• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Atlantic Magazine: Carrying guns to protests counterproductive, but not dangerous

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Very clear thinking on what many or most think is a "liberal" news source, whatever "liberal" means these days
--

http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/08/are_guns_at_protests_really_da.php

SNIP

I think carrying guns to protests is entirely counterproductive. . . . But the hysteria about them has been even more ludicrous. Numerous people claim to believe that this makes it likely, even certain, that someone will shoot at the president. This is very silly, because the president is not anywhere most of the gun-toting protesters, who have showed up at all sorts of events. It is, I suppose, more plausible to believe that they might take a shot at someone else. But not very plausible: the rate of crime associated with legal gun possession or carrying seems to be very low. Guns, it turn out, do not turn ordinary people into murderers. They make murderers more effective.

So perhaps unsurprisingly, when offered the opportunity to put some money down on the proposition that one of these firearms is soon going to be discharged at someone, they all decline.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
imported post

My biggest fear is that one of the 'anti's' will attempt to disarm somebody. THAT could get ugly.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
imported post

Sonora Rebel wrote:
My biggest fear is that one of the 'anti's' will attempt to disarm somebody. THAT could get ugly.
I might worry that a criminal could try that, but not an anti... most of them are afraid of guns, or afraid that they can't safely handle a gun, so I doubt they would even want to hold one, much less go grabbing for one in a crowd.

TFred
 

milkmanjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
75
Location
, ,
imported post

Since my little world, and I mean that sincerely, only has Concealed Carry, I would like to better understand if members here prefer Open Carry, or is Open Carry a legal avenue to have local goverments lean to Concealed Carry for them in the future. I have read that Open Carry is sometimes pursued because that is what the particular state government law allows, but members want to conceal. The question is both for me to understand you OCers better, and I wonder if, what if, these people carrying at political events were carrying concealed would it be so controversial since nobody would know. Please fill me and other CCers here in so we can be well informed.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
imported post

Governments don't 'allow' rights. Governments recognized rights or deny them. Concealed Carry is a contrivance of state government per 10th Amendmentrequiring permit/license for a 'fee'. This 'fee' is for the permit to conceal... not to 'carry'. The statists would have the public believe otherwise.

Free exercise of a pre-existing right requires no permit/license or other 'allowance'. Such rights would exist if there were no government at all. CC wasn't even a recognized mode of carry in Arizona until 1994. Open Carry wasn't even a term... You were either heeled or not. There was no question who was with the exception of criminals who routinely conceal anyway.

Quote: "I would like to better understand if members here prefer Open Carry, or is Open Carry a legal avenue to have local goverments lean to Concealed Carry for them in the future."

This is Open Carry Dot Org (OCDO)... you're putting the chicken before the egg. We bear arms openly per the 2nd Amendment. 'Concealed' is a government contrivance. You seem not to understand that lawfully bearing arms does not require... should never require, government 'permission'. I don't think you can conceptualize just 'wearing a sidearm' or slinging a longarm without having to think much about it. It's a RIGHT... like any other right. You just do it.

All this other nonsense is just 'clutter'... and FUDDishness. Bottom line...: Right to carry arms recognized... everywhere. 'The "Shall not be infringed" part'. Respect for private property still paramount.
 

WheelGun

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
276
Location
Delaware County, New York, USA
imported post

I open carry proudly.

I conceal carry grudgingly. (Sometimes you have to in NY)

I only vacation in open carry states, and open carry in those states, even though I have non-resident CCWs in those same states.

I avoid CC only states, even the states I have CCWs for.

Locally, I prefer to take my family on outdoor recreation outings on land I can OC, even though I may encounter objections, even though I could legally CC and avoid any scrutiny whatsoever.

I live in a county in New York that allows OC, andthat wasamong the main reasons I chose to live here !
 

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Sonora Rebel wrote:
My biggest fear is that one of the 'anti's' will attempt to disarm somebody. THAT could get ugly.
Yeah, my wife has seen some of the antis at out at public events and thinks they are inherently unstablepeople.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
imported post

Mike wrote:
Sonora Rebel wrote:
My biggest fear is that one of the 'anti's' will attempt to disarm somebody. THAT could get ugly.
Yeah, my wife has seen some of the antis at out at public events and thinks they are inherently unstablepeople.
Your wife is an astute observer. :) My thoughts exactly.
 

milkmanjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
75
Location
, ,
imported post

Sonora Rebel wrote:
Governments don't 'allow' rights. Governments recognized rights or deny them. Concealed Carry is a contrivance of state government per 10th Amendmentrequiring permit/license for a 'fee'. This 'fee' is for the permit to conceal... not to 'carry'. The statists would have the public believe otherwise.

Free exercise of a pre-existing right requires no permit/license or other 'allowance'. Such rights would exist if there were no government at all. CC wasn't even a recognized mode of carry in Arizona until 1994. Open Carry wasn't even a term... You were either heeled or not. There was no question who was with the exception of criminals who routinely conceal anyway.

Quote: "I would like to better understand if members here prefer Open Carry, or is Open Carry a legal avenue to have local goverments lean to Concealed Carry for them in the future."

This is Open Carry Dot Org (OCDO)... you're putting the chicken before the egg. We bear arms openly per the 2nd Amendment. 'Concealed' is a government contrivance. You seem not to understand that lawfully bearing arms does not require... should never require, government 'permission'. I don't think you can conceptualize just 'wearing a sidearm' or slinging a longarm without having to think much about it. It's a RIGHT... like any other right. You just do it.

All this other nonsense is just 'clutter'... and FUDDishness. Bottom line...: Right to carry arms recognized... everywhere. 'The "Shall not be infringed" part'. Respect for private property still paramount.

Yes, you are correct, I, of all people, have no understanding of law. Let's try it this way to see if you, or someone else, can be less defensive and provide a simple answer.

Do you prefer Open Carry or Concealed Carry and why?

Please, in simple terms of purely mechanical or safety reasons.
 

Alexcabbie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
2,288
Location
Alexandria, Virginia, United States
imported post

Mike wrote:
Sonora Rebel wrote:
My biggest fear is that one of the 'anti's' will attempt to disarm somebody. THAT could get ugly.
Yeah, my wife has seen some of the antis at out at public events and thinks they are inherently unstablepeople.

Wow, what a discussion for the 70th annivesary of the outbreak of WWII in Europe!

Yeah I have seen antis hectoring OCers and a couple times been spoken to like a schoolchild, very insultingly by a shopkeeper who (wagging her finger in my face) told me I was "very frightening and intimidating". Now if that were true, she wouldn't be that far up in my face now, would she? The motivation was of course to publicly force me to make a choice: Appear as an immature schoolboy who wore a cap-pistol to school and was being told to go home and put it away; OR to provoke me to escalate the argument so as to make me look like the rash, rude, dangerous rube we are all supposed to be in the World According to Brady. My choice? I drew. Yes, I drew a hankie from my pocket, wiped my face and told her she did not need to spit on me while she was yelling. Then I left. I could go on but I think most folks here know exactly what I am talking about. :?
 

Nutczak

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
2,165
Location
The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

milkmanjoe wrote:
I would like to better understand if members here prefer Open Carry, or is Open Carry a legal avenue to have local goverments lean to Concealed Carry for them in the future.
I am in a "Open-Carry Only" state, I choose toO-C because that is all that I got, I do not use my right to O-C asa vehicleto try andget aConcealed-Carry bill passed through the legislature.
I would like the option to Carry-Concealed because it is awfully difficult to O-C when it is snowing 3"-4" per hour and way below freezing and you're wearing a parka that would cover your gunbelt. Us Wisconsin people are pushing for VT/AK style carry! if you are legal to own a firearm, carry it any way you can with no mandatory training or permits required. We have a gubernatorial candidate that is also pursuing that option too.

I am not willing to trade my right to O-C for C-C, I do not O-C to make a point, or to be an activist. I open-carry becauseI can, it is either carry it openly on my side, ordo not carry at all, I absolutely refuse to go about my life relying on other people to defend me. I lived in a C-C only state, it sucked trying to make sure everything was hidden at all times, I do not want to endure that again!

The current governor of WI, veto'd legislation that would have provided a concealed option. He pressured people that originally signed the bill to change their minds during the vote to overirde his veto. When questioned about this at a public appearance he stated "if you want to carry a gun, wear it in your hip where everyone can see it" with so much news happening in WI with illegal arrests of O-C'ers, and out attorneyt general issueing a memo that O-C is fully legal and to quit charging people with Disorderly conduct when they exercise their 2A rights,the Governorthen vowed to get O-C made illegal in many places by repealing the state preemption statute during his term.
A few short months later, he announced he will not be running for reelection.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
imported post

milkmanjoe wrote:
Sonora Rebel wrote:
Governments don't 'allow' rights. Governments recognized rights or deny them. Concealed Carry is a contrivance of state government per 10th Amendmentrequiring permit/license for a 'fee'. This 'fee' is for the permit to conceal... not to 'carry'. The statists would have the public believe otherwise.

Free exercise of a pre-existing right requires no permit/license or other 'allowance'. Such rights would exist if there were no government at all. CC wasn't even a recognized mode of carry in Arizona until 1994. Open Carry wasn't even a term... You were either heeled or not. There was no question who was with the exception of criminals who routinely conceal anyway.

Quote: "I would like to better understand if members here prefer Open Carry, or is Open Carry a legal avenue to have local goverments lean to Concealed Carry for them in the future."

This is Open Carry Dot Org (OCDO)... you're putting the chicken before the egg. We bear arms openly per the 2nd Amendment. 'Concealed' is a government contrivance. You seem not to understand that lawfully bearing arms does not require... should never require, government 'permission'. I don't think you can conceptualize just 'wearing a sidearm' or slinging a longarm without having to think much about it. It's a RIGHT... like any other right. You just do it.

All this other nonsense is just 'clutter'... and FUDDishness. Bottom line...: Right to carry arms recognized... everywhere. 'The "Shall not be infringed" part'. Respect for private property still paramount.

Yes, you are correct, I, of all people, have no understanding of law. Let's try it this way to see if you, or someone else, can be less defensive and provide a simple answer.

Do you prefer Open Carry or Concealed Carry and why?

Please, in simple terms of purely mechanical or safety reasons.

That was not your question. There is an entire thread on why Open Carry. Again... this forum is OCDO. It's fairly simple... even for FUDD's. (Maybe?) Bearing arms is a right. Open or concealed is only a mode of doing so. Concealed generally requires the government contrivance of permission. Most of us would prefer that contrivance discontinued as unconstitutional. 'Shall not be impaired' is clear enough language regardless of mode. Open carry is obvious... accessability is immediateand as a visible deterrent.

Otherewise one may be mistaken for one of the sheep. The tactical element of surprise is always with the aggressor. This isn't rocket science. AGAIN... this is OCDO, not CCDO or whatever. :banghead:
 

milkmanjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
75
Location
, ,
imported post

I am in a "Open-Carry Only" state, I choose toO-C because that is all that I got, I do not use my right to O-C asa vehicleto try andget aConcealed-Carry bill passed through the legislature.
I would like the option to Carry-Concealed because it is awfully difficult to O-C when it is snowing 3"-4" per hour and way below freezing and you're wearing a parka that would cover your gunbelt. Us Wisconsin people are pushing for VT/AK style carry! if you are legal to own a firearm, carry it any way you can with no mandatory training or permits required. We have a gubernatorial candidate that is also pursuing that option too.

I am not willing to trade my right to O-C for C-C, I do not O-C to make a point, or to be an activist. I open-carry becauseI can, it is either carry it openly on my side, ordo not carry at all, I absolutely refuse to go about my life relying on other people to defend me. I lived in a C-C only state, it sucked trying to make sure everything was hidden at all times, I do not want to endure that again!

The current governor of WI, veto'd legislation that would have provided a concealed option. He pressured people that originally signed the bill to change their minds during the vote to overirde his veto. When questioned about this at a public appearance he stated "if you want to carry a gun, wear it in your hip where everyone can see it" with so much news happening in WI with illegal arrests of O-C'ers, and out attorneyt general issueing a memo that O-C is fully legal and to quit charging people with Disorderly conduct when they exercise their 2A rights,the Governorthen vowed to get O-C made illegal in many places by repealing the state preemption statute during his term.
A few short months later, he announced he will not be running for reelection
.

Thank You.......all I am seeking is enlightenment, not lectures, and you have helped.

More of this would be great for guys like me who visit here and make posts. We are all pro-gunners in our own way. To state it, I am for both Open and Concealed Carry.

Sometimes I don't post cause I don't feel I understand well enough, and sometimes I post and get attacked, which is counter productive. I surely have alot more to offer than to take, and would appreciate to be treated that way.

Once again, thanks for helping me understand a piece of the world of carrying a firearm I don't get to experience.
 

DKSuddeth

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
833
Location
Bedford, Texas, USA
imported post

TFred wrote:
Sonora Rebel wrote:
My biggest fear is that one of the 'anti's' will attempt to disarm somebody. THAT could get ugly.
I might worry that a criminal could try that, but not an anti... most of them are afraid of guns, or afraid that they can't safely handle a gun, so I doubt they would even want to hold one, much less go grabbing for one in a crowd.

TFred
some of the more rabid Obama democrat supporters have stated that if they see someone carrying a gun in the open, that they would take it. Now it might be all bluster, but I wouldn't put it past one or two of them to try in a group. Personally, I hope it is never tried but if they did it would be their fault they died.
 

Alexcabbie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
2,288
Location
Alexandria, Virginia, United States
imported post

Yeah, having a mob try to snatch your weapon is an action that would reasonably cause you to fear for your life, thereby justifying deadly force. I doubt there is an anti out there who would actually be stupid enough to try, but one never knows, do one?
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
imported post

DKSuddeth wrote:
TFred wrote:
Sonora Rebel wrote:
My biggest fear is that one of the 'anti's' will attempt to disarm somebody. THAT could get ugly.
I might worry that a criminal could try that, but not an anti... most of them are afraid of guns, or afraid that they can't safely handle a gun, so I doubt they would even want to hold one, much less go grabbing for one in a crowd.

TFred
some of the more rabid Obama democrat supporters have stated that if they see someone carrying a gun in the open, that they would take it. Now it might be all bluster, but I wouldn't put it past one or two of them to try in a group. Personally, I hope it is never tried but if they did it would be their fault they died.
The carrier would most likely have to shoot them. Perhaps that's what they want. I can see no other possible outcome. If the carrier were to 'give up' his/her weapon, there's no telling what some nutcase would attempt.The carrier would have todefendthemselves and the weapon responsibly. Some of these Obamabots are emotional nutcases(as has been demonstrated) given to those typesof irrational theatrics.
 

milkmanjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
75
Location
, ,
imported post

Sonora Rebel wrote:
DKSuddeth wrote:
TFred wrote:
Sonora Rebel wrote:
My biggest fear is that one of the 'anti's' will attempt to disarm somebody. THAT could get ugly.
I might worry that a criminal could try that, but not an anti... most of them are afraid of guns, or afraid that they can't safely handle a gun, so I doubt they would even want to hold one, much less go grabbing for one in a crowd.

TFred
some of the more rabid Obama democrat supporters have stated that if they see someone carrying a gun in the open, that they would take it. Now it might be all bluster, but I wouldn't put it past one or two of them to try in a group. Personally, I hope it is never tried but if they did it would be their fault they died.
The carrier would most likely have to shoot them. Perhaps that's what they want. I can see no other possible outcome. If the carrier were to 'give up' his/her weapon, there's no telling what some nutcase would attempt.The carrier would have todefendthemselves and the weapon responsibly. Some of these Obamabots are emotional nutcases (as has been demonstrated) given to those typesof irrational theatrics.
I didn't specifically write about a situation like this, but it goes back to would concealed carry be a better idea with all these nutcases around? Understood about the right to Open Carry, but...... these nutcases someday will grab a weapon, and I would not be surprised if someday one of them was put up to it.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
imported post

I'm not a big fan of being intimidated... directly or possibly. If anyone acts up toward an open carrier...(attempting to take the weapon) I expectthe perpetrator(s)toreap the immediateconsequences.
 
Top