For those that don't know, it has recently come to law that MS citizens can open carry. Of course there are exceptions where they cannot carry openly but if you have an Enhanced carry permit, there is not many places you can't carry. Just wanted to know what you guys thought about. I'm thrilled myself.
- Thread starter greggrissom
- Start date
Is it thrilling to force others to immediately confront their fears in the presence of an openly carried firearm? The only advantage that I see in having a state recognize OC as legitimate is in the cases where accidental exposure of a concealed firearm might alarm passers-by enough to call 911, resulting in some sort of "brandishing" charge. Other than that, in the context of self-defense, I see no advantage, and, in fact, I see it as a disadvantage in dealing with those who might have criminal intent towards the carrier and who aren't dissuaded by the presence of a weapon.
It gets the general public to accept the idea that good people carry firearms in addition to just criminals. I am all for open carry.
I gotta agree with Veer on this one. I think people who open carry put themselves at a severe tactical disadvantage. I guess if you want to send some sort of "message" then open carry is the way to do it but beyond that it has no use. For me personally, concealed is the way to go.
open carry will make you a primary target, aka the first to fall, and not necessarily by a gunshot_
I think he is completely right, first to fall. Then if alive, you will feel very stupid.
A mentor of mine growing up spent some time in the choicer garden spots of the world working for uncle sam. His sentiment, which he conferred to me, was that the only advantages a handgun presents are portability and concealability. Losing these makes no sense unless you are wearing a gun for duty purposes or for show (a mistake in itself). I hide mine. YMMV
Last edited:
More than likely mine will be carried concealed, but if a criminal went into an establishment with intent to do no good and he saw several patrons with open carry, don't you think he might reconsider? I think the general public might be a little spooked at first but in time I believe they will become desensitized to it. There will definitely be more people carrying, some will be open and some will be concealed. As a criminal, do you think he will know who is concealed? Might second guess himself. And now he knows anybody could be carrying.
I am in Oklahoma and we just adopted open carry last November, I have yet to see anyone with there weapon exposed. The main intent of the law is so that if your conceled weapon is noticed by someone it is no longer a problem. I am sure there are some going to show up with their pistol on their hip which is OK because they will be the first target for the Bad guy, myself the weapon stays hidden. Thanks.
I am an investigator with a dept. near Jackson. There has been a ridiculous amount of time spent debating this on the news and in the papers here. It's like the media thinks Jackson is going to turn into Dodge City or something. It has always been legal to carry open in Ms. This law was written to clarify what "concealed" meant. There are, belive it or not, shit heads in my profession who intentionally use the letter of the law not the intent to arrest people. The original law stated that the firearm had to be carried openly and unconcealed to carry without a carry permit. Aholes were arresting people whose guns were holstered calling the gun concealed because it was partially covered by the holster. This started as a pissing contest between the Lt. Gov and the Atty. General. It's silly and yes there will now be the a-holes that are going to carry open just to get a rise out of people. I find that mindset just as disturbing as the bad concealed weapon charges. This was written also so that if a person with a CCP inadvertantly flashes a pistol it won't be a chargable offense. I think the hoopla will blow over in a few months. I personally think open carry in public is a bad idea. I carry open on my property, deer camp, etc., but in public? No way off duty. The only time I want a BG to know I have a weapon is when they are staring down the barrel.
Just my opinion
Patrick
Just my opinion
Patrick
I'm not real excited about the new law. My concern is now businesses will be putting up the no firearms signs. Which will prevent everyone from being able to carry
DODGE 268, You are a breath of fresh air needed by many. A Cop that thinks and will go out as to others that don't think, just push things around and piss off all they can.
No matter where you are, there will always be those A--Holes that do not think and throw their weight around under the guise of a Badge.
I Salute you.
A few months back I posted about how my nephew was busted for DUI and thrown in jail overnight even though be blew 000 and his blood test showed 000 as did a UA.
Happened a block and a half from his home after he steered around a cat.
There were members here that said good for the cop, at least your nephew was in a safe place in the lockup, as if that were better than being at home.
Those are the A--Holes you refer to I feel.
My farm retains a lawyer for all legal matters and I pushed this thing because it just was not right. The nephew could not afford to do so but I am OLD and will take on a fight when I think it needs done.
Long story short, settled out of court, Cops paid high 5 figures and kept it hushed up. False arrest and he did not show up well on the video tape. The Judge was not impressed to say the least.
The "Man" in Blue is no longer in blue, he now wears the Red of MacDonalds as he flips burgers.
We made sure his record would follow him as to him going to another Dept. I don't see him ever wearing a badge again.
Don't fuck with an old farmer that has few years left and money to spend. Regards, FM
PS FUCK YOU Slapchop...
No matter where you are, there will always be those A--Holes that do not think and throw their weight around under the guise of a Badge.
I Salute you.
A few months back I posted about how my nephew was busted for DUI and thrown in jail overnight even though be blew 000 and his blood test showed 000 as did a UA.
Happened a block and a half from his home after he steered around a cat.
There were members here that said good for the cop, at least your nephew was in a safe place in the lockup, as if that were better than being at home.
Those are the A--Holes you refer to I feel.
My farm retains a lawyer for all legal matters and I pushed this thing because it just was not right. The nephew could not afford to do so but I am OLD and will take on a fight when I think it needs done.
Long story short, settled out of court, Cops paid high 5 figures and kept it hushed up. False arrest and he did not show up well on the video tape. The Judge was not impressed to say the least.
The "Man" in Blue is no longer in blue, he now wears the Red of MacDonalds as he flips burgers.
We made sure his record would follow him as to him going to another Dept. I don't see him ever wearing a badge again.
Don't fuck with an old farmer that has few years left and money to spend. Regards, FM
PS FUCK YOU Slapchop...
As of tonight 6/28/2013, a MS judge has blocked the new law-it appears a judge has ruled regardless of the will of the elected govt., he will interpret the new law as being too difficult to understand, therefore it is blocked? Go figure....
I think that the tactical advantages of concealed carry (where that option exists) are enormous, and anyone willing to give up that advantage must have a different agenda than carrying a firearm for "serious social work". Either they have a different agenda, or are horribly ignorant about the tactical advantages of keeping the firearm concealed.
Carrying a firearm openly simply to show you can do so is asking for trouble. I have little sympathy for people who go looking for trouble, then find it. Cases where someone is hunting, or fishing and actually has a firearm on for that purpose is different than those who would wear a firearm around simply to show they can do so. I think the "in your face" open carry folks do more harm than good for the firearms community.
Carrying a firearm openly simply to show you can do so is asking for trouble. I have little sympathy for people who go looking for trouble, then find it. Cases where someone is hunting, or fishing and actually has a firearm on for that purpose is different than those who would wear a firearm around simply to show they can do so. I think the "in your face" open carry folks do more harm than good for the firearms community.
Graham's post is a perfect example of one of the many tactical disadvantages of open carry. I would be embarrassed as hell if I were mugged for my pistol.
I hope he at least had the foresight to shave down the front sight just in case Mr. Criminal decided to let him keep his pop-gun.
There are a lot of open carry states. I do not think it has been shown, by a real study, that those states are suffering "wild west" like problems. I disagree with your assumption that those legally carrying their weapons, in the open, have a social agenda, whereas those that carry their weapons concealed do not. I just don't find any factual evidence of this in crime stats. There are a large number of folks that open carry in a large number of states, they are doing no harm to the firearms community-or should I say the believers in the 2nd Adm, and the Constitution itself. Your opinion leads me to believe that you think, anyone that carrying their weapon, IAW the state law, not concealed, is "in your face" and wants to use that weapon in an unlawful manner, whereas those that keep their weapons hidden, are more likely to be honest-none trouble causing people. Nothing could be further from reality. In Fact, most criminals carry their weapons concealed-most convicted felons illegally carrying weapons, do so concealed-they don't want everyone to see them committing yet another felony. Could you point me to some meaningful police data, FBI crime data, that backs up your contention?
There is no 'meaningful police data kept' on whether or not people carrying weapons have a social agenda.
Most people who advocate open carry fail to consider the practical considerations that go along with it in densely populated areas, especially at crowded functions such as youth ball games, sporting events, public parks, major shopping centers, etc. Many of them simply cannot understand that law enforcement do not have the ability to disregard "man with a gun" calls. We have to respond and determine what is occurring. That's where the problems start.
Advocates of open carry would have us believe that no one should question the appropriateness of a displayed weapon and that no police officer should ask them who they are and what they are doing... since they have broken no law. But these advocates of open carry should consider how they themselves would react if they were in an urban area or heavily populated suburb and the following happened to them while they were unarmed:
Your seven year-old child is playing soccer in an organized youth sports league. There are at least one hundred children playing soccer on numerous fields in the sports complex. You are there with your wife to watch your daughter play soccer. Hundreds of parents are also there to do the same thing. A man you have never seen before walks up to the field where your daughter is playing and simply stand there with his arms crossed. He is wearing a full-sized pistol that is openly displayed. He walks up and down the sidelines with the weapon exposed. He crosses his arms and seems fixated on one of the players. He alternates between staring at her and the child's mother. He appears oblivious to everyone around him and the concerned looks on people's faces. You finally realize that he might be the child's father and that the woman he is staring at must be his ex-wife or girlfriend. She is visibly nervous. The child on the field is visibly nervous. The coaches and referees are looking at this guy with suspicion but he does nothing. The referee asks him, "Can I help you with anything sir?" The man answers, "No." He then simply continues to stand there, arms crossed, looking intently at the two females while wearing a pistol that everyone else can see. How are you going to feel about that? Are you going to be able to focus on the game or will you be watching him? Would someone be out of line to call the police and have them come find out who this guy is and what he is doing there? After all, he has broken no law even if he is making people very nervous.
Now what?! Does you answer differ depending on whether you are the cop, the coach, another parent, the man's ex-wife, or the guy carrying the gun? You bet it does. Is the situation likely to escalate or de-escalate depending on which two of those people mentioned you put together? Probably. Or maybe not.
When people criticize open carry to say that it 'causes trouble', this, from their perspective, one that is that is neither pro not anti gun, this often what they mean.
Last edited:
Pawprint,
I like to think myself reasonable, and in the case of your posting, you make some good points. I had not researched any crime stats about open VS concealed carry relating to crimes. I actually prefer a society where more people are armed, whether that is concealed, or open.
My complaint with many of the open carry people comes from postings on youtube where they open carry in a deliberate attempt to provoke police, or the public in general. They are usually successful, but in doing so they have the connected effect of making other firearms supporters look like people who are seeking confrontations. I do not believe that this helps the cause of educating people about the second amendment, or local gun laws.
As my information about most open carry problems comes from those youtube videos, I have no information about the motivations of other people who open carry. Clearly, the open carry people with an agenda are easy to find, and the open carry people who do so without an agenda don't feel the need to create studies about why they open carry. I do not believe that EVERYONE who open carries has an agenda to provoke others, my complaint is that the provocateurs are just so damned easy to find, and they generate press that many other firearms supporters would rather do without.
I don't think that either open or concealed carry will result in a "wild west" scenario. In fact, the huge increase in people carrying firearms because of "shall issue" laws, indicates exactly the opposite.
I have no issue with people who wear a firearm concealed, or in the open, as long as they are not doing so in an attempt to provoke a reaction from other people. To be sure, many people would be frightened of a firearm even when it is not being used to provoke a reaction. Perhaps gentle education would help those people, but I suspect that their fears are more deep seated, and any attempt at rational discourse would be fruitless with them. Of course, there is also the possibility that my trying to convince those who open carry (in an attempt to provoke) to do otherwise would also be fruitless.
I like to think myself reasonable, and in the case of your posting, you make some good points. I had not researched any crime stats about open VS concealed carry relating to crimes. I actually prefer a society where more people are armed, whether that is concealed, or open.
My complaint with many of the open carry people comes from postings on youtube where they open carry in a deliberate attempt to provoke police, or the public in general. They are usually successful, but in doing so they have the connected effect of making other firearms supporters look like people who are seeking confrontations. I do not believe that this helps the cause of educating people about the second amendment, or local gun laws.
As my information about most open carry problems comes from those youtube videos, I have no information about the motivations of other people who open carry. Clearly, the open carry people with an agenda are easy to find, and the open carry people who do so without an agenda don't feel the need to create studies about why they open carry. I do not believe that EVERYONE who open carries has an agenda to provoke others, my complaint is that the provocateurs are just so damned easy to find, and they generate press that many other firearms supporters would rather do without.
I don't think that either open or concealed carry will result in a "wild west" scenario. In fact, the huge increase in people carrying firearms because of "shall issue" laws, indicates exactly the opposite.
I have no issue with people who wear a firearm concealed, or in the open, as long as they are not doing so in an attempt to provoke a reaction from other people. To be sure, many people would be frightened of a firearm even when it is not being used to provoke a reaction. Perhaps gentle education would help those people, but I suspect that their fears are more deep seated, and any attempt at rational discourse would be fruitless with them. Of course, there is also the possibility that my trying to convince those who open carry (in an attempt to provoke) to do otherwise would also be fruitless.
Thank you for your response, you have made a good point regarding those looking for a confrontation, those that are looking for a confrontation almost always find it, be it open carry, walking on the flag, etc., the problem isn't with the 2nd Adm, but rather with the opportunistic individuals. From my vantage point, if open carry was "common as dirt", no confrontations precipitated by open carry would be taking place. I don't believe those youtube videos are in any way helping the police or the "confronters", both look stupid in most cases. In order to completely diminish the impact of those engineering confrontations, with LE and others, because they have chosen to open carry (IAW the law), the best answer is more open carry! I do agree with your assertion that trying to convince those who open carry ( in an attempt to provoke).....also be fruitless, these types will find "another cause" the idea of getting a video looked at, where they are the "star" on youtube has consumed what was left of their brains.
In response to Grahams post above, We can all write scenarios, how about the same scenario, but add that you are open carrying, as are most of the parents, including the female the guy is looking at. If the guy in your scenario was there to cause trouble, there would be, let's say, 100 open carrying parents there also. If the "bad guy" in your scenario was there to do some harm, he could easily do so with a concealed weapon-just as easily, maybe easier. The problem isn't with open carry, or with concealed carry, but with people, criminals are what they are. You are right that there is no meaningful data on where those that open carry having a social agenda, but there sure is data from open carry states regarding major crimes (FBI stats). Strangely enough, those states with very restrictive gun laws (and as usual the criminals don't follow them) have a different crime rate than those with open carry laws, or even "must issue" laws. And let there be no doubt, the open carry states have plenty of large cities and population centers.
To deny American's their rights, those guaranteed by our Constitution, due to the illegal practices of a few, just doesn't square with my idea of America. If we have criminals-arrest and prosecute. To curtail or abolish the majority of American's rights-as it "may" reduce crime, and "may" keep us safer, is horrifying. Those states that have actually embraced our heritage, have in fact seen lower crime rates, not higher. It seems like, given their freedom, Americans do quite well, as they have always done in the past, and I believe will do so in the future, but our freedoms must be protected, if not, we won't be worthy of our heritage.
To deny American's their rights, those guaranteed by our Constitution, due to the illegal practices of a few, just doesn't square with my idea of America. If we have criminals-arrest and prosecute. To curtail or abolish the majority of American's rights-as it "may" reduce crime, and "may" keep us safer, is horrifying. Those states that have actually embraced our heritage, have in fact seen lower crime rates, not higher. It seems like, given their freedom, Americans do quite well, as they have always done in the past, and I believe will do so in the future, but our freedoms must be protected, if not, we won't be worthy of our heritage.
Last edited:
I like your idea about changing the scenario to one in which almost everyone is carrying, because that does change things: I have spent time in countries where almost everyone has a gun, and carries it, and in that case there's really no issue about causing trouble by openly carrying one yourself. Open carry is indeed a cultural issue, which is one of the reasons its political advocates here want to be seen to be doing it more and more.
That said, my first post was to say that simply carrying a gun does not automatically make one safer.
My second post was to say that while so many pro-gun people enjoy taking courses and advocating the advice of BTDT SME's, when one of those experts points out something that interferes with their personal desire to do whatever they want with a gun the same students start protesting about somehow losing their rights. No one is losing any rights: People are more free to carry weapons in public now than at any time since the end of the Civil War. Exercising the freedoms that we take for granted today regarding the carrying, transporting, and using weapons (especially handguns) would have landed us in jail in Mississippi in 1963. We are also better equipped and better armed than any previous generation. One could even argue that American citizens who live in most places in this country are more free, and more able to conceal, carry, and use their firearms today than at any time in history. But with these rights come responsibilities. One of the responsibilities is to understand that other people who don't like guns have rights, too.
I just happen to think that open carry is a bad idea. But that's my bias from my experience in law enforcement and from having lived in a densely-populated city. I strongly support the 2nd Amendment, state CCW programs, and even open carry. I support open carry because here in Michigan some people can't get CCW permits but can otherwise own a gun, so if they want to take their dog for a walk at 3am I see no reason why they shouldn't arm themselves. But I am an advocate of using discretion and exercising social responsibility when it comes to firearms ownership. Sometimes that means I choose not to do everything that I want to do, or can do, especially in public.
Last edited:
I too have spent years in countries where almost everyone carried openly, including me, "cultural bias", maybe, I'm less inclined to go along with that. AZ has had open carry for a hundred years, I've spent a lot of time in AZ, a lot of people carry openly-could that be categorized as "AZ cultural bias" I guess, depending on how small a sub group you want to hang tags on. I believe all real Americans advocate discretion and social responsibility, not just with the ownership or use of fire arms, but in all aspects of their lives! The RIGHT to own a gun is basic to our Constitution. Often times Rights are confused with privileges! An honest American has the right to keep and bear arms. You do not have a right to exercise the privilege of driving a car, flying a plane, or performing surgical procedures, these are privileges granted under the rule of law. I have never advocated, nor would I, that rights do not come with responsibilities, they do, and should. I do not have a responsibility to anti American/anti constitution people. If they don't like free speech, or freedom to go to the church of my choice (or not go at all), or to read the books of my choice, or to dye my hair purple my recommendation is for them to leave America. What makes America-America is in fact our freedoms, for all. Just because someone doesn't like the second Adm, is no reason to curtail our Freedoms! There are those that don't like Jewish Synagogues (bigots), this is no reason to limit their existence. We should all make it our business to read and understand the Constitution, from what I can tell, it isn't taught in school anymore (public school), and if so, not very well. In my experience the criminal element within a large number of American cities, do not obey the open drug dealing laws, or almost any other law for that matter, to include the ownership (on those previously convicted of a felony) of firearms. Here in Memphis Tennessee, crime is quite high, as it is in Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago etc., the only people gun laws effect seems to be the people that tend to obey the law-not in any way the full time criminal elements that run rampant within our large cities. To "Keep and Bear" is a right that the individual exercises (the honest citizen) it is not mandatory!
You are 100% correct, when you stated "Simply carrying a gun does not automatically make one safer". Although, I would add, based on the number of crimes thwarted by honest citizens carrying guns, you would Tend to be safer carrying a gun- than not. Just as you would tend to be less likely to suffer injury in an auto accident if you are wearing a seat and shoulder belt- than not. A 100% rule? Hell no, but a damn good rule of thumb.
You are 100% correct, when you stated "Simply carrying a gun does not automatically make one safer". Although, I would add, based on the number of crimes thwarted by honest citizens carrying guns, you would Tend to be safer carrying a gun- than not. Just as you would tend to be less likely to suffer injury in an auto accident if you are wearing a seat and shoulder belt- than not. A 100% rule? Hell no, but a damn good rule of thumb.
Last edited:
I truly wish that open and concealed carry was so common that no one would give it a second look. In Israel, and many other countries it is the case. I also wish that the people carrying were as responsible, and well trained as I suspect the majority of members on this board are. The problem is that with firearms, just as with drivers on our roads, we regularly see idiots that shouldn't drive, or be carrying a firearm. Solving either of those issues is very difficult. Perhaps the open carry proponents are hoping to start a trend, or desensitize people, rather than provoke...but I sort of doubt it.
With freedoms come risks, and other problems. In the long run I would rather have to deal with the risks and problems associated with freedoms than give up my freedoms in the false hope that someone, or some agency will take care of me or have my best interest at heart. I think the way it was said was "Those who would exchange freedom for security deserve neither." Sorry that I don't know who said it.
With freedoms come risks, and other problems. In the long run I would rather have to deal with the risks and problems associated with freedoms than give up my freedoms in the false hope that someone, or some agency will take care of me or have my best interest at heart. I think the way it was said was "Those who would exchange freedom for security deserve neither." Sorry that I don't know who said it.
It is usually attributed to Benjamin Franklin.
Graham,
Thank you. I have a book of famous quotes around here somewhere, but my "library" is only generally organized, so finding things between 3 places is a bit of a pain. I do try and keep most "gun stuff" in my little armory though. The problem is with books that are neither "hide nor hair" as they could be just about any where.
Thank you. I have a book of famous quotes around here somewhere, but my "library" is only generally organized, so finding things between 3 places is a bit of a pain. I do try and keep most "gun stuff" in my little armory though. The problem is with books that are neither "hide nor hair" as they could be just about any where.
Open carry scares the shit out of me. I absolutely hate it. Every time I've seen it, some Fuck-Tard is out in public trying to make a point. The world is dangerous enough without the crazies showing how armed and dangerous they are. Wearing a cover shirt over a t-shirt is a heck of a lot safer for everyone involved.
I don't mind that selfless act of self-identification because if I am not armed, and should desperately need a gun, I would know where to find one. When a fool is carrying concealed I have no way of knowing it.
It's like when I see a Volvo with an election campaign bumper sticker I know to give it just that much more room on the road. Or, when I see a motorcyclist without a helmet I know that guy has never come off a bike so there's no way he has developed the skill to properly ride one.
When people are up-front about their shortcomings I feel safer.
Last edited:
To each his own I guess. Having something covering my pistol makes it just a little harder to take it away. Has anyone ever noticed how NONE of the open carry "protestors" have security holsters? I haven't seen one yet with anything more than a thumb snap, and most don't even have that. The most common holster for the open carry folks I have seen are the cheap nylon cloth Uncle Mike's holsters that run $10-20 tops.
I've remarked on the lack of retention holsters, proper gunbelts, and the blissful lack of situational awareness on the part of most OCers. Many of them, unfortunately, make us look like total goobers.
That mentality, I'm afraid, is not limited to OCers. I was talking to a police chief the other day: In a courthouse; in uniform; full size SIG in some Fobus-like contraption with no retention device whatsoever. What are the chances that his open-hand defensive tactics skills are so good that everyone else's pale by comparison?
I'm all for open carry, we have it here in Louisiana.
I am completely against the YouTube douchebags that video every encounter with a LEO and scream about their rights. I'd like to see them all get choke slammed.
The general public normally only ever encounters firearms in negative light. They hear about shootings on the news, rap videos of morons with guns, etc. In my opinion, it is a very good thing that people see a firearm on one's person where there is no threat to anyone. Thanks to the media, TV, movies, and much of our government, guns = danger! and they're quick to disrust anyone out of uniform with a firearm.
Just please be smart about it and don't do it because you think it looks cool/badass.
I use it LA for when it's hot and I don't want my holster against my bare, sweaty skin. Removes the danger of accidental exposure.
I am completely against the YouTube douchebags that video every encounter with a LEO and scream about their rights. I'd like to see them all get choke slammed.
The general public normally only ever encounters firearms in negative light. They hear about shootings on the news, rap videos of morons with guns, etc. In my opinion, it is a very good thing that people see a firearm on one's person where there is no threat to anyone. Thanks to the media, TV, movies, and much of our government, guns = danger! and they're quick to disrust anyone out of uniform with a firearm.
Just please be smart about it and don't do it because you think it looks cool/badass.
I use it LA for when it's hot and I don't want my holster against my bare, sweaty skin. Removes the danger of accidental exposure.
No matter how good anyone is with firearms, or empty hand defense tactics, there is always someone better, or just luckier. Although LE trainers try really hard to educate and train the officers, the problem is that most officers do defensive tactics once of twice a year, and never train afterwards. Many of the convicts train daily because they have nothing better to do inside the walls.
While many of the LE defensive tactics trainers are very good, the odds are that over time, anyone (officer or citizen) will come up against someone better, sneakier, or luckier. One sucker punch, and an open carry firearm is now in the hands of someone who shouldn't have it.
Those who ignore those simple facts do so at their own peril.
Well said.
Making sure i wasn't the only one who remembered this. Friends kept asking me about open carry i thought it had been legal for some time.
Police Officers, Law Enforcement Agencies, some members of the Military (SEALs, CAG, etc.), Government certified PSD teams/members and a few others have been thoroughly trained and vetted on carrying an exposed firearm.
The guys I have seen are nothing more than ass clowns who are clueless about what they'are doing. No retention devices on holsters, no situational awareness and no concern whatsoever about the impact they have on the public around them.
Just like putting on a cape doesn't make someone a super hero, an untrained person strapping on an exposed firearm doesn't make ANYONE safer. They're the drunken drivers of gun owners. Just because they haven't killed anyone yet, doesn't mean they're NOT a public hazard.
Concealed carry is there for a reason. Open carry is inviting accidents, injuries and Death.
The guys I have seen are nothing more than ass clowns who are clueless about what they'are doing. No retention devices on holsters, no situational awareness and no concern whatsoever about the impact they have on the public around them.
Just like putting on a cape doesn't make someone a super hero, an untrained person strapping on an exposed firearm doesn't make ANYONE safer. They're the drunken drivers of gun owners. Just because they haven't killed anyone yet, doesn't mean they're NOT a public hazard.
Concealed carry is there for a reason. Open carry is inviting accidents, injuries and Death.
But concealing the firearm won't make them competent, and being a marginally-trained law enforcement officer won't make them 'vetted'. So are you against anyone carrying who is not trained by the government, or are you in favor of untrained and 'un vetted' people carrying concealed?
Last edited:
PA is an OC State. Not a big fan ... prefer to 'walk softly and carry a big stick' myself. However, I always OC a sidearm when out hunting. A big issue I have with OC here in PA is that many times it's about confrontation with law officers to prove a point. Just can't get into that.
Last edited:
Your post leads me to believe that you think carrying a weapon concealed magically increases the competency of the concealer. Just putting a cape on doesn't make someone a super hero, any more than putting a pistol in your pocket makes you competent, or thoroughly trained and vetted. I was reading the 2nd Adm today, and was unable to find where it stated, the right to keep and keep concealed arms shall not...... How is concealed carry UN inviting accidents? Can you site any actual quality data that supports this position? Have firearms related accident rates increased by those practicing open carry as opposed to those carrying their weapons concealed in the jurisdictions where both are permitted?
I am opposed to trying to provoke a confrontation with LE, or anyone else for that matter, be it with a legally owned firearm, baseball bat, crowbar etc. We as Americans has become toooo willing to compromise our Constitutional Rights, due to the acts of a few idiots. If people in your state are starting confrontations with your police, it seems to me you have laws on the books to cover this, but to throw the baby out with the bath water will never make any sense, once it's gone, it'll be gone forever.
It should be noted, one sucker punch on someone carrying a concealed weapon, and the scum may take your wallet and money, but out of respect they'll leave your handgun? Criminals in my part of the world are not training daily in the art of hand to hand, but rather are armed, and they come in groups, not one on one, as they do in the Pacific Northwest- we call these groups or organized criminals- gangs. A large number of these scumbags are convicted felons, that could(and should) be facing big prison time if caught with a weapon, but two things seem to keep this from happening. They are almost never prosecuted on weapons charges-state or federal, and for some reason, are seldom caught. The amount of gang related death via firearms is out of control, in fact the media makes a big deal on the murder rate in Mexico, while the gangs in the US seem to be non- news worthy! Honest Americans that want to exercise their Constitutional Right to Open Carry are not the problem-the known criminals running our inner cities are. Let's not even think for one minute about giving up our Rights, because of the actions of Criminals that should be in prison.
Last edited:
I am in favor of NO ONE carrying open except those wearing a badge / uniform who are on duty and trained to do so. And a marginally-trained police officer is an UN-TRAINED officer and a disgrace to his Commander. If the Officer is a Fuck-Tard, then he/she should be put into the Fuck-Tard category. He/she should be relieved of duty until up to snuff.
But as was pointed out I fully understand and agree with open carry when out in the woods (away from the public) hunting when you're carrying a rifle / shotgun / etc. Duh.
So your position is that only LE should be able to carry openly, no off-duty open carry by officers and no plain clothes open carry by officers; with whatever 'training' standards to be left to the police departments and whether or not an officer is permitted to open carry on duty also to be subjectively determined by his administration?
Last edited:
So, I guess you are in favor a federal standard for all police officers, maybe a federal police training board/evaluations board? Otherwise what is meeting a standard in one state may not meet it in another-in short one complete police force would be a disgrace to his/her commander! Just out of curiosity, when would you have liked this new type of laws your recommending to have gone into effect? I sure hope you're not going to say 1775! What year would you have federalized all police via standards in the US?
Also would you fire all LEOs that fail to come up to the new standards, to include physical standards? By physical standards I'd use the standard Army PT test-this may be toooo easy, how would you improve it? As most LEOs will never fire their weapons during their entire LE career (not at the range-at a bad guy), but are far more likely to be in physical contact with those they are arresting, a very vigorous PT training and testing (annual) I'm sure is something you'd be in favor of. I think the police are given a bad rap, most officers I see are proud of themselves, and keep themselves in top condition, only in the movies do you see big fat guys eating donuts and the like, all I've ever seen were "lean, mean fighting machines". This should be easy to implement, as most guys would pass their annual PT test, then go to the gym for the rest of their daily workout.
Last edited:
You had to re-read the 2nd Amendment to see there wasn't anything in there about concealed carry? Sweet Jesus. How many times do you have to read "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." before you grasp there's nothing in there about concealed carry?
Is leaving your car door open more inviting to theft than closing it, even if the door is unlocked? (Answer to those baffled by the question: Yes, leaving the car door open does invite more trouble than shutting it.) Open carry is just like that car door. It's an invitation for trouble. It advertises for trouble. It dares the impulsive to cause trouble.
What plain clothes officers carry open? If they wear openly, they wear their badges as well. Do you seriously not know this?
Well Fellas, it's been REAL. So, before I get banned, I wish you adu. Stay safe and watch your six.
It's not an absolute. But even if it was, are you are saying that the fact of an openly displayed badge changes the nature of open carry?
If so, I find it interesting that your position is substantially the same as the one voiced by the Canadian Prime Minister in 1994 when he made his case to ban handguns in the hands of anyone but the police and the military.
There's no need to run before a battle even starts. I'm not arguing with you, I'm just making observations about the position you are taking.
Last edited:
