Why hasn't the NRA freaked out about Open Carry bans?

[KansasVoter]

Texas does not allow it. I know other states do not either.

How in the world can Texas not get it passed when that place is what I would call the epitome of Gun "Enthusiasts". Seems like a ballot initiative would pass by like 90%. And that every damn politician in Texas would push for it.

Just curious how the NRA has let that go on so long?

No motive here, just curious.

[Llewlladdwr]

1. Open carry is still a relatively new issue.

Give it some time and I think we'll see open carry legal in most states.

[KansasVoter]

2. I thought open carry was legal before concealed in most places.

[AtheistCrusader]

4. Wrong.

[KansasVoter]

5. I know in missouri you could carry a gun in parts of the state in a holster. Before CCW.

[AtheistCrusader]

8. 'some' states would be accurate.

Washington had Concealed Carry for some 25 years before Open Carry was allowed near urban areas.

'open carry' has only been allowed in 'most' or 'all' states in the sense of being engaged in some 'valid' related outdoor sport. Like hunting with proper licenses and tags.

[cowman]

34. NV is

an open carry state.

[Statistical]

40. Not true if you go back far enough.

Open carry was routine at the time of the founding of the country. Nobody (except maybe criminals) concealed arms. Firearms were considered tools and nobody on lawful business would consider concealing a firearm any more than they would conceal a hammer or other tool.

Most states prohibited conceal carry almost immediately.

"The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons." - Colorado Constitution.

It really never occur to the early Americans to regulate or control openly carried firearms. They didn't use the term "open carry" it was simply not prohibited just like we don't have a term for whistling while you walk because it isn't prohibited. Conceal carry is a relatively new invention and followed conceal carry by roughly 200 years.

[MicaelS]

13. In Texas, IIRC, before CCW you could Open Carry

Only while you were working in your own personally owned place of business. Liquor store, gun store, convenience store, etc.

[X_Digger]

20. Which really isn't open carry per se.

That's more about private property.

[Pullo]

14. The NRA isn't often the trailblazer within the gun rights movement

They are by far the largest pro-gun organization, and wield the most power, but they are anything but nimble and efficient.

Even within the gun rights movement, there is a detectable level of animosity toward the NRA. Just for example, the NRA did everything it could to derail the Heller case early on. In part because they'd rather fight in legislatures than courts, but even more so because they don't like it when they feel somebody else is trying to steal their thunder.

If you're are looking for an "inside baseball" view of the NRA, I suggest you read a book called "Ricochet: Confessions of a Gun Lobbyist" by Richard Feldman

[KansasVoter]

25. Thanks!

[KansasVoter]

7. Being an Atheist you should have loved the NRA using "God" as much as anyone.

[AtheistCrusader]

9. Being an intelligent, tool using mammal

I am aware that some people use 'god' as a euphamism for 'natural right' in that context. So their use doesn't exactly freak me out, but I would probably agree with you that it is childish.

[Statistical]

39. Actually it is RIGHT (surprisingly given the source).

Open carry was almost never illegal for first 150 years of this country. Concealed carry was routinely SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED by state statute. Some of the very first gun control laws (as in less than a year or two after the Constitutions) were laws against "hiding arms".

The thought was that if you had nothing to hide why would you conceal your arms. Not very neighborly like.

What happened is that open carry either became banned or fell into disuse. Later conceal carry was adopted. In some states Open carry has always been legal. In VA for example conceal carry was a felony prior to 1962 however open carry has ALWAYS been legal. It has never been prohibited by statute not even once since the founding of the country.

[one-eyed fat man]

37. The laws vary from state to state.

That a free citizen of the Commonwealth of Kentucky had the right to openly bear arms for self defense has long been recognized. It was articulated in clear and unambiguous language by the Court of Appeals in Holland v. Commonwealth in 1956.

"In our state the legislature is empowered only to deny to citizens the right to carry concealed weapons. The constitutional provision is an affirmation of the faith that all men have the inherent right to arm themselves for the defense of themselves and of the state. The only limitation concerns the mode of carrying such instruments. We observe, via obiter dicta, that although a person is granted the right to carry a weapon openly, a severe penalty is imposed for carrying it concealed. If the gun is worn outside the jacket or shirt in full view, no one may question the wearer’s right so to do; but if it is carried under the jacket or shirt, the violator is subject to imprisonment for not less than two nor more than five years. The heavy emphasis, we suppose, is upon the undue advantage given to a person who is able suddenly to expose and use a weapon, although the gun itself is the vicious instrument………."

emphasis added

There are no Kentucky Revised Statutes that govern the open carry of firearms by persons who lawfully possess such firearms except for the following:

* KRS 527.070 - Unlawful possession (whether carried openly or concealed) of a weapon on school property, except for certain specified exceptions.
* KRS 244.125 - Which bars loaded firearms (concealed or otherwise) in places where alcohol is sold by the drink, except for certain specified exceptions.

Kentucky State Police CCDW

Seeing someone merely wearing a gun in a holster openly does not particularly draw my attention. On the other hand, if someone is constantly fiddling with the thing for no apparent good reason, I would look askance. I will not abide people handling firearms in an unsafe or careless manner.

Be that as it may, since the option to carry concealed, properly credentialed, has been available I much prefer to be armed discreetly. Ostentation can invite unseemly attention whether it is a flashy
Rolex, a gaudy pinky ring, a fat wad of cash, or a revolver in buscadero gun belt. There is also the inconvenience and the waste of some officer's time when someone ignorant of the law, or simply hoping to force a scene, makes the "man with gun call 911."

[AtheistCrusader]

3. Why don't you ask the NRA?

[KansasVoter]

6. I did and they did not respond. You a little touchy today?

[AtheistCrusader]

10. I could venture a guess, I suppose.

But it would probably be unfounded. Did you search their site for open carry? Probable they have some public statement on it, for states where it is illegal.

[HockeyMom]

11. I have imagines of open carry on

on a NYC rush hour subway car where people are packed in like sardines. I wonder how long those people would still have their guns? Actually, even someone with a concealed carry would have a difficult time "concealing" it.

[GreenStormCloud]

32. I could conceal a Ruger LCP and nobody on a crowded subway would know.

A large handgun may be difficult to conceal under those circumstances.

[MicaelS]

12. Becaused many people react

Viscerally to someone open carrying who is not wearing a uniform, or not working at their place of business. I'm pro-RKBA and even I react this way. CCW, I am absolutely in favor of. Open Carry, I still am trying to decide upon my exact opinion and feelings, and I use the word "feelings" on purpose. My opinion is if you can CCW why Carry Open? But that is just me.

[PavePusher]

21. Because Civil Rights shouldn't require a burkha. n/t

[safeinOhio]

47. Is having sex with your wife a civil right?

just asking.

[PavePusher]

49. Only if she consents without threat or intimidation.

Though I'm mystified by what the relevance of the question might be.

I was stating that Civil Rights should not be required to be hidden, else the term "Civil Right" ceases to meet the definition of the words.

[safeinOhio]

52. I suggest you and others

google "civil rights vs civil liberties". There is a difference. Most on this board are calling the two the same, when they are not. I would suggest, to be correct, start using the term Civil Liberties. Your post makes it sound like any liberty can be done in pubic. While having sex is a right, in that you may have sex regardless if your partner is gay, a different race or handicapped, the act itself is a liberty and may be limited to place.

[Statistical]

72. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.

Nothing in there about liberties.

The people have a RIGHT to keep and bear arms, a right that pre-exists the Constitution. The Bill of Rights protects that against governmental infringement.

[TheWraith]

50. If you're about to suggest we should be able to fuck in public...

...then I'm all in favor of that, as long as people give you room to ignore them. I don't want to see a couple senior citizens screwing like rabbits in the middle of a baseball diamond, but if they want to go to a shady corner of the park, let them.

[safeinOhio]

53. That would be infringing on

the couples "civil rights" as you are limiting sex in public to protected groups, ie, age. Limit all to sex in private and you are dealing with a "liberty",

It's like confusing assault weapons with sporting arms. It's about definitions.

[TheWraith]

56. No, you're pretty much completely wrong.

One, I was referring to all couples giving people the option of not watching them.

Two, what--exactly--is the difference between "assault weapons" and "sporting arms"? Are you aware that "assault weapons" include some of the most popular new hunting rifles?

[hack89]

61. "Assault weapons" are in fact sporting arms

when you look at how they are commonly used in America.

[Statistical]

41. "My opinion is if you can CCW why Carry Open?"

My opinion is if revolvers work why do you need a semi-auto pistol?
My opinion is if you can use a bolt action hunting rifle why do you need an "evil black rifle?
My opinion is if violent crime is so rare why do you even need to CCW anyways?

Of course the answer to all 4 questions is it is a Bill of Rights not a Bill of Needs.

What is the compelling government interest to ban open carry but allow conceal carry? That is how restrictions on rights work. Something isn't banned just because an alternative exists. Something is banned/restricted/regulated because a compelling government interest exists and that interest can ONLY be furthered by the restriction.

[tularetom]

15. Because the NRA being lobbying organization for the arms industry doesn't care HOW one carries

All they are interested in doing is selling more firearms and ammunition. If they can do it by promoting outdoor sports, fine. But that ain't working so well anymore as increased urbanization slowly takes over a lot of the easily accessed habitat. So they have had to resort to selling their products through fear. Fear of minorities, fear of terrorism, fear of crime, fear that "liberals' are gonna take away your guns. And by god you need 'em for self defense. Once they sell you the guns and ammunition they really could care less whether you carry it concealed, in your pocket, stuffed in your belt or shoved up your ass.

I was once a life member of NRA. I couldn't wait for my magazine to come every month. I learned a lot from them. But as their message began to change from a sportsman orientation to the promotion of fear, I became disenchanted. Now fuck 'em. I'm no longer buying their bullshit. And I'm donating to groups who promote the preservation of habitat.

[TheCowsCameHome]

18. Amen to that.

:thumbsup:

[SteveM]

27. My brother once said that NRA membership was defacto registration. nt

[spin]

35. So is a concealed carry permit. (n/t)

[GreenStormCloud]

51. BULLCRAP. The NRA is not supported by gun manufacturers.

They have a separate organization for that. The NRA is supported by members. Several of the regular posters on this board are members. The American Shooting Sports Council is the lobby for the gun makers. Sometimes the two work together and sometimes they are at cross purposes.

The fact that you so freely lie about something that is easily fact-checked undermines the rest of your screed.

BTW - Last year there were over one million acts of violent crime in the U.S., so I consider it reasonable to carry a gun.

[Callisto32]

55. SAAMI?

Or is there another to which you are referring.

[GreenStormCloud]

57. SAAMI doesn't lobby.

SAAMI was created by congress in 1926 to set industry standards for technical aspects of guns.

ASSC is the lobby organization to represent the manufacturers.

[X_Digger]

70. NSSF is the lobbying arm of the mfgs.

[tularetom]

59. Rationalize your fear anyway you want to

If you are so concerned about violent crime that you are willing to give the government control over whether or not you can carry a firearm you basically are a supporter of gun control.

BTW, I've owned firearms probably longer than you've been alive. And no government agency has ever said one goddamn word to me about "grabbing" them, or even registering them. But if I were the government and I wanted to grab somebody's guns, the first place I would look would be at the NRA membership rolls. Then at the holders of concealed weapons permits.

[GreenStormCloud]

62. I am already a senior citizen, drawing SS. So you need to be pretty damn old.

I don't like giving the government control, but it is the law so I obey it.

There are three times that I can readily think of when a state or local government took guns away from honest, law-abiding, people. California, New York, and New Orleans after Katrina.

[Hoopla Phil]

16. Hummm. There's that 90% number being thrown out again.

[Statistical]

42. Must only have two numbers in Kansas. the niner and the zero.

[Bonhomme Richard]

17. You can open carry in CT but the caveat is.........

that you are not allowed to upset people. So, if you open carry and some bystander freaks out because they see you carrying a pistol then you will be written up for breach of peace.

[PavePusher]

23. Because Civil Rights should be limited by bigoted paranoids.

Not attacking you, but that's a retarded way to limit Civil Rights. I wonder how many people would be "up in arms" if they applied that to the First Amendment?

[SteveM]

28. This "upsetting" notion is a poor way to arbitrate a civil right...

I don't know the ends & outs of the law, but (how you phrase it) an "upset" by "some bystander" makes the standard for brandishment sound almost precision by comparison. How long has this aspect of the law been on the State's books? It seems to resonate with our feelingly/feary/narcissisy culture.

[Bonhomme Richard]

45. In our permit class, the instructor who works for the state police,..

said that you need to be careful. He said that if you were in a supermarket and , while reaching for your wallet, the cashier sees your pistol, freaks out and calls the police......you will get written up.
This part of the law is now being seriously challenged in the courts and I don't think it will last very much longer.

[Statistical]

48. This is one reason why open carry is good.

In VA if I am conceal carrying and my weapon is exposed.... well I am not open carrying which is also legal. :)

Sometimes I open carry because it is less startling for someone not exposed to firearms to see somehow standing their with a firearm (they just assume I am an off duty cop of security guard) than to have clothing that poorly conceals a pistol which is revealed.

[X_Digger]

19. Your 'common wisdom' seems to be consistently wrong.

-Texas as the 'epitome of Gun Enthusiasts'
-NRA supporting 90% repugs
-CHL holders needing 'steel courage'
-asserting that if we got rid of guns, our homicide rate would be on par with other countries
-'arms' means long guns kept for hunting
.....


Honestly, if you'd wipe out all the preconceptions you appear to have and do some actual research, we could have more intelligent discussions without first having to disabuse you of your wrong notions.

[proteus_lives]

22. "if you'd wipe out all the preconceptions you appear to have and do some actual research"

Now you're asking for the moon and stars!

:rofl:

[gravity556]

24. AZ has always been open carry friendly.

And in 20 days, we join Alaska and Vermont as the third state to go with Constitutional Carry-meaning no permit needed to carry concealed. That said, while it removes the requirement for a permit, permits will still be offered for folks who want them for reciprocity and NICS bypass reasons. There are a few interesting things within the law-should someone conceal a weapon in the course of committing a crime, it will be an aggravating factor leading to additional charges and a longer sentence. Permit holders will be allowed to carry into places that serve alcohol, but cannot drink-meaning that if you have a permit, you are legal to carry when you go out to dinner if the establishment serves booze (applebees, TGIF, and pretty much every other eatery that doesn't have a ball pit and slide for the kiddies).

Non permit holders are still barred from carrying in bars. Businesses who post a "No Firearms Allowed" signs are off limits as well-to all carriers. I anticipate a flurry of places posting shortly after the law takes effect, but I imagine that in time, they will revert to carry friendly again.

As to open carry, I do so quite often. Most people never even notice the gun, because most folks wander the world with their heads completely up their asses, necessitating quite a few glass belly buttons so they don't wander into the walls. The few folks who do notice are usually curious about the legality of open carrying. A few minutes of polite conversation and off they go. There are a very small number of people who see someone openly carrying and make stupid comments-"What, are you going to rob the place?" or "Guess I'd better not piss you off...".

Those people get the same level of courtesy given to the polite and curious. Though I've never understood why, if the thought of someone carrying a gun is so horrifying, rudeness towards someone carrying a gun seems reasonable. And one lady at a convenience store that I have literally carried into once or twice a day for several YEARS suddenly noticed I had a gun and immediately asked if I was going to rob the store (in the most nasty tone imagineable). I admit that I laughed at her. I told her that if I robbed the place, I'd have to drive another 5 miles to the next closest convenience store to buy smokes and red bull. Nevermind the fact that I was familiar enough to her in the store that she was grabbing my smokes before I even asked for them.

Sorry, rambling again. Anyhow, just keep in mind that someone who is open carrying and going about their daily business isn't looking for a fight, or a confrontation with some indignant fool anymore than anyone else. But most of us will happily answer polite questions.:)

[KansasVoter]

26. You and I could read the same stats and come to totally different conclusions......

Just like the dems and gop do now.

Who gives a shit?

[SteveM]

29. Stay with it. You'll see the light. nt

[KansasVoter]

30. Funny, same thing my GOP friends tell me. That says a lot.

[SteveM]

33. Well, culture war does stink. "Liberals" are so-o-o majorly bad at it. nt

[X_Digger]

38. That's just it.. you don't have any stats to back up some of these inane assertions.

Hence my calling it your 'common wisdom'- as though you assume whatever-the-hell-it-is is a foregone conclusion.

Did you ask your daughter if she got an email with her membership number? You could be checking those ratings right now.

[GreenStormCloud]

31. Other things take higher priority.

The NRA is mainly pushing to get laws that are heavily restriting guns to be declared unconstitutional, or to be repealed.

The NRA is still pushing for shall-issue CCW in nine states.

They are concerned with gun-privacy laws to protect people who take their guns to work but leave them locked in their cars.

They are trying to get states to allow CCW on college campuses, and to expose the fallacy of so-called gun-free zones.

Open Carry is a bit far down on the list.

[oneshooter]

36. Texas lost "open carry" after Mr. Lincolns War.

There were a lot of carpetbaggers in Texas who were afraid that Texans with guns would harm them as they stole their property. So they got open carry AND concealed carry banned in Texas.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Statistical]

43. NRA is rarely takes big chances.

Having the most political power they go for the big relatively easy to pass bills or work to defeat the worst gun control bills. The NRA is most useful just trying to shift the line a little. A little more freedom, a little less control rather than trying to go for the hail mary.

The smaller organizations do the promoting work.

Open carry is (so far) a States Powers issue so state organizations are more nimble at dealing with local law. For example the VCDL (Virginia Citizens Defense League) has been active is protecting open carry in VA. Now Open carry has NEVER (not one day) been prohibited in VA since the founding of the nation but it did fall into obscurity and it has taken some work to prevent wrongful prosecution, illegal local laws, and intimidation. Also some work has been needed to educate Police Officers including Norfolk's finest which have been sued not once, or twice, but three times for arresting people over an illegal law.

[Ter]

44. The NRA is a moderate corporate tool

The real 2nd Amendment, no-compromise gun group is the Gun Owners of America (GOA).

[Statistical]

46. They also contribute 100.00% of money to Republicans. n/t

[GreenStormCloud]

65. BULLCRAP. They send about 78%.

That number is decreasing as more Democrats support RKBA.

[Statistical]

67. Please read before your CRAP.

The post I responded to said the GAO is the no-compromise gun organization. I said they also contribute 100% to Republicans.

The GAO does contribute 100.00% of money to Republicans.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00278101&cycle=2010

2010: 0% to Democrats
2008: 0% to Democrats
2006: 0% to Democrats
2004: 0% to Democrats
2002: 0% to Democrats
2000: 6% to Democrats
1998: 1% to Democrats

[GreenStormCloud]

69. Sorry. I thought you were refering to the NRA. N/T

[Statistical]

71. No problem.

Looking back I could see how "they" is unclear.

I like the GAO as a no compromise organization but as long as they support only Republicans they won't get my support.

[Callisto32]

54. In may states, it IS legal, sorta.

In PA you can open carry, but the police often will harass you and bring you in on some contrived contempt of cop charge like "disorderly conduct" or "disturbing the peace."

As for the NRA, it is probably that they have to put so much money and time into keeping the firearms themselves legal, that further up the road issues get lost in the shuffle.

[MisterBill45]

58. Because open carry is far from accepted even among CCW licensees

I'm a gun owner, hold a concealed carry license and am a certified NRA pistol and firearms safety instructor. I'm pretty much an absolutist on the right to keep and bear arms.

As a matter of personal protection open carry is vastly inferior to a concealed pistol. It broadcasts your armed status to anyone who can see you, including criminals. If a guy is going to stick up a liquor store and sees you with a hogleg strapped to your side, the only thing your likely to accomplish is to ensure you get killed or disarmed before the robbery starts.

I find the deterrence argument to be somewhat weak. I think the idea that there are lots of armed citizens out there and you never know which one is packing to have a far better likelihood of a deterrent effect.

And of course the other part is that in terms of expanding our rights, I think open-carry may do us more harm than good. Freaking out over someone carrying a gun openly in a holster may be irrational, but it's the way it is, even among many people who otherwise support gun rights. You CAN do lots of things. But some actions cost you more than they gain you.

I'm still of the opinion that ACT UP probably set back the cause of gay rights rather than helped it. I have a lot of gay friends who agree. Similarly I think the open carry protests, particularly in places like California where there is precious little popular support for gun rights, does nothing but freak people out and get us bad legislation prohibiting not just that practice, but whatever other restrictions they think they can get into the bill under the guise of stopping open carry.

Morally, it's great. Legally it may be fine. But tactically I think it's a very bad move for us.

I think the NRA is thinking along these lines. You have to remember that for all the lies the VPC etc. make up about the NRA, it's still a pretty mainstream organization that depends on the support of it's members. Organizations like GOA (Gun Owners of America) or JPFO (Jews for the Protection of Firearms Ownership) are far more radical on these things than the NRA has ever been, and a lot more politically radical and overtly Conservative. One look at any gun forum in the country speaks volumes about the far right's general distaste for the NRA. They hate it because it's not willing to fight hopeless causes merely to bolster some of it's members' egos. These aren't exactly politically sophisticated people. They simply don't grasp that tilting at windmills is futile. They want the NRA to make symbolic gestures that alienate large portions of the public for a purely symbolic act of bravado. The NRA's tactics have always been essentially (small c) conservative.

[PavePusher]

60. I know we've disagreed on this before...

but I have to ask...

How do you get people accustomed to exercise of a Civil Right in public if you never actually... exercise the Civil Right in public?

I also feel obligated to point out that I have never seen any evidence that OC is tactically inferior to CC.

As I said up-thread earlier, Civil Rights should not have to exercised only under concealment. I don't know of anyone who would agree to only being able to read books in your basement or behind a closed door, or transporting books only in backpacks or fully-concealing bags.

[MisterBill45]

63. You can't progress faster than the people can keep up

I completely support the right to O/C, but I don't see it ever being a widely accepted practice outside more rural places like Montana. People in LA or NYC will NEVER become accustomed to open carry. I just don't ever see that happening. Not in my lifetime and probably not in my children's, if ever. Heller or no Heller, kids are indoctrinated against guns every day all day at school in those places. My daughter went to school there through high school, I saw it.

As people who care about gun rights, we need to reach out to those kids in a non-threatening, non-confrontational way and get them out to the range to get the facts for themselves. We need to be reaching out, not inward to people that are already on our side. You don't do that with O/C. Quite the opposite. All you do is scare a large number of people who would have been open to changing their minds or who at least tacitly supported RKBA. You've now cemented an image in their heads that's very unappealing and may drive someone to the other side altogether.

To me, the open carry protests in San Fransisco were identical to the Republicans' disastrous move ever further to the extreme right. They may win some victories in one election cycle, but the further they go, the more reasonable everyone else seems in comparison. Long term it's a political blunder of catastrophic proportions. (Not that I want them to stop. I've contemplated sending money to the tea party. They'll kill the GOP better than I can:P)

The actual effect of open carry is not to get people used to it. The actual effect in places like San Francisco and LA and NYC would be to terrify people. Terrified people will make MORE gun control laws, not fewer. And if you think the supreme court is going to rule that the states can't deny you the right to carry, you are sadly mistaken. They will call those things "reasonable restrictions" and leave it to the states. I would be willing to bet large money on that one.

So you have to look at your proposed action and the effects it will have and then decide if it's still a good idea. Personally I think it produces far more harm than good for gun rights overall. I would vote to uphold your right to do it, but I would never say you were wise to do so in all places at all times.

[mvccd1000]

66. I find those arguments to be illogical.

What criminal is deterred by what someone "might" be doing? (Hint: they "might" be arrested for what they're doing - how many of them does that slow down?)

Scenario: Suppose you and I are each working in our garages at 11pm on a Sunday night and realize we forgot to get cash out of the ATM for lunch at work Monday. We hurry and run out to the local bank in the dark of night; I'm open carrying and you're carrying concealed. If some tweaker is out lurping, looking for an easy target, which one of us do you think he's going to pick? Sure, you might have some imagined "tactical advantage," but the bottom line is... you're still going to have to deal with this guy and I'm not, because he's going to give me a pass and go looking for an easier target.

As for your liquor store scenario, look at videos of most holdups captured by store cameras. Most of these criminals are either high or stupid (or both), and scared of every sound. Do you really think if someone walks in hoping to hold up a store and sees someone with a pistol, they're going to shoot them and carry on with the robbery? Hell no! They're going to buy their cigarettes and walk out and head for the next store down the road. Can you link to a single article of an open carrier shot by someone who continued on to rob the store they were in? I've never seen one...

One of my favorite examples that I like to post in these debates was an article in the Arizona Republic back in probably 2008 or so. A waitress was walking home from Applebees after her shift got off at midnight. Two guys stopped and tried to grab her purse. She'd seen them drive by and pulled a pocket knife out before they got there, and her screaming and slashing managed to scare them off. When the police caught them about 20 minutes later, they claimed they'd been out driving around looking for someone to rob for about 1/2 hour. Do you really think they'd have picked her if she had a pistol visible on her hip?

I guess open carry could make you a first target with no tactical advantage if you were in the famous Bank of America shootout robbery in LA back in the 90s... other than that, I can't remember reading of many real-life situations where it would be an advantage.

I often think CCW holders are hoping to end up in a situation where they can pull out the hidden gun and surprise a criminal, while open carriers simply want to avoid the situation altogether.

Luckily I live in a state where it's not necessary to get permission from the government to carry openly or concealed.

Rant over... thanks for reading.

[MisterBill45]

73. I'm not partisan enough on the issue

to be willing to debate the issue on a tactical level. I've heard very persuasive arguments on both sides from people I have a lot of respect for.

As I said, I completely support your right to open carry. I've done it in NH, which isn't far away. In NH, it's a non issue. Do that in Mass, where it's technically legal and watch how fast you lose your firearms rights, not to mention the cops and sheeple having a complete cow.

I just don't see this as any kind of winning issue for gun rights. There is no way in Hell the supreme court is going to rule that the states can't restrict where, when or if you can carry a gun outside the home. That's a stretch so far beyond anything even attempted in Heller/McDonald it's like comparing a trip to the grocery store to a trip to the moon.
They're going to rule that as a reasonable restriction, which is why you won't ever see the NRA bringing such a suit. If there's no definitive ruling they have leverage. If there is and it's against us, they give up a lot of that leverage.

When your opponent is busy drowning, you don't toss him a rope.

[Statistical]

74. "where it's technically legal and watch how fast you lose your firearms rights"

That sounds like tyranny to me.

Maybe someday Mass will respect the rule of law. Likely it will take a couple lawsuits to do so.

It also shows the dangers of "may issue" = "may revoke for any reason they want".

[MisterBill45]

75. It is tyranny

And discretionary licensing is going to go bye bye before too long. You can't say the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right and then say the states can refuse to issue you a license to own one without consistency or due process.

Mercifully I will be gone from this corrupt cesspool in a few more months and I will never set foot in the place again except for attending funerals.

For states like MA and NJ this means they are going to have to become shall-issue on gun possession at least. Carry is another issue altogether.

People here couldn't understand why I was so infuriated at having to take a state mandated course and a long permitting process that took months before I could buy so much as a shotgun. It completely escaped them that the notion of having to get government approval to exercise the most basic of all human rights is an outrage. -The same as it would be if you had to get a license to speak your mind or vote that could be revoked for no cause whatever with essentially no recourse.

[Statistical]

68. Why don't cops conceal carry if it is tactically superior?

Honestly if it is legal where you live you should try open carry once as an experiment.

99.999999% of people have no situaitonal awareness. We are trained by society not to stare at people's waist.

Most people that do see it just assume that I am a cop. Maybe 1 in a thousand (and it is likely less than that) have ever made a comment. Most are also gun owners. Of those that make a comment most are unaware they can open carry in VA without a permit.

The most common question I get is:
"Are you a cop?" My response is no I am a free citizen. :)

I tend to CCW in fall, winter, spring but in summer it is difficult to CCW well and I feel that a poorly concealed weapon is more of a "Scare".

[spin]

76. People who carry concealed in Florida often carry "mouse guns" ...

I carry a S&W Model 642 snubbie in .38+P in a pocket holster.



My son in law carries a Ruger .380 LCP in his pocket. It conceals better than my S&W.



My daughter carries a S&W Model 351PD in .22 magnum.



She also carries a NAA .22 mini revolver, which she calls her, "get away from me" gun.

[mvccd1000]

64. I've noticed that, too.

Although I've never been an NRA member, I live in an open carry state and watch forums dealing with open carry. It seems like every time the issue of open carry comes up, the NRA is either silent, or somehow attempts to sabotage the issue.

I've often wondered if they get their mailing lists from the state registers of CCW holders, as that seems to be their "darling issue."

I've avoided getting a CCW specifically because I see no reason to ask permission of my government to exercise one of my rights. Open carry works fine for me...