Scaring Kids a Bad Strategy

[SocialAnarchist]

And who knows if the story as told here isn't 100% true and factual? It very well may be.

Not every person with a gun is guilty of what they are accused of and not every person with a gun is innocent of what they have been accused of.

 

[BarryLee]

I do have to suspect that some of the 'moms' there who called the police may have, just a tad, exaggerated

Yes, it is quite possible that some folks overreacted. However, the sheriff reported receiving twenty calls to 911 which means a lot of folks overreacted. Also, this event occurred in a suburban/rural area that’s probably pretty gun friendly not in an in-town neighborhood where they might not be.

However, regardless of the facts of this specific case I still believe actions that are specifically designed to alarm folks just to prove that it’s legal to carry hurts our cause.

 

[9mmfan]

Open carry where legal should be no problem as long as you don't go around strutting like some over confident peacock.

Exactly. This, um, character, is behaving in a childish manner that is doing his part to set the movement back. He just lacks the aforementioned respect and a mixture of common sense and maturity to really get the job done.

A friend of mine posted this story on FB, with a derogatory comment that encompassed all gun owners if I understood it correctly. I am still trying to come up with a cogent, thoughtful response to begin what might pass for an intelligent discourse. Perhaps a more private venue would be appropriate.

 

[SHE3PDOG]

I think open carry is often counterproductive and politically foolish. Anti-gunners harden their positions when they see it. In-between moderates who don't think about the issue very often may tilt into the anti gun group when they see blatant examples of open carry in public areas. I am concerned that continuing examples of such displays may gradually push a majority of voters in some communities into the anti category.

Open carry by itself may not be counterproductive, but I totally agree that open carry demonstrations and the like are in poor form. It is neither wise nor prudent to scare people who may already be opposed to your ways of thinking.

He, and the others like him, are attention whores. They give no consideration to the wisdom or prudence of their words and actions. They want attention.

Open carry is not the problem. HE is the problem and the actions of him and others like him will be BAD for gun rights in general and open carry rights in particular.

This is about as on the money as it gets. It irritates me to no end that people who are supposedly pro 2A are so ignorant of how much they are hurting their own rights and the rights of other gun owners when they do stuff like this.

Just like owning a gun, open carry is fine when done so responsibly.

 

[green_MTman]

open carry is good if your somewhere where being harmed or assaulted is highly probable.
it helps you avoid having to use a gun.the junkies know who not to rob

but around children its best to not have a gun at all honestly.what person person would commit a crime at a childrens sporting event anyway.100 to 200 honest witnesses who all have cell phones

 

[gyvel]

what person person would commit a crime at a childrens sporting event anyway.100 to 200 honest witnesses who all have cell phones

To answer that question, it would be someone whose mental processes no longer function correctly, and who intends to make some kind of sick, twisted "splash."

To wit: Harris, Klebold, Cho, Lanza, Loughner, etc.

 

[Evan Thomas]

what person person would commit a crime at a childrens sporting event anyway.100 to 200 honest witnesses who all have cell phones

All it takes is a sufficient level of anger. "Hockey dads" (and, less frequently, moms) assault coaches fairly regularly. (Nothing against hockey, I just happen to live in hockey-land. Substitute the sport of your choice.)

Now, I wasn't there that day, but I have this sneakin' suspicion that when the cries of the mommies weren't pacified that they "kicked it up a notch" and alleged actions that would get the Sheriff's attention.

Let's take the facts as reported at face value until we learn otherwise, rather than speculate according to our wishes about what might have happened. And blaming "mommies" is inappropriate; people who are anti-gun, or just concerned about someone who appears to want to intimidate people with a gun, come in all sexes.

 

[4thPoint]

open carry is good if your[sic] somewhere where being harmed or assaulted is highly probable.
it helps you avoid having to use a gun.the junkies know who not to rob

but around children its best to not have a gun at all honestly.what person person would commit a crime at a childrens sporting event anyway.100 to 200 honest witnesses who all have cell phones

On the 23rd of April, 2014, Governor Nathan Deal signed HB60 into law at an outdoor ceremony held in Ellijay, Georgia. At this highly charged, controversial, political event with a crowd conservatively estimated at between 200 and 250,

• with the Governor
• with assorted Legislators
• with Clergy
• with babies, schoolgirls and boys
• with the mainstream media

all in attendance, roughly half the crowd was armed and a full third were armed openly. As the opening speaker said to thunderous applause, "I don't think I've ever been in a safer place in Georgia."

"What person would commit a crime at a children's sporting event"
I dunno.. the Boston Bombers maybe?
If you get a little less specific and say "entertainment event" then I'd add the 2012 shooting in Aurora, Colorado's movie theater.

All those 'honest witnesses' armed with cellphones couldn't prevent tragedy, they can only point out "This guy's dead, and that guy, oh, and there's a dead guy over yonder ways. And the guy that did it left here in a blue car heading North."

 

[Jim567]

W

Bad manners, no common sense.
I wouldn't want this guy as a neighbor.
His actions speak volumns for his personality.

 

[ShaulWolf]

Y'all sure it's the majority of OCers who are attention whores, or just a few idiots? Quite frankly, most of us don't do it for attention, but because it's just more comfortable and usually pretty practical for us. Pretty broad generalization, and not really an accurate one.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

“Look, I got a gun and there's nothing you can do about it”

If he is proven to have said that - then he is a disgrace. You can chortle about it as you fantasize doing the same thing but that is not the act of good person.

As far as open carry - do some FOF in a crowded venue with an airsoft gun and see if you can hold on to it when someone plans to take it.

 

[BarryLee]

Y'all sure it's the majority of OCers who are attention whores

No, I do not believe that nor do I believe it is the general consensus of TFL membership. This thread really isn’t about open carry something I myself have done on occasion. The issue is people who want to flaunt their right to carry as a way of making a political statement, sticking it to their opponents, educating Police, etc, etc.

It’s very important to remember that some of our recent victories were by small margins. There are a few folks on both sides of this issue that are motivated to get out and push for change. However, the general populace is really not too focused on gun rights issues either way. However, if we as gun owners go around acting irresponsibly we might just push enough undecided people into the other camp and tip the scales against us.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

Y'all sure it's the majority of OCers who are attention whores, or just a few idiots?

Since no one said, nor even implied, any such thing, it makes no sense to ask such a question.

 

[Uncle Buck]

As someone who open carries frequently (Farm work, running to town for hardware, fuel, feed, etc.) This guys actions blows my mind. The only time I have ever been questioned about open carry was once while paying for fuel, the lady attendant called my pistol cute and and we struck up a conversation.

Most times if you go about your business no one seems to notice you.

This guy was either an idiot (Trying to keep it clean and obey TFL rules ) or he was paid to be there and cause some kind of commotion. I have read several statements, none from the press or anyone involved, that he was paid by MDA (?) to perform this act of stupidity.

Some people never cease to amaze me. If we could get them all together and put them in a sideshow tent....

 

[JimDandy]

We've already seen it in California and other places.

Like Starbucks.

Most times if you go about your business no one seems to notice you.

Masaad Ayoob once wrote an article, I forget what exactly about, where he talked about his experiences carrying. He was open carrying and only knew of one person who "caught" him. A young girl on eye level with his waist line, so she was staring right at it. No one else either saw it, noticed it, or reacted to it. I suspect most people who see open carry, or even spot a concealed carry assume the carrier is a LEO.

 

[zincwarrior]

This topic may start a firestorm of responses, but I think open carry is often counterproductive and politically foolish. Anti-gunners harden their positions when they see it. In-between moderates who don't think about the issue very often may tilt into the anti gun group when they see blatant examples of open carry in public areas. I am concerned that continuing examples of such displays may gradually push a majority of voters in some communities into the anti category.

Agreed. OC is just fine for where it was intended: rural/wilderness/hiking areas or along the border (I'm in Texas). Anywhere else and it starts this nonsense. This comes from someone who grew up where it was common to see kids with bb guns and pellet guns on the side of the road having fun, and every pickup having a 30-30 or beater shotgun in it. Thats how it should be.

 

[Skans]

I read the story and watched part of the video. I couldn't really see much happening in the video. Did anyone ever get to the bottom of why the guy was walking around a park spouting off about the gun he was carrying? Did this guy even have any reason to be there - like watch his kid play ball, or was he on some kind of planned excursion to test the bounds of the law by acting like a jerk?

If this guy was just meandering around a park by himself, open carrying a firearm, spouting off about how he can carry a gun and no one can do anything about it, I'd think the cops could at least detain him for questioning. Heck, if the guy was carrying a police baton spouting off about how he can carry the baton and there's nothing anyone can do to stop him - I'd think that would be the kind of "crazy" that lets the cops at least question him.

Normal folks carrying guns shouldn't scare anyone. But, I'll admit, crazy people doing crazy things in public get me on edge.

 

[JimDandy]

I'd think the cops could at least detain him for questioning.

I'd think that would be the kind of "crazy" that lets the cops at least question him.

"crazy" probably/usually isn't enough for the cops to take you downtown. The lawyers from the legal/civil rights board can explain this better, and probably more accurately but-

They could, and probably did initiate a "Terry Stop" or "Stop, Question, and Frisk" type of encounter. They could confiscate the gun while talking to him. Ask him for ID, his name, what he was doing, and so on. But without a pretty good idea the guy was going to or had committed a crime, they couldn't do much more without giving the guy a lawsuit

But, I'll admit, crazy people doing crazy things in public get me on edge.

Rude isn't crazy. Neither rude, nor crazy is a crime. This guy could have marched up and down with a sign with just about any sort of outside-the-main-stream message he wanted, pro Al-Qaeda, pro-NAMBLA, pro-KKK/NeoNazi and so on. Most of us would find any of those objectionable too. We'd label it the layman's "crazy" or "nuts" and consider the guy a whackjob. That doesn't mean law enforcement can do anything then either.

This guy was engaged in both first and second amendment activities that most of us don't approve of, but are still protected by those amendments. Taking him in for questioning just because we disapprove of how he's doing something that's still legal is another shade of the same gun-control argument used against us by people who disagree with concealed carry, or firearms in general. It's the very definition of the slippery slope. He's worthy of ostracization and condemnation, not criminalization and incarceration.

 

[4thPoint]

This guy was either an idiot (Trying to keep it clean and obey TFL rules ) or he was paid to be there and cause some kind of commotion. I have read several statements, none from the press or anyone involved, that he was paid by MDA (?) to perform this act of stupidity.

If he's a Bloomberg plant they are certainly playing the long game, he's been a member on a Georgia firearms forum since 2005.
I heard he whispered inappropriate things to impressionable youth
I heard he fornicated with a goat and spawned a medusa
I heard he waved his gun about
I heard he was a soulless ginger who burned under the direct light of the sun
I heard he forced parents to call the Sheriff's Office
I heard he forced parents to form a human shield
I heard he forced the local athletic league to cancel games (Although for the last three I'm not not sure if he forced them at gunpoint or not.)

... and now you've heard all those things too.

How true does it make them?

(Unless one happens to have made an Open Records Act request with the Forsyth County Sheriff's Office I doubt any real statements have been made.)

 

[4thPoint]

I'd think the cops could at least detain him for questioning.

Nope. They can have a consensual encounter with him but without a suspicion of illegality they are not permitted to detain. - Terry v. Ohio
Forsyth County Sheriff's Office stated that the individual was at no time detained. "The gentleman did nothing illegal," said Sheriff Piper.

They could, and probably did initiate a "Terry Stop" or "Stop, Question, and Frisk" type of encounter. They could confiscate the gun while talking to him. Ask him for ID, his name, what he was doing, and so on. But without a pretty good idea the guy was going to or had committed a crime, they couldn't do much more without giving the guy a lawsuit.

No 'Terry stop' was conducted, again Terry v. Ohio and in Georgia they cannot confiscate, seize, hold, or otherwise secure, a firearm without a suspicion of 'armed And dangerous' as in Georgia 'armed' is not synonymous with 'dangerous.' - State (GA) v. Jones 289 Ga.App 176 (2008)


Legally, they are entitled to as his name, his date of birth, what he had for lunch or if he wanted to come back to the squad room and play naked Twister(r).
Legally, he was under no obligation to answer, respond, or provide any information unless he was a suspect in a crime, a witness, or being arrested, in which case he could be charged with obstruction. - OCGA 16-1-24 and the Georgia State Patrol Newsletter.