Later, however, the fashion police cited her for a violation...
IOW, the Officers DIDN'T KNOW the State Constitution permitted law-abiding citizens to OPENLY-carry weapons--including firearms--on their person
"He came from Texas, which he described as having restrictive gun licensing laws."
A one page background form that takes five minutes to complete and a five minute wait (if that long) for telephone confirmation is restrictive?
With all of my rifles, I completed the form, had my background verified, paid for my firearms and walked out the store with said rifles in 15 minutes.
So what is NH's legal definition of "concealed"?
I think some "citizens" better start getting used to seeing guns. I carry concealed, mostly because I don't want anyone to know I've got a gun. But sometimes you can "flash" a gun and not be aware of it ... wind blows back a jacket, etc. "Citizens" have got to get educated that there are a bunch of us out here actually "protecting THEM" and not call the cops every time they see a gun. At the supermarket the other day, I was reaching to a lower shelf to get something and "flashed" my 1911. A fellow nearby asked (and very quietly) a minute later ... "Do you have a permit for the gun?" I responded with "Yes sir, I do, and here it is" and I showed it to him. He simply said "thank you ... I should probably carry mine more often!"
Yeah, I'm sure that most criminals look for someone carrying a gun or knife or club as their first choice for a vicitm.
So this alleged "firearms instructor" (not lawyer) seems to think that the law should depend on the type holster you're using?
And whether or not he personally approves of it?
Huh? Why do they have to respond? If somebody calls and says "I saw a black man and that alarms me", do they respond to that? Unless a caller is alleging that s/he has specifically seen something which is a violation of a law, or that a reasonable person would regard as evidence of a violation of a law, I see no reason why police should respond by dispatching officers. The police should handle such calls by asking the caller questions aimed at determining relevant details: e.g. Did the gun-carrier point the gun at you or at someone else? Did the gun carrier verbally threaten to shoot someone? If the answers are "no", the police should take the opportunity to explain the law to the caller, so that the caller understands why the police won't be dispatching officers.
" Rice said, I think he exercised extraordinarily poor judgment on that particular night (because) he had an open-top holster in the small of his back in an unconcealed fashion. . . .
Most professionals do not carry a gun there because its hard to access the weapon and hard to retain the weapon if someone wants to take it away from you."
He is correct that it is not a good idea to carry that way unconcealed. For concealed carry that type of holster is fine. Ever try to draw a concealed pistol positioned behind the hip from a holster with a retaining strap?
IMO it was very poor judgement to remove his jacket when he was supposed to be carrying concealed. You should always be aware that you are carrying, if you forget you have become complacent. In fact, if I was a skeptic (and I am), I would think he intentionally removed his jacket to start an incident.
Me? I just keep my M16A2 at sling arms. Less fuss.
I find it enlightening that two of these folks are Free Staters, a group that has been bashed a lot around here. It seems as though they are making their presence felt in a positive way, good for them.
Though it is legal to carry a gun in plain view, open-carry is not a bright idea, Rice said. You are a target. If someone comes in with criminal intent, the first thing he is going to do is neutralize any person with a weapon who can hurt him.
Mr. Rice doesn't get it.
The Founding Fathers understood this but I am convinced they were the last ones.
I challenge anyone to find a large organization, of any type, government, private, church etc. that does not abuse their power simply because they became powerful.
Paging Lord Acton!
"Commenting on what Pelletier has written on the Internet about his bookstore experience, Rice said, I think he exercised extraordinarily poor judgment on that particular night (because) he had an open-top holster in the small of his back in an unconcealed fashion. . . ."
I bet the MSM is furious about this--they went to the instructor looking for Rice to say "What were you thinking carrying a gun!?!?!?" Instead, Rice said, "What were you thinking carrying a gun THERE, when you might NEED it?"
An article like this makes me wish that the hubby had a FReeper account. He'd enjoy the posts.