Posted on 12/19/2013 8:19:15 AM PST by rktman
The University of Texas’s resident “writing and photography” guru, Matt Valentine, has identified for your delectation a vexatious “new craze.”
The worrying trend, Valentine reported yesterday on Salon, is nothing less than the open carrying of firearms, and it “is more dangerous than you think.” Crazy libertarians, you see, have opened up a “new front line in the battle over gun rights and public safety in American culture,” and they are demanding the “liberty to display their guns in public rather than keep them concealed under clothing.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
I assume he backs this up with emotions, not actual proof.
Times I’ve carried openly, it’s extremely rare for anyone to notice.
The sight of anyone packing heat doesn’t offend me.
The sight of the Obamadork, Boxer, Pelosi, Reid, (and pretty much any congresscritter) anyone on MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, anyone from CAIR or the ACLU, greatly offends me.
And - coming soon - we’re just gonna say no.
Oops, make that h*ll no, and make our day.
Isn’t open carry currently illegal in Texas? Then why would a University of Texas professor have his panties in a wad over it?
It was best typified in a movie with Jamie Lee Curtis and Ron Silver called "Blue Steel" where Silver's character takes a gun from a crime scene, and the mere possession of the gun turns Silver into a murderous lunatic. Libs actually believe that stuff.
Which is why any accidental gun deaths are loudly trumpeted in the news while the prevention of a crime by a legally-armed citizen is never printed or aired.
They even open carry in the state capitol building here in Michigan. Democrats get their panties in a wad over it but none of them have been killed yet.
These people are becoming extremely tiresome.
While I appreciate open carry as a way of reassuring the public that there are armed citizens about; tactically, concealed carry is far more practical.
Open carry sends a message to everyone. Concealed carry sends a message just to criminals, and one they cannot see coming. A message that even dimwits can get.
Finally, something I harp on, if you carry a concealed carry handgun, you should definitely carry a quick draw sheath knife, as the two are very complementary for self defense.
It’s all good, and the more, the merrier.
Because Austin is the blue blight in the middle of the red/blue election map and UT professors are bluer than blue. There is one (maybe more) UT prof who lectures that due to overpopulation, ebola should be used to eliminate 90% of all humans. I don't see him at the front of the line.
Then there's UT's temper tantrum on the Top Ten ruling. Several years ago, UT was so into diversity that they refused to admit some well qualified white students into Pre-Law giving those slots to less qualified minorities. The whites (specifically a white female, Hopwood) filed suit and won. Eventually, that played out into the Top Ten ruling which states that if you graduate in the top 10% of your Texas high school class, you will automatically be admitted into a Texas public college. That was meant to help get minorities from podunk schools a leg up. All well and good until 4 years ago when UT got their panties in a wad because too many Top Ten students (cough, whites who had the tuition $) were being admitted so that left less openings for minorities who couldn't get in on their own merit with good grades and high SAT scores - OH, NO!!! So, UT's president decided to bully the TX legislature into eliminating the ruling. When that didn't work, he went public announcing that if the ruling wasn't changed immediately, UT would have to do away with football - OH, NOOOOOOOO!!!!!! Ha, as if, snort! But, the legislature caved/compromised to all powerful UT even though it was UT's fault we had the ruling in the first place. Now, UT has to only admit the top 8% and they have to make X score on the SAT but all the other public universities still have to admit the top 10% (because their football teams aren't as important as UT's). Whew, what a relief that UT can recruit more not so smart minority athletes while us taxpayers had to pay for all the controversy in the legislature. Further proof libs can dish it out but can't take it. Same with the open carry.
Thanks for that info on the Top 10 Rule being amended for UT. I hadn’t heard that before but that’s not surprising since I live north of the Red River.
As to the UT professor, watch for his head to explode when the TX Legislature finally gets around to catching up with all the surrounding states on OC for handguns.
Someone help me with this concept.
What would have possessed our Founders to have enumerated a right that "should not" be exercised?
This seems to mimic the atheist stance that religious people "should not" exercise their religion. Similarly, one "should not" exercise their right to be secure in their persons and homes because honest people have nothing to hide.
Is there something special about coffee shops which make the Constitution irrelevant?
You can't practically carry an AR15 concealed. If that is the weapon you need, then it must be open carried.
Further, your statement doesn't consider the tactical advantage to YOU when others carry openly.
>>Is there something special about coffee shops which make the Constitution irrelevant? <<
Yes, they serve Kool Aid to anyone who asks for it.
One quibble, it’s not our Right that is enumerated, it just has an enumerated protection for that Right in the “Supreme Law of the Land”.
Unless you are trying to draw someone in to attack you, making yourself look weaker than you are has no tactical advantage.
If you look like food, don’t be surprised when something tries to eat you.
It is exceptionally rare when you need an AR-15 in any sort of urban or suburban situation away from the home. Though I’ve no objection to it, its optimal range is outside a typical gunfight, so any need to carry it concealed is mitigated.
Likewise, criminals only very rarely carry openly, and there is little or no need for advantage against an honest citizen carrying openly, unless they enter into an existing gunfight and do not know who is the criminal and who is the good guy. You still don’t want to shoot them, you want them to not shoot at you.
It has a huge tactical advantage, even if the aggressor is brandishing a cocked gun, someone with concealed carry has lots of advantages.
To start with, if you think they are hostile, but they do not know you are armed, you might not be their priority, thus allowing you to seek cover and pull your weapon. If there is more than just you on “your side”, any of you might be armed, which divides the aggressor’s attention.
If they see you are armed, they might “get the drop on you”, so if you go for your gun, they will shoot you. But if they don’t know you are armed, they likely *want* something from you, not to shoot you, but their attention is all over the place; whereas yours is simple: retrieve gun and shoot them.
If they want to rob you, you have to get out things they want, like your wallet, giving you the opportunity to draw on them if they are distracted. Likewise, if you give them your stuff and they turn to leave, you can shoot them.
So again, while open carry sends a message to everyone that you are armed, concealed carry just sends a message to criminals. In the form of hot lead.
Agreed - the author lost me at that point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.