Open carry is the practice of wearing a presumably loaded firearm, visibly. It normally takes the form of a holstered handgun. It occasionally takes the form of someone carrying a rifle or shotgun into a restaurant, which has a history of causing restaurant chains to ban or at least decry the practice. There is also what gun writer and blogger Tam Keel calls “Open carrying at people,” which I think is the province of those colloquially known as “attention whores.”
A few years ago, Mark Walters hosted a three-way debate on the topic on his show “Armed American Radio.” The “pro” speaker came, IIRC, from Georgia Carry. The “anti-open carry” speaker was a cop from the Midwest who, though generally pro-armed citizen, thought open carry was counterproductive to both the public peace and the Second Amendment cause. I took the middle ground, which I still hold. One the one hand, I would like for every state to allow any citizen who has a clean record and hasn’t been adjudicated mentally incompetent to be allowed to open carry a holstered, loaded handgun. First, because there are some jurisdictions where if the wind blows your coat open and reveals the gun you are legally carrying concealed, a genuinely frightened citizen or vindictive anti-gunner can combine with an anti-gun prosecutor to create a perfect storm of criminal charges for illegal open carry. Second, because if a good person suddenly becomes a stalking victim or the target of death threats, I don’t want them to have to wait up to 90 days (gun-friendly Florida) or six months (the time it takes before a new resident can even apply for a concealed carry permit in California, which for the most part is decidedly non-gun-friendly). But on the other hand, I don’t think we win any friends for gun owners’ civil rights by flaunting deadly weapons in the face of a general public conditioned to fear guns and their owners by generations of anti-gun media and political prejudice.
I do open carry a few times a year in public, just to gauge typical response, and have done so in jurisdictions from New Hampshire and Connecticut to Washington State. Most folks don’t even notice. I just got back from a class in Tucson, hosted by Dan Southard and his Gator Farm Tactical training group. There is no more open-carry-friendly state than Arizona, though Tucson is pretty much “blue yuppie central” on firearms issues. At the airport hotel, about a fifth of the students open carried, while a majority of the rest were packing concealed. There were no incidents or complaints. Interestingly, if you look at the class photo below, you’ll be hard put to spot even the openly carried handguns, including the Glock on my own hip. Yes, open carry can be discreetly performed.
Now, contrast that with this YouTube video, taken by a true attention whore and cop-baiter. Ask yourself just how much of an ambassador this guy, trolling a school while wearing an openly carried handgun AND a slung long gun, is for the cause of responsible armed citizens. Note that at the end, he and his flaunted guns walk right up to the door of the school, doing a remarkable imitation of Adam Lanza approaching Sandy Hook Elementary School. Note that it was the Bloomberg anti-gun-owner forces who made it go viral.
Click Here for Video.
(First video removed by user link updated to use the original video, not the deleted, edited Demanding Mom’s video. you can visit his Youtube channel here. EP)
Let me ask again…what is YOUR take on the matter?
My state is open carry and has been since the beginning of statehood. As mentioned here before, I saw a guy in a Menards store not long ago carrying a pistol in a shoulder holster, OVER his jacket. Either to comply with open carry because he didn’t have a CCW permit, or to advertize to potential criminals they shouldn’t mess with him. He was elderly and disabled, walking slowly with a cane, so perhaps he felt the need to try to prevent anyone from thinking he would be an easy victim. In any event, he didn’t seem to cause concern to anyone that I saw.
BTW, in my state it’s a simple matter to obtain a CCW permit, so there is really no excuse for not getting one.
Another repeat from an earlier post: I was in a small gas station/convenience store in a little town in rural Wyoming not long ago. A sheriffs deputy was in the store paying for his snacks when a local rancher came in carrying a Glock in a belt holster. Didn’t cause so much as a ripple of notice from anyone. I was watching to see if anyone seemed concerned, nobody batted an eye. But this was rural Wyoming where carrying a weapon of some sort, either on your belt or in a rack in your pickup, is seen by most folks as just good common sense. As one local once told me, “It never fails, when you ain’t got a gun you are gonna see somethin’ that needs shootin’.”
Much like the Boy Scout motto: “Be prepared.”
I feel the same way as Mr. Ayoob about the attention whores who carry around a slung AR and bait the cops. There is no reason for causing fear among the general population just because you are legally able to carry a weapon. Especially these days with heightened awareness thanks to a few psychos.
Took my 22 year old daughter out shooting my 1911 .45 last week. After she had burned through about 100 rounds and we were picking up to go home, she asked me about getting her own pistol and obtaining a CCW permit. She seemed to think a pistol would be a fitting birthday present next time around. Smart girl, and she made me very proud. When she was about 4 years old I was wondering if she would be interested in guns, hunting and shooting, like her older brothers. One morning as I was sitting in my chair drinking coffee and reading the paper she came out of her bedroom carrying a doll under one arm, and holding a toy cap pistol in the other hand.
No worries.
Dennis: If you think I’m defending this clown, why don’t you try reading my comments earlier.
My issue is that the cops’ actions contributed to this fiasco. The guy in the video had no intention to go onto the school’s property. He was conducting his 2A stroll *past* the school, on the public sidewalk, when he noticed the cops — those same cops that have had contact with him several times in the past and knew what he was about — staking him out from the school parking lot.
And when he walked onto school property, Officer Friendly told him the school had the legal authority to bar him from the grounds. Um, no they did not, as I’ve proven here with links. The cops is either ignorant of the law, or is a liar — either of which is unacceptable.
And I won’t even go into Officer Barney Badass’s provocativeness in resting his hand on the grip of his holstered sidearm.
Remasculated, please tell us why the officer putting his hand on his gun constitutes “provocativeness,” but the OC dude carrying a slung rifle at a school does not.
Mas, again, the showboat had no intention of going onto school property. He was walking *past* the school on the public sidewalk when he noticed the cops staking him out from their vehicles parked in the school lot. That is when he walked onto school property…to ask them why he was being staked out for doing something that is lawful.
I’ve explained earlier that this clown was well-known to the local PD. He has gone on over a dozen 2A strolls in that community (and in the neighboring community of Royal Oak) over the last several years. He has provided them ID *and* his CCW in the past. The PD knows he’s a showboat and posses no threat to the community. There was no reason for Officer Badass to rest his hand on his sidearm other than to be a showboat himself.
I would get pretty hacked off, too, if a cop rested his hand on his gun talking to me about my 100 percent legal conduct.
Michael JT: He wasn’t carrying an AR-15. He was carrying, as he always does when he goes for his 2A strolls, an antique, bolt-action Mosin-Nagant.
Also, would it help for you to learn that the incident in the video was the SECOND time that week the guy had walked past the high school carrying his rifle? The first time, someone from the school saw him and the school went into immediate lock-down. He never entered school property. He just walked on by, never leaving the sidewalk. No issue, no tragedy, no dead children. Just a known 2A activist out for one of his routine walks.
But the first one hacked off the school administrators who called the cops.
From the video, you can see how things went on the guy’s second 2A stroll of the week, once the cops decided to be “proactive” and become involved before the fact.
This is nothing more than school administrators (and local cops) making a big fuss over conduct with which they disagree, not conduct that is unlawful.
Remasculated, I’ve read and re-read your previous posts several times. It’s hard to tell if your intent is to “defend this clown” or to put into writing your disdain for police officers. Whichever, the latter is very apparent. I will reiterate, that just because someone is engaging in an activity that is permissible by law does not shield that person from being held accountable for other violations he may be committing, or about to commit, while “exercising his rights”. An officer advising “this clown” of this fact is not stupid, nor was it a lie.
Case law has deemed that an officer resting his hand on his sidearm is not a provocation, but rather, an acceptable action for both weapon awareness and weapon retention while conducting an interview (in other words, a safety issue). Hopefully these “activists” won’t be falsely led to believe, by their internet mentors, that this is to be viewed as a deadly threat. If things go south due to this misinformation, they are in for a rude awakening after the dust settles.
I’m sure “this clown” enjoys these encounters with police officers, knowing their response will be measured (as shown in the video) and the chances of it ending badly for him are slim. He can go home and upload his video and boldly proclaim his bravery and courage, proven by his challenging the “jack-booted, thug, stupid cops”, all the while knowing that only a police officer would put up with his childish behavior. Encounters with anybody else would scare him out of his real, simulated, Special Forces “certified” combat boots.
Mas, the slung rifle or holstered pistol is just carried. Putting a hand on the gun is the first step to drawing. That is more provocative.
St. Paul said, “I can eat whatever I want but if what I eat offends you I will not eat it.”
My right to swing my fist stops at your nose. If I am going to be a responsible adult who cares about my fellow man I have the duty and responsibility to take the feelings of those around me in consideration when choosing how to act. If I am around those who fear guns I have the obligation to take their feelings into consideration before I strap on my six-shooter and make them fear me too. We live in a self centered world where only the “I” matters. As a servant I am to put the good of others before myself. If there is not an immediate or pressing need to open carry and by doing so I offend or scare another it is prudent for me to conceal my firearm.
We don’t need to give into the fear or hate but we don’t need to be A-holes about it either. It is difficult to hate someone who genuinely puts other’s needs before their own and easy to hate someone who sticks their rights in your face and dares you to say something about it.
Just as we expect and want the good Muslims to denounce the actions of the radical ones, all supporters of the second amendment should also stand with the gun haters and denounce the idiotic actions of anyone who makes videos like the one Mas talks about in this post.
Dennis: The cop in the video was NOT advising him of “any other violations of law he may be committing” which would bar him entry onto school property.
This is from the video:
Cop: “We’ve been advised by school administrators that they don’t want you on school property, OK? You cannot open carry on school property.”
Nixon: “Actually, you can open carry on school property, with a CPL.”
Cop: “Not if the school administrators tell you not to.”
Where, Dennis, in that exchange is the cop telling the OCer that he may be barred from school grounds for “other violations of law” other than for openly carrying a firearm? There isn’t one.
As I’ve stated repeatedly, the cop is either woefully ignorant of the law, or was lying; yet you continue to cling to your derived falsehood, just like you at first tried to claim criminal trespass was in play when it wasn’t.
Even though I’ve provide links to news stories and a link to the Michigan State Police legal update stating as much, you apparently will not accept the fact that presently, under Michigan law, neither the school administrators nor the local PD can bar him entry onto public school grounds, openly-carrying a firearm if that is what he wishes to do. He has a state-issued CCW, which means he passed a background check. He has no record of conduct or criminal activity since being issued his CCW that would put his license in jeopardy of being revoked, thus providing LE possible legal authority to bar his entry onto school property.
In summary, you clung to the criminal trespass thing until that was proven to be a canard and now you’ve switched to the “other possible violations of law” thing. Personally, I think you’re just one of those guys that absolutely hates being proven wrong and will continue to construct strawman arguments in an effort to save face.
I’m done with you.
@markm: Exactly. And you’ll note in the video that none of the other cops felt the situation called for them to place their hands on the butt of their holstered service pistol (with a presumably unsnapped retention strap) during that exchange.
Knowing the video was going to show up on Youtube eventually, that act by Officer Barney Badass was purely for show.
And now, from the OCer’s attorney, it has come to light that the OCer has walked past that particular high school SEVERAL times over the last few with his bolt-action rifle slung over his back. Not walked onto school property, but walked *past* the school, on the public sidewalk.
It’s looking more and more to me like a case of politically-liberal school administrators not agreeing with this guy’s constitutional right to be anywhere near “their school” openly carrying a firearm. Never mind the fact that under federal and state law, there is nothing prohibiting him from doing so. They just don’t like it.
Remasculated, in the time of Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Sandy Hook you can’t say that flaunting a rifle near a school is not provocative. You can’t say this guy did not cause alarm. And frankly, I don’t see where you can say this guy is doing a damn bit of good for the gun owners’ civil rights movement, either.
Illinois Bob:
That was actually very well stated. I don’t agree with this clown’s tactics, but now, given the apparent fact that the OCer had walked past the school several times over the preceding weeks without a single child being harmed, I’m even more incredulous over the actions of the local PD. Four patrol vehicles staking out the OCer from the school parking lot was highly provocative and completely unnecessary.
As a person known to local PD as an activist who has often gone on 2A strolls, the call could have been cleared in under one minute:
Cop: “Hey, Shawn, how’s it going today?”
Nixon: “Fine.”
Cop: “Just out for another one of your Second Amendment walks?”
Nixon: “Yep.”
Cop: “Well, someone called in on you again. You know we have to respond and clear the call, right?”
Nixon: “Yep.”
Cop: “Okay, I’ll call it in and clear it. Have a good day, Shawn.”
There. Done. Move on.
There was no threat warranting four cops staking him out in the school parking lot. In fact, the only threat to the public I see in the video is early on, when the cop in the patrol vehicle stomps on the accelerator while in reverse, almost striking a motorist’s car behind him.
Mas, you’re not reading me correctly. I have repeatedly stated that I don’t agree with his in-your-fact tactics. I have stated that the guy is not very well liked within the Michigan OC community for that very reason. It does NOT do the rest of us any good. But you need to take a look at the actions of the local PD, given information that has since come to light, and ask yourself whether it could have, and should have, been handled better.
It’s looking to me like both the school administrators and the local PD just don’t like him doing what he is doing, even though it is lawful, constitutionally -protected conduct.
That’s my problem.
My final comment here, because it’s obvious that some people here, like Dennis the Cop, is unwilling to see any other side of the issue other than his own.
And then there are those who seem to believe I’m defending the guy in the video, even though I’ve repeatedly stated that I don’t agree with his tactics.
I can support the concept of one exercising his or her lawful, constitutionally-protected rights, absent harassment and/or infringement from public officials, without being in agreement with the tactics employed in exercising those rights.
The school administrators are public officials. So too are the cops. It is not within the purview of public officials to seek a means to end or prevent conduct that, while not unlawful, is something with which they personally disagree.
School officials and cops are also private citizens. If they don’t like the fact that an OCer may lawfully walk around the community or past the local school while doing so, they can be like any other citizen and petition their elected representative, seeing legislation barring such conduct.
In the meantime, as public officials, do your duty within the official construct of your job description. Know the laws you are expected to enforce, stop lying, and stop provoking confrontation with citizens over lawfully, constitutionally-protected activity.
Pretty simple.
Remasculated, I will type slowly in hope that you grasp what I’m saying (I have my doubts). The school administration controls who is allowed on the school grounds. It is their decision and theirs alone to bar entry to anyone on the grounds who would in their opinion pose a danger or disruption. If a scantily clad person whose body parts are barely covered to the degree required by law to avoid arrest for indecent exposure, was refused entry by school administrators, fearing disruption to the children’s educational environment, would he be overstepping his authority? If the police arrested this person, if that person refused to leave the premises, they would arrest him for trespassing (or whatever Michigan law would be for that offense), not indecent exposure. Now if that person has a beef with anyone, it would be with the school administration’s actions, not the police. A court would decide if the administrators decision was reasonable and prudent under the totality of the circumstances.
If administrator’s expel an unruly student, can he come back if he straps a rifle to his shoulder? If a school employee is placed on paid leave and barred from campus for exhibiting mental instability, can he return, against the wishes of administrators, as long as he has an openly displayed rifle with him?
Now, pray tell, how would that scenario differ from one involving a man who seems to troll the town, carrying a rifle slung over his shoulder, who is openly confrontational with police when contacted as a result of citizen complaints about his conduct, who (I’m guessing here, since you haven’t used it in his defense) doesn’t have children in this school, being barred by administrators? The decision would be made not based on his exercising his 2A rights, but on the totality of his actions. The officer mentioning the open carry was but one aspect of the totality of the activist’s actions and behavior that led to his being told to stay off school grounds.
Would it have satisfied you if the officer had said ” the administrators told us they believe you’re a nut job who is disruptive to the educational environment, who seems to be intentionally targeting our school by repeatedly walking by with that rifle, scaring the children and the parents as well as others in the neighborhood. They told us they don’t want you, an apparently unbalanced person carrying that weapon on our campus”?
Frankly, this persons actions are enough outside the norm, I strongly doubt he would fare well in front of a jury, should he ever push his agenda to the point of arrest. I take note that he didn’t challenge the officers by going onto the school property after being warned. Why not? He seemed more than happy to test them on the sidewalk, why not test his beliefs by going back on the school grounds.
Do you think police actually enjoy dealing with jerk-offs like this one, just to have the opportunity to bully and intimidate? If so, I suspect it’s more about hating police, not exercising 2A rights.
I side with you Mas. I am a Texan. I carry under LEOSA and a CHL. I am afraid many of the “In your face” Open Carry Texas group has done more harm than good. For an example, as a Christian, if I want to talk to a non Christian, I am not going to be self righteous and figuratively beat them over the head with a Bible. I will sit down with them and have a friendly conversation with them as if they were my best friend. I am for open carry. As a matter of convenience, it would be great on a hot Texas summer day. I always practice avoidance and awareness. I don’t want to draw too much attention to myself though. I am not sure if OC is for me, but I do not object to the law abiding carrying open. If I ever do OC, I will make sure it is in a good retention holster.
Mas, publish this if you want, or not, I don’t particularly care, but keep an eye on this case moving forward:
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2015/03/open_carry_lawsuit_filed_after.html
Regarding a school system in Michigan denying an open-carry citizen entry onto public school property based upon the catchall “disruption to the educational process,” we’ll eventually see if Dennis the Cop is right, or I am.
That’s Dennis the RETIRED cop. The worst kind of cop for those who like to get in other folk’s faces. We’re no longer under the constraints the badge placed upon us when we were active and dealing with juvenile antics of so-called adults (like the OC activist in the video). Our only constraint now is the law everyone else is governed by. This allows for a lower tolerance for stupidity.
I’ll allow others to decide who has shown an unwillingness to look at all sides of this incident.
MAS,
I am curious. Do any of the people who are spouting about their 2nd AMENDMANT rights understand that there are NO ABSOLUTE RIGHTS.
As the often quoted line about the 1st AMENDMENT goes, you can say anything you want, but you cannot shout FIRE in a crowded theater. Nor can you make threats or incite to violence.
Also, I have not seen any challenges to the laws barring possession of a firearm after you have been convicted of a felony even though there is a 2nd AMENDMENT.
Also, there is a 4th AMENDMENT that says your house cannot be searched without a warrant, but the police can search it with a warrant.
I think that the biggest accomplishment of the OC crowd will be to have people post signs denying entry to those carrying, either open or concealed. Those posting the signs also have rights!
Jim CARROLL
A lot of typing by defenders of theoretical generalities and still no direct answer to the question of what they themselves would do in the thug/kkk’er scenarios, or exactly how the parallel of G. Zimmerman is dissimilar from what is being defended here. And that’s the problem; these are real-world specific situations, and dogma don’t mean shit when it’s your house, your school, your neighborhood that is endangered by a perceived threat. That’s all the cops here and at Unc’s vid were doing; investigating a real-world potential threat to the folks that pay them to do just that. The gun here was just a prop; it’s the nutjob himself that was the perceived threat.
There is the IDEAL, and then there is the REAL. Ideally, I want to drive Grampa Munster’s “Dragula” coffin car, but really, I drive a 2004 Toyota Corolla. If we lived in a country where citizens were well-educated in Constitutional Law and firearms, we could have open carry and it wouldn’t cause a problem. That would be the ideal. But we live in the real world, or the real America, where ignorance of firearms is abundant. We should probably adapt to that reality. Then again, open carriers want to educate the public. That can also be done with signs, or empty holsters, or a bolt action rifle with the bolt removed.
But I say again that it is wonderful that in this country we can at least attempt to approach the ideal. Do you think Europeans sit around and discuss the pros and cons of open/concealed carry?
I think that the question of whether a person engaging in open carry while possessing a CCL can be successfully charged with criminal trespass is going to boil down to this: If the facts and circumstances show that the only reason that they were excluded was their open carry AND their open carry was legal, then they’re going to be acquitted. That would include reasons such as “disruption to the educational process” if the only grounds for the theoretical disruption were the presence of the weapon or the carrier’s assertion of his or her rights to carry the weapon. If, on the other hand, the school can prove that they had some other credible reason, such as the person had no reason to be at the school in connection with the business of the school and refused to leave when asked to either get on with his or her business or leave, or was in fact causing a disruption other than administrators or other personnel reacting badly to the lawful presence of the gun, or was a suspicious-looking or suspicious-acting person, or even that they just didn’t want him or her there gun or not (and can convince a judge or jury that it wasn’t about the gun), then I think they’ll be convicted.
(Does that mean that school administrators just need to learn to come up with better excuses when they want to keep open carry people off campus? Yup, just that, with limitations: it would be best if the defense can’t prove that the principal has previously said, “if I’m confronted with this, I’m just going to give reason X that has nothing to do with guns” or “I’ll don’t give a blast what the law says, no one is ever carrying a gun on this campus” or etc.)
The uncertainty will come with cases with mixed reasons on the reason for exclusion: they were concerned about the gun, but they also said that he had no legitimate reason to be there for school business. The most interesting case might be the one where his or her gun causes a disruption which is not caused by the school administrators: Some kid sees him, freaks out, and causes other kids to freak out; the school orders him off the premises due to the disruption he’s causing and he refuses to leave. The result in that one would be uncertain, but my money would ride on there probably being a conviction. If I’m right about that, then the next interesting case would be one where some open carry activist open carries some scary-looking gun, say a semi-automatic copy of an AK-47, into a school for no apparent reason within a day or two after a mass school shooting in another state and, while there’s no kid freakout which causes a disruption, the school administrators order the carrier out of the school only because of the presence of the gun because of the very real possibility that there could be such a freakout and/or emotional or psychological damage to the students. That one would be, I think, a very close call as to who would win and I wouldn’t want to put money on the outcome.
How many bank robbers just run into any old bank they see without first casing the joint?
How many mass murders don’t do at least one dry run before going nuts?
Just because this guy has walked past the school many times in the past without incident is no reason not to watch him closely. Gang bangers in Chicago are painting the ends of their guns orange to make a police officer think, even for a second, that it is just an airsoft gun. A second of hesitation is all they need.
I am all about our rights to bear arms but as a father to several school aged kids this guy would both scare me and peeve me off.
Being in your face never wins anyone to your side and this guy is doing damage to what so many fight for everyday.
Maybe he is a lefty and knows this and is doing what he is doing exactly for that reason. We know they show up to protests to stir the pot hoping for trouble. Ferguson was full of them.
Rifle dude should be glad police were all over him. Consider this situation… Open carry rifle dude being an ass, no police present, a law abiding citizen mom who was dropping off something at school is in fear for the lives of everyone in the school. Mom gets her pistol from glove box and drops rifle dude in his tracks… What now?
Seeing as I do not have a CCWP, open carry is the only way I carry, it’s the only way that I want to carry. Concealed carry, where you HIDE the exercise of your right to carry arms. Besides, it’s kind of hard to conceal a .45 Single Action with a 7½” barrel.
I have seen these videos and my first thought was it takes a lot of guts to confront the police like this but in the end I was left disturbed by it and thought this is a really bad idea that in no way reflects anything good on the issue of gun ownership.
This kind of childishness is what gives OC a bad rap. This seems like a taunting video to make gun carriers look like ignorant trigger happy rednecks. I think the police reacted wrongly, the man should’ve been arrested for being an dick in public. Cop or not disrespect is jus no respect for yourself.
Based on all the debate over the 2nd Amendment, it appears that Open or Concealed carry should be allowed in all 50 states, if you are not in violation of any laws that forbid you the “right” to bear arms. Somehow we are finally winning back the “right” that had become violated by various local and state governments. Unfortunately in a nation of millions of people, there are 1000’s of opinions of what should and shouldn’t be legally allowed. Even those of us that agree, don’t agree 100, 90, 80 or even on 50% of what should and shouldn’t be restricted or imposed as requirement(s) for legal ownership and carry in public or where.There will always be those that claim there is ZERO restriction per the 2nd Amendment. However, I would suggest that COMMON (or not So Common) sense was very likely expected to be used. Mistrust of public officials is surely a legitimate reason to be wary of gun owner licensing and certification for carry concealed or open for that matter. So how do we comfort those who Fear Guns, those who Fear Criminals and those that Fear Government betrayal all at the same time? Personally, I think Open Carry of long guns in the country is fine, during hunting season(s) as well. Does carrying a long gun in downtown LA, NYC, Seattle, Chicago (etc.) or the nearby suburbs seem logical, no. There are no places to shoot nearby (typically) or to hunt. A handgun in the majority of circumstances makes more sense if you are carrying for self defense. Concealed carry makes more sense in crowded scenarios and places where people might be wary. However, it could be seen as infringement if I have to hide my weapon when there is not an easy way to do so; such as in warmer climes where you wear very little clothing (shorts, short sleeve shirts). There are some sensible Open Carry laws with regard to portraying intimidating behavior. Here’s hoping one day before my time expires, that we have the Freedom to Carry as intended by “our constitution” across all 50 states without multiple permits and a booklet telling us what we can and cannot do in each of these “UNITED STATES” of America.
Open carry is a really BAD idea!
For instance:
If someone goes into a restaurant/bar/store with the intent on robbing it- armed- and the ‘poop’ hits the fan, the first person they are likely to shoot is whoever is wearing a firearm in the open.
A preemptive strike. Like we were taught in the U.S. Military some 35 years ago. Stop anyone who is obviously armed that might oppose you.
Second For Instance:
The vast majourity of people I see with a handgun open carry in a thigh or speed rig of some sort, looking like thay are LOOKING for trouble.
That makes them- and by association, all gun owners- look like a Wannabe-Yahoo-Looking-To-Be-A-Hero, and that is NEVER good if you are attempting to reassure the Non-Gun-Owning public that we are just normal people who are prepared to defend ourselves, our family, and even them, if the poop DOES hit the fan.
Open cary is counter productive. It won’t deter someone from committing a crime, it will just get the open-carrier shot first.
What a silly dip-wad! At a time when we have multiple mass shootings, this fool
wants to approach a school while openly carrying firearms,and he thinks these cops
are overreacting? I would like to slap him up side the head! I bet Bloomberg nearly
pooped his pants when he got hold of this. Great ammunition for the anti-gunners.
Many people will see this and believe all gun owners are like this. It just makes me
furious.
This guy is clearly an idiot, he clearly does not understand the 2nd A right and the open carry laws nor does he respect law enforcement. He is out there to prove he is the BAD BOY when carrying his weapons. He is one of many, who who make it so hard for us law abiding citizens, who want to protect ourselves and our families from that one incident. It makes me mad when people do these videos and waste the the officers time for crap like this.
My State, Az, has open carry and CCW. I see people in Walmart open carry and non of them really have level II or II holster.If a person wants to open carry make sure there is some type of retention or thumb safety to keep the weapon at your side if someone tries to take it from you. Most of us who carry can easily take that weapon from anyone because we know how to remove the gun from the holster with no safeties. Purses, fanny pack, back packs, and other types of carry bags are a easy to get at and remove from the person, once it is in the hands of your opponent your screwed. keep your gun on your body however position you like but, ON YOUR BODY!!!
OC of pistols is a non-issue.
Most people don’t notice, and those who do can generally figure out that I’m doing exactly what everyone around me is doing (shopping, waiting in line at the bank, whatever). I have hidden-camera videos from venues around Milwaukee (MKE) proving this.
OC of long guns shows which police are pro-rights, and what their reaction is likely to be in an emergency (civil emergency, where society starts to break down, when we’re likely to most need to be armed).
If the rifle (or pistol) is not in hand, it’s not a threat to anyone.
People who have them in hand could be considered a threat, and the response to an armed threat is likely to hurt a lot.
IMO, that’s what some people don’t consider.
BTW, ‘samuriboy’, some concealed-carry purses are pretty hard to get off the owner. Mine has steel cable in the shoulder strap (which is worn cross-body). Can’t be cut, and I doubt anything in the system would break when pulled by a criminal.
And before WI got cc, I kept an orange training pistol in it so I’d be in the mindset of “never let this out of my control”. (Something some police officers would be good to learn.)
The only places I do let it out of my immediate control are at home (or a friend’s home) & work.
I work for an FFL, and trust that my closest co-worker wouldn’t get into my purse.
The other people in the building (10 at most, and my workroom is away from most of the activity in the building, on another floor) mostly also carry concealed, know how to handle guns, so I don’t worry about them.
Oh, I forgot… it usually stays in my locked locker at the gym. Sometimes I’ll wear a belly band holster & carry even in the gym. (It’s in a not-so-great part of town; people have been attacked – by teen boys with guns – in the parking lot.)
I am somewhat ambivalent on the subject of open carry. On the one hand, I believe, as you stated, that a law abiding citizen should have the option but I am not comfortable with it myself. The fact is, it’s going to cause a fear response in some people, justified or not, and negatively impact what we should be striving for; good concealed carry legislation on the books and accepted in every state of the union. Likewise, I believe that you give up a real tactical advantage when your defensive weapon is carried openly. Any real threat to you will just shoot you without announcing, by word or deed, their presence. I feel, perhaps incorrectly, that the balance of people that choose open carry are either doing so to piss people off or rub their face in it, It’s posturing. That being said, I’d sure like to carry my Glock 19 in a Blackhawk SERPA OWB.
Comments are closed.