why conceal in an open carry state?
- Thread starter C0untZer0
- Start date
- Status
GoOfY-FoOt
New member
I do believe this statement is an oxymoron....
As in, the more widespread that OC is accepted, the less the desire for quality footwear....
GoOfY-FoOt
New member
It was a joke....And, I was picturing the hills of Kentucky. (very near where I was born)
Whenever I drive across Kentucky, I take my shoes off at the state line. (true) It just seems fitting. And I've been told to be careful if they are leather, 'cuz someone may swipe them for the burgoo pot. 
__________________
"When I was a child, my family would travel down to western Kentucky where my parents were born. There's a backwards old town that's often remembered So many times that the memories are worn" -John Prine
__________________
"When I was a child, my family would travel down to western Kentucky where my parents were born. There's a backwards old town that's often remembered So many times that the memories are worn" -John Prine
OK, apparently the purpose of the gun for you is that of conversation starter so that you might educate others, especially those who have a negative response to OC.
Thank you.
While drawing attention to yourself so you can educate the public, no one will notice me and I can play the part of Gray Man (one of Clint Smith's references). Hopefully, I won't be distracted by you and the interesting conversation so that I might forget to be alert to my other surroundings.
JustThisGuy
New member
The best reason to live in an open carry state is so that if a concealed carry accidentally displays for a moment such as if my jacket suddenly blows open on a windy day at a gas pump, no crime has been committed.
You see, that's where we differ. I'd approach the robbery or assault of an openly carrying victim by choosing somebody else. As the criminal, I would get to pick when, where, and who I attack. And soft targets would appeal a _lot_ more than armed targets. After all, even if I took the "just shoot them" approach, maybe I'd miss, or maybe I'd get them but they'd remain active ("the dead man's ten seconds") long enough to return fire. Chancy, even when I have the drop on them. Better to find someone who's less risky.
So far two cases of that have been presented. Is something for which only two cases can and have been presented really something to worry about? And what _else_ might one have/do that can lead to at least two cases of someone being targeted? A nice suit (indicating that you might have money)? Nice watch? Nice car to be carjacked? Nice stereo visible from a window (leading to a home invasion)?
If "someone might target you for it" is sufficient reason to not OC then what else are you willing to give up to avoid being a target? Dress like a bum so no one thinks you have money? Live in a dump? Drive a POS car all the time that nobody wants to jack? Where else does this approach extend?
Similar for the "they might target you first" argument that some make. I have been around on the cc vs. oc argument before and to date nobody has come up with an example of a citizen, lawfully armed and open carrying who was targeted first at a robbery. This has happened to police and uniformed security but that's not quite the same thing. Police and paid security are a "regular" item that would be included in the criminals' plans. And again, even if one came up with one, how often does it really happen compared to other things?
Finally (and this is just a general response), regarding all the psychoanalyzing of people who OC from some CC proponents. Would you like it if the tables were turned, and it were assumed that the reason you conceal, when you could carry openly, is because you recognize that guns are something to be hidden away because they are shameful? Tell you what: I won't make unflattering assumptions about your motives and you can perhaps return the favor.
As a CC proponent, I choose to CC because I don't want the fact that I have a gun to be noticed. I have the gun. I know I have the gun. Until it is time to use the gun I'm the only one who needs to know.
In my opinion, and that's all it is, unless you are in a place where OC is normal and accepted, you are a poser and a wannabe if you OC. I'm being honest here. If I see you walking down the street in Seattle OCing thats the thought going thru my mind. If I see the same thing in Wenatchee or Omak I'm barely noticing.
Civilians who OC in places where OC is abnormal are attention hogs (again, my opinion). I judge them the exact same way I judge people with unnaturally colored hair, multiple piercings, excessive tattoos, neon colored cars and other "hey look at me" displays.
I support the right to OC. I also support discretion. Legal and right are not the same thing. The law decides legal. I decide right. And so do you.
In my opinion, and that's all it is, unless you are in a place where OC is normal and accepted, you are a poser and a wannabe if you OC. I'm being honest here. If I see you walking down the street in Seattle OCing thats the thought going thru my mind. If I see the same thing in Wenatchee or Omak I'm barely noticing.
Civilians who OC in places where OC is abnormal are attention hogs (again, my opinion). I judge them the exact same way I judge people with unnaturally colored hair, multiple piercings, excessive tattoos, neon colored cars and other "hey look at me" displays.
I support the right to OC. I also support discretion. Legal and right are not the same thing. The law decides legal. I decide right. And so do you.
"The thought going through my mind" says more about you than about anything else. That's true for anybody, anywhere.
One thing I do notice, however. The proponents of OC tend to be accepting of CC proponents reasons and decisions. They may disagree with them but, generally don't denigrate the individuals for making choices different from their own. The same cannot be said for many of the CC proponents.
Oh, and saying "my opinion" doesn't make an insult any less insulting.
One thing I do notice, however. The proponents of OC tend to be accepting of CC proponents reasons and decisions. They may disagree with them but, generally don't denigrate the individuals for making choices different from their own. The same cannot be said for many of the CC proponents.
Oh, and saying "my opinion" doesn't make an insult any less insulting.
I accept full responsibility for what I think. And say. You can rest assured that I've considered every possible way in which any comments I make can be interpreted and have worded those comments in a way intended to make my point. I'm very proud of what runs through my mind. As an adult I consider it my solemn duty to judge people. Accepting everyone for what they are is for kindergarten.
I've noticed the exact opposite tendency in the OC/CC argument. CC'ers support the right to OC even when we choose not to exercise it. OC'ers tend to challenge our commitment to the cause.
I've noticed the exact opposite tendency in the OC/CC argument. CC'ers support the right to OC even when we choose not to exercise it. OC'ers tend to challenge our commitment to the cause.
I did not at any point say that I'm accepting of people coming to different conclusions than me. I do not accept any such thing. If I come to a conclusion it is because I have thought it out and have decided that the conclusion is the correct one. I do not come to such conclusions until I'm satisfied that I've considered it properly. If you come to another conclusion I think you are wrong.
You are entitled to come to different conclusions. I can think you are wrong without trying to take away your right to do so. But I'm under no obligation to keep my mouth shut about it. Nor to sugar coat what I think.
In the end, if the subject of OC comes up in my state I'll vote to keep it legal. But this does not change my conclusions the next time I see someone OCing in an inappropriate setting.
There is a difference between making a reasoned adult judgement and making assumptions based on ones own prejudices. People have given a number of reasons why they or others OC. You dismiss all of that and simply assume that your claimed reason "they are attention hogs" is correct.
As I said the "thought going through [your] mind" says more about you than about the people you are thinking about.
And, I have also found that there is no strong correlation between the certainty that someone is that he or she is right and he or she actually being right, at least not on anything more complicated than 2+2=4.
If anything, the certainty of ones position is a problem since the first step in learning is acknowledgment that one might actually be mistaken.
As I said the "thought going through [your] mind" says more about you than about the people you are thinking about.
And, I have also found that there is no strong correlation between the certainty that someone is that he or she is right and he or she actually being right, at least not on anything more complicated than 2+2=4.
If anything, the certainty of ones position is a problem since the first step in learning is acknowledgment that one might actually be mistaken.
Who elses prejudices should I base my judgements on? My contention is that I am obligated to judge. My judgement is as stated. Your contention that I should base my judgements on the prejudices of you or someone else besides me is just silly.
Yes it does. Thank you for noticing. Intellectual honesty wasn't easy to achieve. I hope I'm able to hang on to it.
I have found the same thing. Unfortunately, in our diseased society the solution to this problem is for no one to THINK anything. There is plenty of "belief" but little thought. Denial of even the possibility that a mere human can actually determine right and wrong for themselves seems to me to be just another symptom of this. If people like Jefferson and Hamilton had suffered this delusion there would be no 2nd Amendment to begin with.
I see the following bumpersticker about once a week: "Don't believe everything you think". What am I supposed to believe? What someone else thinks? Yeah, that's gonna happen.
You know, there are things other than prejudices on which to base judgements. You might consider listening to other folks arguments and reasons and actually considering them rather than just blanket tossing them out in order to cling to your prejudice.
A number of reasons for people open carrying have been presented. You just blithely dismiss all of them and claim, with no evidence but your assertion that the "real" reason is that they are attention hogs.
At a glance that all makes sense, except that firearms, particularly stolen pistols, are highly sought by the scum, mostly because they a cant buy one at the store unlike everything else you mentioned.deburkhead said:
Firearms are the one thing that no matter how much money you have if you have a felony you cant buy it legally, therefore pistols are top prize items on the street, bring good money, and are likely worth the risk to take from you.
Yes, a OC'er could easily be targeted because of his gun. Simple as that.
Amen.lawnboy said:
Last edited:
- Status