Sidearms & Scatterguns Why open carry?

[Longshot38]

Because we live together with other people, as part of a society. Because our polity, our way of life, our values and our political system is based on this very concept. And because if you think you are a lone wolf, you are mistaken.

We do live together in a society. As such we share some commonality as countrymen. But with a country the size of ours that covers so many vastly different geographic and demographic areas we also have to understand that the way people live in one area of the country is vastly different then the way people live in another. And to treat the lifestyle of rural america the same as the lifestyle in urban america the same is beyond wrong and inadequate. That is the point myself and 45.308 have been makeing.

That open-carry shit is all ego. Love ya, mean it.

That is a load of crap. Is it ego when a rancher open carries while riding this fence line? Is it ego when a hiker open carries Big Bend or Denali? Try to remove yourself from the urban enviroment and rethink that comment. As I previously stated both CC and OC have their place and painting the debate with a broad stroke shows a failure to understand the issue.

 

[George Az]

This whole discussion saddens me and shows just how far off base things are becoming. forget open carry. I live pretty rural and no one thinks twice about anyone open carrying. Do it because you can. This is history passing by. I often wear a beautiful little custom Steven Kelly sheath knife horizontal sheath. Leather, bone handle, sterling silver bead on a lanyard, the darn knife is just over seven inches - hell I have a Spyderco para bigger than that. The looks of horror that I get from folks passing through is astounding. And sad. My grandfather rode a horse from Douglas Az to Gallup N.M. less than a 100 years ago carrying a .45 and a Winchester rifle. Less than a 100 years has turned the public into a nation of pansies. I can't carry a damn Case 3 blade whittler pocket knife in some cities. What the hell is wrong with that picture folks?

I never felt threatened by anyone carrying open. I feel way more threatened by cultures I do not understand and I speak a a couple of languages. What I am talking about is gang cultures and OMC cultures and drug cultures. Tactics ...... I earned my stripes too and I watched Los Angeles burn from MLK Blvd in 1992. tactics have nothing to do with a open carry. For me, open carry is a lot more comfortable than concealed and I own some nice ccw holsters too. I can be the gray man. I don't have to like it.

 

[pinsandpitons]

..... with a country the size of ours that covers so many vastly different geographic and demographic areas we also have to understand that the way people live in one area of the country is vastly different then the way people live in another. And to treat the lifestyle of rural america the same as the lifestyle in urban america the same is beyond wrong and inadequate. That is the point myself and 45.308 have been makeing.

Agreed. So does that mean you and 45.308 would change your OC/CC choices in Seattle, Atlanta, Anchorage, Boise, Miami, Boulder, Bethesda, or any other non-rural place?

 

[Longshot38]

Agreed. So does that mean you and 45.308 would change your OC/CC choices in Seattle, Atlanta, Anchorage, Boise, Miami, Boulder, Bethesda, or any other non-rural place?

Change what choice? I have always maintained that both OC and CC are viable choices. I also made it clear that when out in town I CC (seeing as my state only allows OC on private property). But I have no issue CC when appropriate. What I have a problem with is the state making the choice for me.

 

[smokebomb]

Rural open carry is a completely different animal than the people that make open carry look bad. The douchebag in Big Rapids, Michigan that open carries in Menards, completely unaware of his surroundings, standing in line with people bumping into him and doesn't even bother to look when someone bumps his gun-side hip. Another moron that promptly comes to mind, squatted down to pick up change he dropped at Dairy Queen and in the process his "birthing hips" canted his holster and he dumped his 1911 (cocked and locked, it appeared...no argument with that portion) onto the sidewalk right in front of a herd of kids. "Happens all the time..." was his muttered response. This is just in my few years around Big Rapids, obviously not the "norm" but... When asked, neither of those people had taken a concealed carry class. I asked them personally.

A little bit of oil makes a whole lot of mess.

A few morons open carrying makes the whole thing look bad in the public eye. Unfortunately, in this world, the few are sacrificed for the many. People choosing to open carry for inappropriate reasons in inappropriate places with inappropriate training make the principals of open carry look wrong.

There are times and places for open carry, provided you are capable. In my experience, a lot of public open carry people do not fit in the "capable" criteria. We, as a society, have training of some kind to read, speak, count, dress, drive...and a lot of people still have trouble figuring those things out after instruction.

To think everyone of age to legally open carry should be allowed as it is a "right" I believe is outdated (Poor word usage...substitue "misrepresented"), as there are those with mental impairments and high levels of stupidity that should not wear their guns in town. There are special requirements of human beings living in urban environments. People in such environments without professional training on firearms CAN be a risk. So can stupid drivers, but unlike driving, there is NO ROOM for "accidents". With Rights come RESPONSIBILITY.

Again, this in no way reflects environments where open carry is necessity. Farm kids raised around firearms (myself included in this category) are some of the most responsible and careful firearms carriers around. Areas of the US that require more clothing than one could otherwise access a concealed firearm OBVIOUSLY fit with open carry.

I am not against open carry in proper environments, I'm against idiots open carrying in urban areas. Get the training, educate yourself, and keep that shit tucked away from the masses...ready when it's needed.

 

[Longshot38]

Rural open carry is a completely different animal than the people that make open carry look bad. The douchebag in Big Rapids, Michigan that open carries in Menards, completely unaware of his surroundings, standing in line with people bumping into him and doesn't even bother to look when someone bumps his gun-side hip. Another moron that promptly comes to mind, squatted down to pick up change he dropped at Dairy Queen and in the process his "birthing hips" canted his holster and he dumped his 1911 (cocked and locked, it appeared...no argument with that portion) onto the sidewalk right in front of a herd of kids. "Happens all the time..." was his muttered response. This is just in my few years around Big Rapids, obviously not the "norm" but... When asked, neither of those people had taken a concealed carry class. I asked them personally.

A little bit of oil makes a whole lot of mess.

A few morons open carrying makes the whole thing look bad in the public eye. Unfortunately, in this world, the few are sacrificed for the many. People choosing to open carry for inappropriate reasons in inappropriate places with inappropriate training make the principals of open carry look wrong.

There are times and places for open carry, provided you are capable. In my experience, a lot of public open carry people do not fit in the "capable" criteria. We, as a society, have training of some kind to read, speak, count, dress, drive...and a lot of people still have trouble figuring those things out after instruction.

To think everyone of age to legally open carry should be allowed as it is a "right" I believe is outdated. There are special requirements of human beings living in urban environments. People in such environments without professional training on firearms CAN be a risk. So can stupid drivers, but unlike driving, there is NO ROOM for "accidents". With Rights come RESPONSIBILITY.

Again, this in no way reflects environments where open carry is necessity. Farm kids raised around firearms (myself included in this category) are some of the most responsible and careful firearms carriers around. Areas of the US that require more clothing than one could otherwise access a concealed firearm OBVIOUSLY fit with open carry.

I am not against open carry in proper environments, I'm against idiots open carrying in urban areas. Get the training, educate yourself, and keep that shit tucked away from the masses...ready when it's needed.

It is different, but the law by large and far doesn't address this. Rather it tends to cover entire states with blanket statements and brings us back to that paints the debate with a broad stroke statement I made. Were the law to address that specific issue it would become excessively long and complicated.

And since when have rights become out dated? Should we change our definition of free speech because it can cause harm? Should we restrict our rights to freedom of religion because some use it's ideology to harms others? Should we allow warrantless searches and seizures because it might prevent crime? Rights are not things that come and go because society changes. Rather they are things that we are born with and our fellow man has no authority over. With rights do come responsiblities. Just as risk come with living in a free society. But we understand that those risk, responsiblities, and consequences are all a worth while price for living as a free people.

 

[smokebomb]

On the "rights outdated" front, I miscommunicated: I forgot to include factoring mental impairment and the dumb, something not recognized in that era. My freedom of typing (expression) was not as efficient as my small mind.

 

[George Az]

I see there is some confusion here. I can only compare what I know and my own experience. My father lives back east. His idea of shooting is a couple hours at a "real" range with rangemasters and overheads and K/D's targets. He likes single fire, believes no one should own a "black rifle." He quit giving funds to the rifle club because they allowed such behavior. They should have their own day. He does not like it nor tolerate it. He doesn't like it when he comes out to see me and we go out shooting. It makes him uncomfortable. "How far is that target?" I lasered it at 300. How do you know what is behind it? Me, "See that dirt mesa - that is a mile away and there is nothing between us." He doesn't think it is right or safe. Shooting firearms should be done at the range.

He has now give most of his collection to museams. Including the 45-70 carbine I wanted and would have used. Regardless. Everything scares him now. As with most of the public. He is a man that used to bird hunt and no longer will because it is unsafe. I mean I am now using steel shot - safe for the environment and look like a freakin orange traffice cone. There would only be two of us and I will walk out front. I learned to shoot from him right up until I went into the USMC, but that is another story.

I have a lot of training driving a car. I mean a lot of hours with professional instruction. Back in the day, I was in many high speed pursuits. I never had one go bad on me or hit a pedestrian. I truly believe there are a bunch of people who do not deserve the car they drive, nor the license they hold. But I am not out lobbying on what to tell people what to do. I have insurance, wear my seat belt and drive the speed limit. There is no way you can tell me anyone needs a 400 horsepower truck on 35's that weighs 4000 + lbs. The other day some guy went by me in a Ferrari doing a 120+, but I don't go around preaching it is unsafe.

Some of ya'll are way bent on what others do. Firearms is a right, unlike driving which is a priveledge. I was in shop once when a guy pulled out a new gun to show his buddy. I was assured it was unloaded. I was still uncomfortable. I asked them to please point it away from the general area and they said it was their right. One of em was the owner. I left and never went back - my right. Their right too.

I don't golf, I don't understand the culture. I don't go to the country club. I don't like the scene. My right. I like the rodeo, I like living out rurally. I give up movies, the mall, concerts. I gain a little quiet and the ability to look at the stars.

I don't give a damn where you live. Ownership of firearms is your American right. Now there are local laws and reasons for going to ranges and how things are carried and accepted. I got it. Do not confuse rights with imposed thoughts of safety. There are far more people killed everyday by vehicles than firearms. You should see the statistics on children drowning in pools in Phoenix. I don't tell people not to have a pool.

 

[Graham]

Why open carry?

Should we change our definition of free speech because it can cause harm? Should we restrict our rights to freedom of religion because some use it's ideology to harms others? Should we allow warrantless searches and seizures because it might prevent crime? Rights are not things that come and go because society changes.

But we have changed the definition of free speech to exclude speech that causes harm; freedom of religion ends at using it to harm others; and search without warrant is permitted for the purposes of preventing crimes.

 

[Longshot38]

We have changed the definition of free speech to exclude speech that causes harm. Freedom of religion ends at using it to harm others. And search without warrant is permitted for the purposes of preventing crimes.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ones rights have always stopped at someone else nose. Our righs have always had limits. That its clearly defined. But altering our rights for the sake of safety flies in the face of those rights and the men who reaffirmed them in our Bill of Rights.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

 

[Graham]

Why open carry?

Ones rights have always stopped at someone else nose.

What about the right to self defense? Your nose is included.

 

[Longshot38]

What about the right to self defense? Your nose is included.

So long as you are not the agressor. We have every right to defend ourselves, we do not have the right to attack others. I thought that was clearly defined.

 

[Graham]

Why open carry?

So long as you are not the agressor.

What about if you are the initial aggressor but then discontinue the attack, do you then have a right to self defense against the victim?

That's a right which is clearly defined.

 

[Griffino]

This one made me laugh....McDonald's playland: 30-something guy, looked to be active military, had 2 extended clip glocks, one on each hip poking out of his T-shirt....and I was like "why?"

Sent from my LG-E980 using Tapatalk

 

[Graham]

This one made me laugh....McDonald's playland: 30-something guy, looked to be active military, had 2 extended clip glocks, one on each hip poking out of his T-shirt....and I was like "why?"

Sent from my LG-E980 using Tapatalk

Pics or it didn't happen. LOL!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Griffino]

I really was considering it, but I'm pro-oc/cc. So I didn't want to get caught

Sent from my LG-E980 using Tapatalk

 

[Graham]

Maybe we can start an instructional thread of pics to help people who open carry..... On second thought, nevermind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pinsandpitons]

I really was considering it, but I'm pro-oc/cc. So I didn't want to get caught

Wait a minute!?! OC or CC! Be a man and pick a side!

 

[Griffino]

Never!!!!

Sent from my LG-E980 using Tapatalk

 

[Griffino]

I think there is appropriate place for both. OC: we should always ask, in this particular setting, is it worth making people uneasy?

Sent from my LG-E980 using Tapatalk

 

[Longshot38]

What about if you are the initial aggressor but then discontinue the attack, do you then have a right to self defense against the victim?

That's a right which is clearly defined.

We can play what if all day. Did the threat stop just because three attack did? What are the specifics of this incident? Were there continued threats of violence?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

 

[Graham]

Why open carry?

We can play what if all day. Did the threat stop just because three attack did? What are the specific poof this incident? Were there continued threats of violence?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

We were talking about rights. Now you change the subject to circumstances. I was talking about the right to self defense. You stated that one does not have that right if one is the aggressor.

 

[Sniper Uncle]

It seems pretty elementary to me.
Just because one may have a right to do something, does not mean it is the right thing to do.
In tandem with the Right to Carry, whether OC or CC, comes the absolute responsibility to use good judgement in ones exercise of that right, should one decide to exercise the right to carry. This responsibility to exercise good judgement will dictate the choice if CC or OC, based upon many factors, including legality, environment, and the desire to live as inconspicuously as possibility.
Ones choice of carry styles should be suited to ones environment, including being thoughtful of others and their perceptions of safety. If OC is accepted and practiced regularly in your environment, the choice may be easier to make. If guns are viewed with fear and distrust in your environment, CC (if legal) is probably your wisest choice.
Question for the OP----Essentially, are you not asking people to use common sense in the exercise of their rights to avoid potential issues, whether caused by fear or actual acts of aggression?


Cheers,
Tim
The Right to Keep and Bear Arms Shall NOT be Infringed

 

[Longshot38]

What about if you are the initial aggressor but then discontinue the attack, do you then have a right to self defense against the victim?

That's a right which is clearly defined.

We can play what if all day. Did the threat stop just because three attack did? What are the specific poof this incident? Were there continued threats of violence?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

We were talking about rights. Now you change the subject to circumstances. I was talking about the right to self defense. You stated that one does not have that right if one is the aggressor.

So you can add circumstances to this debate but I can't? And I never said anything about the rights of the aggressor. I only stated that people don't have the right to go around randomly attcking others.

 

[Snake-Eyes]

Everyone has the rights, on paper/parchment/stone or Not, to live life how they see fit. In a society, the majority will impose limits on what is an acceptable amount of "interference" from one person to another. In the United States, we started the country with the proclamations that certain rights should be protected, because those founding folks knew the consequences of the alternative.

Bottom line: you are allowed to wear your hair in a pink mohawk with 50 body piercings and multiple tattoos while talking gibberish and carrying a loaded firearm. As long as you don't point it at someone without proper cause, then so be it. The moment you become a danger to others, then you've stepped over the "line", and society now wants you to be held accountable.

The real debate here is what is "the line"? Not what is your "Right", but rather, what is the "Limit" that society is willing to endure? We all should agree that we all have the right to do what we want, "as long as it doesn't negatively impact others". So then, what is the majority definition of "negatively impacting" someone else? Hurting their feelings? Making them uncomfortable?


Founding Fathers seemed to be clear: "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."


Whether a moron "should" carry a gun is a different answer than whether the same moron has the Right to carry. If the moron continues to act like a moron while armed with a gun, then he gets to be treated like the criminal he now is, and his rights will get further limits as deemed by society.

The fine balance is when society gets to impose those limits.

Personally, I'm a fan of the capitalist kind of system: let the market balance itself. Let everyone open-carry. After the first few shoot-outs, folks will calm down. If not, then at least the honest folks will have an unfettered opportunity to defend themselves or others.

How many of these pointless shootings would've occurred if the local populace was armed?

I still believe you are responsible for your own actions, though. If you choose to go cowboy it up and play hero, and in the process your stray shots kill innocent civilians, then guess what: you get to be prosecuted as appropriate for involuntary manslaughter or whatever... Perhaps as part of that "responsible citizen" expectation, you should've gone to the range more if you plan to carry.

There's that responsibility thing again...

 

[PBRACEGUNS]

I have had a CCW for some 31 years now. Open carry is legal in this state and carry both ways. My wife also carries both ways depending on the situation. Our Governor recently signed into law a bill that clarified our handgun laws. Several great things came from this. !st. Employers used to be able to say that a employee couldn't keep a handgun in their car/truck in the parking lot under ANY circumstances. The new law removes that stupid provision from the employers.
2nd, our carry permits may now be renewed for 1-5 years ( our choice of which). And it clarified and made the general public aware that open carry is 100% legal in Alabama. Any stores,eateries, etc: that don't want open carry in their facilities have the option of posting a easily visible sigh on Every entry door stating opposition to open carry. However CCW permits still apply for carry in those places.
I personally consider fear of a law abiding citizen carrying open to be irrational. I and my wife have open carried for several years now and for the most part it is ignored by almost everyone. We have seen an upsurge in open carry around here and I have yet to see anyone acting like a shithead while doing so.
I'm not out to "educate" anyone or berate them if they object to open carry. I have had a few rational people question why I do. The answer is simple. Because that's what I choose to do. It is funny but more than 20 or so times I have had people actually tell my wife and I like they like knowing there are responsible armed people out there and that they too are considering going to the open carry option.
As a side note, we both carry in retention holsters. I use a Serpa level 2 or a Uncle mikes reflex depending on which sidearm i carry. My wife carries in a serpa as well.
If people open carry they need to understand that purposely drawing attention to themselves or acting like billy badass is stupid and looked down on by everyone whether they agree with open carry or not.

 

[hatidua]

After this one, can we have a .45 vs 9mm debate, those are always fun too... Oh, and let's not forget to toss in a 1911 vs Glock pissing match as well.

 

[Snake-Eyes]

After this one, can we have a .45 vs 9mm debate, those are always fun too... Oh, and let's not forget to toss in a 1911 vs Glock pissing match as well.

Glock 21. Done.