OPEN CARRY IN CALIFORNIA [Archive]

CitaDeL

05-25-2008, 06:17 PM

Here is what we should do and it is perfectly legal. People need to start carrying a holstered pistol exposed (open carry) dont have your shirt covering the firearm at all. Make sure the firearm is unloaded and there are no mags in the mag well. Carry loaded mags on the opposite side of your belt.

This is perfectly legal. What it will do is start to create a presence in California. This is the first step in making California a free state. You may think it is crazy or you will get arrested. but you wont law is the law.

Come on everyone start to open carry.

I appreciate the enthusiasm, and wish others shared it... but Ive been advocating open carry since August 2006 and it seems there are only a few willing to put their actions where their principles are.

This is a form of protest that we can all participate in while conducting our errands... there is no need to march on City Hall or the State Capitol en masse. There is no need to call the media out to cover a parade of armed men and women. This simple demonstration can help educate the fearful that regular people- (their neighbors and friends) are gun owners and can be trusted in spite of nearly 50 years of anti-gun legislation and media propaganda. This regular exposure of lawfully armed citizenry will help promote tolerance of the practice and can be used as a tool to urge licensing reform.

When issuing agencies have a choice between responding to 'subject with a gun' or issuing a license to carry concealed, they will have to adjust their policies to accept one or the other.

Yes, there are some places you can't do this. 626.9 is of particular concern as it is a felony, but there are measures you can take to remain within the law and carry- even in a 'gun free' school zone. You have to do your homework to take on this project.

If youre afraid to go alone, buddy up with a like minded friend and go to lunch, go shopping at a discount store, or whatever you normally do. You may even write your local law enforcement and inform them by certified mail that open carry is lawful in California, that you intend to go armed and their officers should be prepared for the possiblity of interaction with an openly armed and lawful individual.

I suggest though that if you chose to do this you should;

1) Carry a tested digital voice recorder that is actively recording.
2) Carry your firearm in a retention holster.
3) Carry one of the various pamphlets composed by the open carry advocates, and pass them out when you have people with questions.
4) Practice your dialogue in the event of a law enforcement encounter.
5) Enjoy the remaining RTKABA in California.

rue

05-25-2008, 06:29 PM

Anyone open carry in Sacramento? I need an open carry buddy.

tombinghamthegreat

05-25-2008, 06:34 PM

lehn20

05-25-2008, 06:41 PM

the Youtube thing is a great idea

tombinghamthegreat

05-25-2008, 06:45 PM

the Youtube thing is a great idea

I have lots of good ideas, some of them tend to be controversal;).

Crazed_SS

05-25-2008, 06:45 PM

CitaDeL

05-25-2008, 07:07 PM

tombinghamthegreat

05-25-2008, 07:12 PM

:shuriken: he could be a ninja gun jacker:rolleyes:

JandJArmory

05-25-2008, 07:17 PM

I maybe wrong but in certain cities you can't open carry right? Also sometimes not a smart move since some places like compton you might get shot first.

Thats just the problem right there. Everyone is so affraid to express their right. And your statement is so stereotypical. Why Compton? This idea isnt ment to be complicated. Check with the city you work or live in. but im pretty sure its all of California.

Crazed_SS

05-25-2008, 07:17 PM

Okay Crazed_SS, youre a gang banger. Come and get it...

Notice I said, *IF* I was a gangbanger.

Personally, I wouldnt want to walk around with an unloaded gun on my hip because it'd make me a greater target for violence. Depending on what gun I was carrying, it'd be like walking around with $500-$1200 hanging out of my pocket.

It's already hard enough to defend yourself with a loaded gun. You honestly think you could draw, load, rack the slide, aim, and fire when someone already has the drop on you?

I understand the symbolism of open-carry, but IMO it's totally impractical for actual self-defense purposes IMO.

JandJArmory

05-25-2008, 07:20 PM

Crazed_SS

05-25-2008, 07:22 PM

Or mabey not

Depends, on the person I guess. Here, let me clarify my statement.

For me, I dont think the benefits of carrying an unloaded gun outweigh the risks and hassles.

Fobjoe

05-25-2008, 07:24 PM

perhaps if we all become victims of violence as a result of inherent vulnerability in the current legal open carry, it will be leverage in pushing for shall issue CCW. But seriously, the idea is to do this so people get used to the idea of guns...Maybe just open carry as a statement in public areas. Kind of like wearing your rolex and nice clothes in occupied public areas ...I doubt you're gonna get jumped in the middle of a mall.

AfricanHunter

05-25-2008, 07:43 PM

Thats just the problem right there. Everyone is so affraid to express their right. And your statement is so stereotypical. Why Compton? This idea isnt ment to be complicated. Check with the city you work or live in. but im pretty sure its all of California.

I though OC was only OK in unincorporated cities and rural areas?

Crazed_SS

05-25-2008, 07:58 PM

I though OC was only OK in unincorporated cities and rural areas?

Unloaded open-carry is OK in cities and incorporated areas.

ohsmily

05-25-2008, 08:26 PM

There have been a huge number of threads on this topic on CalGuns.

journeyman

05-25-2008, 08:45 PM

If I was a gangbanger and I saw one of you guys walking around with a flashy, unloaded, 1911 on your hip, I'd jack you for it. I dont think the benefits of carrying an unloaded gun outweigh the risks and hassles.

just stick an empty mag in and keep a loaded one on your opposite hip! Btw not many gangbanger are willing to go to someone and attempt to disarm someone loaded or not...furthermore whos gonna pay attention to the magwell being empty certainly not the cop who comes to talk to you, hes gonna approach you with the same apprehension as he would any other 415

JOURNEYMAN

CitaDeL

05-25-2008, 08:47 PM

Notice I said, *IF* I was a gangbanger.

Personally, I wouldnt want to walk around with an unloaded gun on my hip because it'd make me a greater target for violence. Depending on what gun I was carrying, it'd be like walking around with $500-$1200 hanging out of my pocket.

It's already hard enough to defend yourself with a loaded gun. You honestly think you could draw, load, rack the slide, aim, and fire when someone already has the drop on you?

I understand the symbolism of open-carry, but IMO it's totally impractical for actual self-defense purposes IMO.

Allow me to dispell some of your assumptions. 1) Those that open carry dont always carry unloaded weapons- this depends on where they happen to be carrying. 2) Armed men and women are a deterent to violence, not a target of violence. If what you were saying were true, law enforcement would regularly be targets of violence... since their job requires them to seek out and engage the worst 2% of society, it would not be fair to assert that they too are attracting 'violence'. But-what criminal wants to 'eff' with the police? And would this same criminal want to tangle with an armed citizen?

Criminals are cowards when acting alone. The only real threats to being disarmed is by the police, or when criminals have the advantage of numbers or surprise.

So it is impractical FOR YOU to open carry. Those of us who are not licensed to carry concealed do not have any other lawful means- our options are to carry some non-lethal defensive weaponry like pepper spray, leave our firearms locked up at home, or openly carry them where ever lawful.

Given these options open carry is less of a hassle than getting arrested for unlicensed concealed carry or a loaded weapons charge.

Crazed_SS

05-25-2008, 09:14 PM

Allow me to dispell some of your assumptions. 1) Those that open carry dont always carry unloaded weapons- this depends on where they happen to be carrying.

I was specifically addressing unloaded open-carry when I said, "...a flashy, unloaded, 1911 on your hip.."

2) Armed men and women are a deterent to violence, not a target of violence. If what you were saying were true, law enforcement would regularly be targets of violence... since their job requires them to seek out and engage the worst 2% of society, it would not be fair to assert that they too are attracting 'violence'. But-what criminal wants to 'eff' with the police? And would this same criminal want to tangle with an armed citizen?

Criminals are scared of cops, not because the cops have guns, but because the cops have radios and can call for more guys with guns with who will come down with an iron fist if one of their own is messed with.

Armed men and women might be a deterent to violence, but when carrying an unloaded gun, you're not really armed. You're just a gun carrying a nice prize on his hip. The average punk with a pocket knife could easily relieve you of your unloaded gun before you'd be able to load and rack it.

Criminals are cowards when acting alone. The only real threats to being disarmed is by the police, or when criminals have the advantage of numbers or surprise.

So it is impractical FOR YOU to open carry. Those of us who are not licensed to carry concealed do not have any other lawful means- our options are to carry some non-lethal defensive weaponry like pepper spray, leave our firearms locked up at home, or openly carry them where ever lawful.

Given these options open carry is less of a hassle than getting arrested for unlicensed concealed carry or a loaded weapons charge.

Im not licensed to carry concealed. I just leave my guns at home unless Im going to the range. I know many people claim an unloaded gun is better than no gun. I guess that's true if you're hoping the bad guy wont call your bluff.

just stick an empty mag in and keep a loaded one on your opposite hip!

Then youd have to draw, unload, grab the other mag from your pocket, load, rack the slide, aim and fire.. just doesnt sound pratical. I guess if you practice it at home, you might get good at it though.

jjperl

05-25-2008, 09:27 PM

Look out for school zones! I can't even walk out of my house without entering a school zone.

vladbutsky

05-25-2008, 10:02 PM

Carry loaded mags on the opposite side of your belt.
Can someone confirm that loaded mag is not equal to loaded gun?
I've heard too many "opinions" that loaded mag may be seen by law enforcement same way as loaded weapon.

tombinghamthegreat

05-25-2008, 10:07 PM

Can someone confirm that loaded mag is not equal to loaded gun?
I've heard too many "opinions" that loaded mag may be seen by law enforcement same way as loaded weapon.

Sounds like more FUD. Loaded weapons according to the penal code are defined as a round in the chamber or mag attached to the gun. A loaded mag by itself is not illegal to OC but some gun ranges may advise you against it.

shawnyteee

05-25-2008, 10:38 PM

When you open carry an unloaded pistol, can you load your gun in self defense where deadly force is presented upon you? Or use your open carry firearm to take down a assailant in a shooting spree?

I'm currently in the progress of assembling an 1911 so I'll be advocating open carry once everything is set (ie. notary and safety precautions). Sadly, my 21st birthday is 11.5 months away so I can't just easy buy a pistol.

Lazy-8

05-25-2008, 10:47 PM

I was thinking the same thing about the risk of being robbed. Someone is going to get robbed by someone who doesn't even have the right to own a gun much less carry a concealed one.

Decoligny

05-25-2008, 11:21 PM

As far as inserting the mag and racking the slide, it can be done effectively in under 1 second with a little practice. And situational awareness is another key issue, know who is around you and what they are doing at all time.

As far as info on the Penal Code concerning Open Carry, see the pamphlet in my signature.

dgey

05-25-2008, 11:38 PM

Shawnyteee,

how did you get a frame to assemble your pistol...? The frame or lower is considered a weapon, whether assembled or not... I believe you still need to register the handgun... otherwise your underage and have an unregistered weapon on your person...

shawnyteee

05-25-2008, 11:52 PM

you may want to add where you CANNOT do this....such as schools and college universities, government buildings, etc.

So if I decide to open carry in my car, and I see the School zone sign, am I fubar?

shawnyteee

05-25-2008, 11:53 PM

jjperl

05-26-2008, 12:00 AM

So if I decide to open carry in my car, and I see the School zone sign, am I fubar?

Short answer is YES! It's a felony. (PC 626.9)

Also, if you carry a concealed loaded mag it's equivalent to carrying a concealed firearm. Everything including the mag has to be open carried. (People v. Hale 1974)

Zhukov

05-26-2008, 12:17 AM

Crazed_SS

05-26-2008, 12:42 AM

All this talk about Jacking guns is hilarious. How in the hell would you even know it's unloaded? I'd have an empty mag in the gun so it would APPEAR loaded, even though it isn't. No random shmuck on the street will mess with you because they will assume you're either a cop or it IS loaded.

You could pretty much assume it's unloaded because it's sitting there on your hip in plain sight with an empty magwell.

I didnt realize you guys were carrying an empty mag in the gun when you open-carry. That adds an extra step to getting the gun ready since you will have to drop that empty mag before you can pull the loaded mag from your pocket/pouch, insert it, and cock the gun.

gotgunz

05-26-2008, 12:49 AM

<<<<< waits patiently for the guy, who can draw (gun and loaded mag) from belt and insert said mag and rack slide in under 1 second, to appear on youtube.

:rolleyes:

yellowfin

05-26-2008, 12:52 AM

nicki

05-26-2008, 01:21 AM

I believe at this time it is a bad idea, all it will do is move our legislature to outright ban open carry of guns, we need to pick our battles and this would a mistake.

Ohio had open carry marches, but only after their Supreme court ruled that the ban on concealed carry did not violate the state constitutional right to keep and bear arms because the people had the right to openly carry arms and it was in the public interest that people carry OPEN weapons.

The push on the open carry marches was to get former Gov Taft who had been stonewalling a ccw bill for 8 years to actually move, the legislature was overwhelmlingly for a shall issue ccw law.

Depending on how the SCOTUS rules on Heller may change things, for now it is a bad idea.

I do believe in going on the offense, I just disagree with the tactic for now.

Nicki

shawnyteee

05-26-2008, 01:24 AM

Short answer is YES! It's a felony. (PC 626.9)

Also, if you carry a concealed loaded mag it's equivalent to carrying a concealed firearm. Everything including the mag has to be open carried. (People v. Hale 1974)

This might be a gray..

So if the loaded magazine is in a leather black mag pouch strapped onto a belt which is in plain view, doesn't that make the loaded mag concealed?

berto

05-26-2008, 01:33 AM

Not for me. I appreciate those that are willing and able.

jjperl

05-26-2008, 01:45 AM

Not for me. I appreciate those that are willing and able.

I know what you mean. The cops and the DA can really make your life miserable if they want to.

ZapThyCat

05-26-2008, 02:22 AM

tombinghamthegreat

05-26-2008, 02:23 AM

I know what you mean. The cops and the DA can really make your life miserable if they want to.

Isn't that more of a reason to get more people to open carry that are able to take the risks? If more people do it then the cops/DA will have no choice but to accept that people have the right to bear arms.

has anyone stopped to think about what if that backfires, and it pushes anti-open-carry legislation through? This IS California, after all...

Currently many of the cops try to harass gun owners so they will not not open carry. Even if they do pass a anti-open carry it could end up at the supreme court thus establishing open carry as a right in all 50 states.

CitaDeL

05-26-2008, 07:25 AM

Look out for school zones! I can't even walk out of my house without entering a school zone.

Yes, be concerned about schools you are AWARE of, because KNOWINGLY possessing a firearm while you are within 1000 feet of a K-12 campus is a felony when you are not on private property.

626.9. (a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the
Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995.
(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person
knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone, as defined in
paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), unless it is with the written
permission of the school district superintendent, his or her
designee, or equivalent school authority, shall be punished as
specified in subdivision (f).
(c) Subdivision (b) does not apply to the possession of a firearm
under any of the following circumstances:
(1) Within a place of residence or place of business or on private
property, if the place of residence, place of business, or private
property is not part of the school grounds and the possession of the
firearm is otherwise lawful.

Can someone confirm that loaded mag is not equal to loaded gun?
I've heard too many "opinions" that loaded mag may be seen by law enforcement same way as loaded weapon.

I am not an attorney, but I am certain a loaded magazine is not a loaded gun. There are codes that make possession of both a firearm and the ammunition for that firearm- a 'loaded weapon" however these only apply if you are a criminal gang member, or in possession of the weapon and ammunition in the commission of a felony, or at the State Capitol, legislative offices or Governor's residence. This has been covered before with citation of law.

So if I decide to open carry in my car, and I see the School zone sign, am I fubar?

Not necessarily. You might be if you were on a state maintained highway or road being stopped for a traffic violation. In that case, you would need to assert your right to remain silent about your knowledge of the school zone and contact an attorney if you are arrested for 626.9

You could pretty much assume it's unloaded because it's sitting there on your hip in plain sight with an empty magwell.

I didn't realize you guys were carrying an empty mag in the gun when you open-carry. That adds an extra step to getting the gun ready since you will have to drop that empty mag before you can pull the loaded mag from your pocket/pouch, insert it, and cock the gun.

This is a violation of the number one rule governing basic firearms handling safety. You can never assume a firearm is unloaded and must treat every firearm as if it were loaded. Even without a magazine in the mag well, there could be a round in the chamber. http://www.thefiringline.com/Misc/safetyrules.html

The use of an empty mag in the gun is a practical matter- maintaining the illusion that the firearm is ready and keeping dirt out of the weapon. Drawing and ejecting a magazine takes zero extra time as the actions can be executed at the concurrently when you place your thumb on the mag release button as you draw the weapon. Once free of the holster, gravity pulls the magazine clear of the weapon as you draw your loaded magazine ready to charge it into your weapon. The empty magazine is allowed to fall to the ground.

I have practiced this loading scenario repeatedly and it takes between 4 and 7 seconds from 'empty gun' to lethal force.

<<<<< waits patiently for the guy, who can draw (gun and loaded mag) from belt and insert said mag and rack slide in under 1 second, to appear on youtube.

:rolleyes:

Even better. I'd like to see the gun owner who can defend themselves with a firearm that is locked in a safe at home while they are out pumping gas, grocery shopping, or enjoying a family meal at a favorite restaurant.

JGarrison

05-26-2008, 07:30 AM

I bet this guy could do it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJVoc5uJ2e4

JandJArmory

05-26-2008, 07:37 AM

When you open carry an unloaded pistol, can you load your gun in self defense where deadly force is presented upon you? Or use your open carry firearm to take down a assailant in a shooting spree?

I'm currently in the progress of assembling an 1911 so I'll be advocating open carry once everything is set (ie. notary and safety precautions). Sadly, my 21st birthday is 11.5 months away so I can't just easy buy a pistol.

Yes you can where deadly force is presented upon you. Thats the whole idea. Why not get everyone accustomed to seeing a pistol on your hip.

Crazed_SS

05-26-2008, 07:51 AM

The use of an empty mag in the gun is a practical matter- maintaining the illusion that the firearm is ready and keeping dirt out of the weapon. Drawing and ejecting a magazine takes zero extra time as the actions can be executed at the concurrently when you place your thumb on the mag release button as you draw the weapon. Once free of the holster, gravity pulls the magazine clear of the weapon as you draw your loaded magazine ready to charge it into your weapon. The empty magazine is allowed to fall to the ground.

I have practiced this loading scenario repeatedly and it takes between 4 and 7 seconds from 'empty gun' to lethal force.

Even better. I'd like to see the gun owner who can defend themselves with a firearm that is locked in a safe at home while they are out pumping gas, grocery shopping, or enjoying a family meal at a favorite restaurant.

4 - 7 seconds to do all that? I guess if you practice like you said. Still, 4-7 seconds is an eternity in a life or death situation. In that time an attacker armed with a pocket knife could easily close the distance and inflict lethal damage before you got a shot off. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill .. If you have 4-7 seconds to spare, running away might be the more prudent course of action.

If you're really that concerned about self-defense, why not carry a tazer? It could be deployed much faster since you dont have to unload, load, and rack it. Plus you dont have the hassle of dealing with school zones, cops or panicky civilians.

Tazer > Unloaded Handgun.

Wonderwhippet

05-26-2008, 08:10 AM

I know very little about our carry laws, even though I have had a California ccw for 35 years and ahve always followed the law. I was under the impression that firearms being transported from one place to another must be in a locked case or compartment, and one must have a valid reason for such transport, such as going to a range, going hunting, taking it to a gunsmith, etc. Could someone please clear this up for me?

CitaDeL

05-26-2008, 09:57 AM

4 - 7 seconds to do all that? I guess if you practice like you said. Still, 4-7 seconds is an eternity in a life or death situation. In that time an attacker armed with a pocket knife could easily close the distance and inflict lethal damage before you got a shot off. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill .. If you have 4-7 seconds to spare, running away might be the more prudent course of action.

If you're really that concerned about self-defense, why not carry a tazer? It could be deployed much faster since you dont have to unload, load, and rack it. Plus you dont have the hassle of dealing with school zones, cops or panicky civilians.

Tazer > Unloaded Handgun.

So do you regularly carry a taser? If you dont, why are you suggesting to me that I should? Even if I did carry a taser instead of an unloaded handgun, how would that improve my chances of survival against an assailant armed with a knife of any kind in the scenario you propose? What kind of deterence effect does a taser have that an exposed handgun doesnt? And who said my only motive for open carry was with lawful self defense? (These are rhetorical questions, no need to answer.)

With every response to my point of view, the evidence of your williness to surrender your right to keep and bear arms becomes more and more apparent. This is what the anti-gunners count on in order to advance their agenda to disarm America. It is easier to pass legislation and compel people to abide by their wishes when you have gun owners voluntarily disarming themselves out of fear of the government and the sheep who worship at the altar of false security.

This belief, that hiding your firearms away- locked in a safe at home, is the greatest danger to gunownership that we face today. It is not the legislators, it is not the Brady Bunch, and its not the Million Moms that threaten the second amendment- it is those who are unwillling to practice their Constitutionally protected right in the face of this opposition.

Where have our "Rebellious Stripes" gone? It seems we no longer have the fortitude or inclination to stand up for what belongs to us anymore, much less fight for it. I want to make it clear, that the purpose for open carry is not only for defense and deterence, but also as a political statement. It forces people to pick a side and certainly we see that being played out on this forum between gun owners (I cant imagine what apoplexy would transpire if a genuine anti-gunner were here).

I believe if you do not use it, the opposition will certainly take it from you, citing your lack of need. While open carry of an unloaded handgun does not seem to be the most prudent or practical action, this is what we have in California if you do not have a license. I suggest we take what we can get, while we can get it.

pullnshoot25

05-26-2008, 10:01 AM

There have been a huge number of threads on this topic on CalGuns.

Yay for open carry! Can't wait for my holster so I can do it with the Makarov!

Ironchef

05-26-2008, 10:40 AM

Crazed SS, don't you stir up about every OC thread that comes through this forum saying the exact same things "you're a target for theft, murder, can't load it to protect yourself in time, advertising, causing trouble with police, etc?" And EVERYTIME you do this, the same members here dispute completely the myths you suggest? I seem to recall at least 2 separate exchanges on this same topic in the last few months.

You and other naysayers seem to always forget the obvious, added appeal to OC in that people behave better around you, if not respectful..mostly all assuming you're a cop. And what bad guy would not also think you're a cop? Not that OCing is intended to be done as if to imprsonate a cop, but it's a side effect. With more OCing going on, or curious people asking you about it, they will learn, as the OP suggests, that lawful citizens can and do openly carry a gun and there's nothing wrong with it.

Further, you are also told every time that when a person open carries, they're not going to blindly go about being less vigilent but rather more vigilent about their surroundings because yes, they ARE carrying a firearm that is appealing for bad guys. So, do you walk through the state fair open carrying where within 100' of you walking there are always at least 50 other people? No, you leave it locked up in your car or at home to walk in such conditions.

It's safe to say the many open carriers in this forum have long since disputed and put your claims and myths to rest. They simply haven't been robbed for their gun, they haven't had issues loading and racking in a couple seconds when practicing (they probably haven't had the occasion to actually defend in place), and they are probably very, very vigilant and aware of their surroundings because of this new elevated presence they command everywhere they go.

Whatever. You'll probably derail the next OC thread that comes up in another week, right? Then we'll be here to dispel your myths again.

-hanko

05-26-2008, 11:20 AM

When you open carry an unloaded pistol, can you load your gun in self defense where deadly force is presented upon you? Or use your open carry firearm to take down a assailant in a shooting spree?
Of course, but you'll be dead already since you'll NEVER have the time when deadly force is "presented upon you."

If you go back and READ the thread, the op talked about unloaded oc in regard to demonstrating a constitutional right. NO ONE with a brain would think that an unloaded gun could be quickly fired in a life/death situation...it takes a LOT of practice to present and fire and stop an assailant charging you from 20 feet away...that's starting with a loaded gun. That's why legal concealed-carry exists, though it's tough to qualify in some areas;).

Your "shooting spree" question indicates you've failed the first rule of ccw, which is avoiding "shooting sprees":rolleyes:

-hanko

-hanko

05-26-2008, 11:24 AM

There have been a huge number of threads on this topic on CalGuns.
Few of which bring any new ideas to the issue:sleeping:

-hanko

shawnyteee

05-26-2008, 03:19 PM

It's safe to say the many open carriers in this forum have long since disputed and put your claims and myths to rest. They simply haven't been robbed for their gun, they haven't had issues loading and racking in a couple seconds when practicing (they probably haven't had the occasion to actually defend in place), and they are probably very, very vigilant and aware of their surroundings because of this new elevated presence they command everywhere they go.

Whatever. You'll probably derail the next OC thread that comes up in another week, right? Then we'll be here to dispel your myths again.

Amen. The worst open carry person is the person that forgets he open carries.

tombinghamthegreat

05-26-2008, 03:24 PM

Yay for open carry! Can't wait for my holster so I can do it with the Makarov!
Record it and put it on youtube.:cool:

I think I might ask my local PD how they would feel. I know one of the sgt's pretty well. I can't wait to hear his response. :D

I am sure they will threaten you and try to say its illegal but in reality you should go to a attorney for legal advise not the cops.

CA_Libertarian

05-26-2008, 07:03 PM

If I was a gangbanger and I saw one of you guys walking around with a flashy, unloaded, 1911 on your hip, I'd jack you for it. I dont think the benefits of carrying an unloaded gun outweigh the risks and hassles.

My personal experience with "gangbangers" - I assume here we're talking about gang members, not adult film stars - most of them don't know the law too well. I'm betting that most gang members don't spend much time researching the law. That's something reserved mostly for us law-abiding types.

Furthermore, even if every gang member in CA were as well versed in the law as we are, I would open carry. Why, you ask? Because I am compelled to do something about the erosion of my rights (and yours). It is a risk I would be willing to accept. I'm sure we can all agree that it is impossible to win any war without taking risks.

Lastly, I'm much more worried about my firearm being stolen at gunpoint by my local Thugs'n'Badges, Inc. Gang bangers are notorious for stealing cars and money. LEOs are notorious (as can be seen on this forum) for stealing rights and firearms.

Crazed_SS

05-26-2008, 07:06 PM

So do you regularly carry a taser? If you dont, why are you suggesting to me that I should?

I dont carry a tazer because Im not that serious about personal defense. I suggested you carry one because it sounds like self-defense is an important concern to you.

Even if I did carry a taser instead of an unloaded handgun, how would that improve my chances of survival against an assailant armed with a knife of any kind in the scenario you propose? What kind of deterence effect does a taser have that an exposed handgun doesnt?

Well, for one, the tazer doesnt require 4-7 seconds before it's ready to use. Being able to quickly deploy your means of self-defense is a huge factor in a scenario like this. If it takes you 4-7 seconds to get your gu ready to fire and an assailant can cover 21ft in 1.5 seconds, you have a problem.

And who said my only motive for open carry was with lawful self defense? (These are rhetorical questions, no need to answer.)

I assumed from your post where you said, "Even better. I'd like to see the gun owner who can defend themselves with a firearm that is locked in a safe at home while they are out pumping gas, grocery shopping, or enjoying a family meal at a favorite restaurant", that self-defense was the point of you open-carrying.

CA_Libertarian

05-26-2008, 07:15 PM

the whole point of this open carry is to push ccw legislation through...

That's not why I open carry. I want them to reform the statutes that prohibit carrying loaded, carrying in school zones, carrying in public buildings, etc. I could care less about bureaucratic permission slips. I refuse to beg permission to carry my firearm. Even 'shall-issue' - which is a pipe dream even if we get a very favorable ruling on Heller - isn't good enough. If you have to ask for permission IT IS NOT A RIGHT!

...has anyone stopped to think about what if that backfires, and it pushes anti-open-carry legislation through? This IS California, after all...

Would you say the same thing to someone building an OLL? What they're doing is not prohibited by law, though it is dancing on the boundary. Maybe you should be raining on their parade too? Or maybe you should thank those of us willing to risk our property and liberty to further the cause of all gun rights.

Crazed_SS

05-26-2008, 07:26 PM

My personal experience with "gangbangers" - I assume here we're talking about gang members, not adult film stars - most of them don't know the law too well. I'm betting that most gang members don't spend much time researching the law. That's something reserved mostly for us law-abiding types.

Furthermore, even if every gang member in CA were as well versed in the law as we are, I would open carry. Why, you ask? Because I am compelled to do something about the erosion of my rights (and yours). It is a risk I would be willing to accept. I'm sure we can all agree that it is impossible to win any war without taking risks.

Lastly, I'm much more worried about my firearm being stolen at gunpoint by my local Thugs'n'Badges, Inc. Gang bangers are notorious for stealing cars and money. LEOs are notorious (as can be seen on this forum) for stealing rights and firearms.

Criminals are not always complete idiots. Let's say unloaded open-carry because popular. How long do you think it will take before bad guys realize you guys are walking around with nice empty guns on your hip?

It seems like a lot of people advocating open-carry here are hoping that the bad guys wont call their bluff, or that they'll have time to unload, load, and cock a gun in a bad situation. This is a bad strategy IMO. You're banking on your opponent being totally inept and standing there while you get the gun ready. That's ridiculous.

Also, you make a good point about cops taking your gun. Guns and legal bills are expensive. I'd rather not have mine taken by a cop who thinks a loaded mag+unloaded gun = loaded gun. My best friend is a SD Sherriff Deputy and he claims him and the other Thugs'n'Badges were taught unloaded open carry is legal, but if you have a loaded mag, it's a loaded weapon. They're probably confusing the different definitions of loaded here in SD County.. It's not something I want to argue with them.

CitaDeL

05-26-2008, 08:25 PM

Criminals are not always complete idiots. Let's say unloaded open-carry because popular. How long do you think it will take before bad guys realize you guys are walking around with nice empty guns on your hip?

It seems like a lot of people advocating open-carry here are hoping that the bad guys wont call their bluff, or that they'll have time to unload, load, and cock a gun in a bad situation. This is a bad strategy IMO. You're banking on your opponent being totally inept and standing there while you get the gun ready. That's ridiculous.

Also, you make a good point about cops taking your gun. Guns and legal bills are expensive. I'd rather not have mine taken by a cop who thinks a loaded mag+unloaded gun = loaded gun. My best friend is a SD Sherriff Deputy and he claims him and the other Thugs'n'Badges were taught unloaded open carry is legal, but if you have a loaded mag, it's a loaded weapon. They're probably confusing the different definitions of loaded here in SD County.. It's not something I want to argue with them.

There are not many people willing to bet their lives that my weapon is unloaded, present company included. Whether a person is a criminal or not is irrelevant- the stakes are the same. Finding out comes with a price.

Now, with all these hypotheticals of criminals targeting openly armed citizens-Explain for me this; there are 42 other States where open carry is lawful, and in 11 of these States there's no license required whatsoever- which makes it possible for anyone to carry a weapon exposed- Why is it that there is not an overwhelming abundance of evidence to support your assertion that criminals would target armed citizens? I can think of one story- you have any more?

Maybe you and your PoPo friend should set up a 'playdate' with Pullnshoot25- maybe they will peg him as a 'criminal gangmember' to get their bogus charges to stick.

I know if any of my open carry friends did face that sort of trouble, Id gladly help them out in whatever way I could. I'd only hope that dissenters such as yourself could support them in their need, as opposed to wagging a finger, saying things like "Tsk, tsk- you got what you were asking for..."

Crazed_SS

05-26-2008, 09:10 PM

There are not many people willing to bet their lives that my weapon is unloaded, present company included. Whether a person is a criminal or not is irrelevant- the stakes are the same. Finding out comes with a price.

Now, with all these hypotheticals of criminals targeting openly armed citizens-Explain for me this; there are 42 other States where open carry is lawful, and in 11 of these States there's no license required whatsoever- which makes it possible for anyone to carry a weapon exposed- Why is it that there is not an overwhelming abundance of evidence to support your assertion that criminals would target armed citizens? I can think of one story- you have any more?

It's not open-carry that I have an issue with. It's the UNLOADED part that I cant get jiggy with. Someone open-carrying a loaded handgun isnt someone you want to mess with, but someone open-carrying an UNLOADED handgun, is just a person carrying a nice $500 paperweight on their hip.

Maybe you and your PoPo friend should set up a 'playdate' with Pullnshoot25- maybe they will peg him as a 'criminal gangmember' to get their bogus charges to stick.

Im gonna do a ride along in a couple weeks.. maybe we'll run into him.. We can all have a get-together and go over the penal code :)

I know if any of my open carry friends did face that sort of trouble, Id gladly help them out in whatever way I could. I'd only hope that dissenters such as yourself could support them in their need, as opposed to wagging a finger, saying things like "Tsk, tsk- you got what you were asking for..."

Well he should know what he might be getting himself into. If he thinks the benefits of unloaded open-carry outweigh the risks, then more power to him.

Decoligny

05-26-2008, 10:08 PM

I am not an attorney, but I am certain a loaded magazine is not a loaded gun. There are codes that make possession of both a firearm and the ammunition for that firearm- a 'loaded weapon" however these only apply if you are a criminal gang member, or in possession of the weapon and ammunition in the commission of a felony, or at the State Capitol, legislative offices or Governor's residence. This has been covered before with citation of law.

IT may not be spelled out in the Penal Code, but there is more to the "LAW" than just the Penal Code. There is also case law. Take the following for instance:

People v. Hale , 43 Cal.App.3d 353[Crim. No. 24910. Court of Appeals of California, Second Appellate District, Division Two. November 20, 1974.]

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CHARLES ANDREW HALE, Defendant and Appellant
(Opinion by Fleming, J., with Roth, P. J., and Compton, J., concurring.) [43 Cal.App.3d 354]
COUNSEL
Paul A. Doyle, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Evelle J. Younger, Attorney General, Jack R. Winkler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, S. Clark Moore, Assistant Attorney General, and Edward T. Fogel, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. [43 Cal.App.3d 355]

OPINION

FLEMING, J.
Charles Andrew Hale appeals the judgment (order granting probation) entered on his plea of guilty to possession of amphetamine. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350.) Hale contends an illegal search of his automobile tainted the evidence on which his conviction was based.
The facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the judgment, show that on the afternoon of 12 March 1973 Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff Price, on patrol in San Dimas, stopped an automobile driven by Hale to warn him of a defective brake light. As Price approached the automobile he saw Hale's hand resting on the center console between the front bucket seats. An automatic pistol lay on the front seat only a few inches from Hale's hand. Fearing that Hale might use the pistol, Price drew his service revolver and ordered Hale to take his hand away from the pistol and get out of the automobile. He then gave Hale a pat-down search, which revealed no weapons. At about that time Deputy Sheriff Brown arrived on the scene and spoke with Hale, and Price understood Brown to say that Hale had previously been arrested for possession of a weapon.

While Brown detained Hale, Price entered Hale's automobile to examine the pistol, and in so doing he discovered the pistol lacked an ammunition clip. Inside the automobile Price saw a hunting knife with a 6-inch blade wedged between the driver's seat and the center console, a bayonet with a 12-inch blade protruding beneath the seat, and a dagger-like letter opener above the sun visor. Suspecting that an ammunition clip might be readily available nearby for use with the pistol, and desiring to make certain the pistol could not be used as a weapon when he returned it, Price searched the immediate area of the front seat. Underneath the ashtray of the center console he found one .380 caliber cartridge of the type used in the pistol as well as a vial containing white double-scored tablets which Price recognized as "mini-bennies" (the amphetamine that provided the basis for the prosecution). This is the search challenged here as illegal and unconstitutional.

[1a] On the facts of the case we conclude that Officer Price had reasonable cause to search the front seat of Hale's automobile and that consequently his discovery of contraband was an incident of a lawful search. [43 Cal.App.3d 356] The facts known to the officer at the time of the search gave him reasonable cause to suspect Hale was committing a crime, viz. unlicensed carrying of a firearm concealed in a vehicle (Pen. Code, § 12025 fn. 2). Only partial concealment of a firearm is required. (People v. Koehn, 25 Cal.App.3d 799, 802 [102 Cal.Rptr. 102]; People v. Tarkington, 273 Cal.App.2d 466, 469 [78 Cal.Rptr. 149]; People v. Linden, 185 Cal.App.2d 752, 757 [8 Cal.Rptr. 640].) One portion of the automatic pistol, the housing and barrel, was visible, and it was reasonable for the officer to suspect concealment nearby of the remaining portion of the firearm, the automatic clip and ammunition. (See Green v. State (Okla.Crim.) 489 P.2d 768.) A firearm disassembled into two or more parts, can nevertheless constitute an operable weapon within the meaning of the Dangerous Weapons Control Law. (People v. Ekberg, 94 Cal.App.2d 613, 616-617 [211 P.2d 316]; see also, State v. Ware (Fla.App.) 253 So.2d 145.)
"The carrying of concealed firearms is prohibited as a means of preventing physical harm to persons other than the offender." (People v. Jurado, 25 Cal.App.3d 1027, 1032 [102 Cal.Rptr. 498].) [2] In our opinion concealment of an essential component of a visible weapon, when done in such a fashion as to make the weapon readily available for use as a firearm, presents a threat to public order comparable to concealment of the entire firearm and falls within the prohibition of section 12025. [1b] In the light of the bizarre arsenal of weaponry Hale had installed around the driver's seat of his automobile, Officer Price had reasonable cause to suspect that a clip and ammunition for the automatic pistol might be hidden close at hand and to make a search for them.
Apart from any specific Penal Code violation, the search was justified as a natural incident of the officer's right to search for weapons when he has reasonable grounds to believe a criminal suspect is "armed and presently dangerous." (Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 24, 27, 30 [20 L.Ed.2d 889, 907-908, 909, 911, 88 S.Ct. 1868]; People v. Superior Court (Simon), 7 Cal.3d 186, 203 [101 Cal.Rptr. 837, 496 P.2d 1205].) The totality of the circumstances, the array of odd and deadly weapons stored about the driver's seat of an automobile by one reported to have been previously arrested on a weapons charge, warranted Officer Price in concluding that during his confrontation with Hale, his safety and the safety of others required a [43 Cal.App.3d 357] search of the area within the immediate reach of the driver to assure that an automatic clip and ammunition were not readily available for use with the pistol.
The judgment is affirmed.
Roth, P. J., and Compton, J., concurred.
[size=+0]*FN 1. Price later learned that Brown had actually said he once arrested Hale on some type of traffic warrant when Hale came to the station to inquire about serial numbers on a gun. However, we must accept the facts as Price reasonably and in good faith understood them at the time of search. (Burke v. Superior Court, 39 Cal.App.3d 28, 32-33 [113 Cal.Rptr. 801].)
[size=+0]*FN 2. Section 12025: "Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, any person who carries concealed upon his person or concealed within any vehicle which is under his control or direction any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person without having a license to carry such firearm as provided in this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor, and if he has been convicted previously of any felony or of any crime made punishable by this chapter, is guilty of a felony."

jjperl

05-27-2008, 12:06 AM

How do you guys open carry? I mean do you tuck in your shirts and jackets? I don't see how open carry is possible unless you tuck your shirt, sweater or jacket in.

CitaDeL

05-27-2008, 06:04 AM

How do you guys open carry? I mean do you tuck in your shirts and jackets? I don't see how open carry is possible unless you tuck your shirt, sweater or jacket in.

Weapons are being carried openly on a belt holster- With an OWB holster there is no need to 'tuck'. Plus in the ensuing summer months who will have a jacket or sweater anyway? Need pictures? Just ask.

futureExpat

05-27-2008, 07:34 AM

Please post pics

E Pluribus Unum

05-27-2008, 11:29 AM

It's not open-carry that I have an issue with. It's the UNLOADED part that I cant get jiggy with. Someone open-carrying a loaded handgun isnt someone you want to mess with, but someone open-carrying an UNLOADED handgun, is just a person carrying a nice $500 paperweight on their hip.

When open carrying, I carry with the mag well open and a loaded magazine in a belt pouch. I can present my firearm, insert the mag, rack the action, aquire the target, and shoot two rounds in around 3 seconds.

If the perp is within a few feet I have a knife I can pull and some minor training on where and how to use it.

With the two I think it makes it a well-rounded defense plan. It only takes an extra second to load the gun.

chokeyourself!

05-27-2008, 11:43 AM

i have a permit for an exposed firearm , all it says is that i have to also have a CA guard card in my possession while I'm carrying. I had this for my old old job but I've always renewed the permits just in case. I heard that the only way to get away with this is that i would have to be in uniform.

E Pluribus Unum

05-27-2008, 11:48 AM

I heard that the only way to get away with this is that i would have to be in uniform.

...and in the performance of your duties as a security guard. You would have to be re-hired as a security guard and be in uniform.

CitaDeL

05-27-2008, 08:04 PM

Please post pics

Your wish is my command. (Poof.)

This is the group photo from our open carry dinner in April.
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a250/FencesMakeGoodNeighbors/OCDODinner4-12-08001.jpg

Close up of the doofus in the Hawaiian Shirt. Note- the shirt is not tucked in, but the holstered firearm is visible. It would more or less be the same with any other shirt, or even a light jacket.
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a250/FencesMakeGoodNeighbors/OCHawaiianShirt.jpg

I have a couple others squirreled away, but I will have to do some digging. Pester me if I forget to post them.

Bill_in_SD

05-27-2008, 08:23 PM

OH THE HORROR! I CAN'T LOOK!

Sorry that was my conditioned response from being a native Californian. I was not always from the Southern end of the state, but have been the last few years........

And, I am pretty sure no one is getting close enough to see who is loaded or not, except the local LE.

DedEye

05-28-2008, 07:00 AM

As of last night/this morning, I think I now have the story that takes the cake for weirdest open carry response.

Riddle me this: have any of you ever been asked if you had cocaine while open carrying :confused:?

Decoligny

05-28-2008, 07:07 AM

DedEye

05-28-2008, 08:52 AM

No, but please, go on with the story.

I was doing my laundry at 2:30AM (I had the time then...) and on the way back to my apartment someone on the balcony above me asked if I had a condom. I figure, someone should get use out of mine before they all dry out and pass their expiration dates, so I tell him yes. I go up the stairs and pass him to the next flight, and after thanking me I hear:

"Is that a gun?"

My natural response, is "yeah."

He asks the question you usually hear from people when carrying, "why are you carrying a gun?" I point out that it's 2AM and I'm doing laundry; who knows who else is out at that time?

He says he figured I was a cop at first, and when I point out I'm not, the most unexpected question arrives. "So, do you have any coke?"

I think we can be fairly sure he didn't mean the carbonated beverage.

I tell him no, that I like to stay legal. He goes back to his earlier amazement at me carrying and repeats the first question, followed by the more blunt "so you're ready to shoot someone right now?" I don't want to explain the peculiarities of California law regarding open carry, and don't really want to tell him it isn't loaded, so I just tell him it's a bit more complicated than that. I get him his condoms (like I said, I'm not using them; he may as well take a handful) and he departs, appreciative and sans coke.

xrMike

05-28-2008, 09:38 AM

Great, now a coke head who knows where you live ALSO knows you own guns. This is no fault of your own -- I'm just saying, it would irritate me a little (if I was you).

Even if he's not the kind of guy to try to rob you himself, my experience is, coke users like to run their mouths.

DedEye

05-28-2008, 09:46 AM

Great, now a coke head who knows where you live ALSO knows you own guns. This is no fault of your own -- I'm just saying, it would irritate me a little (if I was you).

The EXACT same thought occurred to me as soon as he mentioned coke. I wasn't too pleased about it either.

Even if he's not the kind of guy to try to rob you himself, my experience is, coke users like to run their mouths.

I'm not overly concerned as I'm moving in less than three weeks, and the safe is enough to deter most burglaries.

Matt@EntrepriseArms

05-28-2008, 09:56 AM

The only time I "open carry" is when I'm out camping in the middle of nowhere, and I'm in my campsite.

You won't catch me walking around town open carrying. Nothing good can come from it in this State.

MudCamper

05-28-2008, 10:01 AM

... Nothing good can come from it in this State.

You might save your life or somebody else's.
You might help inform your local LEO.
You might show your neighbors that guns aren't just for cops and criminals.
Some good can come from it.

xrMike

05-28-2008, 10:25 AM

I'm not overly concerned as I'm moving in less than three weeks, and the safe is enough to deter most burglaries.Oh, that's good then, if you're moving soon anyway...

And yeah, I figure my little Sentry safe, while not the best, ought to provide just enough protection to keep your typical tweaker smash-n-grab burglars from getting away with my guns too.

Bill_in_SD

05-28-2008, 01:12 PM

DedEye

05-28-2008, 01:49 PM

I would not worry too much. No tweaker is coming after your guns, when there are easier things like cash and jewelry to be had in a purse left in a car, or an empty non-armed person's house.....

I am thinking that if a guy has enough stones to open carry, in California, if I cross him, he will no doubt have the tenacity and drive to hunt me down........ :-)

Not to mention I know which apartment is his. The building is 95% college student populated, so I'm even less worried about someone who wanted to combine a night of carnal lust with some blow than I am some random methed out junkie (I wouldn't have given him condoms if he were the latter). Not that I don't support or condone any kind of drug, by the way.

tombinghamthegreat

05-28-2008, 04:02 PM

The EXACT same thought occurred to me as soon as he mentioned coke. I wasn't too pleased about it either.

Last i checked coke dealers and other criminals do not open carry firearms since they draw LE attention. The lawbidding citizens open carry and get harassed by LE.

LOW2000

05-28-2008, 06:04 PM

the whole point of this open carry is to push ccw legislation through...

has anyone stopped to think about what if that backfires, and it pushes anti-open-carry legislation through? This IS California, after all...

So you suggest that we not exercise a right for fear it might be taken away? Thats kinda like doing all the work for them. :wacko:

CitaDeL

05-28-2008, 07:23 PM

So you suggest that we not exercise a right for fear it might be taken away? Thats kinda like doing all the work for them. :wacko:

That's exactly the point with all of our 2A related issues... When we obey the prohibitions that the anti-gunners would have us heed, we make the job of 'gun control' that much easier. When we elect not to excersize that right, it opens the door to the arguement that since we dont use it, we must not need it.

Dr. Peter Venkman

05-28-2008, 08:28 PM

mikehaas

05-29-2008, 07:16 AM

I don't see the point in unloaded open carry for self-defense unless the person doing it is actively aware of their surroundings to the point where the gun being unloaded is negated. Regardless, good luck to you guys who do!
Proposing Open carry in the political climate of California is INSANE. Want to set the cause back decades? Just start sticking your finger in the eye of the voting public and scaring them LIKE THE BLACK PANTHERS DID WHEN THEY STAGED THEIR ARMED MARCH ON SACRAMENTO. That propelled the cause of gun control LIGHT YEARS into the future and we're still dealing with the aftermath of that stupidity.

There's a reason hunters no longer tie big game to the fenders of cars and Hunter Safety courses advise against the practice.

"Feel good" suggestions like proposing open carry in gun-hostile environments is extremely dangerous to the protection of civil liberties. One brush with the media of such "insanity" can undermine the good work of a lot of dedicated activists. Just ask the "pro-gun" idiots who forced the Prop H handgun Initiative on the ballot after NRA had quietly convinced enough SF supes to keep it off. It took 3 court actions and millions of dollars to set that right (and there are NEVER any guarrentees when one goes to court.)

Decoligny

05-29-2008, 09:41 AM

Proposing Open carry in the political climate of California is INSANE. Want to set the cause back decades? Just start sticking your finger in the eye of the voting public and scaring them LIKE THE BLACK PANTHERS DID WHEN THEY STAGED THEIR ARMED MARCH ON SACRAMENTO. That propelled the cause of gun control LIGHT YEARS into the future and we're still dealing with the aftermath of that stupidity.

There's a reason hunters no longer tie big game to the fenders of cars and Hunter Safety courses advise against the practice.

"Feel good" suggestions like proposing open carry in gun-hostile environments is extremely dangerous to the protection of civil liberties. One brush with the media of such "insanity" can undermine the good work of a lot of dedicated activists. Just ask the "pro-gun" idiots who forced the Prop H handgun Initiative on the ballot after NRA had quietly convinced enough SF supes to keep it off. It took 3 court actions and millions of dollars to set that right (and there are NEVER any guarrentees when one goes to court.)

INSANE is such a strong word. I for one am completely in my right mind. I go so far as to actually often times open carry a "LOADED" handgun on my hip right here in good ole' California. The local polulace hasn't paniced. I haven't been arrested. The police haven't drawn down on me or forced me to lie on my face on the hot concrete.

I live in an "unincorprorated area" where discharge of a firearm isn't prohibited.

I will continue to exercise my rights to the fullest extent available. I refuse to do the anti-gun lobby's job for them.

It is a different world than when the Black Panthers swarmed the State Capitol with loaded shotguns, and one or two individuals peacefully and legally open carrying is never going to bring about the political backlash that a gathering of a large angry armed militant group in the Capitol Building brought.

As far as the "pro-gun" idiots who forced prop-H onto ballet, good came of it. We basically now have a CA Supreme Court decision that will keep EVERY single city in California from trying to pass their own gun laws. So it was a case of going through the inconvenience of the legal process to promote the greater good. Rosa Parks went through a lot of inconvenience to promote a greater good. A lot of people would have at the time loved it if she just sat quietly in the back of the bus. She was willing to risk the hardship that she knew would come in order to forward the case for civil liberties. Sitting quietly and waiting for "THEM" to change has never worked without a burr under their butts. Open Carry may just be one little point on that burr.

Matt@EntrepriseArms

05-29-2008, 06:27 PM

You might save your life or somebody else's.
You might help inform your local LEO.
You might show your neighbors that guns aren't just for cops and criminals.
Some good can come from it.

I pretty much disagree with all of that, except that I may save my life, but then again, maybe not.

Its just my opinion, as I think that no matter how much we open carry or "educate," its never going to be Ok in this state. Quite the opposite, I'm afraid.

Its a nice thought, though.

CitaDeL

05-29-2008, 07:44 PM

Its just my opinion, as I think that no matter how much we open carry or "educate," its never going to be Ok in this state. Quite the opposite, I'm afraid.

Its a nice thought, though.

Let me frame your rationale with some historic parallels.

'The American colonies will never be free of the Crown.'

'Coloreds' will never ride in the front of the bus with good white folk.'

'Homosexuals will never be accepted in public or allowed to marry.'

In the first place, we as gun proponents are under the obligation to at least try to exersize our second liberty- particularly if excersizing the first is ineffectual. Second, we must remind ourselves as well as others, that we will not be treated as second class citizens on the basis of our 'appearance'. Third, if society can become accustomed to two people of the same gender cohabitating, showing affection in public, and raising a family, they certainly can handle the appearance of a person regardless of sexual orientation openly displaying their intent to defend their spouse and their progeny.

Ultimately, the only way we will make advances in restoring the right to keep and bear arms, will be to throw off our own inhibitions to what we believe society will be offended by. Because when we allow ourselves to be self conscious of our civil right to be armed, we then endorse the bigotry that keeps good people from taking up arms in defense of self and the defense of others. It is WE that create the perception that none are worthy to be allowed arms, when we abide by restrictions that do not exist and at the risk of offending some unknown persons sensibilities.

If we can in some small way show that gun owners are regular people, I believe that like other civil rights struggles, it is possible to change prejudice into acceptance... if not acceptance, then tolerance... if not tolerance, acknowledgment...

Whatever the advance, its much more than we will get by assuming that we will never educate or change people's perceptions.

pullnshoot25

05-29-2008, 09:57 PM

Let me frame your rationale with some historic parallels.

'The American colonies will never be free of the Crown.'

'Coloreds' will never ride in the front of the bus with good white folk.'

'Homosexuals will never be accepted in public or allowed to marry.'

In the first place, we as gun proponents are under the obligation to at least try to exersize our second liberty- particularly if excersizing the first is ineffectual. Second, we must remind ourselves as well as others, that we will not be treated as second class citizens on the basis of our 'appearance'. Third, if society can become accustomed to two people of the same gender cohabitating, showing affection in public, and raising a family, they certainly can handle the appearance of a person regardless of sexual orientation openly displaying their intent to defend their spouse and their progeny.

Ultimately, the only way we will make advances in restoring the right to keep and bear arms, will be to throw off our own inhibitions to what we believe society will be offended by. Because when we allow ourselves to be self conscious of our civil right to be armed, we then endorse the bigotry that keeps good people from taking up arms in defense of self and the defense of others. It is WE that create the perception that none are worthy to be allowed arms, when we abide by restrictions that do not exist and at the risk of offending some unknown persons sensibilities.

If we can in some small way show that gun owners are regular people, I believe that like other civil rights struggles, it is possible to change prejudice into acceptance... if not acceptance, then tolerance... if not tolerance, acknowledgment...

Whatever the advance, its much more than we will get by assuming that we will never educate or change people's perceptions.

WELL SAID. LOVE IT!

ChibiPaw

05-30-2008, 03:57 AM

Python2

05-31-2008, 05:09 PM

Just a little experience I had today. I've already posted this, but it needs some exposure and I need your help.

Edit:

Python2

05-31-2008, 05:35 PM

..., "If you have magazines within your REACH, the weapon is considered LOADED."
.

Edit:

E Pluribus Unum

05-31-2008, 06:10 PM

As far as PC12031(g) citation that LEO has no leg to stand on.
The above statement by the LEO fall under PC12025(b)(6)A, which is correct if you were caught carrying your FA concealed.
I am not a lawyer Glin, but that is my understanding. I hope you get a good lawyer.

Wrong Wrong Wrong Wrong...

Whether a gun is considered loaded has nothing to do with whether it is concealed or visa versa.

Here is the law:

A gun is considered loaded when there is ammo in the magazine and the magazine is in the gun, or there is a round in the chamber. ANYTHING else is unloaded. Period.

There are isolated exceptions like gang members and legislator's residences and stuff like that but in public places this is the case.

A gun is considered concealed when any part of the gun is not visible including the magazine. So, if you have a gun in the seat next to you and the magazine is in your pocket, that is concealed but it is NOT loaded.

Liberty1

05-31-2008, 06:28 PM

Until you talk to your attorney I'd hold off on posting too much more;)

DedEye

05-31-2008, 07:43 PM

CitaDeL

05-31-2008, 08:15 PM

An update if anyone is interested on one department's view of open carry.

I brought an Open Carry flyer to the local UCPD/SBSO substation and asked their opinion and got exactly the answer I expected. The UCPD officer I spoke to said "legal or not, if I saw you doing that I'd be pointing my gun at you." I talked to a few of them for a while about CCWs, open carry and assorted related matters; they were all polite but didn't see it as a wise move.

Herein lies the problem. If it isnt against the law, then how can law enforcement justify anything other than a field interview and a brief detention?

Again, it seems that police are determined to discourage lawful actions and influence or coerse people into compliance with their wishes, abusing their status as an officer.

ProlificARProspect

05-31-2008, 09:57 PM

No NO no NO more post on "talk to an attorney first", Plain and simple its it legal or not....its legal so do it if you like. This is the problem Kalifornia has us second guessing our selves, dont fail safe something thats already fail proof...:D

steven_m64

06-01-2008, 01:56 AM

the problem is not if its legal or not.

even though its legal a lot of leo's do not know or do not care to know if its actually legal or not.

do any of you really have the excess time and money to spend fighting any charges that are pressed on you.

what about your employer will they be nice enough to give you enough leeway to deal with legal charges involving firearms?

what if you loose the case and found guilty do you really want to loose all of your rights as a gun owner and have to give up all of your guns?

i would love to open carry, but i just dont have the time or money to fight off a idiot leo who does not understand the legality's of open carry or the legal definition of a "loaded" firearm ruining my life in the process.

E Pluribus Unum

06-01-2008, 02:26 AM

i would love to open carry, but i just dont have the time or money to fight off a idiot leo who does not understand the legality's of open carry or the legal definition of a "loaded" firearm ruining my life in the process.

If you want to live in fear and not exercise your rights then that is your decision. Those of us that grew a pair will exercise those rights for you lest they become atrophied and you lose them.

I open carry at least once a week. I have open carried for about a year. I have never even been stopped by police. I have never had the police called on me. I carry a copy of the penal code with me just in case.

steven_m64

06-01-2008, 03:17 AM

may i suggest that you grow a brain to go along with that pair you have.

your personal experiences so far with open carrying means nothing in respect to the possibility of a persons getting royally screwed the hell over if a Leo decides your breaking law's, and just because you have not been bit by a leo for a year does not mean it wont happen tomorrow.

good for you that your willing to risk screwing your self over to exercise your right to open carry, having brave fools take the bullet for the common good is nice right??

with the climate as it is its just not smart, to quote mikehaas since he put it so well:
Proposing Open carry in the political climate of California is INSANE. Want to set the cause back decades? Just start sticking your finger in the eye of the voting public and scaring them LIKE THE BLACK PANTHERS DID WHEN THEY STAGED THEIR ARMED MARCH ON SACRAMENTO. That propelled the cause of gun control LIGHT YEARS into the future and we're still dealing with the aftermath of that stupidity.

There's a reason hunters no longer tie big game to the fenders of cars and Hunter Safety courses advise against the practice.

"Feel good" suggestions like proposing open carry in gun-hostile environments is extremely dangerous to the protection of civil liberties. One brush with the media of such "insanity" can undermine the good work of a lot of dedicated activists. Just ask the "pro-gun" idiots who forced the Prop H handgun Initiative on the ballot after NRA had quietly convinced enough SF supes to keep it off. It took 3 court actions and millions of dollars to set that right (and there are NEVER any guarrentees when one goes to court.)

it will also be nice to see what happens to that pair you grew if you ever get bit by a idiot leo.

E Pluribus Unum

06-01-2008, 05:12 AM

may i suggest that you grow a brain to go along with that pair you have.

your personal experiences so far with open carrying means nothing in respect to the possibility of a persons getting royally screwed the hell over if a Leo decides your breaking law's, and just because you have not been bit by a leo for a year does not mean it wont happen tomorrow.

good for you that your willing to risk screwing your self over to exercise your right to open carry, having brave fools take the bullet for the common good is nice right??

with the climate as it is its just not smart, to quote mikehaas since he put it so well:

it will also be nice to see what happens to that pair you grew if you ever get bit by a idiot leo.

You are calling me a "brainless fool" and you have less than 10 posts?

Only a brainless fool would start a new account on a gun board and start calling a senior member a "fool" because he chose to exercise his rights.

If you want to be a sheep and roam our violent society unarmed that is your choice. Do not criticize those that choose instead to be armed despite the fear of harassment from ignorant police officers.

P.S.
If you had been around for more than 6 posts you would know that I was indeed arrested for something by an ignorant CHP officer that did not know the law. I paid $2000 in bail and attorney fees and the charges were dismissed so it is not like I have not been through it. (It was not for open carry however it was concealed carry while hunting)

lakai

06-01-2008, 06:16 AM

INSANE is such a strong word. I for one am completely in my right mind. I go so far as to actually often times open carry a "LOADED" handgun on my hip right here in good ole' California. The local polulace hasn't paniced. I haven't been arrested. The police haven't drawn down on me or forced me to lie on my face on the hot concrete.

I live in an "unincorprorated area" where discharge of a firearm isn't prohibited.

It's quite easy to do and feel that way when you live out in the desert where the population is around 14,000 people away from any large metropolitan area. Although I am not saying I know the risks that you take in doing what you do, I am saying that if you lived in one of California's top 100 populated cities that the word "insane" is good word to describe those who open carry
I will continue to exercise my rights to the fullest extent available. I refuse to do the anti-gun lobby's job for them.

By all means please exercise your rights in Los Angeles where many of us risk to much to do so. We need more political super heros down here willing to take the risk to prove a point. :)

lakai

06-01-2008, 07:48 AM

You are calling me a "brainless fool" and you have less than 10 posts?

Only a brainless fool would start a new account on a gun board and start calling a senior member a "fool" because he chose to exercise his rights.

If you want to be a sheep and roam our violent society unarmed that is your choice. Do not criticize those that choose instead to be armed despite the fear of harassment from ignorant police officers.

P.S.
If you had been around for more than 6 posts you would know that I was indeed arrested for something by an ignorant CHP officer that did not know the law. I paid $2000 in bail and attorney fees and the charges were dismissed so it is not like I have not been through it. (It was not for open carry however it was concealed carry while hunting)

I'll have to go with what steven said even if I might not have enough posts to satisfy your belief that one's care of their rights or knowledge of guns is based upon how much time you spend on the internet.

I don't know what city you live that is so violent where you would really need to carry a firearm but , I think most of us that feel that legal or not, It's not a really good idea don't feel the way you do about living in a "violent" society. is quite safe to live our lives without the need to carry a firearm.

Now I'm not criticizing your belief that "open carry" is pre-requisite of having a "pair" or that it somehow makes you the Martin Luther King for gun rights, but those with who preach open carry just because you were denied for a CCW permit are just being irresponsible and being "foolish (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/foolish)" (click on the word and #1 is what I mean). From reading your posts there is a real bitterness and resentment in your tone to people who don't follow you or praise you on your beliefs or actions. Yes, you might have might understand the law better than some police but you seem to confuse them as being lawyers. You seem enjoy walking on the thin line between what is legal and what is not and challenging LEO's by finding technicalities to law and acting on them.

Your arrest has nothing to do with open carry, so it doesn't count as "taking one for the team" nor does it prove to anyone that what you do is a good idea to everyone. If you got a beef with the police, then I suggest you just flip them off or something instead of having confrontations with them where they feel like you might be doing something dangerous, then trying to change their views on gun laws by throwing penal codes at them and explaining that even though laws against ccw without a permit is not legal, there's no code saying carrying a unconcealed weapon isn't. You might be technically right on the legal issues, but you are not right in believing that you are in any way educating the police.

-hanko

06-01-2008, 07:52 AM

may i suggest that you grow a brain to go along with that pair you have.

............snipped...........

good for you that your willing to risk screwing your self over to exercise your right to open carry, having brave fools take the bullet for the common good is nice right??

it will also be nice to see what happens to that pair you grew if you ever get bit by a idiot leo.
That 'pair you grew' would be just fine, as the law is clear as to what 'loaded' and/or 'concealed' mean.

No one is responsible for the 'idiot leo's' reaction but the officer;).

No one is advising you to open/unloaded carry. If you're a little concerned about it, don't do it. Others will carry on the struggle.

If your Founding Fathers had the same attitude, Revere would have never ridden his horse, you'd speak with a British accent, and Starbucks would serve only tea.

Relax and have a good weekend:sleeping:

-hanko

VegasND

06-01-2008, 08:00 AM

...I don't know what city you live that is so violent where you would really need to carry a firearm but , I think most of us that feel that legal or not, It's not a really good idea don't feel the way you do about living in a "violent" society. is quite safe to live our lives without the need to carry a firearm...

And that's what amazes me. Many people think it's ok to just acquiesce to limitations without complaint. I carry every day whether I 'need to' or not. Why isn't it clear that the Constitution recognizes the right of people to maintain their security irrespective of how "violent" surroundings may or may not be. The problem is not with people who wish to open carry / conceal carry! The problem is with people who pass laws that limit inalienable rights and those who sit quietly and allow it.

Everyone should be pleased that these citizens are willing to exercise what few rights the PRK have left them--maybe they can awaken a desire to live as free people in others.

Python2

06-01-2008, 10:41 AM

I don't know what city you live that is so violent where you would really need to carry a firearm but , I think most of us that feel that legal or not, It's not a really good idea don't feel the way you do about living in a "violent" society. is quite safe to live our lives without the need to carry a firearm.

.

If my suspicion is correct based on your screen name, you really surprise me with your thinking:rolleyes:But, to each his own. While I will not carry openly in urban areas, I do however support those who does. They have balls, I dont have the financial means to support my balls.

CitaDeL

06-01-2008, 11:44 AM

snipped for pertenency...

I don't know what city you live that is so violent where you would really need to carry a firearm but , I think most of us that feel that legal or not, It's not a really good idea don't feel the way you do about living in a "violent" society. is quite safe to live our lives without the need to carry a firearm.

Now I'm not criticizing your belief that "open carry" is pre-requisite of having a "pair" or that it somehow makes you the Martin Luther King for gun rights, but those with who preach open carry just because you were denied for a CCW permit are just being irresponsible and being "foolish" (click on the word and #1 is what I mean). From reading your posts there is a real bitterness and resentment in your tone to people who don't follow you or praise you on your beliefs or actions. Yes, you might have might understand the law better than some police but you seem to confuse them as being lawyers. You seem enjoy walking on the thin line between what is legal and what is not and challenging LEO's by finding technicalities to law and acting on them.

Your arrest has nothing to do with open carry, so it doesn't count as "taking one for the team" nor does it prove to anyone that what you do is a good idea to everyone. If you got a beef with the police, then I suggest you just flip them off or something instead of having confrontations with them where they feel like you might be doing something dangerous, then trying to change their views on gun laws by throwing penal codes at them and explaining that even though laws against ccw without a permit is not legal, there's no code saying carrying a unconcealed weapon isn't. You might be technically right on the legal issues, but you are not right in believing that you are in any way educating the police.

I think that a more fundamental issue is being ignored with this ad hominum attack.

Let's rewind a bit and examine what these 'demonstrations' of open carry are really about. First off, being armed does not require us to examine our need- and second, chosing to be armed does not have any bearing on our testicular fortitude.

If you think we should assess our need to carry a firearm, should we also refain frorm speaking, writing, or using gestures to communicate our opinions? You can flip off a policeman, but you wont be arrested for it. So what is the difference between that, and knowing the law, acting within the law and excersizing a choice that is not prohibited by law?

Gun owners questioning the wisdom of carrying a firearm openly are using the rhetoric of the anti-gunners...Who ask us to justify our need in a society that is purported to be 'peaceful', 'civilized', and 'safe'- when the authorities are under no obligation to provide protection as has been repeated ruled by the supreme court.

If my safety and defense is not the governments responsibility, who then, is best suited for providing for this need, even if such a need cannot be predicted? Who then can say, "Why do you need to be armed?", when it is not possible to get assurance from the authorities for our protection and we cannot possibly predict what level of force may be used against us by some future unknown threat?

It is my choice how I prepare myself for defense- even if there is no immediate discernable threat. The law does influence how I make this choice in California- and because it has been made unlawful to carry a loaded concealed weapon without a license, one of the only remaining options is to carry an exposed weapon in most cases, unloaded. If you think this is foolish, then what word would you use to describe those who make no preparation for their own self-defense when they know the prospect of a threat exists? Moron? Idiot? Buffoon?

Try 'victim'.

The police must be educated for them to fairly and justly enforce the law. While this seems to be needlessly confrontational, we still have rights in spite of some of the prejudices and ignorance perpetuated by law enforcement. It is when abuses occur that we can advance gun rights through positive case law- and case law isnt made by following the artificial lines drawn by anti-gunners and closeted gunowners who own weapons that never see daylight.

E Pluribus Unum

06-01-2008, 12:19 PM

I'll have to go with what steven said even if I might not have enough posts to satisfy your belief that one's care of their rights or knowledge of guns is based upon how much time you spend on the internet.

Re-read my post. I never said anything about how his 6 posts limit his knowledge of firearms. I said it is foolish of him to call me foolish for exercising my rights when he has no idea who I am or what I have been through.

He tries to criticize me for not knowing or not caring what "could happen" but had he been around longer then 6 posts he would know I HAVE been through it. I have posted several times about it and THAT is what he is foolish about.

Where in my post did I say he was ignorant of firearms?

ProlificARProspect

06-01-2008, 01:37 PM

Bravo! to all the brave men who speak and stand for their rights....Important note Police, D.A.s, LEOs, the Government, etc. We the People dont need to account to them. Police, D.A.s, LEOs, the Government, etc. need to account to the People, We are the Power some people have just forgotten.

LOW2000

06-01-2008, 01:51 PM

"You can beat the rap but you can't beat the ride."

Sucks that ignorance of the law is no excuse, unless you're a cop or DA. It is unacceptable that innocent citizens have to live in fear of being arrested, jailed, and socially and financially burdened due to a civil servant's ignorance of the law.

I would think a good use of the CalGuns Foundation would be to pay TMLLP to draft a legal notice that is available for Calgunners to print and send certified and notarized to their local PD putting them on notice of the current open carry laws so that if and when they falsely arrest someone who is carrying legally that we have a recourse against the department.

Blackwater OPS

06-01-2008, 02:41 PM

berto

06-01-2008, 02:56 PM

I don't know what city you live that is so violent where you would really need to carry a firearm but , I think most of us that feel that legal or not, It's not a really good idea don't feel the way you do about living in a "violent" society. is quite safe to live our lives without the need to carry a firearm.

Speak for yourself. I live in a safe neighborhood but would love the option of legal CCW when I feel the need. I imagine many here feel the same way. Carrying doesn't have to be about fear or paranoia and it's not about blasting your way out of trouble. It's about having the option to protect yourself and those around you if it's reasonable under the circumstances.

I don't and won't open carry. I have neither the time nor money to prove that I'm right and the police are wrong. If given the option to CCW I would.

steven_m64

06-01-2008, 04:32 PM

Re-read my post. I never said anything about how his 6 posts limit his knowledge of firearms. I said it is foolish of him to call me foolish for exercising my rights when he has no idea who I am or what I have been through.

actually i have been here as long as you have take a look at the join date under my name, i tend to ghost forums so i only have 6 posts because almost all of my free time is spent on coding and i dont tend to make posts unless i really feel i have something to add to a thread or if i am overly bored at the time but i always read the forums.

and yes i know who you are and have seen your other posts.

i will probably never be able to understand why your willing to go though such legal and fiscal risks again.

then again a lot of people do crazy things everyday from skydiving to base jumping.

feel free to open carry if you want to, my life is just not stable enough and i dont have the financial support to fight something like that.

That 'pair you grew' would be just fine, as the law is clear as to what 'loaded' and/or 'concealed' mean.

the law may be clear to you and me but the interpretations of the law by them sure the hell is not.

E Pluribus Unum

06-01-2008, 06:34 PM

actually i have been here as long as you have take a look at the join date under my name.

This is my third account on this board.

My first account was a shared account with my brother... who has some brazen opinions and was not afraid to share them. He alienated us from a large portion of people so I chose to make my own account. I used that account for a while until I switched ISP's and lost the password to my old account so I had to create this one. I have been on this board since the beginning.

and yes i know who you are and have seen your other posts.

No, you do not know who I am. You may see my posts but you don't know me.

i will probably never be able to understand why your willing to go though such legal and fiscal risks again.

then again a lot of people do crazy things everyday from skydiving to base jumping.

Since when is it crazy to advocate human rights? Was Dr. King "crazy"? Were the founding fathers "crazy"? Were the hundreds of thousands who have died to preserve your right to be ignorant "crazy"?

feel free to open carry if you want to, my life is just not stable enough and i dont have the financial support to fight something like that.

Thank you for your permission. If you have made a personal decision that you do not have the strength to oppose oppression then do not criticize those that do. You came on to a board that advocates the fighting for our 2nd amendment right to carry firearms. You then get offended when I infer you haven't "grown any" because you are too scared to do so. Those are the facts whether you like to hear it or not.

the law may be clear to you and me but the interpretations of the law by them sure the hell is not.

Yes, they are perfectly clear to those that understand the statute and case law surrounding firearms issues. If you exercise your post button a little more and ask questions in a humble manner I would be happy to help you with it.

duenor

06-01-2008, 07:04 PM

Well put, E Pluribus. You and the other OC folks have my respect and admiration. I do not see your comments as belitting my choice to not OC here in Los Angeles - I prefer to believe that you understand that my circumstances may not be the same as yours. In every war there are giants. In your own way, you are in this battle - and I do not feel any less for it.

You OC despite knowing that it may draw a lot of criticism, and incur significant personal cost. If you run into trouble, you can count me in as one who would add his support, however small.

As for stephen...
Your comments remind me of one of the Virgina Tech survivors when he confronted the Campus Carry group during their demonstration this year: "I feel sorry for you that you feel you need a gun to feel safe". My reply would have been "I feel sorry that you are too stupid to realize despite being shot that being armed has its benefits".

tombinghamthegreat

06-01-2008, 07:28 PM

-hanko

06-01-2008, 07:47 PM

feel free to open carry if you want to, my life is just not stable enough and i dont have the financial support to fight something like that.

the law may be clear to you and me but the interpretations of the law by them sure the hell is not.
Fine, you've made a good decision based on your circumstances;)

-hanko

vladbutsky

06-01-2008, 08:13 PM

I would think a good use of the CalGuns Foundation would be to pay TMLLP to draft a legal notice that is available for Calgunners to print and send certified and notarized to their local PD putting them on notice of the current open carry laws so that if and when they falsely arrest someone who is carrying legally that we have a recourse against the department.

Sounds like a good plan. I would donate to help this happen...

CA_Libertarian

06-01-2008, 11:30 PM

They have balls, I dont have the financial means to support my balls.

I don't know why, but that's frickin' hilarious to me right now. That's going in my signature.

I too, lack the financial means to battle anything big. However, I'm willing to take that risk - that's how strongly I feel.

If I had financial means my activities would likely not fall within the confines of the law... civil disobedience would be a much faster catalyst for change.

recshooter

06-02-2008, 12:22 AM

Hey guys.

I can't OC at all, as I go to med school, and to be honest, I don't know if I am ready to handle the potential consequences. That being said...

I have probably been on the opposite side of the political fence from a lot of you guys in the past, for a lot of reasons that are not relevant at the moment.

Although my Dad was not an avid shooter or hunter by any stretch, he taught me the importance of gun safety and marksmanship when I was young. Most importantly, he taught me that I had second and fourth amendment rights as an American citizen. He also taught me what to do if I found myself in fear of my life from a stranger in the house in the dead of night. When I could drive, he made sure that I understood my rights in the event of a traffic stop. He never educated me about these things because he thought I needed to avert an imminent disaster, but rather, because he simply believed in the rights of citizens.

As I have recently been getting back into shooting after a long break and reviewing the laws, I was very dismayed to see that many of these rights have been eroded over the last 10 years.

This initial shock has given way to resolve--to do something to help the situation.

So thank you to everyone who is willing to take on the challenges inherent to open carry, and to those involved in fighting all of the asinine regulations in the state. We need more people to call, write letters, and exercise their rights. Even people who are not firearm owners, need to exercise all of their rights fully (eg. don't ever consent to police searches).

We do not need more people to question the motives of those who choose to exercise their rights up to the razor's edge--they are Rights after all, no explanation is really needed anyway.

We all need to find our own meaningful way to help fight for our freedoms as free men and women, not just gun owners.

Sorry for the long post, I'm done.;)

Blacky

06-02-2008, 06:30 PM

To be honest I had no idea this was a legal. I was just thinking about what would happen if I strapped on my Desert Eagle .44 and went to the mall. I would love to see someone do this with someone else in the background video taping reactions and responses.

At what point would it be legal to lock-n-load?

The only way I could see this making a positive point would be if at least a dozen or more gun owners made random appearances around town. Maybe wearing t-shirts that proclaimed details about open carry.

Its nice to know that if I am going to be in a position where I would be handling a large amount of money that I could arm myself legally.

tombinghamthegreat

06-02-2008, 07:29 PM

Crazed_SS

06-02-2008, 07:36 PM

Has the people who activate open carry considered to promote the cause at gun shows? I seen RP supporters, people supporting certain laws. It would be even a faster way to cut though the false claims from the PD that people can't open carry.

The PD isnt claiming you cant open-carry. Like I said, the my deputy friend acknowledged that unloaded open-carry is perfectly legal, however, he claims that he was taught that having a loaded mag on your person with that unloaded gun means you have a loaded gun.

That is the point of contention. You can see from the DOJ email that some Cops/DAs are indeed interpreting the law that way.. http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/11082.html

That would explain why my friend thinks like he does and why that one calgunner recently was cited for carrying a loaded weapon and had his gun confiscated even though he was open-carrying and unloaded gun.

hoffmang

06-02-2008, 08:13 PM

Luckily, both the DOJ and your LEO friend are wrong on the law - both as written and as interpreted by the courts.

-Gene

Crazed_SS

06-02-2008, 08:29 PM

Luckily, both the DOJ and your LEO friend are wrong on the law - both as written and as interpreted by the courts.

-Gene

Well hopefully the guy who just got his gun confiscated will be able to show that. This whole unloaded open-carry thing seems like a nice chunk of risk with no real practical benefit.

MudCamper

06-02-2008, 08:37 PM

Like I said, the my deputy friend acknowledged that unloaded open-carry is perfectly legal, however, he claims that he was taught that having a loaded mag on your person with that unloaded gun means you have a loaded gun.

Well fortunately you can point your uninformed friend here:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=103660

Everything you ever wanted (and didn't) to know about "loaded".

As I've mentioned many times before in these threads, the probable reason why LEO assume ammo = loaded is because most of the time they are dealing with criminals, who through 12001(j)/12023 or other PC sections do meet some definition of loaded. But we, the law abiding gun owners, do not.

CitaDeL

06-02-2008, 08:41 PM

Has the people who activate open carry considered to promote the cause at gun shows? I seen RP supporters, people supporting certain laws. It would be even a faster way to cut though the false claims from the PD that people can't open carry.

I believe open carry at a gun show would be a problematic to attempt. Gun show operators are under strict regulation to obey all laws,... while open carry isnt illegal, the presumption even by gun owners is that it is.

Even if we were allowed on the premises we would be subject to the following-

12071.1. (o) The producer shall require that signs be posted in a readily visible location at each public entrance to the show containing, but not limited to, the following notices: (1) This gun show follows all federal, state, and local firearms and weapons laws without exception. (2) All firearms carried onto the premises by members of the public will be checked, cleared of any ammunition, secured in a manner that prevents them from being operated, and an identification tag or sticker will be attached to the firearm prior to the person being allowed admittance to the show.

So carrying a handgun with the slide or the cylinder open becomes awkward as holsters are designed for a 'closed' firearm and certainly lacks the appearance of open carry.

Perhaps instead of inside.... how about outside, passing out flyers in the parking lot? Just thoughts...

CitaDeL

06-02-2008, 08:59 PM

Well hopefully the guy who just got his gun confiscated will be able to show that. This whole unloaded open-carry thing seems like a nice chunk of risk with no real practical benefit.

The benefit is yet unrealized. You are searching for a 'practical benefit' before the authorities even have had the chance to be exposed to open carry and absorb the legality of this form of demonstration. They havent been made aware that they will have to make a choice- between unloaded exposed carry, and less restrictive licensing.

This is only one small part of the process...and not the only objective. You want soup? There has to be more than one ingredient. Right now, all we have is a pot with tepid water. Add more ingredients, heat, and time- then we will have our 'practical benefit'.

tombinghamthegreat

06-02-2008, 10:09 PM

I believe open carry at a gun show would be a problematic to attempt. Gun show operators are under strict regulation to obey all laws,... while open carry isnt illegal, the presumption even by gun owners is that it is.

Perhaps instead of inside.... how about outside, passing out flyers in the parking lot? Just thoughts...

By promoting open carry i mean passing out flyers in the parking lot or handing flyers out inside. I might print a few extra out and give them to a few people coming with me to the gun show to increase awareness of the laws.

hoffmang

06-02-2008, 10:49 PM

Well hopefully the guy who just got his gun confiscated will be able to show that. This whole unloaded open-carry thing seems like a nice chunk of risk with no real practical benefit.

On point one, I don't like to assume things, but I do think he'll get his gun back and we will not hear much about it.

I agree with you on point two about that practice for now. However, things are changing and there may be quite a bit of payoff for such a practice in as little as three weeks. In fact, the other side may have a little problem on its hands if point one isn't taken care of cleanly...

-Gene

LOW2000

06-05-2008, 05:34 PM

Do we have any information on this case which can be publicly revealed yet?

Matt@EntrepriseArms

06-05-2008, 11:43 PM

CitaDeL

06-06-2008, 05:49 AM

Nice speech, but let me know when you are ready to come back to reality.

Not that I disagree with any of the points made above per se, but I also know reality, and reality in L.A. is if you walk around with a gun on your hip, don't be surprised if bad things happen.

First- since it was written and not spoken, what I wrote is not a 'speech'.

Second- I think most people understand that there is a possibility of 'bad things' happening during open carry- however, this is true of any actions we take in our day to day lives. If you look at the accounts, even those involving law enforcement in southern California, the outcome is not nearly as bad as what some gun proponents here would have everyone believe.

Liberty1

06-06-2008, 12:54 PM

Do we have any information on this case which can be publicly revealed yet?

Not just yet. Those of us that know just a little, are letting the defendant and the "right people" communicate with "those people" over the polite officer's improper ticketing sans all the hoop-la that would accompany our righteous internet indignation over the violation of this young man's liberties.

Based on preliminary facts, if correct, there has been a strong desire to back this individual with funds if needed.

So I hope everyone here is giving generously to the Calguns Foundation as you never know when you'll need the assistance of the "right people" too.:cool2:

Note: My posts are my own and I am not affiliated with the Calguns Foundation in any formal way other then as an occasional "light weight" private donor.

And our victim here is away doing his TWO WEEKS :p federal service so I doubt we'll hear much in the interim. :D

Liberty1

06-06-2008, 01:11 PM

Nice speech, but let me know when you are ready to come back to reality.

Not that I disagree with any of the points made above per se, but I also know reality, and reality in L.A. is if you walk around with a gun on your hip, don't be surprised if bad things happen.

Yes, bad things can happen. Yet at some point in the not too distant future, and hopefully with stronger legal footing, there will be the need for men and women of Patriotism, Courage and Enterprise to assume a little risk in necessarily moving our teams ball closer to the goal.

So far in all the states that have a secure open carry right there have still been some bumps in the road. But so far, those standing by their Rights, have come out ahead every time and improved the situation remarkably while the State has retreated in defeat from the legal field of battle. Check out the Washington and Virginia State threads at opencarry.org in particular.

BigKevLA

06-06-2008, 08:41 PM

So do you regularly carry a taser? If you dont, why are you suggesting to me that I should? Even if I did carry a taser instead of an unloaded handgun, how would that improve my chances of survival against an assailant armed with a knife of any kind in the scenario you propose? What kind of deterence effect does a taser have that an exposed handgun doesnt? And who said my only motive for open carry was with lawful self defense? (These are rhetorical questions, no need to answer.)

With every response to my point of view, the evidence of your williness to surrender your right to keep and bear arms becomes more and more apparent. This is what the anti-gunners count on in order to advance their agenda to disarm America. It is easier to pass legislation and compel people to abide by their wishes when you have gun owners voluntarily disarming themselves out of fear of the government and the sheep who worship at the altar of false security.

This belief, that hiding your firearms away- locked in a safe at home, is the greatest danger to gunownership that we face today. It is not the legislators, it is not the Brady Bunch, and its not the Million Moms that threaten the second amendment- it is those who are unwillling to practice their Constitutionally protected right in the face of this opposition.

Where have our "Rebellious Stripes" gone? It seems we no longer have the fortitude or inclination to stand up for what belongs to us anymore, much less fight for it. I want to make it clear, that the purpose for open carry is not only for defense and deterence, but also as a political statement. It forces people to pick a side and certainly we see that being played out on this forum between gun owners (I cant imagine what apoplexy would transpire if a genuine anti-gunner were here).

I believe if you do not use it, the opposition will certainly take it from you, citing your lack of need. While open carry of an unloaded handgun does not seem to be the most prudent or practical action, this is what we have in California if you do not have a license. I suggest we take what we can get, while we can get it.

Sounds great but what about the trigger happer LEOs that we have in some cities. I can just imagine what will happen to someone in LA or surrounding cities walking around with a gun strapped to their hip and don't display a security uniform or police badge, that is the making for a possible bad day. Of course nothing may happen or you may get harassed or worst you may get shot. Is it worth it? I'm a business owner and I carry every day at work but I not ready to be the test case for open carry in LA. I know at least 30 officers who are good friends, all know it is legal to open carry but they advise against it because of the mentality of some of the folks they work with. I wish it was as simple as everyone makes it sound. But I can tell you one thing, if you are willing to come to LA and open carry I will join you!

Decoligny

06-06-2008, 08:50 PM

But I can tell you one thing, if you are willing to come to LA and open carry I will join you!

Put up or shut up.
FreshTapCoke right here on Calguns Open Carries in Metro LA.
PM him, I'm sure he would enjoy someone else OCing with him.

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/5156.html

CitaDeL

06-06-2008, 08:54 PM

Sounds great but what about the trigger happer LEOs that we have in some cities. I can just imagine what will happen to someone in LA or surrounding cities walking around with a gun strapped to their hip and don't display a security uniform or police badge, that is the making for a possible bad day. Of course nothing may happen or you may get harassed or worst you may get shot. Is it worth it? I'm a business owner and I carry every day at work but I not ready to be the test case for open carry in LA. I know at least 30 officers who are good friends, all know it is legal to open carry but they advise against it because of the mentality of some of the folks they work with. I wish it was as simple as everyone makes it sound. But I can tell you one thing, if you are willing to come to LA and open carry I will join you!

There are already members of the open carry community in the LA area. Given the opportunity, I will take you up on your invitation.

Ken H

06-07-2008, 11:22 AM

This is my first post, I'm new to this great website, retired LEO with 23 years on the streets. My department had over 2,500 sworn so no I didn't work in some quiet little town.

I've been reading a lot the last few days and seems many of the members and this organization are very much on the right track. I think many of us would be in a bind if it wasn't for this place. SO THANK GOD for Calguns.

I see by some postings we have other LEO's giving input here to help others and that's great..

You are all correct, it's legal to open carry in this state with a few exceptions,
IE, schools, court houses, state capital etc.

But guys I gotta tell you, carrying a pistol around this state especially in your larger cities, is a gamble to your safety, even greater than when I was chasing a armed robbery suspect through the streets.

Just way to many factors that immediatly endanger YOUR safety from the unknowning citizen or cop who confronts you. I don't know to many cop who will be walking up to you saying, "hello, how are you today", if you have a pistol strapped on your side.

Especially when they recieved a radio call from a "paranoid" frantic citizen reporting a man with a gun call... IT GETS THE YOUNG COPPERs REAL excitied and that is where the danger is. Even worse for the HERO citizen who is not trained.

BigKevLa speaks from absolute wisdom and the advise he has gotten is sound.

I wouldn't call LEO's trigger happy for the most part, a little paranoid maybe, lack of life experience, on the job experience and several other factors.

Just before I retired, 90% of the patrol force was less than 2 years experience and under age 30...

I see many members here speak of the unknowing, or uniformed LEO arresting people for AW issues, well need I say anything more.

I do not think badly of anyone who believes what some of you do, nothing changes for the better in life, unless we fight for it, we just have to be careful to make sure we don't die in an effort to win the fight.

pullnshoot25

06-07-2008, 11:28 AM

This is my first post, I'm new to this great website, retired LEO with 23 years on the streets. My department had over 2,500 sworn so no I didn't work in some quiet little town.

I've been reading a lot the last few days and seems many of the members and this organization are very much on the right track. I think many of us would be in a bind if it wasn't for this place. SO THANK GOD for Calguns.

I see by some postings we have other LEO's giving input here to help others and that's great..

You are all correct, it's legal to open carry in this state with a few exceptions,
IE, schools, court houses, state capital etc.

But guys I gotta tell you, carrying a pistol around this state especially in your larger cities, is a gamble to your safety, even greater than when I was chasing a armed robbery suspect through the streets.

Just way to many factors that immediatly endanger YOUR safety from the unknowning citizen or cop who confronts you. I don't know to many cop who will be walking up to you saying, "hello, how are you today", if you have a pistol strapped on your side.

Especially when they recieved a radio call from a "paranoid" fratic citizen reporting a man with a gun call... IT GETS THE YOUNG COPPERs REAL excitied and that is where the danger is. Even worse for the HERO citizen who is not trained.

BigKevLa speaks from absolute wisdom and the advise he has gotten is sound.

I wouldn't call LEO's trigger happy for the most part, a little paranoid maybe, lack of life experience, on the job experience and several other factors.

Just before I retired, 90% of the patrol force was less than 2 years experience and under age 30...

I see many members here speak of the unknowing, or uniformed LEO arresting people for AW issues, well need I say anything more.

I do not think badly of anyone who believes what some of you do, nothing changes for the better in life, unless we fight for it, we just have to be careful to make sure we don't die in an effort to win the fight.

Out of curiosity, what was/is department procedure on these matters and why are cops so afraid of citizens that are not trying to hide anything, follow the law and be generally good citizens?

Ken H

06-07-2008, 11:44 AM

Procedures and policy will vary from department to department, but it's the state of mind, training, current climate in your area, homicide, assaults, etc that dictate how things are handled.

But many cops are no different than anyone else right or wrong, they don't want to die or get shot..

Anyone who has been around firearms or has any formal training knows it only takes a couple seconds to draw and fire a weapon.

Sometimes responding to a man with the gun call was nothing more than a frenzy to see who could get to the call first and get the bad guy.

A few times, it was an off duty LEO who was packing a cannon under his shirt in the supermarket and AUNT BEE saw it and called 911...The outcome of all that could have been fatal.

Many times a man with the gun call gets a large response of police units, the more the cops who show up the more potential for errors and problems, it can become a control issue, that is where miscommunication becomes a real issue.

When answering these types of questions always remember there are many variables in what should have or could of happened.;)

Army

06-07-2008, 01:45 PM

OC'd first time today, all day, in San Luis Obispo. Springfield in a Galco thumbreak, empty well and no ammo, this time, on person.

Initially went to the range (slosa.org), but remembered all my ammo, and my hearing protection was sitting on the kitchen counter at home....so drove back (15mins both ways). Noticed my tank was low, and stopped at the Arco for the cheapest (???) gas in town. The lady behind me got a little bug-eyed, but said and did nothing. The clerk didn't seem to notice my weapon when I paid for a couple of sodas.

On to the range (S&W Steel Challenge is on-going this weekend, lots of famous shooters including Jerry Miculek) where I spent a few hours talking to others, and killing a few bits of paper. Then my daughter calls..

Seems while getting her oil changed, her car decided to crap its ignition coil. So, off to town to pick her up...and still holstered. Took her to work, then stopped at a very busy Circle K for another soda and Slim Jims. Noticed "pointing" from a couple of skateboarder punks, but no other action or comments from anyone. Then returned to the range (I'm an RSO there, so naturally it's a preferred hang out).

Picked up the daughter from her work, and returned to the oil change place as they had fixed her car by then. Paid for the work, and asked for all the parts they removed. They tried some cock&bull story about how the coil core is recycled and they already sent it in...uh huh...so I asked for any paperwork that would show and prove this. Then they noticed the .45. Suddenly, they knew where the part was, and they would go get it right now. Ten minutes of waiting and talking with my kid about her job, and the wayward part was in my hand, with profuse apologies from the "manager" of the shop. Hmmmmmmmmm....

Sent the kid on her way, and proceeded to Albertsons to pick up some veggies and milk for dinner, with no looks or questions at all in the store or parking lot.

98% uneventful day, except for being noticed at the oil shop (and some good natured teasing from my buddy Jeff at the range). I will do this again, but need to map out all the schools in SLO to find the 1000' margins. Except for the immediate downtown area, I'm clear for most of the city. Home Depot though, is JUST inside the 1000' line...............dammit!

pullnshoot25

06-07-2008, 03:52 PM

pullnshoot25

06-07-2008, 03:59 PM

Ken H

06-07-2008, 04:11 PM

Pullshoot, your pretty much correct in all that.

Actually the first officer on the scene of any incident where others are responding to, needs to, better take charge unless ordered otherwise by a supervisor.

Regarding DA's, yep each will have their priorities on what to and not prosecute. Your quieter jurisdictions are more inclined to be more anal about smaller issues, than the larger countys. Their case loads are much smaller.

But like the most recent Supreme court decision on AW's, that decision better be listened to by everyone.

Case law sets the standard in this country for how LE, DA's operate. Operate under those guidelines, life will be better for all..

Kinda like Miranda vs. Arizona 1966...A persons right to counsel before being interviewed while in police custody.;)

ChibiPaw

06-08-2008, 10:57 AM

So I got to thinking lastnight. Are there some other means of carry/transportation method that is considered legal? I've been searching around, and really haven't found a anyone who really talked about it much. Except a huge debate with guitar cases.
What I'm thinking are the following variables could possibly in play.

Let's pretend this is always in a large city.
You have no belt or pocket to attach holster to your body directly. Think polo and dresspants with office casual standard.
You have no car / bike / motorcycle. Your transportation is walking , or perhaps catching a bus. Your destination is close by but some what of a hike to get there. Perhaps it's work place, perhaps a shooting range. Also, The bus also is empty, the driver is indifferent and pays no attention to you after you pay your fare if you choose to take the bus.

You have your locked container with weapon inside. Ammo is inside this locked container along with a loaded magazine which it's not attached to the weapon.

You do have backpack or messenger bag with too much stuff in it to put the pistol box in. And what you are carrying can be either a rifle or a pistol, but either way it's not going into the backpack.

How would one stay as legal as possible in this scenario? Would one simply walk/bus over to the destination carrying this locked container in hand? or would it be safer in to say take it out and open carry the pistol on the shoulder strap of your backpack? And if it's a rifle, lets assume it's already got a sling.

CA_Libertarian

06-08-2008, 11:05 AM

...But guys I gotta tell you, carrying a pistol around this state especially in your larger cities, is a gamble to your safety, even greater than when I was chasing a armed robbery suspect through the streets...

Seems like I have this conversation either online or in person about every other week. It's almost always the same argument, so I've gotten to where I let others tear up the false claims. However, the above assertion is such a gross exaggeration I can't resist. So, here we go again...

I've carried at least once a week for almost a year. If this is so dangerous (more dangerous than chasing an armed robber), why have I never had anything scary happen to me? To hell with me, what about the many other people across the USA that open carry?

Do you have any facts to support your assertions? Any research or statistical data? If I chased an armed robbery suspect once a week for a year, I'm certain I would have drawn my firearm at least once. Can you explain why among all of us who open carry all over the United States there are not constantly news stories about the violent outcomes of our activities?

Your opinions are not facts. Your hypotheticals are not facts. Your analogy is a flat out lie.

Ken H

06-08-2008, 01:33 PM

Seems like I have this conversation either online or in person about every other ..week. It's almost always the same argument, so I've gotten to where I let others tear up the false claims. However, the above assertion is such a gross exaggeration I can't resist. So, here we go again...

I've carried at least once a week for almost a year. If this is so dangerous (more dangerous than chasing an armed robber), why have I never had anything scary happen to me? To hell with me, what about the many other people across the USA that open carry?

Do you have any facts to support your assertions? Any research or statistical data? If I chased an armed robbery suspect once a week for a year, I'm certain I would have drawn my firearm at least once. Can you explain why among all of us who open carry all over the United States there are not constantly news stories about the violent outcomes of our activities?

Your opinions are not facts. Your hypotheticals are not facts. Your analogy is a flat out lie.

Well I guess I might say you are lucky, and if you have done all that and no problems, that's great.

What I posted is personal experience, they are not opinions, they are not hypotheticals and my analogy is not a lie, that sir I take exception too.

But again, if you wish to carry as you have, good luck to you...

Many stories of tragedy are not always posted, because you have not read them doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Statistics of stupid ideas or action is generally not supported by specific data charts. Sorry

The use of common sense is not always a news story...No I didn't chase armed robbers once a week either.

I have lived in So. Cal for over 40 years, off duty I have never seen anyone openly carry a firearm on their belt.

I have handled many situations where a call was recieved of a person carrying a gun openly and responded to it, the scenario was often dangerous, and in most all cases there was no crime. But it doesn't set aside the fact, things could go wrong for everyone involved.

I appreciate your opinion on how things have worked out for you.

If you like you can come to my necks of the woods, carry your unloaded pistol around and see how long before several cops show up with their guns draw to find out why your carrying a pistol around...

You have a right to carry openly, the cops have a duty/right to stop and check you and your firearm to see if it's loaded, then tell you that what your doing may be legal, but isn't very smart.

Just across the board right/wrong, stupid idea, good idea, not a situation I would want to put myself into to make a point..

In closing, I've been to Arizona where folks do carry openly, but they have been doing it for a long time and is part of a culture legal right that is accepted, and been going on for sometime.

It is not something that is generally done here in the areas I've lived and worked in. This is Kalifornia and I don't compare what others do in others states to be a standard for what we do here because of the mind set of many.

But if the citizens and the police in Modesto don't hassle you for carrying openly, all I can say is that's AWESOME..;)

CitaDeL

06-08-2008, 04:45 PM

Well I guess I might say you are lucky, and if you have done all that and no problems, that's great....

...I've been to Arizona where folks do carry openly, but they have been doing it for a long time and is part of a culture legal right that is accepted, and been going on for sometime.

It is not something that is generally done here in the areas I've lived and worked in. This is Kalifornia and I don't compare what others do in others states to be a standard for what we do here because of the mind set of many.

1. I don't think 'luck' has anything to do with it personally. It was almost a year to the week when I first drew the attention of the local law enforcement. People don't generally pay that much attention, assume that the person is 'authorized' to carry, and while it may be a surprise to many here, most people mind their own damn business, even if they do get bug-eyed and point. In the anecdotes of police contact, almost to a fault, it is law enforcement making the biggest fuss about this behavior. (I believe my story is the exception to this, as it appears the busybody who called 911 seems to be a self-hating 'gun enthusiast'.)

2. Arizona and California are both of the United States. You ascribe some form of cultural differences that would suggest open carry could not be accepted here... the fault with this thinking is that Constitutionally speaking, the rights enjoyed in one state must be recognized in all of them.

Article 4, clause 2 reads; The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

So if it is the right of the people to keep and bear arms in Arizona, Vermont, New Hampshire, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Washington, and others where open carry is lawful, then it is lawful here in California too. The dynamic is not that Californians can not tolerate the presence of firearms, because it has already been demonstrated that they can- the dynamic is that our legislature has overstepped their authority in infringing on our rights with laws that are not lawful and the judiciary has backed them up when they should have been protecting our rights.

As for those who find the appearance of a firearm on someones belt frightening or repellant- they ought to seek out a country friendlier (China, North Korea, England, Australia, Japan) to their beliefs, since the U.S. was born from the need to defend ourselves from tyranny...

...and no anti-gun whining and complaining will ever change that.

Ken H

06-08-2008, 05:00 PM

All I can says guys, do what ever and good luck...:cheers2:

bubbagump

06-08-2008, 05:21 PM

Well I guess I might say you are lucky, and if you have done all that and no problems, that's great.

What I posted is personal experience, they are not opinions, they are not hypotheticals and my analogy is not a lie, that sir I take exception too.

But again, if you wish to carry as you have, good luck to you...

Many stories of tragedy are not always posted, because you have not read them doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Statistics of stupid ideas or action is generally not supported by specific data charts. Sorry

The use of common sense is not always a news story...No I didn't chase armed robbers once a week either.

I have lived in So. Cal for over 40 years, off duty I have never seen anyone openly carry a firearm on their belt.

I have handled many situations where a call was recieved of a person carrying a gun openly and responded to it, the scenario was often dangerous, and in most all cases there was no crime. But it doesn't set aside the fact, things could go wrong for everyone involved.

I appreciate your opinion on how things have worked out for you.

If you like you can come to my necks of the woods, carry your unloaded pistol around and see how long before several cops show up with their guns draw to find out why your carrying a pistol around...

You have a right to carry openly, the cops have a duty/right to stop and check you and your firearm to see if it's loaded, then tell you that what your doing may be legal, but isn't very smart.

Just across the board right/wrong, stupid idea, good idea, not a situation I would want to put myself into to make a point..

In closing, I've been to Arizona where folks do carry openly, but they have been doing it for a long time and is part of a culture legal right that is accepted, and been going on for sometime.

It is not something that is generally done here in the areas I've lived and worked in. This is Kalifornia and I don't compare what others do in others states to be a standard for what we do here because of the mind set of many.

But if the citizens and the police in Modesto don't hassle you for carrying openly, all I can say is that's AWESOME..;)

Open carrying in the city I work in would get you a 417 response by the police in a heartbeat. God forbid the first officer 97 thinks your reaching for it.

It would be the last time you open-carried.

I agree with Ken H. It may fly up north, but down here in the dirty south it will get you negative results from law enforcement. Its unfortunate, but true. I have never, in my 20 years of being alive, seen someone open carry in my area.

CA_Libertarian

06-08-2008, 07:10 PM

I have lived in So. Cal for over 40 years, off duty I have never seen anyone openly carry a firearm on their belt.

I have handled many situations where a call was recieved of a person carrying a gun openly and responded to it, the scenario was often dangerous, and in most all cases there was no crime.

This statement does not help prove your original claim. If you have handled 'many situations' involving 'person(s) carrying a gun openly' and in 'most all cases no crime was committed,' how can you say it is dangerous? I'm not sure how that situation is dangerous if no crime was committed. Can you elaborate on that?

CA_Libertarian

06-08-2008, 07:13 PM

Open carrying in the city I work in would get you a 417 response by the police in a heartbeat. God forbid the first officer 97 thinks your reaching for it.

It would be the last time you open-carried.

I agree with Ken H. It may fly up north, but down here in the dirty south it will get you negative results from law enforcement. Its unfortunate, but true. I have never, in my 20 years of being alive, seen someone open carry in my area.

Well, let's tuck tail and give up our rights since the police might murder us in your town. Makes me sick that this attitude exists...

Ken H

06-08-2008, 08:15 PM

Ca Lib all I'll say any further, if you ever come down this way, look me up...;)

bubbagump

06-08-2008, 09:37 PM

Well, let's tuck tail and give up our rights since the police might murder us in your town. Makes me sick that this attitude exists...

I have to go to work...But as soon as I come up with a good reply...I shall post

Army

06-08-2008, 11:44 PM

You have no good reply. "I have never, in my 20 years of being alive, seen someone open carry in my area." Well, that's certainly a fine reason to not carry legally...because YOU haven't seen anyone else do it. I've never met an Astronaut, but I would still love to go to the moon.

Ken H. Despite you never seeing anyone openly carrying a gun...you have responded numerous times to someone openly carrying a gun. Huh? It's one or the other, friend. BTW, how many of these responded to calls were for law abiding citizens carrying according to state and federal law?

I have refused to be a sheep any longer. I have stood up, strapped on, and expressed my lawful right to carry. If the police need to be schooled about all this, then no better time than now.

Hypothetical scenarios of cops gunning down citizens, criminals grabbing your gun, and old ladies having coronaries over a holstered weapon, simply don't pass the smell test. Got any proof it happened? Got any proof it happens at all?

bubbagump

06-09-2008, 07:24 AM

Well, let's tuck tail and give up our rights since the police might murder us in your town. Makes me sick that this attitude exists...

In my town, the police respond to 417 calls almost daily. Most of these calls involve violent people wielding handguns or people who have just shot someone. They go into these situations nervous and probably scared knowing that they may be harmed, a bystander may be harmed, or that they may need to kill someone. AGAIN...GOD FORBID THIS LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN WHO IS OPENLY CARRYING A HANDGUN MAKES SOME TYPE OF AGGRESSIVE MOVEMENT WHICH THE OFFICER PERCEIVES AS HARMFUL TO HIS HEALTH OR THAT OF BYSTANDERS/PARTNERS...

WOULD YOU WANT TO BET YOUR LIFE TO SEE WHETHER SOMETHING BAD WILL HAPPEN NEXT? I would assume most officers want to return home to their families, instead of finding out whether this guy they've never meet in their life is going to kill them.

And you consider this murder?

How bout another scenario?

A 417 call goes out and when units 97 the area, they find LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN WHO IS OPEN CARRYING A HANDGUN. While the "real" 417 subject is robbing the liquor store, the officers are tending to you. How are they to assume that you are not the suspect?

If that still doesn't float your boat. How bout this one?

Why the HELL would you want the possibility of people pointing loaded guns at you. I don't care who they are. I wouldn't want ANYONE pointing loaded guns at me. If me LEGALLY open carrying is POSSIBLY going to result in nervous police officers pointing loaded guns at me, then I prefer not to carry openly. If you like having loaded guns pointed at you (you know, stuff like handguns, shotguns, MP-5's, AR-15's), then thats a WHOLE DIFFERENT DISCUSSION.

You have no good reply. "I have never, in my 20 years of being alive, seen someone open carry in my area." Well, that's certainly a fine reason to not carry legally...because YOU haven't seen anyone else do it. I've never met an Astronaut, but I would still love to go to the moon.

Ken H. Despite you never seeing anyone openly carrying a gun...you have responded numerous times to someone openly carrying a gun. Huh? It's one or the other, friend. BTW, how many of these responded to calls were for law abiding citizens carrying according to state and federal law?

I have refused to be a sheep any longer. I have stood up, strapped on, and expressed my lawful right to carry. If the police need to be schooled about all this, then no better time than now.

Hypothetical scenarios of cops gunning down citizens, criminals grabbing your gun, and old ladies having coronaries over a holstered weapon, simply don't pass the smell test. Got any proof it happened? Got any proof it happens at all?

-If 20 years isn't good enough for you, then my 80 year old grandfather has never seen anyone open carrying in the LA area.

-By making that statement, I am not telling you not to open carry. What I am trying to (I'm gonna use a big word here) allude to by saying that is that every city in this state has its own type of culture. In my city and surrounding cities, people are not used to seeing folks open carrying firearms. In these area's, people relate firearms not carried by the police to be an immediate threat to their health. They WILL call the police. You WILL get guns pointed at you. And I don't know how officers respond to 417 calls in your community, but the city I work for is very aggressive in that aspect. They need to be, because we deal with very dangerous people. How aggressive are the officers in their tactics? I know former officers from my department who have gone to other cities with lower crime rates, who have been scolded by supervisors for being "cowboys". The officers aren't trying to be mean, they're just being as safe as possible. Why? Because 11 year old kids in my community will kill you because they are down for their hood.

It may be fine for you to open carry in San Luis Obispo or Modesto simply because it is not culture shock like it is here in the Los Angeles area. THATS WHAT I MEANT.

-And all this stuff about proof and numbers/statistic is ridiculous. I would think this is common sense.

You want numbers? Let me know. I'll stand in front of one of the Targets in the LA area and ask people what they would do if they saw someone walking down the street with a openly displayed handgun. I'll record the answers. I'll call it, "BubbaGump Open Carry Survey 2008 ".

I DO NOT believe open carry is tactically sane anyways. If your going to carry a handgun around, I would hope it is at least loaded. My belief is that if I am going to carry a handgun, then NO ONE needs to know I have one on me anyways. Probably better off carrying a metal paperweight.

I also believe that this type of conduct will only aggravate the lawmakers more. All you need is for Fox 11 to broadcast something about crazy rednecks with guns at your local Starbucks for things to go downhill. Every ignorant soccer mom in this state will want open carry banned. Even better, BAN ALL HANDGUNS!

I would love to carry concealed in this state, but unfortunately, I'd probably never be able to get a permit from the chief. And its sad, because I actually have what most would consider good reason to go apply for one. Yet, we shouldn't need a reason to be responsible for our own protection. You have no idea how many times I've seen people get hurt knowing they could have defended themselves instead of waiting for the police to show up. I get to hear it all go down on the radio and sometimes get to see it up close and personal.

Why live in a state like that?

And I understand everyone is looking for a solution. Some solutions I've read about here were diplomatic and some were straight out militant.

And to wrap things up, I know how some people feel about LEO's on this forum. Understand that some LEO's are with you guys all the way. Some are not. I don't like hearing stories about people's houses getting raided by LAPD SWAT or bros being pulled out their college classes because they were looking at gun pictures. I don't think LEO's should be confiscating firearms which are legally configured. But it happens. I try to educate my co-workers as much as I can, but I can only cover so much ground. I wish that people on this forum would not create such a deep chasm with Law Enforcement. Instead we should try our best to educate them.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe open carry is worth the trouble. To everyone their own.

I am going to sleep now.

Ken H

06-09-2008, 10:06 AM

Sorry Army let me explain a little better, I have no personal issue with anyone doing what is legal or getting tired of being afraid. But reality is what it is.

I never saw when off duty traveling around doing whatever, folks carrying a pistol in the open.

On the job we got calls, not everyday or every week where people were carrying guns. Yes some were law abiding citizens, taking guns from the trunk of their cars going into their house and all. That's not how it was reported via 911 though.

Some were not law abiding and were carrying loaded firearms with the intent to harm others. BUT A MAN with a gun call is what it is until we get things under control, and mistakes could and have happened because of that.

Absolute bogus calls in more than a few cases, but we have to check it out. I think I said in an earlier post where off duty cops over the years were carrying, someone saw the gun on their side and called 911.. Until we found out who the person was, they got proned out at gunpoint, dangerous scenario for all.

Many times the caller to 911 didn't give us accurate facts and the information we recieved made things seem like a guy is waiving a gun around when in fact he was standing in his front yard talking to another neighbor, showing him a new rifle he just bought.

Now being a person who understands what we talk about here, I was not as hyped up as some of my younger collegues when these calls came out. Yes some of them got excited and that's where the danger comes into play.

Kinda like other posts here where people are afraid to get stopped with their AR in the car and an unknowing uniformed cop takes their AR and arrests them for illegal possession of an AW, when in fact they are compliant.
FEAR is FEAR....

But do understand, I believe the paraniod people are in greater numbers down this way than maybe where you live. Don't know, hope not.

During the LA riots, we got lots of calls of people walking around their front yards packing pistols on their side. Well we did tell those people nothing wrong with that....But the citizen was insistant we tell that person to take their gun off, "CAUSE IT DIDN"T LOOK RIGHT", well we didn't even go to the call.

Now have I ever on duty been driving down the street and see Joe citizen walking his dog, carrying an unloaded pistol on his side exercising his rights under PC 12031.....NO NEVER HAVE....

But I'd sure stop and find out why he was if I did...AND I'd tell him it's not a good idea to do that, cause there are to many paranoid citizens and some not so understanding cops out there..

The worst part of all this as some citizens have learned that if they want to get the cops to their house real quick, tell the dispatcher that someone has a gun, even though no gun is present or has even been seen...

So you all need to understand, we get some real crappy info from the average citizen sometimes, AND THE LAST thing were thinking of in all that we have to think of is, GEE IS THIS CITIZEN just carrying an unloaded firearms because he can legally..

Lots of people are shot every year in this country who were not armed at the time of the encounter, I just think folks who want to carry openly run the risk of getting hurt. But if they want to chance that then do what ever you want, it's your butt not mine.

We have members here who don't want to get hasseled for carrying AR's in their cars, I surely understand that, why because some cops are not up on the laws as they stand now.

If some of us think that about the AR issue, you damn sure better be thinking about what could happen carrying a pistol on your side for all to see.

Kinda like speeding down the road in your car, may have been doing it for years without an accident, but that one time you have an accident, you or someone else gets hurt or killed. WAS IT WORTH IT??

Now if you cannot relate to any of that because of your believes on this issue of openly carrying in public, then disaster potentially awaits you at some point. Maybe not..

I didn't get hurt out on the streets, because the good lord gave me a brain to use, and even though I had the authority to do certain things, sometimes the potential disaster that could happen was not worth enforcing the letter of the law vs the spirit.. OH I WAS right, but not worth the potential violent encounter that might take place.

There is always tomarrow, live to fight another day.

Become openly defiant, arguementative, refuse to do what your told by the unknowing cop, things will get ugly at some point...If all that risk is worth it too you, good luck.

You better have plenty of money in the bank, a good lawyer on retainer, and you better hope you get a 12 person jury who are all gun toting citizens, otherwise your screwed.

And for the most part the average public defender is overworked has a massive caseload and probably doesn't share your convictions of openly carrying and unloaded pistol around town that led to a pissing match with the local police...

As a couple have commented on what I posted instead of having a discussion or clarifying something they came across like radicals who have no worries and I was full of crap in everything I said, instead of seeing the post for what it was, JUST one persons perspective..

That speaks volumns to me as to what might happen to them when they meet a young cop who thinks he wears an S on his tshirt confronts a person demanding his rights in carrying a firearm on his hip, especially if the town in which this happens is a busy town with lots of crime...

If you got big testicles, think you have all the answers want to play with the system, cause you think you know whats right, come down here and we will see what happens when you pack a pistol around some of these paranoid liberals...Didn't say it was right, it's reality here.

Now what would I recommend for those who believe so strongly in this issue, get a group of folks who share your ideas, go to a city or county counsel meeting and express your views on this and see what happens. Attempt to get the local media involved like folks did in Utah. Go meet with the Chief of Police or Sheriff and see what they say. Safety in numbers is better than doing by yourself.

Just my perspective, disagree thats ok too, but don't call me a liar...;)

NiteQwill

06-09-2008, 10:41 AM

Some people need to get off their fantasyland soapboxes and realize that OC in California (especially in the LA or SF major areas) is just a bad and STUPID idea. The risk of getting shot by police vs. a BG is far greater on the former than any necessary gains obtained by OC.

Get a CCW or don't OC. This is the reality we live in in California. The other reality is a lot of us have family and friends who want us around. If you don't, carry on!

FreedomIsNotFree

06-09-2008, 10:48 AM

Can someone please make a concise list of legal activities that aren't "smart" to do?:rolleyes:

yellowfin

06-09-2008, 11:10 AM

Get a CCW or don't OC. This is the reality we live in in California. The other reality is a lot of us have family and friends who want us around. If you don't, carry on!

"Men were NOT meant to fly. If you want to get somewhere it's going to be on land or by boat, period." -- Reality of North Carolina on Dec 16th, 1903. Two bicycle repairmen refused to listen.

"If you want to hear someone's voice in another building, go there!" -- Reality in Massachusetts on March 9th, 1876. A teacher of the deaf refused to listen.

"You want light after sunset? Light a candle or a lamp...or be in the dark. Your choice, take it or leave it." -- Reality in New Jersey on Oct 21, 1879. A crackpot inventer refused to listen even after failing over a thousand times.

3 very dumb ideas at the time, don't you think? You would have laughed yourself silly at these ridiculous lunatics tinkering around with their wannabe science fiction.

NiteQwill

06-09-2008, 12:56 PM

"Men were NOT meant to fly. If you want to get somewhere it's going to be on land or by boat, period." -- Reality of North Carolina on Dec 16th, 1903. Two bicycle repairmen refused to listen.

"If you want to hear someone's voice in another building, go there!" -- Reality in Massachusetts on March 9th, 1876. A teacher of the deaf refused to listen.

"You want light after sunset? Light a candle or a lamp...or be in the dark. Your choice, take it or leave it." -- Reality in New Jersey on Oct 21, 1879. A crackpot inventer refused to listen even after failing over a thousand times.

3 very dumb ideas at the time, don't you think? You would have laughed yourself silly at these ridiculous lunatics tinkering around with their wannabe science fiction.

You're comparing apples and oranges. ;)

Inventions vs. reality of California with OC

You point is?

Edit: I challenge anyone to OC in LA or SF and report back the results. Oh, and please post your name so we can make a match to the local papers of the "criminal" arrested for "legally" OC in "California."

yellowfin

06-09-2008, 01:09 PM

You're comparing apples and oranges. ;)

Inventions vs. reality of California with OC

You point is?

Edit: I challenge anyone to OC in LA or SF and report back the results. Oh, and please post your name so we can make a match to the local papers of the "criminal" arrested for "legally" OC in "California."
It's rejecting the status quo and pursuing what is thought impossible instead of sitting there in the so-called reality. California can and will be changed.

PatriotnMore

06-09-2008, 01:33 PM

I didn't see this particular link but, I also didn't check every link posted in this tread. If its old news, so sorry.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-opencarry7-2008jun07,0,849912.story

NiteQwill

06-09-2008, 01:46 PM

It's rejecting the status quo and pursuing what is thought impossible instead of sitting there in the so-called reality. [b]California can and will be changed.[b/]

I'm sorry, but California is already changed and will not be going back in the direction You and I would like it to. The change will only worsen and alienate us as a group (look at all the ridiculous bills just sailing through our assembly, that has to tell you something).

Rejecting the status quo is all honorable and courageous, but 99% of the time, those who reject the status quo are pushed backed, rejected, or killed. OC is one of those subjects

I'm glad you believe so strongly in such an effort, that's commendable. I myself, gave up on this state long time ago. Majority of this state is "willing to give up a little liberty for temporary safety." Unfortunately, those sheep don't know that a "little liberty" for them is livelihood of another. Sheep outnumber us in votes and mass number, that will NOT change.

PatriotnMore

06-09-2008, 01:50 PM

Sheep outnumber us in votes and mass number, that will NOT change.

It will change, one voter at a time. Keep talking to others, for those who will listen, your efforts are well worth it. Nothing is gained, if nothing is ventured.

Decoligny

06-09-2008, 01:51 PM

I challenge anyone to OC in LA or SF and report back the results. Oh, and please post your name so we can make a match to the local papers of the "criminal" arrested for "legally" OC in "California."

OC IN METRO L.A.
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/5156.html
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/9651.html

OC IN OAKLAND AIRPORT
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/8580.html

Crazed_SS

06-09-2008, 02:05 PM

OC IN METRO L.A.
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/5156.html
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/9651.html

OC IN OAKLAND AIRPORT
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/8580.html

Did any of these people walk past cops?

You guys might be right that most people will assume an open-carrier is a cop or someone who is "supposed" to be carrying a gun.. but cops know who is a cop or not and when they see you, it becomes more hassle than it's worth.
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/5988.html

Personally, I try to keep all interactions with law enforecement to a mininum. Wearing a gun around in CA is just ASKING for the police to get in your business.. Call me a coward, sheep, anti, whatever, but I have better things to do than argue with the police and risk losing my gun.

kwest10

06-09-2008, 02:33 PM

ViPER395

06-09-2008, 02:34 PM

For once, i'm with Crazed. I'm flat out too wussified by CA gun laws to OC anywhere where it might be troublesome.

Personally, I try to keep all interactions with law enforecement to a mininum. Wearing a gun around in CA is just ASKING for the police to get in your business.. Call me a coward, sheep, anti, whatever, but I have better things to do than argue with the police and risk losing my gun.

PatriotnMore

06-09-2008, 03:22 PM

Did any of these people walk past cops?

You guys might be right that most people will assume an open-carrier is a cop or someone who is "supposed" to be carrying a gun.. but cops know who is a cop or not and when they see you, it becomes more hassle than it's worth.
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/5988.html

Personally, I try to keep all interactions with law enforecement to a mininum. Wearing a gun around in CA is just ASKING for the police to get in your business.. Call me a coward, sheep, anti, whatever, but I have better things to do than argue with the police and risk losing my gun.

I don’t’ think anyone Feels you or anyone is a coward, sheep, or any other negative. I personally choose not to open carry because of a personal comfort zone, not that I would not, it is my right to exercise if I choose.

That is what we are really talking about here folks! We have certain rights, inalienable, and given. We are given certain rights within the Constitution, those who feel so inclined may do so, and I support their right to do so.

What we really seem to be going back and forth on is peoples comfort zones, and to some degree moral values. I am not comfortable with many things, but that does not give me the right to keep them from doing it. I am not comfortable with assembly of what I consider hate groups such as the KKK, Skin Heads, and others. I am not comfortable around those who choose to smoke pot, or wear offensive tee shirts, or use offensive language as part of their everyday vocabulary, I may not be comfortable seeing someone with a folder knife in their pocket, the lists can go on and on.

Do I want morality, and my personal comforts regulated and made into law? NO. In addition, what a mess our system of laws and justice will become, and have become, if we foster this type of, "personal feeling" approach to law.
If I am not comfortable, I have the choice not to participate. It is not the Governments given responsibility to interfere with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness so long as it is not a detriment to others. It’s this exact thinking that got the gun control ball rolling, and why we have to fight tooth and nail, to keep it from happening.

The question to always ask ourselves is:
1. Is it Constitutional?
2. Does it infringe on our inalienable, or given rights?

If the answer is yes, it violates either, it is not an issue law should be allowed to restrict.

Two Shots

06-09-2008, 03:51 PM

Personally, I try to keep all interactions with law enforecement to a mininum. Wearing a gun around in CA is just ASKING for the police to get in your business.. Call me a coward, sheep, anti, whatever, but I have better things to do than argue with the police and risk losing my gun.

I think that your right (OMG, I agreed with SS) as far as being tossed by the cops and risking legal problems.
I wonder what is going to happen if a peace loving person claims he/she was intimitated by the mere presence of the weapon to a over anxious cop.

NiteQwill

06-09-2008, 04:00 PM

I think that your right (OMG, I agreed with SS) as far as being tossed by the cops and risking legal problems.
I wonder what is going to happen if a peace loving person claims he/she was intimitated by the mere presence of the weapon to a over anxious cop.

That's all it takes for OC to backfire on someone and the legal books. Either the carrier will be dead or in jail AND/OR an assemblyman creates an amendment to remove legal OC from the books.

Blacky

06-09-2008, 05:44 PM

Again... I would like to see someone legally strapped go about their day - shopping, gas up, walk the dog etc. Along with a videographer close by to catch any responses.

Decoligny

06-09-2008, 05:50 PM

I think that your right (OMG, I agreed with SS) as far as being tossed by the cops and risking legal problems.
I wonder what is going to happen if a peace loving person claims he/she was intimitated by the mere presence of the weapon to a over anxious cop.

Absolutely NOTHING. In the end. It may end up costing some time and money, but in order to advance our 2nd Amendment Rights some of us are willing to take that chance.

The instance in the mall http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/5988.html that CrazedSS hinted at being "more hassle than it's worth", well if you read you will find out the following:

The officers informed me that I was to be banned from the mall but no charges were going to be pressed against me. They would also proceed to nag me that they were merely doing their job (to which I sarcastically agreed), that I was crazy to do this to which I replied it's perfectly legal. They also told me some information to try and scare me such as "what if a rookie cop was the arresting officer and he shot you." To this I replied I would either take legal recourse against the proper parties or I would simply be dead and that in that case it wouldn't matter.)...A right that goes unexercised is a right that is lost. Don't let the ignorance or fear of others prevent you from fully exercising your rights under the law.

The guy in the mall thought it was well worth the effort to educate a few law enforcement personnel on the legality of Open Carry.

The 2nd Amendment is a Civil Right. Just imagine the country if Civil Rights Activists who fought for Racial Equality thought the way CrazedSS thinks. "It's not worth the risk of being jailed, or possibly being killed." We would still have Whites Only drinking fountains.

Some of us are willing to put our Security on the line for a little bit of Liberty.

tombinghamthegreat

06-09-2008, 05:56 PM

I wonder what is going to happen if a peace loving person claims he/she was intimitated by the mere presence of the weapon to a over anxious cop.

Wouldn't that only make open carry more entertaining?;)

pullnshoot25

06-09-2008, 07:00 PM

NiteQwill

06-09-2008, 07:25 PM

SO have any Open Carry people been shot at/killed or is this just one of those many myths like "You are more likely to kill your brother than a robber if you have a gun in the house" or other such perverted logic?

No, because no one open carries in California ;):gene:

The above individual should be caught OC by a major metro PD, LAPD, OCSD, SDPD and see if he gets the same treatment, I seriously doubt it. I'd be willing to bet he would be in handcuffs for awhile longer than he was.

You guys who want to put your personal security on the line, go ahead. For some of us, we have families, small kids, and friends who would like us to be around instead of explaining to the DA, LEOs, God at the Pearly white gates, whatever why "of course it is legal to OC." I'm sure my spouse would be pissed off if I were spending college funds for the kids on lawyer fees. Sorry, but to me, that's reality and a reality I'm COMFORTABLE living in.

CitaDeL

06-09-2008, 07:28 PM

I'm with you 100%. There is a big difference between "rights" and "responsibilities". It might be your "right" to open carry but I think it's everyone's "responsibility" not to create possible panic and 911 calls. Especially your responsibility as a gun owner not to draw negative attention to the gun group.
Just because you can doesn't me you should. Goes for a lot of things.

Keep your guns safely locked away and out of sight, do you?

At the risk of being punished by the administration and otherwise ostrasized by membership here, I believe this makes you a good 'negro'. You are dutifully showing obedience to masters who are happy to whip gun owners for stepping out of place, using law enforcement to do the dirty work. These masters manufacture more chains and bondage in the form of legislation to enlsave people who have done nothing wrong.

I draw these parallels with skin color and open carry, because they have the same roots in our civil rights and both are an 'appearance' issue. I'm certain there was a time where it was 'inappropriate' to permit black slaves in common areas expected to be exclusively white. While it may not have created a 'panic' it was no doubt 'frowned upon' and measures were taken to ensure that this discomfort would never happen again.

So would you say that you are for or against racial segregation? If you are against it, then telling people not to assert their civil rights for fear of inducing a panic makes you something of a hypocrit, because you are telling gun owners they must self-segregate and not make their presence known for fear of offending someone.

The answer to racial division and apartheid was and will always be desegregation and equality. As a gun owner, I demand and deserve the same treatment regardless of whether or not I chose to be armed. So why should I abide by your wishes to not draw 'negative' attention to the second amendment movement? Do you suppose there were some blacks who looked at Rosa Parks or MLK Jr. and thought to themselves, "Sit where you are told and shut the hell up- You'll make it worse for black people..." Maybe there were, but I can attest- none of them made history.

NiteQwill

06-09-2008, 07:53 PM

Keep your guns safely locked away and out of sight, do you?

It the risk of being punished by the administration and otherwise ostrasized by membership here, I believe this makes you a good 'negro'. You are dutifully showing obedience to masters who are happy to whip gun owners for stepping out of place, using law enforcement to do the dirty work. These masters manufacture more chains and bondage in the form of legislation to enlsave people who have done nothing wrong.

I draw these parallels with skin color and open carry, because they have the same roots in our civil rights and both are an 'appearance' issue. I'm certain there was a time where it was 'inappropriate' to permit black slaves in common areas expected to be exclusively white. While it may not have created a 'panic' it was no doubt 'frowned upon' and measures were taken to ensure that this discomfort would never happen again.

So would you say that you are for or against racial segregation? If you are against it, then telling people not to assert their civil rights for fear of inducing a panic makes you something of a hypocrit, because you are telling gun owners they must self-segregate and not make their presence known for fear of offending someone.

The answer to racial division and apartheid was and will always be desegregation and equality. As a gun owner, I demand and deserve the same treatment regardless of whether or not I chose to be armed. So why should I abide by your wishes to not draw 'negative' attention to the second amendment movement? Do you suppose there were some blacks who looked at Rosa Parks or MLK Jr. and thought to themselves, "Sit where you are told and shut the hell up- You'll make it worse for black people..." Maybe there were, but I can attest- none of them made history.
Are you serious? You're going to compare contemporary OC here in California to the Civil Rights movement? God, have we become this far-fetched in this thread?

The Civil Rights movement may have come but I can guarantee you that racial segregation still exists in our nation today, either subtly or bluntly, although on a smaller scale. You can demand equality all you want but the persons around you will think otherwise. This is the reality of things, legally or not. I'm sorry, but in my personal experience, fear of such consequences because of my skin color kept me alive and away from harm.

tombinghamthegreat

06-09-2008, 08:13 PM

Are you serious? You're going to compare contemporary OC here in California to the Civil Rights movement? God, have we become this far-fetched in this thread?

The civil rights act and OC are very similar. The CA republic is oppressing our right to bear arms much like the local governments in the south were impeding on black people's individual rights. The question is, should individuals stand up for their rights against an oppressive government or surrender(for whatever reason, family, fear ect.). That is the question we must ask ourselves.

NiteQwill

06-09-2008, 08:21 PM

The civil rights act and OC are very similar. The CA republic is oppressing our right to bear arms much like the local governments in the south were impeding on black people's individual rights. The question is, should individuals stand up for their rights against an oppressive government or surrender(for whatever reason, family, fear ect.). That is the question we must ask ourselves.

Point taken.

But there are no OC marches, rallies, or demonstrations. There are single, individual, lone persons out there that decide to do normal everyday stuff with an unloaded weapon on their hip. That doesn't change anything. If anything, that makes things worse for gun owners. All you need is one pissed off mother whose husband is an assemblyman who sits on a committee in the Capitol and BAM!!! amendment striking the legality of it out of the book and making OC illegal.

The reality is, you will not find many California gun owners willing to participate in "standing up" for their rights in any type of lobbying-affect towards our government. Not every gun owner is a Calgunner (many, if not all, of gun owners I personally know and mingle with laugh at the OC legality in California). My family and profession are too much at risk to take part in such action. So yes, I will tell you, I would bow down like a fearful sheep in such a demonstration. But that doesn't mean I don't pick my battles. I just feel OC in california is a lost battle with the type of politicizing we currently have in our state.

Bill_in_SD

06-09-2008, 08:24 PM

NiteQwill

06-09-2008, 08:24 PM

To add: The civil rights movement was fueled by the media. Such fuel is necessary to start any contemporary movement. You will not find such fuel here in California for gun rights.

NiteQwill

06-09-2008, 08:26 PM

They are not similar; they are the same.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_rights

Refer to paragraph 3 under "United States"

Granted, this is wikipedia, but the references seem to point in the same direction.

(edited to add, I just saw our post and feel the same)

And the armed agressors are who? California? So we should all have unloaded guns on our hips? Please.....

PatriotnMore

06-09-2008, 08:26 PM

To add: The civil rights movement was fueled by the media. Such fuel is necessary to start any contemporary movement. You will not find such fuel here in California for gun rights.

I believe you have made your position clear, however wrong it may be.

NiteQwill

06-09-2008, 08:28 PM

I believe you have made your position clear, however wrong it may be.

I'm wrong because I have a position? Or I'm wrong because I have a little common sense? Or I'm wrong because I choose my family over "legal OC" in California?

I see you're from Anaheim Hills. So you know the area. OC in Santa Ana, in or around the area of OCSD or Courthouse. Post results.

PatriotnMore

06-09-2008, 08:31 PM

I'm wrong because I have a position? Or I'm wrong because I have a little common sense? Or I'm wrong because I choose my family over "legal OC" in California?

I see you're from Anaheim Hills. So you know the area. OC in Santa Ana, in or around the area of OCSD or Courthouse. Post results.

Your position is yours, I don't agree with it, but I am not willing to beat a dead horse to try and change your mind. We will have to agree to dis-agree, and leave it at that.

NiteQwill

06-09-2008, 08:33 PM

Your position is yours, I don't agree with it, but I am not willing to beat a dead horse to try and change your mind. We will have to agree to dis-agree, and leave it at that.

Agreed. And a gentleman at that. :):surrender:

PatriotnMore

06-09-2008, 08:36 PM

:)Agreed. And a gentleman at that.:patriot:

CitaDeL

06-09-2008, 08:37 PM

Are you serious? You're going to compare contemporary OC here in California to the Civil Rights movement? God, have we become this far-fetched in this thread?

The Civil Rights movement may have come but I can guarantee you that racial segregation still exists in our nation today, either subtly or bluntly, although on a smaller scale. You can demand equality all you want but the persons around you will think otherwise. This is the reality of things, legally or not. I'm sorry, but in my personal experience, fear of such consequences because of my skin color kept me alive and away from harm.

Just what is far-fetched about this comparisom? Would it help if I were a black man with a gun?

You assert that racial segregation still exists- that may be true to the extent that it is now elective segregation... but not mandated by government. How is elective segregation different from gunowners electing to refrain from open carry? Why should any person adhere to some uncodified social norm in exchange for their inalienable rights? Do you think any black man would tolerate being harrassed by anyone on the basis of their appearance- not bothering to contact the ACLU and the NAACP? Where is the same fortitude among our gun toting bretheren? Have we lost the strength to fight for our ideals? Will we only own guns to keep them locked safely in our homes? Is that the only refuge where we may be allowed security? We know the anti-gunners would abolish even that- so why must we concede further?

We cannot win if we oblige the opposition by disarming ourselves. If you own it, you ought to carry it like youre not ashamed. Anything less, will give them sufficient excuse to legislate it away under the pretense--"You didnt need it anyway- you never used it..."

NiteQwill

06-09-2008, 08:41 PM

Just what is far-fetched about this comparisom? Would it help if I were a black man with a gun?

You assert that racial segregation still exists- that may be true to the extent that it is now elective segregation... but not mandated by government. How is elective segregation different from gunowners electing to refrain from open carry? Why should any person adhere to some uncodified social norm in exchange for their inalienable rights? Do you think any black man would tolerate being harrassed by anyone on the basis of their appearance- not bothering to contact the ACLU and the NAACP? Where is the same fortitude among our gun toting bretheren? Have we lost the strength to fight for our ideals? Will we only own guns to keep them locked safely in our homes? Is that the only refuge where we may be allowed security? We know the anti-gunners would abolish even that- so why must we concede further?

We cannot win if we oblige the opposition by disarming ourselves. If you own it, you ought to carry it like youre not ashamed. Anything less, will give them sufficient excuse to legislate it away under the pretense--"You didnt need it anyway- you never used it..."

Personal experience: I was refused SERVICE in a Southern state in 2002 during a PCS move because of my skin color. My buddy, who was white, had to give my order to the lady. (this was a food diner) This was a small town, roughly 2,000 population. And many times more in smaller towns in Texas, Alabama, and other places while in the Army. It's on a smaller scale, but exists nontheless.

And, I surrender on the topic already. ;)

CitaDeL

06-09-2008, 09:15 PM

And, I surrender on the topic already. ;)

Then I will spare you any further diatribes...

I will say though that any institutionalized discrimination must be met with all available opposition- including the legal variety... whether that discrimination be for being armed or being a minority.

Matt@EntrepriseArms

06-09-2008, 09:17 PM

First- since it was written and not spoken, what I wrote is not a 'speech'.

Second- I think most people understand that there is a possibility of 'bad things' happening during open carry- however, this is true of any actions we take in our day to day lives. If you look at the accounts, even those involving law enforcement in southern California, the outcome is not nearly as bad as what some gun proponents here would have everyone believe.

Ok, captian obvious. But I'm pretty sure I saw your lips moving while you cut 'n' pasted it, so it still counts as a speech in my book.

Anyway, I asked the quite a few police officers I know or encounter professionally, and while most thought it was illegal, none thought it was a good idea. What was their response to my pointing out that it was technically legal?

Hook me up and arrest me anyway, and get me into the court system and let the court figure it out. Call them bad cops or whatever you want, but they don't care, nor do they want to care.

So while some people can get away with it, and others will foolishly listen do bad advice and get themselves in trouble, I think there are more important things to worry about right now than open carry in CA.

This whole thread is a moot point anyway, but has provided some good laughs, so it wasn't a total waste :43:

PatriotnMore

06-09-2008, 09:59 PM

Hook me up and arrest me anyway, and get me into the court system and let the court figure it out. Call them bad cops or whatever you want, but they don't care, nor do they want to care.

Good, and exactly why this may need to be pursued all the way to the SCOTUS if need be. I could care less, if LEO's care or not. It is not their responsibility to make law, it is their's to enforce it. If they choose to ignore it, great, will have our day, and the innocent will prevail. They can either choose to be responsible with the law, or abuse it, either way, they don't get a free pass because they are LEO.

LOW2000

06-09-2008, 10:15 PM

hoffmang

06-09-2008, 10:22 PM

Open Carry being banned would actually help the legal position of the pro gun cause. Everyone understands that, right?

-Gene

PatriotnMore

06-09-2008, 10:28 PM

I still find it amusing that the people who already don't OC keep throwing out the arguement of "If you keep doing this, its going to get banned!". Well if it does, its not going to hurt you since you think its silly or stupid or whatever, it's only going to effect the people who are actually doing it.

Ignorance best sums it up. These people have already surrendered their rights in their mind. Lets deal with facts, not hyperbole.
For the issue of whether a firearm, by itself, justifies detaining a person, there are many federal cases addressing the issue. United States v. Ubiles, 224 F.3d 213 (3d Cir. 2000) declares that possession of a firearm in public, with no other circumstances present, does not justify a stop. "For all the officers knew, even assuming the reliability of the tip that Ubiles possessed a gun, Ubiles was . . . lawfully exercising his right . . . to possess a gun in public." See also United States v. Dudley, 854 F. Supp. 570 (S.D.Ind. 1994), in which the court declared that a report of persons with guns did not justify an investigative stop. "In short, the Government failed to establish . . . that some reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, based on articulable facts, justified this seizure. And, if the stop itself is unlawful, neither Terry nor Michigan v. Long authorize the police to search the suspects or the suspect's vehicle for weapons, even if the officers reasonably fear for their safety."

Likewise, the U.S. Supreme Court in Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000), declared that there is no "gun exception" to the Fourth Amendment.

Crazed_SS

06-09-2008, 10:48 PM

Absolutely NOTHING. In the end. It may end up costing some time and money, but in order to advance our 2nd Amendment Rights some of us are willing to take that chance.

The instance in the mall http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum12/5988.html that CrazedSS hinted at being "more hassle than it's worth", well if you read you will find out the following:

The officers informed me that I was to be banned from the mall but no charges were going to be pressed against me. They would also proceed to nag me that they were merely doing their job (to which I sarcastically agreed), that I was crazy to do this to which I replied it's perfectly legal. They also told me some information to try and scare me such as "what if a rookie cop was the arresting officer and he shot you." To this I replied I would either take legal recourse against the proper parties or I would simply be dead and that in that case it wouldn't matter.)...A right that goes unexercised is a right that is lost. Don't let the ignorance or fear of others prevent you from fully exercising your rights under the law.

The guy in the mall thought it was well worth the effort to educate a few law enforcement personnel on the legality of Open Carry.

The 2nd Amendment is a Civil Right. Just imagine the country if Civil Rights Activists who fought for Racial Equality thought the way CrazedSS thinks. "It's not worth the risk of being jailed, or possibly being killed." We would still have Whites Only drinking fountains.

Some of us are willing to put our Security on the line for a little bit of Liberty.

I dont think the comparison to the civil rights movement is a proper analogy. There was a practical purpose behind a person demanding equal rights under the law. In the end, the benefit they achieved was much greater than the risk.

There is no point to carrying an unloaded gun as there is nothing to be gained in the end. I guess you might get the satisfaction of "sticking it to the man", but like I said, many people would rather not risk their livelihood over something so trivial.

bubbagump

06-09-2008, 10:58 PM

CA_Libertarian

06-09-2008, 11:05 PM

WOULD YOU WANT TO BET YOUR LIFE TO SEE WHETHER SOMETHING BAD WILL HAPPEN NEXT?

No, but I am willing to risk my neck to exercise my rights. I don't fault those who are not willing to do it. However, I refuse to let fear of searches, seizure (of property or self), injury, or death dissuade me from maintaining what few rights I have left in this state.

[quote]I would assume most officers want to return home to their families, instead of finding out whether this guy they've never meet in their life is going to kill them.

And you consider this murder?[/qoute]

So you think the taking of life is an acceptable alternative to 'finding out' if someone is dangerous? Last time I checked the only justification for homocide in CA is reasonable fear of imminent, grave danger. The mere (legal) presence of a firearm is not reasonable cause for that kind of fear.

Crazed_SS

06-09-2008, 11:08 PM

SO have any Open Carry people been shot at/killed or is this just one of those many myths like "You are more likely to kill your brother than a robber if you have a gun in the house" or other such perverted logic?

Perverted logic?

You think the police wont draw down on you if you make one false move? Police shoot people with guns all the f'in time.. especially SDPD and San Diego Sherriff's Dept. Deputies killed like 5 people in one month last year and a special investigation had to be opened. Sure they were all bad, but
if the cops have to interact with you while you're carrying a gun, they will see you as a threat until they can determine otherwise.. they dont know you're a good guy.

Here's what happens when the SDPD simply think you have a gun.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20070706-1422-bn06gunbelt.html

Several minutes later they walked out of the bank to see 10 to 15 police officers with their real guns pointing at them, Johnson said.

“They said 'Put your hands in the air,' ” he said.

It's a pretty good chance you will get the same treatment if you carried a real gun. You might even get cited and lose your piece depending on how the cops feel like interpreting "loaded" at the time. SDPD doesnt play aroud.. and the DA here is always on their side.

CA_Libertarian

06-09-2008, 11:17 PM

SO have any Open Carry people been shot at/killed or is this just one of those many myths like "You are more likely to kill your brother than a robber if you have a gun in the house" or other such perverted logic?

Yes, I have been shot at twice, had a gun pointed at me in a third incident, and was threatened with knives on two occasions...

oh wait... that was before I owned a gun.

hoffmang

06-09-2008, 11:32 PM

I dont think the comparison to the civil rights movement is a proper analogy. There was a practical purpose behind a person demanding equal rights under the law. In the end, the benefit they achieved was much greater than the risk.

There is no point to carrying an unloaded gun as there is nothing to be gained in the end.

You are seriously going to take the position that Rosa Parks sitting in the front of the bus was both seriously important on its own merits (both ends of the bus get there at the same time) and not a stepping stone on the road to the end?

The civil rights analogy is far more apt than the naysayers who wish to protect the status quo wish to make it.

You sound an awful lot like the middle class black clergy that Mr. King so eloquently challenged (http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html).

Saying all that, I think OC is a touch early - but we're talking months, not years here.

Please understand the history before you repeat it on the wrong side.

-Gene

CA_Libertarian

06-09-2008, 11:34 PM

There is no point to carrying an unloaded gun as there is nothing to be gained in the end. I guess you might get the satisfaction of "sticking it to the man", but like I said, many people would rather not risk their livelihood over something so trivial.

My goal is to educate people (including LE). Most people don't carry guns because they think it's illegal. Once people are educated, some are interested in open carry. If you visit the forums over at OpenCarry.org you could see people regularly posting say things like, "just found this site... can't believe this is legal... can't wait to try it."

Once we have enough people interested we will have large gatherings to petition our government. We will have marches - in fact, we already had a meetup with 7 of 13 attendees openly armed. We will have petition signings. One day, you may even see some civil disobedience. Hopefully this will lead to case law that finds PC 12031 to be unconstitutional. Then we can practice loaded open carry, which will make us safer.

You make the assumption that nothing can be gained. You are mistaken.

bubbagump

06-10-2008, 12:02 AM

I would assume most officers want to return home to their families, instead of finding out whether this guy they've never meet in their life is going to kill them.

And you consider this murder?

So you think the taking of life is an acceptable alternative to 'finding out' if someone is dangerous? Last time I checked the only justification for homocide in CA is reasonable fear of imminent, grave danger. The mere (legal) presence of a firearm is not reasonable cause for that kind of fear.

AGAIN...GOD FORBID THIS LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN WHO IS OPENLY CARRYING A HANDGUN MAKES SOME TYPE OF AGGRESSIVE MOVEMENT WHICH THE OFFICER PERCEIVES AS HARMFUL TO HIS HEALTH OR THAT OF BYSTANDERS/PARTNERS...

Aggressive movements=Reaching for holstered weapon or reaching for other location on body which may conceal a firearm.

Under a stressful situation such as responding to a 417 call expecting a violent person (especially if its the norm in the community), you cannot expect an officer to wait for the weapon to be pointed at him. The aggressive movement as defined above would be enough.

And I DO NOT think that constitutes murder on the officers part.

I can think of one situation where an UNARMED man was shot many many times during a traffic stop because he made a movement he should not have made, and the officers (I was not there, so I don't know what they saw) believed they saw a gun. There was no gun found at the crime scene. One of the officers (whom I know), was sued in civil court for many many dollars. He ended up winning the case. I DO NOT consider that officer a murderer.

You've got an example here of a man being shot by law enforcement even when he DID NOT have a gun on him. Now take that legally holstered weapon and wonder to yourself how that could have made the above situation much worse.

PatriotnMore

06-10-2008, 07:51 AM

[/B]
I can think of one situation where an UNARMED man was shot many many times during a traffic stop because he made a movement he should not have made, and the officers (I was not there, so I don't know what they saw) believed they saw a gun. There was no gun found at the crime scene. One of the officers (whom I know), was sued in civil court for many many dollars. He ended up winning the case. I DO NOT consider that officer a murderer.

You've got an example here of a man being shot by law enforcement even when he DID NOT have a gun on him. Now take that legally holstered weapon and wonder to yourself how that could have made the above situation much worse.

This does not surprise me one bit. LEO's are let off the hook more often than not for poor decisions and mistakes. LEO's just love to rally around the troops for the sake of the brotherhood.

Anyone, with any training knows the difference between pulling a gun, finger off the trigger to assess a threat, and pulling a gun blasting away. If the only reason for taking a life was a percieved agressive movment based on some knuckle heads lack of sound judgement, especially when no weapon was at the scene, he should have been found guilty, and at minimum let go from his duties as an LEO.

Any LEO who makes a bad mistake is going to say, umm, yeah I saw a gun and was in fear for my life. Its called lying to save ones ***.

You LEO's keep patting yourself on the back.

Had this guy been found innocent, you would probably be telling us how right they were in their decisions. http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/22/elderly.shootout.ap/index.html?eref=ib_topstories

MudCamper

06-10-2008, 09:25 AM

[/B]

AGAIN...GOD FORBID THIS LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN WHO IS OPENLY CARRYING A HANDGUN MAKES SOME TYPE OF AGGRESSIVE MOVEMENT WHICH THE OFFICER PERCEIVES AS HARMFUL TO HIS HEALTH OR THAT OF BYSTANDERS/PARTNERS...

Aggressive movements=Reaching for holstered weapon or reaching for other location on body which may conceal a firearm.

Under a stressful situation such as responding to a 417 call expecting a violent person (especially if its the norm in the community), you cannot expect an officer to wait for the weapon to be pointed at him. The aggressive movement as defined above would be enough.

And I DO NOT think that constitutes murder on the officers part.

I can think of one situation where an UNARMED man was shot many many times during a traffic stop because he made a movement he should not have made, and the officers (I was not there, so I don't know what they saw) believed they saw a gun. There was no gun found at the crime scene. One of the officers (whom I know), was sued in civil court for many many dollars. He ended up winning the case. I DO NOT consider that officer a murderer.

You've got an example here of a man being shot by law enforcement even when he DID NOT have a gun on him. Now take that legally holstered weapon and wonder to yourself how that could have made the above situation much worse.

The sad reality of this story is not just that this kind of horrific police negligence has become the norm, but that people like you actually defend it.

One of the beneficial side effects of OC is that it forces people and LEOs to remember that normal law abiding people pack guns too, not just cops and criminals. Our society has forgotten that firearms are a tool used by the decent citizen, and needs to be reminded of that fact. Your story only reenforces this need to me.

GuyW

06-10-2008, 11:00 AM

...If anything, that makes things worse for gun owners. All you need is one pissed off mother whose husband is an assemblyman who sits on a committee in the Capitol and BAM!!! amendment striking the legality of it out of the book and making OC illegal.

I don't get it, all you naysayers. You (corporately) say you wouldn't OC for various reasons, so why would you care if OC is outlawed? (not that I agree it will be...)

NiteQwill

06-10-2008, 11:54 AM

I don't get it, all you naysayers. You (corporately) say you wouldn't OC for various reasons, so why would you care if OC is outlawed? (not that I agree it will be...)

I'll chime in, again. ;) One more time...

I do care. I would in fact vote YES for outlawing OC. Like I pointed out before, I think it's stupid, retarded, fill-in-the-blank... Flame me now. :eek:

There, does that make people happy? Sheesh.

Edit: My best analogy to this is the people who wear camo (to the range, outside, etc.). I just view them, as well as other close gun enthusiasts, as posers, fakes, and wannabes. Frankly, those dressed in digi camo (whether in the military or not) look like idiots, and I laugh. The same goes with those who carry UNLOADED guns on their sides.

Hopi

06-10-2008, 11:58 AM

I'll chime in, again. ;) One more time...

I do care. I would in fact vote YES for outlawing OC. Like I pointed out before, I think it's stupid, retarded, fill-in-the-blank... Flame me now. :eek:

There, does that make people happy? Sheesh.

Edit: My best analogy to this is the people who wear camo (to the range, outside, etc.). I just view them, as well as other close gun enthusiasts, as posers, fakes, and wannabes. Frankly, those dressed in digi camo (whether in the military or not) look like idiots, and I laugh. The same goes with those who carry UNLOADED guns on their sides.

So, to get this straight...
You would vote to infringe and outright outlaw "the right of the people to keep and bear arms"?

This is a 2nd amendment forum, did you get lost?

NiteQwill

06-10-2008, 12:14 PM

So, to get this straight...
You would vote to infringe and outright outlaw "the right of the people to keep and bear arms"?

This is a 2nd amendment forum, did you get lost?

Bear arms against who? Please clarify.

Yes, you read correctly, I would vote to outlaw OC. I stated my reason, but maybe we should start a 1st Amendment forum to clarify that, too.

Hopi

06-10-2008, 12:20 PM

Bear arms against who? Please clarify.

Yes, you read correctly, I would vote to outlaw OC. I stated my reason, but maybe we should start a 1st Amendment forum to clarify that, too.

By that logic, you would vote to outlaw free speech, only allowing the right to be enjoyed if that speech is contained in a locked and soundproof box....1000ft from a school at all times?

NiteQwill

06-10-2008, 12:27 PM

By that logic, you would vote to outlaw free speech, only allowing the right to be enjoyed if that speech is contained in a locked and soundproof box....1000ft from a school at all times?
Yea, why not? I would vote to outlaw free speech too. I would don my military uniform and support an overthrow of our nation in support of a rogue general. Let's throw in plush teddy bears and candy canes for the kids, please.

CA_Libertarian

06-10-2008, 12:31 PM

Bear arms against who? Please clarify.

Yes, you read correctly, I would vote to outlaw OC. I stated my reason, but maybe we should start a 1st Amendment forum to clarify that, too.

This is, in my opinion, the biggest argument for the protection of free speech. I like the fact that idiots like you express your opinions. This helps me to identify the idiots. How much harder that would be if we didn't have free speech.

Thank you for letting me know who my enemy is. Anybody that would use force (even by voting to let the thugs with badges use force) deserves the same fate as anybody that would infringe on the rights of another.

GuyW

06-10-2008, 12:37 PM

...I would in fact vote YES for outlawing OC....

Thanks for clarifying that you are in fact an enemy of freedom.

PatriotnMore

06-10-2008, 12:41 PM

I like the fact that idiots like you express your opinions. This helps me to identify the idiots. Thank you for letting me know who my enemy is.

I feel the same about many who post here. It's better to know who your enemies are, as to keep them closer. I welcome all opinions, it only helps me to know who I would want to invest time in, and those I definitely don't.

Spelunker

06-10-2008, 12:44 PM

NiteQwill

06-10-2008, 12:44 PM

I'm guessing you guys never heard of sarcasm? Wow. The perverted, concrete society we live in today. The lack of analytical logic sweeped under the rug for the triumph of a one-eye-one-view society.

yellowfin

06-10-2008, 12:47 PM

Even in supposedly safer areas the need for CCW still exists. The criminally inclined do not completely forego venturing into them, nor do the residents completely quarantine themselves inside them.

NiteQwill

06-10-2008, 12:51 PM

Hey NiteQuill,
When did you have your Orchiectomy? Maybe you feel safe since you live in the safest city in the nation (Irvine, CA, for the last 4 years). Not all of us can live there so we must exercise out civil rights to protect ourselves. Remember, it is not the job of the police to protect us.

For clarification. I call this home now. I've lived in LA/Long Beach during the riots (in which I was shot), New York, Philadelphia, Texas, Georgia, Florida, Washington, Las Vegas, Europe, and overseas. I've beared arms in defense of a nation when I was called upon (multiple times) in instances where most, if not all, would and will never hear about my specific contributions when we look back in history where our country resides conflict with. Don't point me out for choosing an area to live safely for myself and family. Don't worry, when things go bad, I can guarantee larger testicles will be brought to the table. ;)

CA_Libertarian

06-10-2008, 12:57 PM

I'm guessing you guys never heard of sarcasm? Wow.

One of the things about the written word (versus the spoken word) is that it takes much more creativity to create inflection. Sarcasm will fail to be interpreted as such about 99% of the time.

I am glad to hear that you weren't serious.

NiteQwill

06-10-2008, 01:01 PM

One of the things about the written word (versus the spoken word) is that it takes much more creativity to create inflection. Sarcasm will fail to be interpreted as such about 99% of the time.

I am glad to hear that you weren't serious.
99% of the time, I'm never serious. Meet me in person and I guarantee you that I'm filled with puns and jokes all the time. :) I may not leave a laugh on every person but a slight grin or chuckle will not be absent. :D

GuyW

06-10-2008, 01:33 PM

99% of the time, I'm never serious. Meet me in person and I guarantee you that I'm filled with puns and jokes all the time. :) I may not leave a laugh on every person but a slight grin or chuckle will not be absent. :D

OK - I'll offer an olive branch to you.

We are a serious bunch here about various issues...

NiteQwill

06-10-2008, 01:38 PM

OK - I'll offer an olive branch to you.

We are a serious bunch here about various issues...
:) Understandable

I left my official, serious posts yesterday. :)

We just need thicker armor in here. But even under armor, let's not lose sense of our humility, humbleness, and most of all, humor at times. It only keeps ALL of us sane. :D

hoffmang

06-10-2008, 02:26 PM

Bear arms against who? Please clarify.

The same person you bear your cellphone against. Please don't fall for an invalid linguistic argument from the other side there.

Jefferson wrote a law regarding the bearing of a gun when hunting in Virginia that was just after the adoption of the Constitution. Bear only means carry.

-Gene

ViPER395

06-10-2008, 02:30 PM

I must not be reading this right. Someone help me out here.

Bear arms against who? Please clarify.

Yes, you read correctly, I would vote to outlaw OC. I stated my reason, but maybe we should start a 1st Amendment forum to clarify that, too.

bubbagump

06-10-2008, 03:28 PM

AGAIN...GOD FORBID THIS LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN WHO IS OPENLY CARRYING A HANDGUN MAKES SOME TYPE OF AGGRESSIVE MOVEMENT WHICH THE OFFICER PERCEIVES AS HARMFUL TO HIS HEALTH OR THAT OF BYSTANDERS/PARTNERS...

Aggressive movements=Reaching for holstered weapon or reaching for other location on body which may conceal a firearm.

Under a stressful situation such as responding to a 417 call expecting a violent person (especially if its the norm in the community), you cannot expect an officer to wait for the weapon to be pointed at him. The aggressive movement as defined above would be enough.

And I DO NOT think that constitutes murder on the officers part.

I can think of one situation where an UNARMED man was shot many many times during a traffic stop because he made a movement he should not have made, and the officers (I was not there, so I don't know what they saw) believed they saw a gun. There was no gun found at the crime scene. One of the officers (whom I know), was sued in civil court for many many dollars. He ended up winning the case. I DO NOT consider that officer a murderer.

You've got an example here of a man being shot by law enforcement even when he DID NOT have a gun on him. Now take that legally holstered weapon and wonder to yourself how that could have made the above situation much worse.

There was a video of when the shooting went down. The video was presented in court. I'm sure the jury believes they made the right decision.

YOU were not there. I was not there. We did not see what those officers considered a threat to their lives.

And do not forget that most of us have never been involved in high-risk stops with loaded guns pointed at people. You can not pretend that everything that happens in those minutes during that stop are crystal clear and stress-free. That is the danger of having nervous people pointing guns at you. Hence the reason I would NOT WANT THE POSSIBILITY OF GUNS BEING POINTED AT ME.

You may question their integrity all you want, but it does not make you right.

bubbagump

06-10-2008, 06:04 PM

This isn't the only forum where this subject is being discussed. I was taking a peak through the off-topic forum at spearboard.com and noticed a similar thread.

Some of the folks over in that forum are posting up some good points as well. Thought you guys or any fellow Spearo's on this forum would like to take a look for yourselves.

Spelunker

06-10-2008, 06:15 PM

hey bubba,
you got a link for that, the website is huge. I looked through the gun section but they were talking about spearguns for fishing... who woulda thought.

bubbagump

06-10-2008, 07:47 PM

hey bubba,
you got a link for that, the website is huge. I looked through the gun section but they were talking about spearguns for fishing... who woulda thought.

Coming right up sir!

http://www.spearboard.com/showthread.php?t=64410

CA_Libertarian

06-10-2008, 09:29 PM

There was a video of when the shooting went down. The video was presented in court. I'm sure the jury believes they made the right decision.

YOU were not there. I was not there. We did not see what those officers considered a threat to their lives.

And do not forget that most of us have never been involved in high-risk stops with loaded guns pointed at people. You can not pretend that everything that happens in those minutes during that stop are crystal clear and stress-free. That is the danger of having nervous people pointing guns at you. Hence the reason I would NOT WANT THE POSSIBILITY OF GUNS BEING POINTED AT ME.

You may question their integrity all you want, but it does not make you right.

This is another issue altogether: high-risk no-knock warrants. I don't think it is appropriate to derail this thread with that topic. If you want to discuss it I would be glad to tear into it in another thread. Just start the topic if you're interested.

bubbagump

06-11-2008, 07:15 AM

This is another issue altogether: high-risk no-knock warrants. I don't think it is appropriate to derail this thread with that topic. If you want to discuss it I would be glad to tear into it in another thread. Just start the topic if you're interested.

:tt1:

I love you man. You've been the biggest pain in the arse since I've started posting on this issue.

Your vigorous attempts to prove me wrong and voice your opinions have been, I must admit, pretty damn good. That goes for the other posters on this thread as well. Your attempts at making me look like an a-hole have succeeded.

And because of that...I throw the white flag up.

The way you guys defended this issue was impressive. And I will admit all you senile old fools changed some of my views.

CA_Libertarian:
As soon as I am of legal age to buy my first handgun, I will meet you wherever it is you reside and open carry with you. Maybe we can have a romantic dinner too. Strapped, of course ;)

As for the law enforcement thing. You cannot expect me not to stand up for my profession and the people I work with. I hope you all realize their are bad officers and good officers. I know this. If anything has turned me off to this line of work, it has been the actions of some bad LEO's and the fact that I think we DO have to much power. I think our privacy is very important. Point taken on some of the issues that were brought up on this topic.

And finally, I will not open carry in my area. One, because I don't have a handgun (and am not lucky enough to be gifted one by father/grandfather or mother/grandmother). And two, because although you guys did much convincing, I would not feel comfortable doing it in this area of California. I am a lowly college student. Court costs are for rich folk. And I also would not want an incident of being arrested for legal open carry, to come back and bite me in the buttocks if I ever tried to go sworn. I hope you all respect that.

I am glad there are folks like you who would stand up for our rights so vehemently. I will try to follow suit.

Oh, and by the way, I'm not gay...Only on the weekends and when I visit Texas.

I am done here. I will go to sleep now. I gotta be back at work at 2.

Mad Respect to all.

joeyriv

06-11-2008, 07:49 AM

If only the majority of our cops had this mindset.....

Re: Packing in public- "open carry"
Here' , as a LEO, what I like about 'open carry';

1. If they are openly displaying arms; I can initally assume that they meet the legal requirements for gun ownership.IE Not a convicted felon, no crimes of domestic abuse, not mentally ill, and so on.

2. Typically the bad guys don't carry openly. Hell, a holster is considered an accessory with alot of them. Pockets, waist bands,under car seats or in consoles, even found one in the palm of a mitten. They generally don't splurge on leather gear.

3. If somebody does posses a CCW, they declare it upon contact.Tells me they meet #1.
It ain't that difficult.

PatriotnMore

06-11-2008, 12:55 PM

[QUOTE=bubbagump;1274080]:tt1:

As for the law enforcement thing. You cannot expect me not to stand up for my profession and the people I work with.QUOTE]

No one, expects any less. I stand up for LEO's by and large, and I've made that quite clear on other posts. What I will not stand up for, and will stand up to, is abuse under the color or authority.

Moreover is, what I and other civilians see as blatant attempts by those in blue to stand up for their brothers when injustice and stupid decisions are made while in the course of duty. I don't expect perfection, I know mistakes will be made, I only expect an honest answer and assessment of those actions.

The job is not for everyone, and not everyone should be an LEO. I know the departments do their best to try and weed those individuals out but, these departments can not allow LEO's to learn by trial and error on making good decisions, at the cost of loss of life, of those who do not deserve it, nor the innocent.

I respect the badge, and uniform for what it represents. If that trust is lost by the general public, it will mean nothing but bad results to those who wear the uniform. Wear it with pride, honesty, and above all respect for those you serve, and these issues will go away.

GuyW

06-11-2008, 12:59 PM

CA_Libertarian

06-11-2008, 01:02 PM

:tt1:

I love you man. You've been the biggest pain in the arse since I've started posting on this issue.

Your vigorous attempts to prove me wrong and voice your opinions have been, I must admit, pretty damn good. That goes for the other posters on this thread as well. Your attempts at making me look like an a-hole have succeeded.

And because of that...I throw the white flag up.

The way you guys defended this issue was impressive. And I will admit all you senile old fools changed some of my views.

CA_Libertarian:
As soon as I am of legal age to buy my first handgun, I will meet you wherever it is you reside and open carry with you. Maybe we can have a romantic dinner too. Strapped, of course ;)

...

I always carry protection when I go on dates... even though I know I probably won't need it. :rofl2:

My hope is that in the near future open carry will be no big deal. The Heller decision may make a big difference there. Either way, I would be happy to buy you a beer (once you're of legal age to do that).

Army

06-11-2008, 09:03 PM

Bubba, you are a student, you are under 21, yet you claim LEO as a current profession?
...You cannot expect me not to stand up for my profession and the people I work with.

Perhaps I missed something in your profile?

NiteQwill

06-11-2008, 10:35 PM

Bubba, you are a student, you are under 21, yet you claim LEO as a current profession?

Perhaps I missed something in your profile?
Doesn't mean he doesn't work for the department as a civilian employee. My good friend was a employee for 7 years before she became a sheriff deputy (helps with GETTING the job, too).

bubbagump

06-11-2008, 11:36 PM

Bubba, you are a student, you are under 21, yet you claim LEO as a current profession?

Perhaps I missed something in your profile?

You didn't miss anything. I am non-sworn.

But don't let the whole non-sworn thing fool you. When our non-sworn people go to apply for LEO at other departments, the background investigators always interview our supervisors. These are the reactions the supervisors always get from the background investigators:

"You guys had guns, right?"

Or my favorite, "You guys let them do that!? We don't even let our officers do that!"

Thats why I talk the way I do. But do not take that the wrong way. I do not pretend to have the knowledge or experience of a Veteran LEO. But I will say that if you put me or any of my senior co-workers out on the street with a rookie straight out of academy...we would make him look bad.

Kinda like being one of those unarmed British cops.

So excuse any confusion I may have caused.

tombinghamthegreat

06-12-2008, 01:45 AM

You didn't miss anything. I am non-sworn.

But don't let the whole non-sworn thing fool you. When our non-sworn people go to apply for LEO at other departments, the background investigators always interview our supervisors.

It sounded like you were a older cop with a very negitive view of people exerising their right to bear arms.Well even though you disagree with the open carry movement at least when you work your way up you will know open carry is legal. Who knows, might run across more people open carrying after the LA times story.

Decoligny

06-12-2008, 06:22 AM

Doesn't mean he doesn't work for the department as a civilian employee. My good friend was a employee for 7 years before she became a sheriff deputy (helps with GETTING the job, too).

Yeah, but just because you want to be a cop while you work as a Civilian Employee FOR a Law Enforcement Agency doesn't mean you can claim "LEO" as your profession any more than wanting to ride a horse while working shoveling horsecrap allows you to claim "Jockey" as your profession.

You ain't one till you actually is one.

joeyriv

06-12-2008, 07:21 AM

Good GAWD, man - you can't be inserting a clear-thinking process into this thread...

...it's reserved for wild speculations and half-baked rhetoric about the sky falling, etc...

er... uhh... oh ya. My bad... :biggrinjester:

bubbagump

06-12-2008, 10:09 AM

Yeah, but just because you want to be a cop while you work as a Civilian Employee FOR a Law Enforcement Agency doesn't mean you can claim "LEO" as your profession any more than wanting to ride a horse while working shoveling horsecrap allows you to claim "Jockey" as your profession.

You ain't one till you actually is one.

Maybe this isn't aimed towards me, but again, I DID NOT CLAIM LEO (LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER) as my profession. I claimed what I do as a non-sworn employee AT a Law Enforcement Agency as my profession. There are more than just officers working inside a Law Enforcement agency. You got jailers, dispatchers, records people, property ladies, admin, forensics, etc working inside an agency to get things done. Each person within that agency considers what they do their profession.

And again, the way I was talking may give you the impression that I claim LEO, but I do not even pretend to be an LEO. But I speak for all non-sworn people (at least at my department and maybe 2 others), when I say that we do our own share of law enforcement work. And some of us stay non-sworn for a long time. So I consider non-sworn work a profession IN the field of Law Enforcement.

Again, sorry for any confusion.

bubbagump

06-12-2008, 10:16 AM

It sounded like you were a older cop with a very negitive view of people exerising their right to bear arms.Well even though you disagree with the open carry movement at least when you work your way up you will know open carry is legal. Who knows, might run across more people open carrying after the LA times story.

I've known open carry is legal:)

Decoligny

06-12-2008, 11:26 AM

Maybe this isn't aimed towards me, but again, I DID NOT CLAIM LEO (LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER) as my profession. I claimed what I do as a non-sworn employee AT a Law Enforcement Agency as my profession. There are more than just officers working inside a Law Enforcement agency. You got jailers, dispatchers, records people, property ladies, admin, forensics, etc working inside an agency to get things done. Each person within that agency considers what they do their profession.

And again, the way I was talking may give you the impression that I claim LEO, but I do not even pretend to be an LEO. But I speak for all non-sworn people (at least at my department and maybe 2 others), when I say that we do our own share of law enforcement work. And some of us stay non-sworn for a long time. So I consider non-sworn work a profession IN the field of Law Enforcement.

Again, sorry for any confusion.

No a problem. Without any previous mention of your working in a non-sworn support position it is just basic human nature to make assumptions from the limited data provided.

When you posted "As for the law enforcement thing. You cannot expect me not to stand up for my profession and the people I work with." it was probably seen by most of us here as you stating that you were a Law Enforcement Officer, when no such overt statement had been made.

CA_Libertarian

06-12-2008, 12:32 PM

When you posted "As for the law enforcement thing. You cannot expect me not to stand up for my profession and the people I work with." it was probably seen by most of us here as you stating that you were a Law Enforcement Officer, when no such overt statement had been made.

I made the same assumption, but I don't think it matters if you are a sworn officer, admin, or not associated with LE at all. Wrong is wrong.

For example, I work at a car dealership. I'm not in sales, never have been and don't plan to ever go into sales. If one of the salespeople I work with screwed you out of a rebate or bilked you on your trade-in (which really rarely happens) I would not stand up for them.

Don't let emotional attachment compromise your morals. That is the cause of most of the corruption in LE today: officer A makes a mistake, so officer B & C help him cover it up. Comradery and teamwork is important, but nothing trumps the rights of the individual.

pullnshoot25

06-12-2008, 12:52 PM

Not entirely relevant yet related and funny...

There is a woman at my church that says she works for the police department. Now, I know she is not sworn in or anything and for a while I never asked what she did, although I assumed it was clerical or some crap like that. We will get to her occupation in a minute.

When I mentioned one time that I wanted a full-on AK-47 but that I couldn't because I live in America's Toilet, she sternly told me that no one had a use for a machine gun and that is because that her work at the police department showed her all the machine guns they confiscate from people committing crimes all the time in the local area. I told her that the guns they are confiscating, if any at all, are Uzis with the sear filed down, not any of highly rare yet legally owned 4-15k firearms. On a side note, she asked me what anyone has a need for one for, hunting herds of deer? Aside from saying that hunting herds of deer with a machine gun is unnecessary though it would be cool to do at least once, I told her that the Founding Fathers intended for people to have arms similar in nature to the military arms, as they were afraid of a "police state" like the one she advocates and they never stated that our beloved 2nd amendment was for the purpose of hunting. Needless to say, the argument was a draw since she thinks that the police are just the best and out to help everyone but soon the day shall come when she sees the light of liberty!

Her occupation, you might ask? A crossing guard for the schools in the area. Somehow, she derived all her legal knowledge from that position.

I am sooo open carrying the next time I see her, just so I can see the look on her face.