens period, open or concealed. As far as the COPS, I am one. It has been well known by Tennessee LEO's that open carry is legal all be it still rare. Yes, some cops don't like it but we don't make the law. Unless your acting like a criminal most folks just assume your a cop anyways. To be honest, I haven't open carried off duty since I became an officer as it's forbidden in our general orders, although some senior guys do it anyways and can get away with it. GREAT BACK TO THE FUTURE REFERENCE, I love that movie!!! About your reply, I'm not trying to dog you but you really just restated your original arguement; although in bigger and bolder type. You stated that your "conjecture" is as equal as mine. You ask me to prove my case. One cannot provide evidence for something which does not leave evidence. If a criminal decides NOT to attack someone who is open carrying then nobody but the criminal will know it. I must therefor make my case from logic. Take a given senerio where one of two things must occur i.e. A OR B must be TRUE. If (A) is true then (B) is false and viceversa. A = Criminal kills Person and takes gun. (LEAVES A DEAD BODY) B = Criminal sees gun and does not kill Person. (LEAVES NOTHING) I asked you to provide evidence of your view because inorder for your view (A) to be correct there must be, somewhere, evidence of dead bodies with empty holsters. As my search of late had yeilded NO dead bodies with empty holsters then I submit that (B) must be true. You also imply that I and the others on this board are arrogant & over-confident after spinning my prey vs. predator analogy. You stringently argue that simply carrying a weapon makes you a target but again you provide no evidence to the point. Yes, criminals are low down dirty rotten tricksters. Yes, as I have made plain in my posts, the criminal chooses the moment of attack. It for that reason that OPEN CARRY serves it's purpose, to discourage criminals. If the criminal simply wanted a gun he could break into a home and steal one. Why would he risk taking it from someone who could use it against him? Yes, I have thought my conclusion through thoroughly and the way in which I reached it has been outlined above. As you say, a gun on a dead body is zero threat. Well, what if I have two or three of my buddies with me. Or better yet, what if we lived in a world where everyone that carried a gun had to carry it openly because only criminals conceal their weapons. What if, what if, what if, we can play the what if game till the cows come home but it doesn't change is one very simple question. Where are all the dead bodies with empty holsters??? First, I'm from the south and I sometimes call groups of people "folks" as a means of describing good down home citizens. It does not imply "Jethro", hick or redneck as you assume. So your rich, own a lot of guns, and shoot the best that money can buy, and your opinions are so well respected that they are published in national magazines. I envy you friend, you epitomize what it means to be American. You also provide ammo against the bias view that all gun owners are hay-seed hick racists. KUDOS!! All that being true it it does not guarantee that you will always be right. As far as my avatar, it's a drawing of Brock Samson from a show called the Venture Brothers. You should look it up, its kinda funny. I'm a fan and I thought it looked cool with the Glock logo on his shirt (which you can't see at that size). His attitude in the show is that of a bad ass but it's the farthest thing from mine. "You think your open gun will keep you safe? Ever heard of houses getting broken into so that the GUNS can be taken? That shoots another hole in your OC theory!!!"I don't quite get it, how does robbing an empty house compare to OPEN CARRY keeping me safe? I do know this, when prisoners were asked what they considered the most risky kind of crime to commit they overwhelming said robbing a home while the home owner was there. I don't mean to "shoot a hole" in your argument but if I apply your reasoning to a home owner who keep a gun loaded then would he be an [ "arrogant" "over-confident" person who fails to see that he has made his manly-self a HUGE target] because as you claim the criminal picks when he attacks and he can just sneak in when they are asleep and shoot them in the head, take their shiny gun, make them his bitch, with blood splurting everywhere etc. etc. etc. HOW can you sit back and tell me that what I am thinking is any LESS valid because YOU haven't seen it on the evening news!!!I'm not saying I haven't seen it on the evening news, I'm saying I havn't seen it ANYWHERE!!! It's like you telling me that BIG FOOT is @#$%ing real and simply because I havn't found his dead corpse is no reason to challenge you. If you wanna keep up the debate I'm game.  Last edited on Wed Feb 25th, 2009 09:35 am by fullauto223cal |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
fullauto223cal wrote: Holy CRAP, I really pissed this guy off. So much RED letter type I don't know if I'm reading BMG50's reply or he's quoting the NEW TESTAMENT.Yeah, and he still doesn't know how to keep his comments OUT of the quoted text.  Oh, and of course, he still hasn't come up with ONE example of an OCer, (not a uniformed LEO/Security guard) who's been attacked like he describes. Last edited on Wed Feb 25th, 2009 09:20 am by Big Gay Al |
|||||||||
|
Dustin Regular Member
|
50BMG wrote: He's gonna see you armed, want your gun, suprise you with a bullet to the back of YOUR head, and THEN rob/shoot-up the place... My point was that even an armed robber usually doesn't pay attention to "bystanders" UNLESS they represent a threat... In doing this "ignoring innocent bystanders", the felon gives the concealed carrier the tactical advantage of being able to chose the safest/best moment of interdiction in the situation.. You're already dead so great help you were.... Also, your open carry will give a felon who wants your gun IDEAS! Even in a grocery store... You carrying openly makes YOU a target, like it or not it IS true... They will find a moment when you least expect it and pounce like a "predator" from behind (there is no such thing as a "fair" gunfight on the streets you know?) One on one like you say, but the moment of the fight is the FELON'S choice, not yours!!!. BAM! Bullet to the back of your head.... I think it's only fair that if your going to use that claim, that you back it up with some kind of statistical truth. Something that will make it valid. Just saying it, doesn't help convince those who don't drink the Koolaid. Would it also be a correct assesment to say that if you saw BG's walking in with guns, that you would take cover and wait for the right moment to fire ? I think your also viewing OC'ers like the main stream media does. Personaly I make it a point in resturants to sit with my strong side to the wall. The majority DOES NOT look like this guy,  We look more like these images,   |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
Dustin wrote:
I dunno, I sort of like the cowboy hat look. But I think I'm gonna go more for the Hawaiian shirt and straw hat look, similar to what I saw in "The Bird Cage" with Robin Williams. Last edited on Thu Feb 26th, 2009 06:40 am by Big Gay Al |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
Methinks 50BMG should switch to DeCaf. 'Wired Waaayyyyyyyyy to tight! Paranoid to the max for some reason. These fantasy scenarios must be a result of too much imaginative creative writing.... 'self defense' videos... or he's livin' in 'Metropolis' with the Joker's henchmen runnin' around. City livin' will do that to ya I think... I dunno... certain life experiences will color perceptions and expectations. There's no guarantee (expressed or implied). You just do the best ya can with what ya got. When I was a cop... (in the 'hood) bein' a target is a given. When I was in 'Nam (twice)... same deal. 'Also worked the flight deck (at night) for years... where things can go wrong from a variety of sources, especially when playin' with ordnance. I've been a competition drag racer as well. There's a lotta situations that'll get you whacked. If I mulled over all that enuff I'd prob'ly hide under the bed... (as would we all). No fun in that. I OC 'cause I can get at it if I need it. I believe it lessens my need to 'get at it' just by it's being visible. I've seen or heard of no tangible event or reason to believe otherwise. Well... all in all, this is OCDO... not CCDO. |
|||||||||
|
countrychic_262009 Regular Member
|
I have read a few of the posts on here, but it would take me ages to read every comment that has been made. I am in full support of open carry, and I have already signed the petition for Texas, and actually I signed it a long time ago, and so has most of my family, and I encourage others to go to the site, and sign the petition as well. I believe that the benefits of open carry greatly outweigh the risks that most people are concerned about. There will always be those that just don't care, and will try to cause harm to someone even if they are open carrying, but most will think better of it, and go looking for an easier target. I believe that a woman should be ready, willing and able to defend herself and or her children by whatever means that are possible and/or necessary. Face it, most often, women are viewed as "easy targets" or "helpless" and that is one thing that really makes me mad. It's time to quit stereotyping, and generalizing. I for one, am not "helpless" or "defenseless", and I refuse to make myself an "easy target"....... |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
Dustin wrote: I think your also viewing OC'ers like the main stream media does. So, just for the hell of it, WHAT is wrong with the guy above? He looks clean cut.....mostly. |
|||||||||
|
Dustin Regular Member
|
Big Gay Al wrote: Dustin wrote:I think your also viewing OC'ers like the main stream media does. We'll IMO. I think it is possible to OC (With Deterrant Value) yet remain Tactical too. If I walked into a restaurant with this guy in there, I would IMMEDIATELY notice him. His choice of outfit draws attention. I don't like to draw attention. Also Anti's see folks like this and automatically think, WILD WILD WEST ! Now I'm not one for pandering to the Anti's but wearing a .44 Mag Revolver does more than act as a Deterrant. IMO, it acts as an Attention Grabber. I'd rather someone confuse me for an LEO, than harass me about why I'm carrying.  |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
Dustin wrote:We'll IMO. Well, everyone has their own style. And his gun could be a .45. |
|||||||||
|
Dustin Regular Member
|
Big Gay Al wrote:
You get the point though. Looks more like "Test Me, and see if I can Draw this 10'' cannon" than it does "Don't screw with me, I'm armed and could be an LEO". Although I hate the LEO similarity context, that's just the nature of today's society. |
|||||||||
|
NavyLT Regular Member
|
Some people carry their 10" barrels in holsters and others elsewhere  |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
Big Gay Al wrote: Dustin wrote:We'll IMO. "WILD WILD WEST!" ? Well... this IS the Wild Wild West (what's left of it) and I carry a .45acp. My 'choice of outfit' is normal everyday wear. Attached Image (viewed 242 times): |
|||||||||
|
SlackwareRobert Regular Member
|
Lets see..... Plaxico CC'd shot, DC starbucks employee CC'd shot. I could go on, and on. Now lets hear where the OC person is shot. CC seems to invite danger not the other way around. Would you care to show how you OC without a holster? But on the OC column, some pistols just cannot be CC'd due to size. Heck it is why I bought it, first thought was there is no way to comply with just hide it. Then made mistake of shooting it. Now I'm making hoster to carry it. This is so liberating learning all these new skills. If the government is so worried about OC being taken and used in a crime, then why is it a crime for me to rig a pistol to explode in the face of the bad guy if he takes it from me? It is simple enough to do, but then I am a criminal because a bad guy blows his face off while committing a crime. Last edited on Thu Mar 12th, 2009 04:52 pm by SlackwareRobert |
|||||||||
|
Loneviking Regular Member
|
I'll just add in a couple of other thoughts for the paper.. Reason to CC: I usually CC, and not so much out of fear as a desire to avoid the anxiety of having to stay at a high level of alert. A lot of posters in this thread have talked about the 'increased situational awareness' that comes with OC, and this is something I would rather avoid. CC means that nobody, good or bad, knows what the various lumps under the cover garment are and I don't have to worry about someone coming unglued in a crowded resturant when my gun brushes past their chair. Reason to OC: One reason that I didn't see explored too much is a direct result of OC. OC forces the LEO's and town fathers to abide by the letter of the law. As a nation, we seem to have strayed from the idea that the law is something that everybody is supposed to follow. Too many LEO's and town fathers (such as Dickson, PA.) have been doing whatever they want, however they want for far to long. I've noticed changes in attitutudes toward law and procedure in every state where OC is actively pursued. Look at Pennsylvania, Virginia and Georgia for good examples of this. Not only are 2nd amendment rights restored, but so too are Freedom of Speech; Freedom of Assembly such as the VCDL picnics; 4th amendment rights to due process and protection from unlawful search and seizure; and 10th amendment 'states rights' also are strongest in states with a strong, pro-gun movement. So, it would appear as if OC has a strong, indirect effect of restoring/strengthening/drawing attention to the rest of the Bill of Rights. |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
I don't wanna be a LEO look-alike... or a LEO wanna-be. I don't want'a be confused with any kind of LEO at all. On the other hand, I don't wanna look like a bad guy either. How ya dress varies with where ya live... and how tho pretty much. Some adapt... some never manage. In response to LoneViking... The 2A is there to guarantee the rest of 'em. It DOES have that effect! Last edited on Thu Mar 12th, 2009 05:14 pm by Sonora Rebel |
|||||||||
|
irish Regular Member
|
Sonora Rebel wrote: Big Gay Al wrote:Dustin wrote:We'll IMO. I'd never mess with someone brave enough to sport that moustache!  Just trying to lighten things up. Have a great day everyone! |
|||||||||
|
Dustin Regular Member
|
Sonora Rebel wrote: I don't wanna be a LEO look-alike... or a LEO wanna-be. I don't want'a be confused with any kind of LEO at all. On the other hand, I don't wanna look like a bad guy either. How ya dress varies with where ya live... and how tho pretty much. Some adapt... some never manage. That's pretty much how I feel too. But What I was referring to was citizens confusion. I'd rather citizens think I were a cop than dress like the picture I posted above and them harass me to get an answer. |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
Confused citizens abound... (Look who they just elected). I'm not in the education business. I don't care what they ask anymore... or bother to respond either. |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
Sonora Rebel wrote:"WILD WILD WEST!" ? Well... this IS the Wild Wild West (what's left of it) and I carry a .45acp. My 'choice of outfit' is normal everyday wear. Looks good to me! |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
Loneviking wrote: I'll just add in a couple of other thoughts for the paper.. If you CC to avoid a heightened state of awareness, I can understand that, to a point. Thing is, whether you CC or OC, you should always be in a state of awareness, that your typical sheeple is not. But I will agree that CCing means you don't need to be as alert as when you OC. |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
Big Gay Al wrote: Sonora Rebel wrote:"WILD WILD WEST!" ? Well... this IS the Wild Wild West (what's left of it) and I carry a .45acp. My 'choice of outfit' is normal everyday wear. uh-oh  |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
Sonora Rebel wrote: Big Gay Al wrote:Sonora Rebel wrote:"WILD WILD WEST!" ? Well... this IS the Wild Wild West (what's left of it) and I carry a .45acp. My 'choice of outfit' is normal everyday wear. But you're cuter. |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
Homie don't play dat...  |
|||||||||
|
NavyLT Regular Member
|
Sonora Rebel wrote: Homie don't play dat... Never know, you may never go back! |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
Y'all in collusion here? |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
Sonora Rebel wrote: Y'all in collusion here? LOL. |
|||||||||
|
SlackwareRobert Regular Member
|
Everyone knows you need to cross draw anything over 7" to get it out quick. So quit picking on the lefty.  OC zone 35 feet, CC zone 15 feet, big difference in allertness for me. All those bunk brady's you are targeted, doesn't change that we do stand out, and need more awareness because of that. Once everyone starts carrying again the danger zone will drop to the CC range because we don't have the waco sheep causing problems. Polite predictable people are never a problem at any distance. Unpredictable screeming sheep are always a danger. |
|||||||||
|
Mr. Dogg Regular Member
|
fullauto223cal wrote: While you make good points you did not even do the very thing you said you would do at the beginning of the "essay". There are NO good points given about conceal carrying and there are certainly NO bad points given about open carrying. Other than that it was an okay article. |
|||||||||
|
Mr. Dogg Regular Member
|
flounder22 wrote: WOW! fullauto, if you are the true author of this writing, please, stand up and take a bow! Very well said. You have hit the nail straight on the head! I disagree, it could have been said much better. I conceal carry and open carry and the time it takes to draw my weapon is virtually the same. To me the article simply points to a "hit piece" against anyone who conceal carry's and says that those who open carry are much smarter, without any real evidence to support either opinion. |
|||||||||
|
Dustin Regular Member
|
Imagine that, the negative post comes from a new member. You'll never convince me you can draw as fast from UNDER your shirt, as from an OC holster.  Last edited on Mon Mar 16th, 2009 06:06 pm by Dustin |
|||||||||
|
abearir Regular Member 
|
Dustin wrote: Imagine that, the negative post comes from a new member. I sure as heck can't. |
|||||||||
|
SlackwareRobert Regular Member
|
Maybe he OC's in a fanny pack. Or he is one of those states where one thread over the gun is considered concealed. But anyone who can draw from inside his clothes as fast as from hip, either has my respect and admiration, or is in need of practice for being so slow with OC draw. Maybe it is a very tight thumb break on his holster. But I just noticed, where is the Do Both at the same time argument. I always CC the BUG, regardless of the main carry option. Has anyone ever OC'd a bug? I guess you could call a dual holster this. But I would look funny with a tiny bug in holster on week side, and full size one on the strong side. Plus in a firefight I would worry about grabbing for the extra mag and grabbing the pocket gun insted. Dual holsters with only two hands to cover both is a hinderence I think if the BG gets within striking distance. But I could argue that dual OC would make him think twice, even if he grabs one gun, the other is going to get him before he figures out the retension. Unless you advertise you can't shoot with either hand with a cross draw on week side and normal draw on the strong one. |
|||||||||
|
deepdiver Activist Member
|
abearir wrote: Dustin wrote:Well, that does depend on how one CCs. I prefer to CC with a cover garment such as a jacket of some type. In warmer weather when CC I tend to wear a t-shirt with a light, unbuttoned short sleeve shirt over it. The time difference in drawing from OC vs CC and pushing back a sports coat to reach the same holster in the same location is likely insignificant. On the other hand, when I have to more deeply CC I personally cannot draw as quickly or smoothly as I can otherwise.Imagine that, the negative post comes from a new member. |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
Mr. Dogg, You stated that, “There are NO good points given about conceal[ed] carrying and there are certainly NO bad points given about open carrying.” “If the ARMED CITIZEN thinks he would be better served in a temporary social environment to have his weapon concealed then by all means do so.” On the contrary Mr. Dogg, I think there are certain times and reasons why concealed carry is necessary from a social standpoint. I give a few examples of this. I stress social standpoint because in the following section “The Case for Open Carry” I argue against the “so called” tactical advantage in a combat and confrontation standpoint. I was lucky enough to finally obtain a position as a police officer within the last year. My department's general orders state that if I choose to carry my weapon off duty it must be concealed at all times. I also have a Tennessee HCP but though my permit allows open carry I cannot disobey my general orders. Even if I were allowed to open carry off duty I would choose not to, WHY? It has nothing to do with tactical this or that but with the different set of legal standards I exposed myself to when I took on this job. As a peace officer I am now duty bound to respond to life threating situations and as I am required to have credientals (badge/ID) on while carrying off duty I would have no choice if I open carried. Citizens who can may flee from a shooting but, though I'm not going to run headlong into a gun battle without assessing the situation, I can't. I also like the idea of open carry because it takes the guessing out of who's armed in any given situation. I haven't come across one thug yet who was even wearing a cheap "Uncle Mike's" holster, much less a Blackhawk Serpa. Bottom line is this, I don't worry about the gun I CAN see, I worry about the gun I DON'T see. Last edited on Wed Mar 18th, 2009 08:45 am by fullauto223cal |
|||||||||
|
SlackwareRobert Regular Member
|
So have you complained about the policies, and keep going up the food chain till you get it fixed. Write your representatives, it is thier job to fix constituents problems with government stupidity. I thought unions were supposed to fight for your rights? Here is a thought for you.... OC your friends weapon then you will not violate you employment agreement. Or travel out of city/county/state, they can't touch you outside your jurisdiction. The more times you excercise your rights the easier it will be to show that you are being denied them. But if you except a job that restricts your rights, then it is on yourself to remedy the problem. I certainly will not mind more gun rights for everyone and hope you succeed. But it will be an uphill battle the politico's at the top are the problem. But you should be gratefull, the majority of gun battles take place where we are not even allowed to have a gun with us, and you are exempt from those laws. Last edited on Wed Mar 18th, 2009 03:57 pm by SlackwareRobert |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
As a cop... (having been one) the Department can even limit your 'brand' of off-duty weapon and restrict you to 'Departmentally issued ammo' only. If the Department requires CC only... then that's pretty much it. As a cop... you have no need for a CCW/CWP 'cause the badge takes precedence. It just goes with the job. |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
SlackwareRobert wrote: So have you complained about the policies, and keep going up the food chainI don't see how carrying his friend's weapon will get around a department policy. If he's told he has to Conceal when packing off duty, then I'm pretty sure it won't matter to the department who the gun belongs to. He'll still have to conceal it. |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
Sonora Rebel, your right in what you said about limiting my choices. It was explained to me like this. Except for not being able to open carry, the Captain I asked said that my HCP permit allowed me to carry any weapon or ammo I liked. The problem is that if I used a non-department registered weapon then I would be on my own legally + I cannot use a non-department registered weapon in any law enforcement capacity. I already carry what my Department issues (Golden Sabre) and the only pistols I own are Glocks which are Department approved. In fact, I'm going to have test bullets taken from my two off duty guns tomorrow so I can start carrying them. It's not a big deal to me but I still plan to keep my HCP on principle. |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
fullauto223cal wrote: Sonora Rebel, your right in what you said about limiting my choices. Golden Sabre is a good choice. And for the issue of insurance, sort of, I'd probably go with Dept. issue/registered myself, if I was in your shoes. |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
fullauto223cal wrote: Sonora Rebel, your right in what you said about limiting my choices. You have more latitude than I did. We were limited to 156 gr. semi-wadcutter .38 spl. Guns were limited to Colt, S&W or Charter Arms... period! The issue piece was a S&W Mod 10, 6" bull barrel (hard to conceal) so I carried a S&W Mod 36. The surrounding departments already carried 9's... but we were limited to antiques. As it was... I used it twice (one on one) and another time inna mass shoot-out with a barricaded nutcase that killed one cop 'n wounded 4-5 others. He had a K98 Mauser rifle... and a shotgun. |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
WOW, Rebel I hope I never get stuck in that kind of situation. We are a small department but we do have a full time TACT TEAM who carry the infamous Glock-18 (FULL AUTO) while on duty. Each patrolman has a personal AR-15 issued to them by the department encase a situation like you describes happens. I use to shun the shotgun due to it's limited ammo capacity and slow rate of fire when compared to a rifle, but then I began to think that most shootouts with police don't happen at 400yrds. Then I watched shootout videos where the cops were missing a hell of a lot of the rounds fired, one where the deputy was rushed and killed by the gunman. I started to see where a few well placed 00 Buck shots would have royally !@#@ UP the bad guy. Body armor, HA, a 12 Gauge slug at even intermediate range will penetrate it and/or cause great blunt force trauma. I better stop now or I'll get off on a rant that will fill up a whole page. NOTE: I haven't seen Mr. Dogg or 50 BMG since I answered them, oh well two more bite the dust!! LOL! |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
By the way, I had test bullets taken from my two off duty weapons today so I'm good to go. Last edited on Fri Mar 20th, 2009 07:24 am by fullauto223cal |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
fullauto223cal wrote: WOW, Rebel I hope I never get stuck in that kind of situation. We are a small department but we do have a full time TACT TEAM who carry the infamous Glock-18 (FULL AUTO) while on duty. Each patrolman has a personal AR-15 issued to them by the department encase a situation like you describes happens. I got into an abandoned house across the alley from the perp (behind him) up on the 2nd floor. I had the 12 ga... outta the trunk... slugs loaded. We still wore white shirts then... so I took off my reefer 'n put it on backward... got on top of a pile of rubble in front of a window. I'd thrown a big cardboard sheet over (from a box of some kind)... on top of the pile 'n got prone. I was about 4' back from the window frame... so it was a good 'hide'. I could see this dude move now 'n then (room to room). My backup was the 'wagon' man... who was doin' commo for me to the Tactical trailer about 2 blocks away. I had to 'ask permission' from the scene commander to take the shot. Denied (three times). He was a Colonel... I was a patrolman... WTF? I was maybe 30 yards range. Easy kill... but... That whole deal was FUBAR from the git-go. Politics!!! I was only 2 years outt'a the 'Nam... This 'Colonel' had no freakin' idea of a tactical shoot or deployment. Tell ya what an 8mm Mauser FMJ can do... At about 30 yards... thru the A-pillar of the cruiser... thru the seats (front 'n back) 'n thru the trunklid 'n hit this officer just above the 'V" on his vest... in the clavical. 'Bout blew his throat out. Another... was aiming at the perp... Bullet hit him between the 2nd and 3rd knuckle of his gun hand... traversed his forearm 'n blew his elbow into the street. Bolt action rifle... No AK could'a done that. Yeah... the 12 ga shotgun is the most effective and deadly device yet devised for close combat. I've got 4 of 'em. Yer right... 'could fill up a page. |
|||||||||
|
Dustin Regular Member
|
Here's the ballistics for the average 8mm FMJ; Energy of 2,103 foot-pounds for a 170 grain bullet at 2360 fps. That's a hellacious amount of Punch Energy ! The AK47 7.62 NATO rounds"lack" 700 to 800 ft. lbs. of energy. Usually scoring in the 1,500 range. |
|||||||||
|
GLOCKMAN40 Regular Member 
|
fullauto223cal wrote:
Great essay, I love this , it hits where it needs to hit , i will be passing this on to every one i can , you were right on the money with this . |
|||||||||
|
guyferg Regular Member 
|
 |
|||||||||
|
compmanio365 Regular Member 
|
What are you on about? Care to elaborate? |
|||||||||
|
fullauto223cal Regular Member
|
Just knocking it back to the top again... |
|||||||||
|
KSDeputy Regular Member 
|
Very well said. I have not encountered anyone just carrying a firearm in the open. Most cities had an ordinance against it (prior to KS CCW law). Now they must be concealed due to the CCW law passage. I have encountered criminals with firearms, but openly carried only when they are committing a crime. I have not made up my mind as to how I feel about a citizen openly carrying a firearm, but it is illegal in many of the largest cities in the state due to city ordinances. Last edited on Sun Aug 2nd, 2009 05:32 pm by KSDeputy |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
KSDeputy wrote: Very well said. I have not encountered anyone just carrying a firearm in the open. Most cities had an ordinance against it (prior to KS CCW law). Now they must be concealed due to the CCW law passage. I have encountered criminals with firearms, but openly carried only when they are committing a crime. I have not made up my mind as to how I feel about a citizen openly carrying a firearm. odd, that's not what the section on Kansas says. |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
KSDeputy wrote: Very well said. I have not encountered anyone just carrying a firearm in the open. Most cities had an ordinance against it (prior to KS CCW law). Now they must be concealed due to the CCW law passage. I have encountered criminals with firearms, but openly carried only when they are committing a crime. I have not made up my mind as to how I feel about a citizen openly carrying a firearm. Don't come to Arizona... you'll have a coronary. Any 'law' or 'ordinance' against the right to bear arms openly, as the founding fathers intended is a blatent violation of a Civil Right as enumerated in the US Constitution. (The one you took an oath to support and defend.) Not an imaginary 'right'... but one enumerated in the US Constitution. As for the 10A argument... that dog won't hunt. The states agreed to abide by the articles of the Constitution as written and ratified in 1783. 10A doesn't address any of the other Amendments already agreed upon. All this CCW... permit, license extra-legalese crap is 'clutter'. The 2A recognizes the Right to bear arms. Rights are not granted by government. Rights are not sold under permit by government. Bearing arms means to carry. There is no caveat as to 'mode' of carry in the 2A. As a cop your not some extra-citizen... you're a civilian like the rest of us. The only authority you have to carry a weapon is the one you were born with. The right to self defense. (Read the 2A) I was a cop... so don't peg me as an anti. You're forced to lick the hands that sign your paycheck... but to do so against the Right to bear arms when borne responsibly is in the support of tyranny and a violation of your oath. What say you? |
|||||||||
|
Grapeshot Founder's Club Member
|
KSDeputy wrote: Very well said. I have not encountered anyone just carrying a firearm in the open. Most cities had an ordinance against it (prior to KS CCW law). Now they must be concealed due to the CCW law passage. I have encountered criminals with firearms, but openly carried only when they are committing a crime. I have not made up my mind as to how I feel about a citizen openly carrying a firearm. Have never seen a BG open carry. Have seen more than a few of them brandishing or actively shooting though. OC (open carry) is a passive, none threatening, none aggressive method of carrying - holstered and visible. BGs just don't do that for a number of reasons. If you ever get east, stop in Richmond, Va. we'll take you on a tour and show you just how uneventful OC can be. In fact if we stop to eat in a nice restaurant where alcohol happens to be served, OC is the only legal method of carry. Yata hey |
|||||||||
|
oldkim Regular Member
|
KSDeputy, I'm assuming you are a sworn LEO of some sort. If it's legal.... what is there for you to say? Of course, all taking into consideration of your location, local/state laws, etc. |
|||||||||
|
spioi Regular Member 
|
when ppl see me OCing they tell me it shouldn't be necessary because you can get a permit to CC. or the 2A doesen't say anything about having the right to carry a firearm. PPL do it to show off or look for a fight. I do it because it's more comfortable in summer.ppl should know I'm not a crimminal because they would hide theirs. |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
spioi wrote: when ppl see me OCing they tell me it shouldn't be necessary because you can get a permit to CC. or the 2A doesen't say anything about having the right to carry a firearm. PPL do it to show off or look for a fight. I do it because it's more comfortable in summer.ppl should know I'm not a crimminal because they would hide theirs. What part of '...Bear Arms' eludes them? I know... I've heard the same twit prattle ad nauseum. I have a CWP... It's been running 108ish here the past month... The only place I'd have to 'hide' a 1911-A1 would hurt like hell if I sat down. 'Look for a fight' is the direct opposite effect of OC. It deters any thoughts of a fight. |
|||||||||
|
45acpForMe Regular Member 
|
Sonora Rebel wrote: What part of '...Bear Arms' eludes them? I joined the NRA, OCDO, VCDL to help support the 2A. I find it bull@#$% (as Penn&Teller say) to restrict type of weapons (class III) or mode of carry (OC/CC/permit-needed). American politicians are supposed to fear the people (literally) so that they do the peoples will (within restraints of the constitutional republic, not mob rule). If politicians ever de-fang the populous @#$% happens. Look at Germany, Russia, China for the millions eliminated in the last century. With that said the constitution restricts powers of the federal govt and states that all other powers are given to the states and the people (as long as the don't contradict the constitution). Since "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." seems to be to darn complicated for the govt to understand all we can do is keep fighting the good fight to restore what is right. This is a local community, state and federal fight. As far as OC vs CC I prefer both. If nothing else OC allows education of the public when they talk to you. People have forgotten their rights and Washington will deceive (false statistics and false arguments) if allowed to get away with it. Evil is afoot. Lock -n- Load. |
|||||||||
|
Andrew065 Regular Member
|
" "IF" carrying openly causes the CRIMINAL to avoid you and those around you as his victims then the need for surprise is negated. " Based on a premise that requires the potential adversary to decide the outcome of events... While I do concur that your basic premise of the fullest appication of the 2A should be completely acceptable, we must really focus on actual outcomes and defend ourselves accordingly. At deer camp, on private proterty etc, open carry is completely without disagreement from me. However, on the street, in the public square in most locales around the country, open cary for self-defense is plainly an advertisement to four undesirable demographs, first, the sheeple who run at the sight of arms, two, anti's who will tie you up with frivoulous calls to 911 (and they lie like the theives they are!) thridly, LEOs who will of their own accord respond to you as a potential threat, and lastly, but for this response, the most pertinent-the criminals who will not be swayed by your stated assumption-they will target you as a threat to their efforts-especially if you happen to be in their way during the execution of a crime, or just out of plain rabid hatred of sheep dogs. I conceal, I do not want anyone to know what I am capable of, just as I do not pin my cash to my shirt. My armed respnse should a total surprise to any lethal threat. Best; Andrew |
|||||||||
|
Grapeshot Founder's Club Member
|
Andrew065 wrote: " "IF" carrying openly causes the CRIMINAL to avoid you and those around you as his victims then the need for surprise is negated. " I'll start with welcome to OCDO, suggest that you add at least your state to your profile as it effects responses frequently and close by inviting you to stay a spell and let us get to know you. Very opinionated first post, but you're entitled. Don't really care what your objections are towards OC - heard 'em all before and they're pretty much baseless in Va. You analogy about money pinned to your shirt is funny though. Exposed money = might equal an invitation to robbery. Somehow my 1911 (w/o ammo pinned to my shirt) seems to work as a deterrent. Yata hey |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
Grapeshot wrote:
+1 'Heard the same story... over 'n over... My 1911 hasn't attracted squat either. Surprise is always with the aggressor... don't kid yourself. Last edited on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 10:44 pm by Sonora Rebel |
|||||||||
|
NavyLT Regular Member
|
Yep. Gotta' side with Grapeshot and Sonora. Very eloquent repeat of the same stuff over and over again, though. But, then again, I carry a Taurus, so maybe that's why I haven't been shot and my gun taken away yet... Last edited on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 12:52 am by NavyLT |
|||||||||