PDA

View Full Version : WSJ Opines on Open Carry


navyinrwanda
04-30-2010, 4:00 AM
Even style and fashion critics have something to say about open carry...


OPINION: TASTE (http://online.wsj.com/public/search?article-doc-type=%7BTaste%7D&HEADER_TEXT=taste) | APRIL 30, 2010

Have Gun, Must Flaunt It?

By NANCY DEWOLF SMITH (http://online.wsj.com/search/term.html?KEYWORDS=NANCY+DEWOLF+SMITH&bylinesearch=true)

Like a fly on a birthday cake, the subject of open carry legally wearing a gun in public keeps landing in the news and nobody can swat it down. Those who would like to be rid of it range from some of the most ardent gun-controllers to some of the fiercest believers in the Second Amendment right to bear arms. Many of the latter live in the 43 states where it already is legal to openly wear a handgun (although rules vary about whether it can be loaded, etc.). That the majority of people who could walk around outfitted for the OK Corral choose not to do so ought to be a hint that the minority who are most eager to force open carry on the rest of us might belong in a special category of bozos.

Consider the case of James Goldberg, who walked up to the counter of a Glastonbury, Conn. Chili's restaurant in 2007 costumed in camouflage and wearing a pistol. Police were called and Mr. Goldberg was arrested, only to be cleared after it was determined that since he had a permit for the weapon he was not breaking a law.

While news reports in 2007 described Mr. Goldberg as the night manager at a liquor store, he told the Hartford Courant this month that he is a "trained firearms instructor, sells guns at a Newington gun retailer and runs a business that provides security for business executives and entertainment industry celebrities." Whatever else Mr. Goldberg is, he's a thoroughly modern Millie. Back in the day, authentic cowboys didn't sue when the going got tough, especially not for "emotional distress."

Equally unimpressive were the armed types who gathered in a Virginia Park this month to demonstrate support for open carry and their opposition to government in general and the Obama administration in particular. Like the characters who now make a practice of wearing handguns into Starbucks and other places of business, such demonstrators may yet turn out to be a godsend for the antigun crowd.

The latter can be so annoying that at some demented level it is possible to imagine the appeal of strolling the aisles at, say, a Whole Foods store, squeezing free-range chicken and bagging edamame with a Hammerli 208S target pistol on display. Yet a firearms dealer suggested to me this week that if open carrying were to become more common, even those of us who are uneasy now in the presence of public firearms would get used to seeing them around. After all, he said, a man "in the 1870s who left Philadelphia and went to Wyoming... was probably nervous as hell because everyone was toting a six-gun."

Which is why they called it the Wild West and we are lucky not to have been born then. Knowing Americans, however, if the open carry fad gathers steam in this century, at some point the urge to trump the Joneses might well extend to guns. They could even become fashion must-haves. A recent article in Women & Guns magazine noted that a number of firearms and shooting accessories now come in colors meant to appeal to female tastes. As the article's headline asked, "Is Pink the New Black?"

Surveys suggest that serious shooters are not particularly drawn to girlie colors. But what about the rest of the female population? The same forces that compel women to change pocketbooks and fingernail colors may add a vexing new list of daily dressing decisions, like "What color pistol grip goes with this outfit?" Next thing you know, women could be trading tips on the Web about the best way to attract men in a world where every girl can have a gun. Should she try to stand out from the crowd with a piece of rustic exotica that reminds him of the safari dolls in 1953's "Mogambo," like a .416 Rigby? Or go with something more crudely flashy, like one of the pretend AK-47s?

Speaking of serious shooters, I don't know a soul among gun owners who is itching to prance around showing everybody what is in their holster. Most of the time, citizens who carry weapons in public places are doing it for protection, and that means concealment. They don't want their handgun easily grabbed by some idiot in a checkout line, and they don't want a potential aggressor to know what they have on them or where it is. If flashing an armory were anything but a stunt, our air marshals would be strapped like Pancho Villa.

Ms. Smith is a member of the Journal's editorial board and a TV critic.

Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

hill billy
04-30-2010, 7:41 AM
:rolleyes: Does it ever end?

loather
04-30-2010, 8:17 AM
Unsurprising, considering the source.

pdq_wizzard
04-30-2010, 8:30 AM
Maybe she needs to work more on her critic in the TV world? :rofl2:

This reads like a bad novel.

cadurand
04-30-2010, 9:10 AM
Where are all these guns being grabbed out of people's holsters?

It's a scary world these people live in. People just grabbing everyone else's stuff..

If the guy in front of me at the checkpoint line at Whole Food's had a gun in a holster.. he'd be the last guy in line I'd consider stealing from.

CCWFacts
04-30-2010, 9:45 AM
Unsurprising, considering the source.

Unsurprising considering that's the impression OC is going to make on probably 95% or more of the population, including many NRA members and gun rights supporters.

Where are all these guns being grabbed out of people's holsters?

I know, there don't seem to be any incidents of that reported. And the police keep saying it's a public safety issue, but I have yet to hear of any incidents of violence or gunfire at any of the OC events.

But these are facts, and facts don't change the public perception. The public perception is what is written in the WSJ article.

I think that article is actually written from the perspective of someone who is pro-gun-rights.

Whiskey_Sauer
04-30-2010, 10:20 AM
Unsurprising, considering the source.

What do you mean by that?

demnogis
04-30-2010, 10:56 AM
What do you mean by that?
WSJ = NEWSCORP = Rupert Murdoch.

Any surprise?

Whiskey_Sauer
04-30-2010, 11:08 AM
WSJ = NEWSCORP = Rupert Murdoch.

Any surprise?

He said unsurprising. I'm wondering what he meant by that. What is it about this source (WSJ) that would lead one not to be surprised?

Glock22Fan
04-30-2010, 11:49 AM
She shares a common misconception that the Wild West was really wild. I would not have wanted to be there either - too unsanitory for one thing - but the gunslinging images are pure Hollywood.

I also think she demeans her own sex by talking about women concerned whether the gun matches their nail varnish.

Nevermore
04-30-2010, 12:11 PM
It's hard to take criticism about firearms-related issues from someone whose signature line is 'TV Critic'. This is like taking Roger Ebert's recent opinion that video games can never be art. In both cases I have to ask, 'How the **** would you know?'

Ebert doesn't play games, and this opinion writer doesn't seem to be a firearms owner. How are these two windbags any different than a bunch of 13-year-old virgins giving advice on how best to have sex? In all three cases, they should stick to criticizing movies and TV shows. At least they'll have some credence there.

M198
04-30-2010, 12:34 PM
Yuck, Ms. Smith makes me wish I was gay. What a discredit to her gender.

corrupt
04-30-2010, 1:08 PM
I can understand the open carry angst or whatever but, wow she is a crap writer.

GuyW
04-30-2010, 1:10 PM
Printing weak-minded drivel like that will make the WSJ even more irrelevant....
.

Whiskey_Sauer
04-30-2010, 1:13 PM
Printing weak-minded drivel like that will make the WSJ even more irrelevant....
.

The Wall Street Journal is the only relevant paper in the country. At least I hope so (i.e., I hope the WSJ does to the New York Times what Fox News did to CNN and MSNBC.)

Glock22Fan
04-30-2010, 1:21 PM
The Wall Street Journal is the only relevant paper in the country. At least I hope so (i.e., I hope the WSJ does to the New York Times what Fox News did to CNN and MSNBC.)

Please explain why.

Whiskey_Sauer
04-30-2010, 3:24 PM
Please explain why.

The Wall Street Journal is the most prominent newspaper in the country that has an editorial staff with a conservative bent. And Mr. Murdoch, I hope, will do with this paper what he did with Fox News. Already they're poised to take on the NYT by creating a metro section (which pretty much glosses over local issues). I believe I read or heard recently that it's one of the only major dailies that's pulling a profit. (need to verify that though.)

I don't mean to get away from the original 2A aspect of this article, though. I just think it's amusing how anyone with any clue would think that the WSJ is a part of the liberal media establishment as was implied.

Steyrlp10
04-30-2010, 3:30 PM
The only thing that caught my attention was her mentioning the Hammerli 208 -- kind of amusing in a twisted way.

Glock22Fan
04-30-2010, 4:50 PM
The Wall Street Journal is the most prominent newspaper in the country that has an editorial staff with a conservative bent. And Mr. Murdoch, I hope, will do with this paper what he did with Fox News. Already they're poised to take on the NYT by creating a metro section (which pretty much glosses over local issues). I believe I read or heard recently that it's one of the only major dailies that's pulling a profit. (need to verify that though.)

I don't mean to get away from the original 2A aspect of this article, though. I just think it's amusing how anyone with any clue would think that the WSJ is a part of the liberal media establishment as was implied.

Thank you, that makes it clear, and I hadn't realized that. (I don't take a lot of interest in newspapers over here, the only ones I've read haven't impressed me.). I guess that I, for one, don't have a clue :)

Or didn't until now.

corrupt
04-30-2010, 5:40 PM
Thank you, that makes it clear, and I hadn't realized that. (I don't take a lot of interest in newspapers over here, the only ones I've read haven't impressed me.). I guess that I, for one, don't have a clue :)

Or didn't until now.

http://s-ak.buzzfed.com/static/imagebuzz/web02/2009/3/29/9/anigif_wacky-dancing-banana-extols-virtues-of-peanut-but-12446-1238333233-37.gif

smarter
04-30-2010, 6:40 PM
Speaking of serious shooters, I don't know a soul among gun owners who is itching to prance around showing everybody what is in their holster. Most of the time, citizens who carry weapons in public places are doing it for protection, and that means concealment. They don't want their handgun easily grabbed by some idiot in a checkout line, and they don't want a potential aggressor to know what they have on them or where it is. If flashing an armory were anything but a stunt, our air marshals would be strapped like Pancho Villa.

Obviously, she is an advocate for conceal carry.

stix213
04-30-2010, 7:21 PM
"Most of the time, citizens who carry weapons in public places are doing it for protection, and that means concealment."

Hmmm, but if you have a concealed carry event it will just look like a bunch of regular people standing around... hence the open carry events instead. :p Though personally I admit I am far more interested in legalizing concealed carry for those of us in counties where getting a CCW only happens as a means of political back scratching.

Bill Carson
05-01-2010, 12:30 AM
They would conceal IF they could get a CCW. This lady is an idiot.