The Open Carry Argument (I didn't write this, it's quoted from the article)

[shadowrider]

My primary goal when I’m out and about, besides whatever I went out and about to do, is to go about peaceably and not be the victim of a violent crime. To that end I carry a firearm whenever I go out as well as follow all the other standard safety practices like maintaining situational awareness, staying out of high crime areas, and avoiding confrontation. I also have a larger overall goal of making it through my life without shooting anyone. Simply put, I don’t want to be responsible, legally or morally, for another’s death. Those two goals might appear at first blush to be mutually exclusive, and with concealed carry it would be a difficult set of goals to realize.

Carry of any firearm or other weapon for defensive purposes is a solemn responsibility. Those of us that do (openly or concealed) are mortified by the idea, constantly promoted by the pacifists, that our behavior is more reckless because we are armed. In other words, because we carry a handgun we take more risks than we would if we were unarmed.

http://www.usacarry.com/forums/open-carry-discussion/7230-open-carry-argument.html

[Tuesday Afternoon]

1. Good Morning, shadowrider

:hi:

[shadowrider]

2. Mornin, mornin. Where's my coffee? n/t

[BeFree]

3. heh

Is it more risky to carry a firearm? Yes.

So why be so risky? If minimizing risk is the goal then ban all guns forever.

I get the feeling minimizing risk as stated in the OP is just a ploy with no real basis other than an excuse to carry.

[shadowrider]

4. If minimizing risk is the goal then ban all guns forever.

[beevul]

7. When the fail is so epic...there can be only one.

[slackmaster]

8. "ban all guns forever"

Except, of course, ones in the hands of government employees.

Violent criminals would decline to participate an such a ban.

[safeinOhio]

5. I think we do take more risk than

if we were not armed. I also have empathy for those that fear all guns. They are entitled to their fears, just as those that carry have fear of being the victim of a violent crime. Both sides have a certain amount of paranoia. While I sometimes carry a concealed weapon, I would most likely hand over my wallet than draw my gun. I have to consider the odds of the person shooting me or not. Most wouldn't, some would. I have to judge that by the situation.

But, that is just me.

[DWC]

141. Your Option

If you are armed, the options are yours. If you are not armed, you are completely subject to the force of others.

Semper Fi,

[MH1]

6. what a sad world the author lives in

My primary goal when I’m out and about, besides whatever I went out and about to do, is to go about peaceably and not be the victim of a violent crime.

Really?? Whenever he goes out one of the main things on his mind is not to be the victim of a crime?

I guess my life is more blessed than I knew. Who woulda thunk it, as I work in a borderline-sketchy part of a city with one of the highest crime rates in the US? (But ok, I live in a decent suburb, that I think only has a murder or two per year).

It just seems like paranoia to constantly worry about possibly being the victim of a crime ... unless of course your life experiences give you real reason for worry. I feel for anyone in that situation.

Then again, it could be just a cover for excessive machoism, which is a trait I've noticed in one or two gun-toting men that I know.

(Rant away, I'm probably going away now, I don't usually post in this forum anyway, just saw it in the latest thread list... I'm personally for limiting the 2md amendment somewhere shy of letting just anyone carry a nuclear weapon around, but I'm not sure exactly where and it's not a big issue for me, except for how the issue impinges politically on other issues I care much more about.)

[Euromutt]

14. Interestingly, one of the leading lights of the Open Carry movement here in Washington state...

...is an openly gay guy who decided when he came out about his homosexuality that he didn't feel like keeping anything about himself concealed--including the fact that he carried a handgun for self-defense--for the sake of avoiding upsetting certain people's feelings. Fit that into your pat little theory.

[MH1]

53. "unless of course your life experiences give you real reason for worry. "

yup, if he is openly gay in this country, it fits.

And I do feel for him. It sucks that a gay person - or anyone who might be perceived as gay - has to fear violence for that reason alone (never mind all the other possible reasons). I see that as a problem with our culture and some laws that encourage discrimination and hatred against gays. I don't think the fix for that problem is that we should all have to go around armed because we fear for our safety.

[shadowrider]

56. Umm. Can you show me where a pro-gun advocate said we "all" have to go armed?

On the contrary. Pro-gun people are ADAMANT that it's YOUR right to CHOOSE whether or not to go armed. We don't try and force anyone.

All we ask is that OUR CHOICE to go ARMED is as respected.

Nothing more, nothing less.

[MH1]

61. I didn't say that he did, but perhaps I was unclear

I think we need to fix the problems that cause people to fear for their safety, and the fix is not that we all go about armed to protect ourselves.

Does that make more sense?


(under what circumstances and to what degree people should have the CHOICE to go armed is a different question that I don't want to get involved in, I have other things I need to do today. I've already stated that I wouldn't give people the choice to walk around with a nuclear weapon. Most people, even most pro-gun people, would probably agree with me on that. Where, exactly, the line should be drawn, is a more difficult question; but I do suspect that you and I would disagree, and I don't have time or interest to argue it.)

[shadowrider]

64. I get your drift. It's the "all" I had a problem with. But we understand each other

Thank you for responding without the use of insults, condescension or name-calling. I mean that sincerely.

[Euromutt]

114. I didn't say he carried because he's gay

And as far as I can ascertain, that wasn't the reason for his decision to carry, concealed at first and now openly. The guy carried concealed before he came out, after all. Besides, he lives in (sub)urban King County, Washington, hardly a hotbed of conservatism and gay-bashing. Seattle has the highest population of gays (by percentage of the population) in the country after San Francisco.

As I said, he decided to carry openly as opposed to concealed (not as opposed to not carrying at all) because when he came out, he decided he was done hiding things about himself, including the fact that he already carried. You can find him quite readily if you Google "Lonnie Wilson" (his name), especially if you include the words "open" and "carry" in the search.

[RSillsbee]

145. Armed Gays Don't Get Bashed PinkPistols.org NT

[SteveM]

142. Respectfully, you have missed the point of this experience...

"I don't think the fix for that problem is that we should all have to go around armed because we fear for our safety."

No, the problem is that THIS gay man (mentioned in the post) is threatened, and he is taking measures to protect himself. Social policies against discrimination lose their effect when a gang of bashers swoops in on some guy in the gay district.

Very few people who own guns are "macho" or "paranoid:" they have merely taken reasonable steps to defend themselves in the case of attack. I keep a heavy revolver beside my bed at night. And get 8-9 hours of sleep each night; not bad for a 62-yr-old paranoid type with late-onset macho-itis!

[guitar man]

16. You should consider yourself blessed

Back when I worked in a "sketchy" part of town, I was shot by an armed criminal. Luckily I survived. I pray I never have to face such a situation again but if there is a next time, I'll be armed too.

[AtheistCrusader]

40. Only a murder or two per year.

I wonder which should be more shocking, his apparent need, or your apparente disregard.

[MH1]

49. please check your sarcasm detector. nt

[lawodevolution]

55. MH1, so what you are saying is there is no crisis involving violent crime and

you have no need to support the advancement of gun control.

[MineralMan]

9. Sounds like a frightened, paranoid person to me.

[PavePusher]

19. And I'm sure you have a detailed history of this person....

to extract such a diagnosis, amIrite?

Or, leaving your ivory-tower bubble of predjudice behind for a brief moment, he could be a person taking reasonable precautions against a known, calculated, moderate-probability, high-risk possibility.

Or do you deny that violent crime exists?

[MineralMan]

20. Nope. Just his words.

It's an opinion, not a diagnosis. I'm not qualified to diagnose anything. See my signature line.

[SteveM]

143. I fail to see how this individual is "frightened" and "paranoid."

Fright would seem to be readily detectable in tone and language choice; paranoia would be an out-sized fear (and consequent actions) in the face of a rather minor threat. I don't detect anything in here that runs afoul of the mushy terminology of psychology.

[RSillsbee]

10. I am going to guess that this is going to be the only time Mainsail ever shows up on DU NT

[jpak]

11. Open Carry Sucks

yup

[slackmaster]

12. Thanks for your scholarly, thoughtful contribution to the discussion

:rofl:

[jpak]

15. It's to the point - open carry is meant to intimidate law abiding citizens

and it sucks

yup

[PavePusher]

17. Cite to evidence?

Else you are full of very low-concentration bovine-extract fertilizer.

[jpak]

21. Because it's the truth - displays of loaded and chambered firearms in public are meant to intimidate

pure and simple

yup

[PavePusher]

24. "open carry is meant to intimidate law abiding citizens"

No, it's meant to intimidate criminals.

The law-abiding have nothing to fear from people O.C.ing a firearm in a legal manner.

[jpak]

29. You cannot tell the difference between a criminal or a law abiding citizen - nope

both are intimidated by armed strangers with an ideological axe to grind.

and criminals could open carry as well - how do you tell if he's just a good ol' boy just a'funnin' with guns - or not?

You can't

yup

[PavePusher]

35. The only "ideological axe" I have to grind...

is that there is never a police officer around when I need defensive action and, in most jurisdictions, they don't even respond to certain crimes anymore. This is not meant to denigrate police forces, it is a matter of scarce resources, including time, money and personnel levels.

Note that O.C. by criminals seems to be about non-existent.

Yup.

[jpak]

45. When have you been in need of "defensive action" and post a link to the police blotter

:rofl:

[RSillsbee]

90. I'm not intimidated in the slightest when I see someone open carrying NT

[Hoyt]

93. Would you be concerned if unarmed and someone walks in with a machete strapped to their back?

Or someone walks in with 5 sticks of dynamite and a detonator and plops it down next to you?

If so, you know how a lot of folks feel about an unknown carrier in public, especially in cities.

[RSillsbee]

95. Machete no

If I saw someone carrying dynamite at Mickey D's I'd pee my pants , scream like a little girl and flee for my life (Kinda like some of the people that write for the Huffing and Puffington post)

[Hoyt]

99. To some folks, a tricked out pistol under a fat belly causes the same reaction as a bomb.

Heck, my best friend -- Marine Vietnam vet -- can't stand to see guns (even the old Civil War Musket I had in the corner). My wife was the same way, as are most of the parents where I live.

Clearly, carriers don't care about others who might have such reactions.

[RSillsbee]

102. In all seriousness

I am positive I OC more often than you do and I don't think anyone has ever even noticed that I was doing so. At least they've never commented

[Hoyt]

105. I doubt it would change your mind if someone said something. It hasn't here.

You should have met my father-in-law -- 23 years military, plus another 25 as a Deputy Sheriff.

I saw him tell some open carrier with dual shoulder holsters in a family restaurant that he was a "silly fool." I dang near fell on the floor laughing so hard at the "silly fool" strutting around in broad daylight outside Birmingham Alabama. He kind of slinked out after my 70 years FIL got hold of him.

Besides, I doubt it would change your mind if someone said something. It hasn't here.

[RSillsbee]

107. You are probably right

I don't live my life based on what other people think of my actions. I also don't walk around w/ dual shoulder holsters, I carry a S&W 6906 in a Bianchi retention holster on my hip. I'm a middle aged man, not dressed like a banger and I live in a fairly OC friendly state. I also go about my business as if the gun doesn't exist, it's kind of like the old Jedi mind trick if you act like there's nothing there people respond like there's nothing there.

For most of the country it's really not that big a deal

[Hoyt]

108. "Banger"? Interesting. If you really want to be a maverick -- go gunless.

I think it is a bigger deal than you make it, but most packers don't care. They gotta have their cold steel fix.

[RSillsbee]

111. As long as I stay out of McDonald's you're good though right? NT

[rrneck]

113. Staying out of McDonald's

is a good idea just out of general principles. The food is more dangerous than any gun.

Reminds me of an old joke.

A guy was backpacking in East Tennessee and came up on an old hillbilly. The hillbilly held out a jug of moonshine to him and said, "Here boy, take a pull." The guy replied he was into health food and didn't drink, especially not that stuff. The hillbilly picked up a shotgun and pointed it at him and said, "I told you to take a drink boy." Considering the extra incentive, he took a pull, coughed and turned about three shades of green. Then the hillbilly took the jug away from him and handed him the gun saying, "Now you hold the gun on me while I take a drink."

[Callisto32]

116. Awesome.

Though as a man who lives in a place where moonshiners and their wares are still (pun intended) pretty common...it ain't all that bad; as long as you know the source.

[rrneck]

120. Very true.

Done right there's nothing better.

[Katya Mullethov]

121. It's really the only way

One can be assured they are getting the proper RDA of isobutyl propionate in their diet .

[SteveM]

147. HA!

[Katya Mullethov]

118. I savor the opportunity at fielding Fuddish attempts

At making me slink away .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSGySNLyACE
Fudd mullets go to the very top of my lodge pole .
Like lions and Hyenas , I will go well out of my way
to gnaw on any I catch running their cock holsters .

[X_Digger]

103. Yes, and I'm sure that a generation ago, two men kissing in public would have caused quite a stir...

They got over it, and you can, too.

[SteveM]

146. OH, god, the imagery!

[PavePusher]

39. No evidence to present, got it. n/t

[Euromutt]

117. It's not actually that simple, because there two kinds of open carriers

The "Open Carry Movement" (henceforth "OCM" for ease of typing) existed before anyone outside Illinois had even heard of Barack Obama. Their objective was to normalize open carry: to get the general public used to the idea that a person openly carrying a firearm does not necessarily present a threat to public safety. In other words, their objective was precisely not to intimidate.

Then there were the Teabagger types who showed up packing outside Obama's town hall meetings over the summer of 2009, and have continued to do so intermittently. Their purpose is to intimidate, I can't argue with that, though I'm inclined to think the entity they want to intimidate is the federal government, rather than other private citizens present.

Because the Teabagger types showed up at (the periphery of) presidential events, they attracted way more media attention, and thus created a misperception on the part of the general public that they were representative of the OCM, when in fact few to none of them were part of the pre-existing OCM. In fact, their shenanigans did a lot of damage to the OCM's cause, setting it back by at least five years, and prompting a major effort at damage control on the OCM's part, including a voluntary moratorium on open carry for the remainder of 2009. The OCM was--and probably still is--rather angry at the OCing Teabaggers over this, and any Teabagger who shows up on the Open Carry forum is likely to get a frosty reception at best.

[rl6214]

25. Prove it.

Show one example where someone has been intimitaded by open carry.

I'll wait.

[jpak]

27. Guns are lethal weapons, the sight of a stranger carrying a gun in a public place induces fear

in most law abiding people.

It's the truth.

That is why open carry advocates fashionably carry - to intimidate.

If an armed stranger knocked on your door in the middle of the night - would fear him or trust him?

Would you even advertise your presence at the door?

Would you even open the door?

Well, would you?

intimidation

yup

[rl6214]

28. I am not afraid of someone with a gun

I don't live in fear, I'll leave that to you.

[jpak]

32. So, if an armed stranger walked up and tapped on your car window at a stoplight at night

you would not be intimidated?

So, if an armed stranger stopped your child on a sidewalk to ask directions - you would not be intimidated?

So, if an armed parent walked into your child's school to argue with at teacher or the principal you would not be intimidated?

So, if an armed stranger got into a heated shouting match with your kid's Little League coach, you would not be intimidated?

:rofl:

[rl6214]

66. I do not live in fear OR get intimidated

And anyone carrying a weapon knows they have a higher responsibility to not "argue with at teacher or the principal or become an armed stranger getting into a heated shouting match with your kid's Little League coach"

I have a concealed carry licenss and I KNOW I cannot get into any of these situations because I am carrying and need to be the more responsible person.

I would also venture a guess that the people that are open carrying are doing so because their state still does not allow concealed carry. If Texas had open carry along with their concealed carry, I would always carry concealed, I don't need to advertise that I am carrying a weapon.

[jpak]

71. Wow - you truly believe that EVERYONE that open carries is responsible?

Yeah - like everyone who has a drivers license is a "responsible" driver.

can you say stupid fairy tale?

yup

:rofl:

[rl6214]

74. show me a situation

Where someone that open carries is not being responsible.

And don't say just cause he/she is carrying in public they are not being responsible. Dosen't count.

[shadowrider]

75. You are asking a question that won't be answered.

Here's the way anti's work:

THEY make a statement, and instead of THEM proving it true, hold you responsible for disproving it. All the stats you can provide, with cited references will be dismissed.

Asking them to prove their case doesn't work since they can't.

[jpak]

78. Stupid question - you are saying that EVERYONE that carries is responsible

That's a crock.

There was some asshole in Texas that was "responsible" enough to drop his pop gun in a restaurant and kill an old lady.

Irresponsible

yup

[rl6214]

80. You are saying that everyone that carries is irresponsible

That's a Crock.

I am responsible enough to never have any issue when I carry (in Texas).

I am VERY responsible.

YUP

[jpak]

84. No, I'm not - a holstered handgun is not a halo - even in Texas

It does make anyone automatically "responsible".

nope

[X_Digger]

94. More responsible (as a group) than the rest of texas..

[slackmaster]

77. You truly believe that anyone dressed in a police uniform is responsible

:argh:

[jpak]

79. I rest my case

To advocate that everyone open carry is irresponsible and stupid.

To claim that everyone that open carries is "responsible" is just plain fucking stupid.

yup

[rl6214]

82. You have no case

YUP

[SteveM]

148. Yup. Or is it P-U-y? Y? Because his case stinks.

[slackmaster]

85. There's that old, tired Straw Man again.

To advocate that everyone open carry is irresponsible and stupid.

Literally nobody is advocating that. NOT ONE PERSON!

[shadowrider]

86. Amazing, isn' it?

No one says that except the anti's, who have convinced themselves of the truth of that statement, then refuse to prove it (when they can't) and insist it's the truth. They hold to it until the bitter end.

[jpak]

87. anti...

.....stupidity?

uip

[jpak]

72. So - when you carry and get into an argument with some punk - you just walk away?

to avoid those "situations".

:rofl:

[rl6214]

73. first of all i DO NOT get in a arguement with SOME PUNK

And Yes, I just walk away.

[oneshooter]

88. If you get into violent arguments with"some punk" is perhaps best

that you do not own a firearm or a weapon of any sort.

I know that this is probably useless but you might do some research on open and concealed carry laws.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[shadowrider]

89. Might I suggest they take a CCW class?

:hide:

[SteveM]

149. Oh, his confrontation is on-line; he'd run, otherwise. He's safe.

[slackmaster]

31. Are you afraid of police officers?

I'm not.

[jpak]

33. I'm not, because they are TRAINED LAW ENFORCEMENT and can be readily identified as such

with a legal mandate to carry guns and use lethal force

some surly drunk in a bar?

some road raging idiot?

not so much

[PavePusher]

37. I am a non-criminal Citizen.

I have "a legal mandate to carry guns and use lethal force" if I deem it neccesary.

And a Constitutional one as well, not merely a delegated authority.

[jpak]

41. You have no legal mandate to use lethal force whenever you "deem it necessary"

There is no such clause or amendment in the Constitution.

On the other hand...

I have a right to be free from intimidation by gun carrying political ideologues.

yup

[shadowrider]

43. Can you specify where in the BOR that right exists?

Nope

[jpak]

46. The 9th and 10th amendments

yup

[shadowrider]

48. Wait, we're restricting rights here. 9th and 10th need to be re-interpreted

because it's an old document. They won't apply. Try again.

[jpak]

51. I win

:rofl:

[PavePusher]

50. Elaborate, please? n/t

[jpak]

52. read em and weep - rights not specified in the Constitution are reserved by the people

I have the right to be secure from gun carrying political ideologues who want to intimidate me.

yup

[PavePusher]

58. You are secure.

None of those people are trying to intimidate you.

In fact, they want very much for you to leave them alone, just as they are leaving you alone.

Yup.

[jpak]

60. Yes they are - and if they want to leave me alone, they can leave their stupid guns at home

yup

[SteveM]

151. Paranoid? yup. pu.

[friendly_iconoclast]

65. Where in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments? Please be specific. n/t

[PavePusher]

47. "keep and bear arms" for "the security of a free state".

As I am part of the "free state", I keep and bear arms for my security.

Also codified into all state laws is mention of using force for self defense.

You can look them up easily on the 'net.

Yup.

[jpak]

54. You do not have the right to intimidate, scare or terrorize law abiding citizens

nope

and Free Staters are not part of the Democratic Party.

They are right wing nut jobs

yup

[PavePusher]

57. I don't go about trying to intimidate law abiding citizens.

If they feel intimidated by me browsing the bookshelves while sipping a Mocha, the problem is not coming from me.

Note here that you are the one trying to restrict Rights without evidence. How very despotic of you. At least that's something you can't accuse the F.S'ers of.

[jpak]

59. It is a natural reaction to lethally armed strangers who get their jollies packing in public

yup

[PavePusher]

63. So, still no presentation of evidence.

We're done here.

Gotta go get some mountain biking with the dog. Armed, or unarmed, that is the question.

Good day to you, sir/madam.

[YllwFvr]

139. I will OC on duty

and off duty. I assume you think that when I am not in a uniform I am intimidating the public, but when the badge goes on it is somehow different?
Admit that you are intimidated by firearms.

[jpak]

62. Despotic? To go to a bookstore without fear of gun toting strangers who enjoy intimidating people?

That's called FREEDOM

yup!

[SteveM]

153. Then "free" yourself. YOU are the one intimidated. yup. pu.

[SteveM]

152. Sorry, but YOU are the one intimidated. Tough. yup. pu.

[rl6214]

68. don't be afraid

maybe you should undergo some counseling.

[SteveM]

150. Actually, you DON'T have that right...

"...to be free from intimidation by gun carrying political ideologues."

Nothing in the Constitution recognizes that so-called "right." If you are that intimidated (your own words), then you should see someone about your paranoia. pu

[rl6214]

67. As a concealed carry licensee

I have a higher responsibility to maintain control, not drink while carrying, keep my cool and I would think anyone open carrying would do the same.

You are making some assumptions on something you know nothing of and are making up yourself.

[jpak]

81. You would think that, huh - like everyone with a drivers license won't drink and drive

and obey the rules of the road

and keep their cool on the highway while driving a potential lethal weapon.

But the newspapers are full of stories to the contrary.

Open Carry Sucks

yup

[rl6214]

83. "and keep their cool on the highway while driving a potential lethal weapon.

Well shit, Ban all those lethal weapons.

Do it for the children.

YUP

[X_Digger]

98. Let's see..

How likely are TX CHL holders to break the law?



This is the rate of CHL holders, among themselves compared to the rate of the general public over 21. If I just graphed actual numbers of crimes committed by each group, you wouldn't even be able to see the CHL bar.

[jpak]

104. But..but...but...no holy CHL holder can break the law - they are ALL RESPONSIBLE

not

thanks

[X_Digger]

106. Did you stuff that straw man yourself?

Or did you have help?

Post 67, that you responded to, did not claim that they're 'all responsible'.

But the reality is, they're likely more responsible than you.

[slackmaster]

76. Everyone has a legal mandate to use lethal force in self-defense

You should educate yourself on the law.

some surly drunk in a bar?

some road raging idiot?

Nice stereotyping.

[PavePusher]

38. No evidence presented. Natch. n/t

[jpak]

42. Ostrich, natch

yup

[SteveM]

154. What? Your butt's in the air again? Yup. pu.

[RSillsbee]

91. RE: If an armed stranger knocked on your door in the middle of the night

I wouldn't open the door if an UNarmed stranger knocked on my door in the middle of the night. What is your point?

[flamin lib]

126. Will I do?

Wasn't OC in the classic sense but the clerk in a convenience store had a semi auto on his hip and it scared hell out of me.

Before you leap to conclusions about my experience with convenience stores consider that for two years I worked the grave yard shift at one. Dealt with biker (not to be confused with motorcyclists) fist fights, fatalities on the premisis and more drunks than I can count.

Come to think of it, a biker is to motorcycles as gun nut is to firearms enthusiast.

You know who you are, own it.

[rl6214]

129. And why would you possibly be afraid of

an inanimate metal object "semi auto on his hip"? Why did this scare the hell out of you? It wasn't doing anything, it was just haning on his hip. He wasn't attempting to rob the place, he wasn't waving it around, he wasn't talking about it or threatening with it, it was just on his hip.

It sounds like you have more issues than just fear of gun issues to deal with.

[flamin lib]

132. IT wasn't doing anything, but HE (it was a he) was clearly afraid

of something and people who are afraid can, and do, react to situations in ways that aren't predictable.

I'm not scared of the "inanimate object", I'm scared of the ass hole who feels the need to show off his "gun".

Like I said, you know who you are, own it.

[rl6214]

133. I don't see anything in your post

That shows that he was "clearly afraid of something". Can you elaborate on how you know he was clearly afraid?

[flamin lib]

134. He was clearly afraid of something because he chose to

openly display his "gun" in a situation that didn't require it.

If someone isn't afraid of something why would they prepare? I'm acrophobic but I don't wear a parachute. If I encountered someone wearing a parachute I'd be uncertain about how they might respond to some unexpected situation.

You know who you are, own it.

[friendly_iconoclast]

137. So why should your judgement of what is necessary outweigh his?

Maybe he was nervous because he was a clerk at a convenience store?

Hint: Where do you think the term "Stop n' Rob" came from?


That's rather solipsistic of you to presume to judge where his interests lie.

Not to mention arrogant.


BTW, I was also an overnight clerk (at a hotel). There had been a rash of hotel robberies in the area (West Palm Beach, early

Eighties), and all of the night shift was armed.


I once ran off an "alternative shopper" (no shots fired). He decided discretion was the better part of valor, and took off

at high speed after charged the bolt on the night auditor's AR-15 carbine (he would shoot at a local range before

coming to work in the evenings. Occasionally I would go with him.)

[flamin lib]

160. Two things:

1) I answered the question asked,"Do you know anyone who was intimidated by open carry?" My answer is yes.

2) I couldn't give a good God damn about HIS state of mind because MY judgment is just as valid as his.

FYI there is no open carry here. He could have legally concealed the "gun" within reach under the counter but wearing it holstered is not legal. Further, I don't give a good God damn about YOUR experience. I have been a graveyard clerk in a convenience and dealt with fights, fatalities and belligerent drunks all without a "gun". Ever deal with a drunk waving a gun and cussing out his wife? I have. Any one of those things is bad news but all three in one place?

The question was asked, I answered it. Don't like my answer? Ignore it. I don't really care.

[YllwFvr]

138. thats not difficult though proving it may be

Its happened to me. I OC during the summer without fail and have been confronted by individuals twice in my three years or so of OC. One freaked out, the other was upset and angry. The latter I calmed down and informed him. The former vacated the area. Thats out of thousands Ive been around in frequent trips to the city. Even in Philadelphia Ive had a dozen people ask us about the legality and walk away quite amazed. They sure werent intimidated. It happens. Some people really do have a fear of firearms.

If you really want I will dig up a story or two.

[rl6214]

156. You can't prove intimidation

you can dig up articles or first hand examples of people that said they fear guns but to say that people that OC intimidate the general public is a stretch. There are always going to be those people out there that oppose something or fear something or may be intimidated by something but you can't paint a group of people with such a broad brush.

[Katya Mullethov]

159. You can make something up though

And claim somebody committed a brandishing offense in the hopes of getting the cops to screw them over .I've only "heard the stories " and do not personally know anyone that this has happened to , but I have been accosted for opening a door for what I had mistakenly assumed to be a lady in Austin , and had false police reports filed on behalf of my shooting . So it's no real stretch of the imagination .

I do however , still hold doors for people .

[slackmaster]

30. Do you believe that the reason police officers carry guns is to intimidate law-abiding citizens?

Do tell.

[jpak]

34. see above

:rofl:

[Callisto32]

115. By that rationale,

the police mean to intimidate law abiding citizens.

Please "re-logic" yourself to a conclusion that makes sense.

[YllwFvr]

136. Ill remember that when I start carrying on duty

perhaps I will hide it under my vest

[SteveM]

144. And to think, 2A advocates are regularly "accused" in phallus terminology. nt

[Hoyt]

13. Agree-- Open carry sucks. Sadly, some consider it quite fashionable to pack in public.

Concealed carry in public -- not much better.

[PavePusher]

18. I notice you didn't use your favorite word in your recent article.

Did it loose it's magic?

[jpak]

22. "loose"?

:rofl:

[PavePusher]

23. Inadvertent puns are the best, ain't they... 8>)

I'll let that one stand for posterity.

[Hoyt]

70. Which one of the many derisive terms are you referring? A bunch come to mind.

[Katya Mullethov]

119. Pant stuffing inadequates

And the perennial favorite amongst the easily impressed would be the ubiquitous cock fluffing open carrier in a double shoulder holster . Vainly, repeatedly , and publicly kneading his gnarled and knotted root with a pair of pistols to no avail .

[flamin lib]

135. I think I love you----vicariously of course. What wonderful use of the language! nt

[Katya Mullethov]

157. And it doesnt warrant even a slight retort from a man of letters

You do realize I am mocking the milquetoasts and useful idiots that would bargain away my freedoms for an unattainable sense of security ?

Perhaps you might read it again .

[flamin lib]

158. No, I just enjoy really good use of language. nt

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PavePusher]

36. Wouldn't that be "tacky"?

Eventually?

[shadowrider]

44. Only if it's packed down the back of your pants, THEN it's tacky personified n/t

[Hoyt]

69. Pistol or sock -- not much difference in the reason folks do so.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RSillsbee]

97. You didn't answer my question NT

[Hoyt]

100. I did answer it, read my answer again.

Most women carriers I've known, weren't cowboys (planning on saving the world) and don't carry openly. Usually their gun -- for the few that carry regularly -- is in a purse. Their only intent is to protect themselves from a rapist, which I can't really argue with (although I think there are other ways to do that). Further, I've yet to see one with a high capacity magazine, drooling over photos of guns, playing Rambo, etc.

[RSillsbee]

101. I meant my other question

The one about screaming like a little girl and fleeing for your life

[friendly_iconoclast]

109. Sounds a lot like "Some of my best friends carry guns".

Followed up with a fresh dose of stereotyping.

Love the way you keep adding to your skillset. A real Renaissance man.

[oneshooter]

112. Please tell us your "better way" of avoiding rape. n/t

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

123. Logically, if one doesn't have a gun it's harder to commit rape... ergo, rape avoided.

[shadowrider]

124. Depends upon which gun he's showing n/t

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

125. Sorry, I should have specified... "pistol"

wait, what?
:rofl:

[shadowrider]

127. Or in my case, pop-gun :(

[PavePusher]

128. Huh, I always carry a repeater... n/t

[oneshooter]

130. Mine is a single shot pump. n/t

[Katya Mullethov]

131. Mare's Leg here

Makes the Keltec look so tiny .

[YllwFvr]

140. I know five women who carry a gun

four do so openly. I guess its all about the area you live in

[SteveM]

155. So, women "carry in a purse?" Should have known; now I'll have to get one...

[friendly_iconoclast]

110. Why is it gun control advocates are the last refuge for Freudian imagery?

Really, this is one step above phrenology.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

122. Have you considered submitting your material to The Onion for publication as well?

I know there's not much difference between huffpo recently and the Onion... but I think the Onion is a little more entertaining with all the videos and stuff.