More open carry guys scaring the public

Status
Not open for further replies.
Garycw,

No those signs aren't a suggestion, they are how a property owner or a business owner expects people to behave on their property. To me carrying there shows a complete lack of respect for that person's rights.
 
Here is another point to ponder. If you WANTED to create a climate in which the people on the fence might be more receptive to additional gun restrictions, wouldn't be in your interest to encourage as much open carrying as possible?

Wouldn't it be in your favor to create as much controversy as possible of people open carrying handguns and long guns in the family pizza parlor and burger joint to "paint the picture" of the so called "irresponsible" gun owner in order to make it easier to enact more restrictions to curtail private ownership of guns in this country?

How many times do we see cartoons of "redneck" gun owners with the beard, missing teeth, plaid shirt, NRA ball cap and pickup truck with a dead child or innocent victim strapped to the hood to make a point.

We don't need to make it easier for them.
 
I have expressed my opinion. I will continue to open carry my sidearm as long as the law allows or until I get my concealed carry permit. I use common sense and I don't carry where it may be inappropriate. I obey property owners wishes and will do so even when carrying concealed.

I see no point in continuing here on this topic when I have said repeatedly that I disagree with the tactics being used in Texas and yet I am being lumped in with them by some here.
 
SocialAnarchist said:
Garycw,



No those signs aren't a suggestion, they are how a property owner or a business owner expects people to behave on their property. To me carrying there shows a complete lack of respect for that person's rights.
Click to expand...


I do behave on there property, and am diffinetly not a trouble maker. I believe some of these businesses are doing this for potential liability issues. Whatever the reason I also feel they are infringing on my rights. If for some reason they somehow knew I was CC ? And asked to leave I would do so. A example would be taking my elderly mother or mother in-law to a hospital that's located in a high crime area.
When I get to the door and see a no guns sign , I don't think I'm going to turn around and go back to parking garage to put a deep concealment pistol in the glovebox.
When working in law enforcement in 80's & 90's I OC & CC everywhere I went while on the job, schools, jewelry & dept stores but you really never saw these signs.
The only times I OC now is on the farm, hunting or sometimes a firearm transaction with someone I don't know in a parking lot.
 
Garycw,

Purely by your actions, disregarding the property owner, or business owner's, wishes and disregarding their no carry sign you are NOT behaving. Your rights do not overrule theirs on their property. It is similar to smoking, you have a right to smoke, but I have the right to tell you not on my property and you can't simply ignore that.

Is the point here that concealed carry is better than open carry because you don't have to comply with the no weapons signs because no one knows you have a gun? Because that seems to be what Garycw is saying.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Property rights are not absolute as discussed many times. Businesses have to follow health laws and cannot discriminate against protected classes.

Signage on businesses used to include:

No Jews, Blacks, Irish, Dogs, Indians, Asians, etc.

That is not permitted and that is righteous.

Gun rights have not reached the level of protected classes.

However, application of your rights has to be weighed against clearly defined safety issues.

One might argue that if you wanted carry to be protected it must be in a safe manner. It is clearly the case that the OC Long Arm crowd in many instances carry in a very UNSAFE manner.

Concealed carry doesn't generate those safety concerns.

You would have to pass legislation to aid carry as a protected issue to trump property rights. I would go along with that for concealed carry unless there is a technical issue not to carry. You might disagree. However, I wouldn't argue the Long Arm OC is the manner we have seen is safe and should be be protected, such that property rights are voided.
 
SocialAnarchist said:
Garycw,



Is the point here that concealed carry is better than open carry because you don't have to comply with the no weapons signs because no one knows you have a gun? Because that seems to be what Garycw is saying.
Click to expand...


I'm not saying one is better, or that you don't have to comply,but if it's concealed & they don't think you have a gun, then everybody 's happy. Right? HOWEVER If I know ahead of time I'm going to be somewhere that has a no guns sign , chances are I would not take one in, but these signs sometimes take you by surprise and pop up where you wouldn't imagine. A lot of places have no smoking signs, and that's understandable. It doesn't address snuff or chewing tobacco. Now I've noticed more no tobacco products signs to cover that. Next may be nicotine patches & gum. And the no guns signs will become no weapons to cover knifes ,pepper spray, stun guns, tactical pens,collapsible batons scissors, nail clippers etc. or whatever someone deems a weapon.
I can still remember seeing the signs on public drinking fountains that said white only too.
 
Garycw,

Please tell me you are not comparing your disregarding no weapons signs to the civil rights struggle. Because if you are I am afraid you are so wrong as to be ludicrous, and far too dramatic for your own good.

I simply can't carry on a conversation/debate with someone drawing such an insane comparison.
 
I have to agree that it's not reasonable to try to compare excluding someone from a business based on the color of their skin with excluding someone from a business based on a particular activity that they choose to perform.

Saying: "You can't come in here because you are X." is not at all the same as saying: "You can't come in here while you're doing Y."
 
I can still remember seeing the signs on public drinking fountains that said white only too.
Click to expand...
This is an unfortunate tack taken by some in the OC community. It's not accurate, and it's view as being condescending by some.

I can take my gun off. Rosa Parks couldn't take her skin off. That's the difference.
 
I'm pretty sure that the guys who run my favorite gun shop support gun rights. Yet if I bring a long gun into their shop I have to check it at the counter when I walk in.
 
Social anarchist
I'm in noway comparing the no gun signs to civil rights issues of the past. I'm saying I've seen all kinds of signs.
I try to obey the signs I see that pertain to me. One way, no entry, employees only etc. even no gun signs! Whether I agree with them or not. If I didn't state that properly, I'm sorry, but please don't try to twist my words into something I'm not saying or meaning.
 
Glenn E. Meyer said:
Property rights are not absolute as discussed many times. Businesses have to follow health laws and cannot discriminate against protected classes.



Signage on businesses used to include:



No Jews, Blacks, Irish, Dogs, Indians, Asians, etc.



That is not permitted and that is righteous.



Gun rights have not reached the level of protected classes.



However, application of your rights has to be weighed against clearly defined safety issues.



One might argue that if you wanted carry to be protected it must be in a safe manner. It is clearly the case that the OC Long Arm crowd in many instances carry in a very UNSAFE manner.



Concealed carry doesn't generate those safety concerns.



You would have to pass legislation to aid carry as a protected issue to trump property rights. I would go along with that for concealed carry unless there is a technical issue not to carry. You might disagree. However, I wouldn't argue the Long Arm OC is the manner we have seen is safe and should be be protected, such that property rights are voided.
Click to expand...


Hopefully legislation will be passed in the future that WILL allow the public that are legally permitted to CC, to do so in businesses that are open to the general public.
 
I can take my gun off. Rosa Parks couldn't take her skin off. That's the difference.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that the tactics and strategy employed by the NAACP were much superior to the OC crowd in Texas. Parks had been riding in the back of that bus for 12 years previously. She was not even the first person to refuse to give up her seat. Instead she was part of a nationally directed strategy to challenge the issue via litigation. And the NAACP didn't just go decide to do it - they spent considerable time and effort planning.

In contrast, there doesn't appear to be any litigation component to OCT. Looking at their actions, it certainly doesn't look like a deeply planned campaign. It doesn't even look like there is cohesive leadership amongst the different groups or an agreed upon strategy.

Comparing OCT to Parks is like saying you are going to visit the moon by strapping a homemade rocket to your back and noting that NASA used rockets successfully to visit the moon so why wouldn't it work for you even though you aren't doing a single thing NASA did other than use a rocket?
 
Sorry for the misunderstand, that was NOT my intent or meaning. The two has nothing to do with each-other than signs.
When I said the signs are more of a suggestion- was a joke. I'm aware they're not suggestions. I'm not stupid. Or trying to infringe on others right to post there signs. I have the right not to go there.and this thread has Absolutely Nothing! to do with NAACP or rosa parks.
 
Garycw,

Let me see if I have this right...Now you want the government to further infringe on property owner's rights and force them to allow weapons on their property against their wishes? This seems far counter to the cries of many to keep government out of our lives as much as possible.

What happened to the freedom to choose as a property owner or business manager? Freedom is a funny thing, you don't always get what you want, especially at the expense of other people's right to choose what they see is best for them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top