☺
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 ...
If you look weak, and like an easy target... You will get attacked with greater frequency than if you looked like a tough meal/hard target.
Period.
This is why schools and malls get attacked by random nutcases with greater frequency than police stations.
Everything else is strawmen and unsupportable by logic or actual criminal stats.
“If they see you are armed, they might “get the drop on you”, so if you go for your gun, they will shoot you.”
Almost never happens. Far more commonly, they pick a different target.
“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.”
Sometime it happens that way, perhaps more often than not. I have also seen a number of instances where the person who is carrying concealed is attacked *because* the perpetrator thinks that they are unarmed.
Concealed carry and open carry both have their advantages and disadvantages. I use both when I think prudent to do so.
Meanwhile, in California my Federal Civil Rights lawsuit seeking to overturn California’s 1967 ban on openly carrying loaded firearms as well as overturning the two recently enacted unloaded open carry bans is fully briefed and awaiting a decision from the district court judge.
As luck would have it the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recently established a framework for evaluating Second Amendment cases. California Attorney General Harris must prove that Open Carry falls outside of the scope of the Second Amendment as it was understood at the time of ratification and she must prove that the bans on open carry do not burden the Second Amendment right. http://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org
Certainly true.
A shooter in Oregon at a mall decided to give up and killed himself after seeing a person who had been carrying concealed draw on him. I think it likely that he would not have chosen the mall as his shooting ground if every other person had been carrying openly.
These cowards who shoot the unarmed may be willing to die but they seldom seem anxious to suffer grevious painful and debilitating wounds followed by decades of life in a wheelchair behind bars.
You are worried about getting attacked or not, because you look like an easier or harder target. But this is totally reliant on the mind of the criminal. They are defective units, which is why they are criminals in the first place.
Policemen in uniform, with open carry guns, are attacked by criminals all the time. Often the criminals are so drunk or on drugs they neither know nor care that a cop has a gun. So what are their pea brains going to care if you, a civilian, have one?
The Tueller drill is based on the idea of a criminal with a knife rushing a police officer with a gun. Again, in uniform and with open carry. The criminal does not care that they have a gun, and are attacking with a knife.
My personal preference is that precisely because you have no idea of a “potential” opponents intentions, if they *walk* towards me, while saying something non-threatening like “do you have a light?”, my hand is going to be on my sheath knife, not a gun, because the moment it is drawn it is in use, even if the guy is right in front of me. No chance of my gun being “smothered”, by him so I cannot draw and brandish it at him.
I will tell him to halt at maybe 10 feet and if he doesn’t, a knife is pointed at him. If he comes in, he is stabbed or slashed. If he backs off, then I can draw my gun. If he tries to draw a gun, we are about evenly matched, at worst.
I really do not care what a criminal is thinking, and neither should you. That is not part of the equation.
Why did you post it in chat?
The left is picking all the wrong fights, and open carry is one of them, IMHO.
Wow... Every non-sequitur and strawman you can think of.
It doesn’t happen. Cops are rarely attacked, unless they are trying to actually apprehend someone.
Don’t believe me. The numbers speak for themselves...
Just crazy I guess. LOL! Sometimes I post stuff and can’t decide just where to put it. What are you thinkin’? Activisism?
While you and I disagree about concealed and open carry, I respect your opinion on it. And arguing tactics, as I learned long ago, has no resolution. So it is probably good to end the thread.
A note on style.
That being said, I strongly recommend not using the phrase “strawman or strawmen”, as it has become extremely trite through over- and misuse. (Also is the over- and misuse of the phrase “ad hominem”.) What makes them worse is that they are continually bandied about on leftist forums.
Yes, and editorial sidebar! After the Supreme Court's Second Amendment decisions in Heller and McDonald, it's time to counterattack all of the left's BS!
LOL! If(when) we attack ALL of it, how would we know where to start? Everything that comes out of them is BS. I’ll see what I can do next time I post something “pertinent”.
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.