PDA

View Full Version : Is Mainstream America Shifting Towards Open Carry?


vantec08
03-12-2012, 4:24 PM
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/03/robert-farago/is-mainstream-america-shifting-towards-open-carry/


"Blood is not flowing in the streets from concealed carriers gone wild. So . . . nothing. Might as well let peopleóaverage folkóbuy and carry guns."

Good take, good read

mag360
03-12-2012, 6:20 PM
I much prefer concealed to open carry. I hate the argument "If they are going to carry, I'd rather it be in the open than concealed."

vantec08
03-12-2012, 6:31 PM
I'm not an open carry fan, but it goes with RKBA.

scarville
03-12-2012, 7:01 PM
Open carry may be OK in OK but California is home to a more civilized and urbane society. Here we keep our guns decently hidden lest they prompt some member of the gentler sex to have an attack of the vapors.

a1c
03-12-2012, 7:02 PM
Mainstream? Not even close.

stix213
03-12-2012, 7:12 PM
When Texas starts allowing open carry, then try telling me its going mainstream.

dustoff31
03-12-2012, 7:28 PM
Not in NW Arizona. People OCing around town is not a common sight.

Out in the desert, going to the range, gun shops, etc, in other words, where you might expect to see people carrying guns, it's not unusual.

CitaDeL
03-12-2012, 7:49 PM
To deny open carry as the practical and mainstream practice is to deny the most core elements of individual liberty in exercizing the second amendment.

I point to two reasons to support my assertion. The first is that regardless of how you prefer to carry a firearm, it is essential for it to be displayed to be effective in detering bad actions of an assailant or group of assailants. (If you disagree with this, next time you are being mugged put your hand in your jacket pocket and point the hidden muzzle at the mugger and tell them you have a gun.) Secondly, open carry is as much 1st amendment activity as it is the second. This silent declaration is a message to others (particularly criminals) that you have taken your personal safety seriously enough that you are prepared to protect yourself from others with lethal force. I wonder if detractors would also have you remove the conspicuous alarm and alarm company stickers from your car or home because they do not approve... Or expect our homes to not have obvious security measures like locks on the doors and windows asserting that it is discriminatory or threatening to whomever approaches.

Is exposed carry appropriate under every circumstance? No- but the elimination of the choice to carry because one might offend or frighten an onlooker is precisely the infringement that leads to more onerous restrictions. It is tantamount in my view, to forcing someone to wear a ball gag because their words are offensive or frightening.

As Thomas Jefferson has been quoted; "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.Ē

1JimMarch
03-12-2012, 9:18 PM
Yesterday here in Tucson I was coming back from a political event with a Democrat lady I know. We stopped to get something to eat at a local buffet, and I decided to leave the jacket in the car. She assumed I'd take flak for open carry.

Instead:

* One guy sitting across from us asked if my piece was a "Colt 45". I said it was a replica of the 1873 Colt, but it was a modern piece by Ruger in 357 with a modern safety grafted in. "Cool!"

* Later an older lady stopped by and thanked me for OCing, said it was great to see, she was from Florida where it's CCW-only by law.

The lady I was with was astonished. She had no idea that "us gunnies" tended to have such camraderie.

NOTE: I dress at least somewhat upscale ("business casual") deliberately, because the "armed and slovenly" look is more disconcerting. And I carry in decent-looking leather of my own creation...

VegasND
03-12-2012, 9:24 PM
It would appear you've never been to Oklahoma. No open carry allowed; if you conceal carry with a permit and somebody sees your handgun you can be cited.

Open carry may be OK in OK but California is home to a more civilized and urbane society. Here we keep our guns decently hidden lest they prompt some member of the gentler sex to have an attack of the vapors.

wash
03-12-2012, 10:13 PM
Nope, open carry is something only a small minority practice.

That minority is getting more visible but the bigger minority that carries concealed is pretty much hidden...

As legal strategies go, concealed carry should always come first because fighting for open carry first will give the antis an argument of "if they want to carry, do it openly" when we are trying to fight for concealed carry.

The opposite argument of "if they want to carry, do it concealed" doesn't make sense to anyone and can not be used against us.

Also in California because of the loaded open carry ban and the fact that we have a may issue license to carry law, fighting for LTC is much more winnable at this time.

Everyone wants constitutional carry as the final result but open carry isn't the right first step to get there.

Liberty1
03-12-2012, 10:39 PM
My favorite topic. OC is my tactical choice for all the reasons spelled out at my favorite link http://www.usacarry.com/forums/open-carry-discussion/7230-open-carry-argument.html . It's a great read please click and see if you aren't converted!!!

For strategic reasons I think easing CA in to Carry via LTC will smooth the cultural transition.

However, I've been carrying concealed for over a decade and it's, IMO, a PITA! Love OCing in AZ and NV and have seen OCers every time I visit.

Lugiahua
03-13-2012, 12:03 AM
It's a well written argument, but even if I had the option, I would still CC.
I am a college student, and not planning to face school discipline yet for my weapons.

but the fact is that I don't get option of any, it's No-carry for me in this county..

guntrust
03-13-2012, 6:16 AM
I much prefer concealed to open carry. I hate the argument "If they are going to carry, I'd rather it be in the open than concealed."

I have never heard or used that argument for open carry.

The two main arguments for open carry are (1) deterrence and (2) education.

Before the ban, i used it locally as political speech. I also used it for self-defense (and family defense) while visiting Yosemite.

Mulay El Raisuli
03-13-2012, 7:19 AM
To deny open carry as the practical and mainstream practice is to deny the most core elements of individual liberty in exercizing the second amendment.

I point to two reasons to support my assertion. The first is that regardless of how you prefer to carry a firearm, it is essential for it to be displayed to be effective in detering bad actions of an assailant or group of assailants. (If you disagree with this, next time you are being mugged put your hand in your jacket pocket and point the hidden muzzle at the mugger and tell them you have a gun.) Secondly, open carry is as much 1st amendment activity as it is the second. This silent declaration is a message to others (particularly criminals) that you have taken your personal safety seriously enough that you are prepared to protect yourself from others with lethal force. I wonder if detractors would also have you remove the conspicuous alarm and alarm company stickers from your car or home because they do not approve... Or expect our homes to not have obvious security measures like locks on the doors and windows asserting that it is discriminatory or threatening to whomever approaches.

Is exposed carry appropriate under every circumstance? No- but the elimination of the choice to carry because one might offend or frighten an onlooker is precisely the infringement that leads to more onerous restrictions. It is tantamount in my view, to forcing someone to wear a ball gag because their words are offensive or frightening.

As Thomas Jefferson has been quoted; "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.Ē


Yup.


My favorite topic. OC is my tactical choice for all the reasons spelled out at my favorite link http://www.usacarry.com/forums/open-carry-discussion/7230-open-carry-argument.html . It's a great read please click and see if you aren't converted!!!

For strategic reasons I think easing CA in to Carry via LTC will smooth the cultural transition.

However, I've been carrying concealed for over a decade and it's, IMO, a PITA! Love OCing in AZ and NV and have seen OCers every time I visit.


Good article.

And yes, LTC first will likely ease the transition. Still don't like the idea of having to get a permission slip to exercise a Right though.


The Raisuli

dwtt
03-13-2012, 8:53 AM
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/03/robert-farago/is-mainstream-america-shifting-towards-open-carry/


"Blood is not flowing in the streets from concealed carriers gone wild. So . . . nothing. Might as well let peopleóaverage folkóbuy and carry guns."

No, the country has been headed toward concealed carry. Look at the number of states that prohibited conceal carry 10 years ago and the numbers now. In many states where ccw is essentially shall issue, such as Virginia, very few people open carry since those who want to carry a firearm have a CCW and conceal carry. The only folks hot for open carry are CA open carry advocates because it's so difficult to get a CCW in CA. If CA was shall issue for CCWs, then it's likely noone will open carry since those who want to carry will do it legally with a CCW.

M. D. Van Norman
03-13-2012, 9:14 AM
Still donít like the idea of having to get a permission slip to exercise a Right though.

The permission slip is to keep you out of jail, not to let you exercise a right. Thatís a subtle difference perhaps Ö but also an extremely important one.

J.D.Allen
03-13-2012, 9:27 AM
Not in NW Arizona. People OCing around town is not a common sight.

Out in the desert, going to the range, gun shops, etc, in other words, where you might expect to see people carrying guns, it's not unusual.

Well in SW AZ, while it may not be a "common" sight, it certainly is not "uncommon". I OC quite a bit around town, and have seen many others doing so as well. At Starbucks, Wally world, Barnes and Noble, the grocery store, etc... no one even bats an eye at me or anyone else I've seen. No one cares or thinks its a big deal at all.

I don't think I would call it mainstream, which in my opinion is unfortunate. But it is generally accepted as normal.

meaty-btz
03-13-2012, 9:32 AM
My favorite topic. OC is my tactical choice for all the reasons spelled out at my favorite link http://www.usacarry.com/forums/open-carry-discussion/7230-open-carry-argument.html . It's a great read please click and see if you aren't converted!!!

For strategic reasons I think easing CA in to Carry via LTC will smooth the cultural transition.

However, I've been carrying concealed for over a decade and it's, IMO, a PITA! Love OCing in AZ and NV and have seen OCers every time I visit.

Best link in ages. I am, and remain an OC (not unloaded) proponent for every reason mentioned in that link.

r3dn3ck
03-13-2012, 9:53 AM
There's no place quite as polite and civil as a gun show and all of those guns are unloaded. Imagine how polite life would be when we are all forced to assume that everyone we encounter is our genuine equal. Sam Colt's legendary tag line was not a joke or a gimmick. It was an astute observation of the human condition in all its complexity. Colt made them all equals.

I don't care if it's on the hip or under the shirt or worn in a fancy 18lbs headdress with 6 foot tall feathers and a chandelier. I think however you want to carry it, carry it that exact way. When you need it, it'll be right there and the first person to thank you for the chance to go home will be you.

diggersdarling
03-13-2012, 11:29 AM
I am absolutely astonished at how some of the people in this thread (which, regrettably, is a a reasonably accurate sampling of the Calguns population) are so close-minded about RKBA and simply don't get history.

California more "urbane and civilized"? You have to be joking.

M. D. Van Norman
03-13-2012, 11:33 AM
He was clearly joking. :cool:

MudCamper
03-13-2012, 11:34 AM
Is Mainstream America Shifting Towards Open Carry?

Nationally, yes. California, no. We will be last to accept it, like all things relating to gun rights. As this thread clearly illustrates, even many "pro-2A" Californians are against open carry, albeit for different reasons than the general public. The "pro-2A" but anti-open-carry Californian is afraid of the blow-back that OC generates.

newbee1111
03-13-2012, 12:19 PM
I know this is an echo chamber but really? Mainstream America is not shifting anyway at all toward open carry. The only people that the average American expects to see openly carrying a gun is a cop or a security guard. Now there are plenty of places where openly carrying a gun when you aren't wearing some type of uniform is accepted and people don't immediately think they should call the cops. But those places are still in the minority and they are in the overwhelming minority when you consider population. Even in places where open carry is allowed most people aren't doing it. The open carry culture is basically gone, its not coming back.

Mulay El Raisuli
03-14-2012, 5:07 AM
No, the country has been headed toward concealed carry. Look at the number of states that prohibited conceal carry 10 years ago and the numbers now. In many states where ccw is essentially shall issue, such as Virginia, very few people open carry since those who want to carry a firearm have a CCW and conceal carry. The only folks hot for open carry are CA open carry advocates because it's so difficult to get a CCW in CA. If CA was shall issue for CCWs, then it's likely noone will open carry since those who want to carry will do it legally with a CCW.


There might not be a lot of people Open Carrying, but there will be some. I will be one of them.


The permission slip is to keep you out of jail, not to let you exercise a right. That’s a subtle difference perhaps … but also an extremely important one.


Too subtle to have meaning. If the exercise of a Right lands me in jail, than it ain't a Right.


The Raisuli

voiceofreason
03-14-2012, 6:26 AM
I support OC for 2 reasons.

1. sometimes while CCing, clothing moves, people forget, and I don't want them getting in trouble because somebody saw the gun

2. some people due to disability, petite frames, other reasons struggle with CCW and OC is simply a more practical alternative for them.

I know a woman who is 4'10" about 80#s. She's not a little person or anything, just incredibly petite. A j frame on her hip looks like a 686 on anyone else's. A full size autoloader IWB... not possible to hide unless she's wearing a heavy coat. To restrict her to CCW and a small gun (which she is might struggle with shooting accurately) seems discriminatory to me. I recommended that she NOT use a bag or fanny pack, but she decided that those are the only 2 methods that she can utilize effectively to conceal her SP101 for daily carry. (Rule 5)

If OC were legal, she's carry in an OWB leather holster daily.

Her personal life experience is such that not carrying is not an option.

M. D. Van Norman
03-14-2012, 9:07 AM
Too subtle to have meaning. If the exercise of a Right lands me in jail, than it ainít a Right.

Not a civil right perhaps, but itís still a right.

Getting the natural right to bear arms protected as a civil right is the goal of the present struggle. Thatís the staying out of jail part.

Ultimately, I want unrestricted carry, but I will accept a shall-issue licensing system as a working alternative. If the powers that be insist on unlicensed open carry, then I will be right there with you open carrying as a matter of principle Ö assuming the arrangement bypasses the school-zone problem.

Iím following the polite, legalistic path chosen by the right people, but by no means have I surrendered my natural right to bear arms.

Wherryj
03-14-2012, 9:55 AM
I much prefer concealed to open carry. I hate the argument "If they are going to carry, I'd rather it be in the open than concealed."

I'd prefer making it the person's choice.

Smokeybehr
03-14-2012, 5:39 PM
I'll throw in with those that want legal LOC backed with shall-issue CCW.

The number of people that will OC is going to be small at first, but with SI CCW, there are going to be plenty of people that would rather CCW than OC, even given the no permit necessary OC.

CEDaytonaRydr
03-14-2012, 5:45 PM
I much prefer concealed to open carry. I hate the argument "If they are going to carry, I'd rather it be in the open than concealed."


+1

Open Carry was never anything I was interested in. That being said, it has freaked out the antis enough to make some headway in the CCW department, so it has been an effective tool in our RKBA struggles... ;)

Tarn_Helm
03-14-2012, 6:00 PM
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/03/robert-farago/is-mainstream-america-shifting-towards-open-carry/

"Blood is not flowing in the streets from concealed carriers gone wild. So . . . nothing. Might as well let people—average folk—buy and carry guns."

Good take, good read

"Is Mainstream America Shifting Towards Open Carry?"

No.

"Mainstream America Is NOT Shifting Towards Open Carry."

Nor should it.

Open carry is a tactical disadvantage amidst human predators in non-rural settings.

It is an axiom of daily personal self-defense tactics that it is better to have hidden strengths/weapons.

If I am visibly armed, I can be disarmed by someone who approaches me by stealth from a blind angle.

I know. I know. I should never be so unaware as to let that happen.

However, only in movies do people have perfect awareness and superninja hearing that blocks out all background noise and focuses in on the soundless footsteps of an attacker.

At least if I am caught off guard by an aggressor while I am carrying concealed, I can then make a quick and planned move--at the moment that is best for me--for my firearm while the aggressor might be assuming I am unarmed.

The problem with open carry is that you have to draw down on someone long before he has signaled his attack upon you. This raises legal issues.

I would rather draw from concealment at the moment when unambiguous evidence of an attack exists in my mind.

Otherwise, surveillance equipment, which might be hidden and called upon later by investigators, could show me drawing on someone whom I perceive to be a threat but who does not appear to be one in the recorded version of things, which does not always pick up audio, including explicit threats ("GIve me your money or I'll stab/shoot/beat you!").

I prefer that advantage to all of the other advantages of open carry.

An exception would be if I were in the wilderness where I am unlikely to encounter other humans.

There, I would want my .458 Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan to be as readily accessible as possible while in any area where I could encounter a bear or other large nonhuman predator.
:cool:

Gray Peterson
03-14-2012, 6:45 PM
If they were shifting to OC, then unlicensed CC wouldn't be pursued.

Tarn_Helm
03-14-2012, 6:54 PM
If they were shifting to OC, then unlicensed CC wouldn't be pursued.

Excellent point I neglected to mention.

Thought it was too obvious.

But I guess sometimes certain things are not too obvious to some folk.

:cool:

HowardW56
03-14-2012, 6:57 PM
Is Mainstream America Shifting Towards Open Carry?


NO... I don't think so....

CitaDeL
03-14-2012, 7:01 PM
"Is Mainstream America Shifting Towards Open Carry?"

No.

"Mainstream America Is NOT Shifting Towards Open Carry."

Nor should it.

Open carry is a tactical disadvantage amidst human predators in non-rural settings.

It is an axiom of daily personal self-defense tactics that it is better to have hidden strengths/weapons.

If I am visibly armed, I can be disarmed by someone who approaches me by stealth from a blind angle.

I know. I know. I should never be so unaware as to let that happen.

However, only in movies do people have perfect awareness and superninja hearing that blocks out all background noise and focuses in on the soundless footsteps of an attacker.

At least if I am caught off guard by an aggressor while I am carrying concealed, I can then make a quick and planned move--at the moment that is best for me--for my firearm while the aggressor might be assuming I am unarmed.

The problem with open carry is that you have to draw down on someone long before he has signaled his attack upon you. This raises legal issues.

I would rather draw from concealment at the moment when unambiguous evidence of an attack exists in my mind.

Otherwise, surveillance equipment, which might be hidden and called upon later by investigators, could show me drawing on someone whom I perceive to be a threat but who does not appear to be one in the recorded version of things, which does not always pick up audio, including explicit threats ("GIve me your money or I'll stab/shoot/beat you!").

I prefer that advantage to all of the other advantages of open carry.

An exception would be if I were in the wildnerness where I am unlikely to encounter other humans.

There, I would want my .458 Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan to be as readily accessible as possible while in any area where I could encounter a bear or other large nonhuman predator.
:cool:

The problem with concealed carry is that you must appear to be a victim before exhibiting your weapon for it to be an effective deterent. This raises 'mortality' issues.

Having your self-defense preparations displayed wards off bad actors in just the same way a marked police car in traffic induces drivers to adjust their behavior to abide the speed limit and use their turn signals.

We can argue benefits and drawbacks all day long- in keeping the subject on topic; Can you argue that one method of carry over another will always be the accepted mode of carry? For me, the answer is certainly 'no', as history bears out that what behavior is culturally acceptable is never completely settled.

Liberty1
03-14-2012, 7:12 PM
Whatever our personal choice, constitutional carry needs to be the end game. It's too easy for a CCer to inadvertently expose or print (Texas/Florida) and an OCer to in inadvertently cover their sidearm resulting in criminal liability and loss of rights.

Unrestricted OC with licensed CC is a close second option.

Tarn_Helm
03-14-2012, 7:48 PM
The problem with concealed carry is that you must appear to be a victim before exhibiting your weapon for it to be an effective deterent. This raises 'mortality' issues.

Having your self-defense preparations displayed wards off bad actors in just the same way a marked police car in traffic induces drivers to adjust their behavior to abide the speed limit and use their turn signals.

We can argue benefits and drawbacks all day long- in keeping the subject on topic; Can you argue that one method of carry over another will always be the accepted mode of carry? For me, the answer is certainly 'no', as history bears out that what behavior is culturally acceptable is never completely settled.


1. a) A visible, exposed weapon does not necessarily have any deterrent value against a human predator, especially against one whom I am unaware of, were I to be carrying openly.
b) If I were a predator, I would attack openly armed folk and take their firearms.
c) Wearing my guns around openly would be like wearing 500-dollar (or 1,000-dollar) bills taped to my t-shirt. Why would anyone want to do that? A gun has many uses and is valuable for far more than as a weapon. In many circles it is currency--currency that is worth more than cash or drugs or whatever else one cares to trade in. At any rate, I have no further interest in discussing this side issue. The whole thing is too obvious in my mind. Do what you like. I just hope I don't get robbed with one of your soon-to-be-stolen guns.

2. I care infinitely more about what is more effective than about what is "culturally acceptable."

Back to the point: Constitutional carry--open or concealed--with an option of obtaining a permit is what I would like to see.

Open carry will never catch on. (If you think it will, I don't think you understand the vast majority of people.)
:cool:

BoxesOfLiberty
03-14-2012, 8:23 PM
Open carry is a tactical disadvantage amidst human predators in non-rural settings...

You should read the link that Liberty1 posted ... it might make you might reconsider.

...If I am visibly armed, I can be disarmed by someone who approaches me by stealth from a blind angle.

I know. I know. I should never be so unaware as to let that happen.

However, only in movies do people have perfect awareness and superninja hearing that blocks out all background noise and focuses in on the soundless footsteps of an attacker...

This must be why so many cops get their guns taken from them every day... oh wait ... that doesn't really happen. If I had a nickel for every verifiable story I've heard in the last twenty years in which some ninja-like assailant crept up on a cop, and disarmed him by surprise, I think I'd probably have somewhere in the neighborhood of ... a nickel.

I open-carried a loaded firearm daily for years in (often quite crowded) urban environments. Twice, I had people try to take my weapon, but neither attempted to do so by stealth, and neither was even close to successful.

You never hear of this happening with armed security guards, either. Of course that's probably because they are so highly trained and have the sort of "perfect awareness and superninja hearing" that you would only expect to find in movies (or malls).

I don't mean to imply that it never happens, but it is exceptionally rare. And by the way, when you carry a weapon -- especially an exposed one -- your situational awareness does improve (at least that is my experience).

Tarn_Helm
03-14-2012, 8:33 PM
You should read the link that Liberty1 posted ... it might make you might reconsider.

Link?

This must be why so many cops get their guns taken from them every day... oh wait ... that doesn't really happen. If I had a nickel for every verifiable story I've heard in the last twenty years in which some ninja-like assailant crept up on a cop, and disarmed him by surprise, I think I'd probably have somewhere in the neighborhood of ... a nickel.

So you say.
A cop can also call for an army of back up, chase the guy down, get his gun back, and cover the whole thing up (which is probably the prudent though illegal thing for him to do)--unlike an OCer.

I open-carried a loaded firearm daily for years in (often quite crowded) urban environments. Twice, I had people try to take my weapon, but neither attempted to do so by stealth, and neither was even close to successful.

You never hear of this happening with armed security guards, either. Of course that's probably because they are so highly trained and have the sort of "perfect awareness and superninja hearing" that you would only expect to find in movies (or malls).

I don't mean to imply that it never happens, but it is exceptionally rare. And by the way, when you carry a weapon -- especially an exposed one -- your situational awareness does improve (at least that is my experience).

What is reported in the media is a miniscule fraction of what actually happens.

Do what you like.
:facepalm:

CitaDeL
03-14-2012, 9:56 PM
Link?

http://www.usacarry.com/forums/open-carry-discussion/7230-open-carry-argument.html

Enough effort has been made in arguing the merits and defects- its all been done before. The only thing we can agree on is that any carry method is and should be unencumbered by infringements.

watsonville
03-14-2012, 10:32 PM
I wouldn't mind loaded open carry but prefer concealed



NO Coal no lights

Mulay El Raisuli
03-15-2012, 6:17 AM
Not a civil right perhaps, but itís still a right.

Getting the natural right to bear arms protected as a civil right is the goal of the present struggle. Thatís the staying out of jail part.

Ultimately, I want unrestricted carry, but I will accept a shall-issue licensing system as a working alternative. If the powers that be insist on unlicensed open carry, then I will be right there with you open carrying as a matter of principle Ö assuming the arrangement bypasses the school-zone problem.

Iím following the polite, legalistic path chosen by the right people, but by no means have I surrendered my natural right to bear arms.


It may be a Right, but if it ain't recognized as such, then that doesn't really have any meaning. Which is I too am going with what the Right People say.


I'd prefer making it the person's choice.


Me, too. Which is why I favor having LOC recognized as the Constitutional Right before CCW.


+1

Open Carry was never anything I was interested in. That being said, it has freaked out the antis enough to make some headway in the CCW department, so it has been an effective tool in our RKBA struggles... ;)


Thank you! That was part of the goal of the events & its nice to see the success of this recognized.


Whatever our personal choice, constitutional carry needs to be the end game. It's too easy for a CCer to inadvertently expose or print (Texas/Florida) and an OCer to in inadvertently cover their sidearm resulting in criminal liability and loss of rights.

Unrestricted OC with licensed CC is a close second option.


Yes!


If they were shifting to OC, then unlicensed CC wouldn't be pursued.


I'm not so sure about that. Unlicensed CCW is only being pursued in the VERY free states. What of the rest?


The Raisuli

scarville
03-15-2012, 6:49 AM
California more "urbane and civilized"? You have to be joking.
Yes. I was. CCW is the gun owners version of the ghetto.

Liberty1
03-15-2012, 1:32 PM
Open carry will never catch on. (If you think it will, I don't think you understand the vast majority of people.)
:cool:

Licensed Carry will never catch on. 3 to 5 % of the eligible population in "shall issue" states get licensed. 95% is therefore disarmed at least in part by the criminal statutes, part by personal choice, licensing costs/process (fingerprints, etc...).

But when a perceivable threat is recognized by a member of that 95% - riot, serial rapist, homicidal ex-domestic partner, stalker, local crime wave...- accessibility of a license is dependent on how fast, efficient, and cooperative .Gov is (if .Gov is even open for business and appointment times are available).

Licensing, which doesn't statistically improve safety IMO (witness accident rates in constitutional carry states), is not therefore serving a 'compelling state interest' and is opposed to the 'security of a free state' which naturally benefits from a robust and exercised RKBA.

M. D. Van Norman
03-15-2012, 1:36 PM
Yes, unlicensed open carry should be legal. Meanwhile, it isnít, but licensed concealed carry is, so making that avenue as wide as possible is the first priority with the best chance of success. We build from there Ö eventually to unrestricted carry.