More open carry guys scaring the public

[Brian Pfleuger]

What other caveats have you got for us on why this mass-arrest is different?
1) Guys were carrying guns
2) People got scared and called 911
3) The cops arrested them when they didn't cooperate

Here is the difference: The result of this public demonstration undeniably HELPED 2nd Amendment Rights across an entire state.

I'd say this example flies in the face of all of you who have been saying OPEN CARRY IS HURTING OUR CAUSE.

If you can't see the differences between carrying a long gun in your hands and carrying a handgun that never gets touched and is strapped to your hip in a holster, I really have no interest in wasting my time to discuss the matter with you.

You might as well be saying that grandma and grandpa cruising on their Goldwing is the same as two guys drag racing down the high-way at 150 on their crotch rockets, weaving in and out of traffic. Same thing, they're both on motorcycles! What's the difference! Why should they be arrested! You don't support motorcycle riders!

Don't be ridiculous.

 

[Lt. Skrumpledonk Ret]

Of course I'm not kidding. One aspect of this thread which I decry is this: public perception can influence our rights. But now I can throw that in your face, like this: Nobody looks at a parking lot full of police cruisers, several men in handcuffs, a handful of armed onlookers and thinks, "Those guys getting arrested are obviously normal, everyday Joes out for a peaceful bite to eat".

Nobody would think that.

Even if they saw the peaceful demonstration, they'd still come to the conclussion that these guys are the 'in-your-face-I'm Rambo, deal with it -gun-nuts-whose-rights-trump-yours' whose vitriol to the peaceful onlookers has garnered the attention of a platoon of cops. Or they think those gun nuts just tried to rob the place. The reaction of the cops in this case, by default MAKES THEM the scary gun freaks to everyone who watches the arrest. Not everyone would think the cops were wrong to arrest these guys as it's happening in front of them.

My point is still the same: open carry enthusiasts helped 2nd Amendment Rights

 

[Theohazard]

One aspect of this thread which I decry is this: public perception can influence our rights. But now I can throw that in your face, like this: Nobody looks at a parking lot full of police cruisers, several men in handcuffs, a handful of armed onlookers and thinks, "Those guys getting arrested are obviously normal, everyday Joes out for a peaceful bite to eat".

Nobody would think that.

Even if they saw the peaceful demonstration, they'd still come to the conclussion that these guys are the 'in-your-face-I'm Rambo, deal with it -gun-nuts-whose-rights-trump-yours' whose vitriol to the peaceful onlookers has garnered the attention of a platoon of cops. Or they think those gun nuts just tried to rob the place. The reaction of the cops in this case, by default MAKES THEM the scary gun freaks to everyone who watches the arrest. Not everyone would think the cops were wrong to arrest these guys as it's happening in front of them.

Your logic is extremely flawed:

You're only referring to the perception of those who witnessed the incident and its immediate aftermath. But what about media coverage? Five guys minding their own business while eating in a restaurant and open carrying handguns gets FAR different media coverage than hordes of morons in restaurants with ARs and AKs slung or carried at the low-ready position.

My point is still the same: open carry enthusiasts helped 2nd Amendment Rights

Exactly! This type of open carry is what we all should support, because these five guys were acting in a way that didn't give ammo to anti-gun groups! There was no easy way for groups like MDA to spin this in the media to make all gun owners look bad: They were minding their own business, their handguns were holstered and untouched, they didn't take over the restaurant, and they weren't bothering other patrons.

Lt. Skrumpledonk Ret, you're actually making our argument for us: This incident is a perfect example of a positive use of open carry. What we're trying to fight against is the negative uses of open carry that end up hurting our cause instead of helping it.

 

[Tom Servo]

My point is still the same: open carry enthusiasts helped 2nd Amendment Rights

Please cite some evidence for this. So far, I've only seen them affect us in the negative.

 

[johnelmore]

A law is a law is a law. The law in New York City says women can go topless on the subway. So if you get on the subway with your kids and feel umcomfortable then thats tough luck. You cant just call the police because you see some breasts and nudity is offensive to you.

Where it is legal to open carry people should realize thats the law and shouldnt just call the police with wild stories of discomfort and pain. If it really bothers then they have the option to leave just like you have the option to get off the subway in the above example.

Now, that said, firearms owners should know that irresponsible acts which are not crimes could give the lawmakers excuses to limit our rights. So we should act in a common sense and responsible manner at all times. The police are really in the middle of this and I bet most dont want to be there. They have a duty to act responsibly so if they come by checking identification and asking questions its all a part of their duty to make sure everything is going peacefully.

 

[Lt. Skrumpledonk Ret]

Please cite some evidence for this. So far, I've only seen them affect us in the negative.

post # 55

Some supplemental info:
The Madison police had to admit that they were wrong to arrest the men. The police then attempted to cover themselves by issuing tickets to all five. In the following lawsuit, those secondary charges were dropped and a $10,000 judgement/settlement (I forget) was levied against the cops. The cops were wrong, the brave, calm open-carriers were right.

Most importantly, the local Wisconsin media dutifully covered this story and dozens of Wisconsinites, whom I know personally, learned about rights they didn't know they had concerning not just guns, but also the requirements placed on cops during a detainment.
Perhaps the timing was right or perhaps the groundswell of civic-minded Wisconsinites who took this story and ran with it resulted in legislation being passed which legalized concealed carry mere months later.

 

[Tom Servo]

Perhaps the timing was right or perhaps the groundswell of civic-minded Wisconsinites who took this story and ran with it resulted in legislation being passed which legalized concealed carry mere months later.

Concealed carry in Wisconsin was the result of smart litigation. See the Hamdan and Schultz cases.

 

[Lt. Skrumpledonk Ret]

The nightly news stories and headlines, and sure, the court cases you mention, all rolled into a tidal wave of 2nd Amendment discussion that most of us dream about and that some of us cannot fathom. It all came together and I'm pleased that those 'scary gun nuts' were a part of it. I'm glad that woman called 911 and brought this to the foreground.

 

[Fishing_Cabin]

Seems that even some of the open carry folks are split on the issue of carrying long-arms...

Open-carry groups call to stop carry of long arms into private businesses

http://www.guns.com/2014/05/23/open...p-carry-of-long-arms-into-private-businesses/

to quote a piece of the article...

“Whereas, our mission is to get open carry of handguns passed in Texas, we must once again adjust in a way that shines a positive light on our efforts, our members, and our respective organizations. We have decided the prudent path, to further our goals, is to immediately cease taking long guns into corporate businesses unless invited,” stated open-carry organizers.

So some are seeing that it may not be a positive idea to make that show or demonstration it seems. Time will tell on how this will change the various methods used.

 

[JohnKSa]

My point in all this is that gun rights enthusiasts successfully made the gun-grabbing cops and the uninformed bystanders into the bad guys/aloof, uninformed citizens by doing the very things that some of you claim hurt our cause. To wit, gun rights have expanded to include concealed carry in the wake of this victory by those 'attention seeking gun nuts who scare people'

Ok, let's take it as a given that these people carried openly and shortly thereafter concealed carry was passed in WI.

• That doesn't mean that all open carry is constructive. One positive example doesn't prove that all open carry is positive any more than a single negative example proves that all open carry is negative.
• Not all open carry is the same. A holstered firearm is roughly equivalent to a cased firearm. If the holster/case is properly constructed it obviates the need for muzzle control. That is not true of an openly carried, uncased long gun. There is going to be a firearm safety issue any time an uncased/unholstered firearm is being handled in an occupied public building without a backstop. And it's certainly true that the public tends to react very differently to persons carrying long guns than to persons carrying holstered pistols.
• It doesn't mean that the same persons open carrying in the same way in another city or state would have had the same beneficial effect. Different areas have different ideas of what is acceptable and what is not and it's important to keep those differences in mind.
• The fact that WI passed concealed carry not too long after the OC incident in question is not proof that the two things are related. The fact is that WI passed concealed carry after the Heller and McDonald rulings which heavily affected the entire country. In addition, there was already momentum for passage of a CC law in WI before the September 2010 incident. In fact bills passed in 2003 and 2005 but were vetoed. The major factor in the final passage of the bill into law was the election of Scott Walker and it's difficult to link his election to fallout from the OC incident in question.
• The fact that someone wins a lawsuit is not evidence that the public is on their side, nor is it evidence that what they did was smart/prudent. A man recently won a lawsuit for being arrested after openly carrying a handgun into a theater in Aurora, CO a few days after the mass shooting there. What he did was legal and what the cops did was not, but that doesn't change the fact that what he did was ill-advised, inconsiderate and extremely unlikely to make any sort of a positive impression on the general public.

Of course I'm not kidding.

It is not in your best interest to convince people that you really can't understand the difference between what is prudent and what is ill-advised when it comes to interacting with the public where firearms are involved.

 

[HiBC]

A thought occurred to me today.I have never been to Switzerland.I recall reading in an old Gun Digest an article about the Marksmanship Culture there.

I do not know if things are still the same,but,at that time,folks walking around with SIG battle rifles was the norm

And the article mentioned local restaurants had rifle racks to rack the rifles before you sat down.

Think about that.

The USA is not Switzerland.The general public is unaccustomed to battle rifles in the restaurant...OK,

But imagine the difference if you walk into the restaurant with your AR,and the hostess says"Hello,please take your arms to the the table over there,we will check them for clear,place an unloaded chamber indicator in them,and you may then rack them.
Sidearms are to remain holstered.We do not allow gun handling inside.

When you are finished,I will take you to your table.Thank you"

Ever notice how sometimes at an unsupervised range ,No RO,things can get unsafe at the firing line?Folks write about it here all the time.

I might not appreciate my Grand daughter getting muzzle swept while she eats her pancakes.

I like AR's,military rifles,enjoy shooting,believe in the Constitution and Freedom.

But this stuff,I do not care which political party,if it gets pushed,lawmakers will cave in.The ones who have supported us will buckle when they are pressured for "Common sense restrictions"

Because some lack common sense.The price of Freedom is Responsibility.

Just to be clear,I am not talking about sensible open carry..wearing a sidearm gassing up the truck,or even sitting down with sidearms same as an LEO having lunch.

LEO's do not walk in for lunch packing M-4's and Ithaca 37's.

 

[Uncle Buck]

I have heard different reason on why the group does this. Here is a novel way to get people to know the law and what/why they do what they do... Print out flyers and poster and pass them out around town.

That would be a great way to help people understand their rights. (Also, make sure they spell check the damn things! Have you seen the calender of events on their page?)

Open Carry Walk in Beaumont with Freedom1300
When
Sat, May 17, 11am – 2pm
Where
5657 Eastex Freeway, Beaumont, Texas 77706, United States (map)
Description
We will meet at Sertinos Café in Beaumont and then Stroll down DOWLEN ROAD ecercising our rights and ourselves!

Have you ever tried the defense: But officer, I saw them doing the same thing. You need to make sure if you are walking for your rights, you educate those who see you.

 

[zincwarrior]

Does open carrying in public hurt the right to bear arms? Im not certain that it does or that it doesnt. I have never seen any of the open carry rallies turn violent and that is a good point to make about target hardening. Lots of trouble and violence at the former Occupy Wall St gatherings, but no trouble and civilized behavior at the open carry rallies.

Open carrying does have its time and place and does harden soft targets.

Its hurt enough that the TSRA is now concerned there might not only be legislation against OC of long guns in Texas (currently legal) but that new legislation modifying 30.06 signs (no CHL here) will be introduced. Thanks for nothing OCers.

 

[biohazard313]

i dont support long gun OC. there is not reason for it. pistol holstered and on the hip or similar fashion. just fine. ive OC'd my pistol for years and only had 2-3 negative encounters that WHOLE time.

 

[Tom Servo]

...and here they are at Sonic, fighting for our rights. At 2:00, the cameraman laments that "nobody likes us."

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Zincwarrior - got a reference on the TSRA? I'd appreciate it.

If anyone thinks that prancing around in a sleeveless crap t-shirt and looking like a Deliverance character will promote gun rights - they are flat out delusional.

I note that they are sweeping each others feet repeatedly.

 

[Uncle Buck]

i dont support long gun OC. there is not reason for it.

I have to agree. I keep my rifle either cased or slung when stalking deer or wild pigs also.

I understand what you meant, but blanket statements like this are meaningless.

 

[johnelmore]

The vast majority of the nation is undeveloped land consisting of forest, fields and mountains. The reason behind rifle OC is for that type of territory where you need protection against animals, hunting, etc. Some states with vast agricultural and ranching concerns might need to open carry rifles. In a hunting town its common to see men with rifles during hunting season. On a ranch you will see men with rifles. Then there are the bears....uh oh better not discuss the b word. Places like Alaska you will need something to protect against wild animals.

So there are reasons to open carry a rifle and you would understand if you lived in a rural area or one of the many remote areas of fhe United States. To open carry in a Starbucks, however, may not be responsible.

 

[zincwarrior]

Quote:
Please cite some evidence for this. So far, I've only seen them affect us in the negative.

post # 55

Some supplemental info:
The Madison police had to admit that they were wrong to arrest the men. The police then attempted to cover themselves by issuing tickets to all five. In the following lawsuit, those secondary charges were dropped and a $10,000 judgement/settlement (I forget) was levied against the cops. The cops were wrong, the brave, calm open-carriers were right.

Most importantly, the local Wisconsin media dutifully covered this story and dozens of Wisconsinites, whom I know personally, learned about rights they didn't know they had concerning not just guns, but also the requirements placed on cops during a detainment.
Perhaps the timing was right or perhaps the groundswell of civic-minded Wisconsinites who took this story and ran with it resulted in legislation being passed which legalized concealed carry mere months later.

Inversely California open carry activists started up and managed to get OC banned in the entire state quite quickly.

Here's another difference:
Guy comes in with pistol on hip and sits down - odds are he's a cop or no one will even notice.

Guy comes in with a rifle in his hands and there's more than a slight chance that someone will empty a mag into him before he clears the door for being yet another mass killer or a robber.

 

[zincwarrior]

Zincwarrior - got a reference on the TSRA? I'd appreciate it.

If anyone thinks that prancing around in a sleeveless crap t-shirt and looking like a Deliverance character will promote gun rights - they are flat out delusional.

I note that they are sweeping each others feet repeatedly.

Statements by one of the lobbyists for the TSRA on Texas CHLforum. Can I link that without breaking a rule?

Mods please wack if inappropriate.

http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=129&t=72856

The vast majority of the concerns I have seen expressed in recent months deal with the tactics being used allegedly to promote open-carry for 2015. While there can be differences of opinion as to how these tactics are being viewed by the public (general public v. the relatively few the demonstrators have a chance to talk to), it is absolutely certain that open-carry demonstrations are having a strong negative impact on the Texas Legislature. I again encourage everyone to listen to the roundtable discussion between Alice Tripp, C.J. Grisham and me on the Open Carry Report website. Alice spoke of the widespread call from legislators and their staff to stop the open-carry demonstrations! Since that podcast was recorded, Alice and I have had several conversations and the calls from legislators are increasing and becoming more intense. This is a fact, not an opinion, not a political ploy. Open-carry may again be a tainted issue and every time an open-carry demonstration hits the radio and TV news reports, the chances of passing open-carry in 2015 diminish. Some people are satisfied just making a point, I want to make it happen.

Here is a hard cold fact: The people who know how to pass pro-gun legislation in Texas are telling open-carry supporters to stop the demonstrations, but they are being ignored. Open-carry demonstrtors are unwittingly but rapidly becoming the Nevel Chamberlin of the open-carry movement.