That's why it's an exaggeration...lol. I have to agree that he has a point. I have surfed Calguns quite a bit and as a whole the forum does seem to lean away from open carry.
I think an unfortunate byproduct of the debate over UOC was that people felt the need to choose a manner preference based on perceived risk to the right. (Let's not debate this here, as I certainly am not trying to rekindle the debate.)
Based on my experience with a large number of people in the community, I firmly believe that real, objective polling of Calguns members would indicate something closer to:
* An overwhelming majority believe that "keep" and "bear" mean just that;
* A large majority would prefer the option to carry in any manner they wish (e.g. open or concealed);
* A large majority believe that carry licenses and fees, as they currently, exist are unconstitutional and overly burdensome;
* A large majority believe that, if concealed carry is to be regulated/licensed, then some other manner of bear must be available to all on a non-discretionary basis;
* A large majority share the fundamental values of the OC community;
* A majority would prefer "Constitutional carry";
* A majority would LOC at some point if it is held to be the constitutional minimum and/or a legislatively-sanctioned lawful manner of bear;
* A substantial number, and possibly a majority, do not agree with the understood tactics/strategy of UOC, etc.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the disagreements those in gun rights have are very much like the fights that occur at the family dinner table at a reunion or Thanksgiving. It hurts, and it sucks. However, the continuing segregation of members of the full community and subjective tests of "patriotism" are no better than the subjective discretion that California's sheriffs impose on law-abiding gun owners.
-Brandon