Skip to comments.Open Carry Advocates: Shooting Themselves in the Foot
Posted on 04/29/2010 10:38:21 AM PDT by AJKauf
Open carry advocates, as a gun rights subgroup, are the continuing negligent political discharge of the shooting community. Their disastrous nationwide campaign to normalize the open carrying of firearms alienates Americans from coast to coast, even among those who champion the concealed carry of weapons.
You only need to look at examples of the media incompetence of these groups in the past year to understand how this theoretically pro-gun movement has managed to cause the public to recoil in horror and actually set the movement back on its heels. It is enough to make you wonder if the group isnt the operation that Crash the Tea Party wanted to be, executed by the otherwise inept anti-gun harpies.
Other than small-scale displays primarily consumed by the local news, the open carry movement is known to most people for precisely two awkward public displays: an August 17, 2009, protest in Phoenix and one this past Sunday on the Potomacs Virginia shores....
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
Where is the hurl alert?
Citizens with guns do not scare me.
The federal government of the USA scares me.
Who the hell is Bob Owens? Open carry is fantastic, frankly.
I am all for our right to open carry, I just don’t think anyone should. It really should be a right to concealed carry without a permit. Bad guys do it all the time.
Obviously you have not met my neighbor. lol
I don’t understand the idea behind brandishing firearms in public. Even some police departments require guns be concealed when carried by officers off-duty in civilian clothes. As an armed citizen, the last thing I want to do is advertise that I’m armed, to friend or foe. Concealment will hopefully educate the bad guys that no one can be assumed to be someone they can safely victimize, regardless of appearances.
It passed in Arizona and will pass elsewhere.
Wow...talk about having the proverbial “sand in the vajajay”...what a whiner! While I don’t necessarily agree with open carry (from a tactical standpoint), these guys are still on our side, as far as I can tell...
Do you own a Dictionary?
Don’t this bozo know that we are no longer cringing with what the other side may say or how they may charactarize us?
No longer are we paralyzed with fear of being called ‘intolerant’ or ‘homophobe’ or even ‘racist’.
Th gloves are off now.
Who is Bob Owens?
What is the BS????
Maybe you should visit some places where having a visible firearm keep everyone at a respectible distance and is a sign of strength and resolve.
Not everyone wants to wait until a bad guy is attacking them and then respond.
Some people might think the same of me though. I stocked up before before Ibama took power.
ole bob evidently doesnt get out much...cowering beneath the covers waiting for a positive media experience will be a long cry...
thank you for the sane nugget...
If open carry is legal in these states then hats off to the men and women who are carrying on with the fight to preserve gun rights.
Two big positives with Open Carry:
1. Open Carry actively protects you, with no intervention from yourself. Concealed carry is useful only once you draw your weapon. Criminals go for the low-hanging fruit, and anyone who feels as though they will “become a target” needs their head examined, and anyone who feels that someone will steal their gun needs a better holster.
2. Open Carry spreads the message to everyday folks that gun owners are peaceful, law abiding citizens. Stats like “4% of the population have CCW licenses/permits” mean nothing to the people on the fence. Actually seeing a gun and seeing someone responsible go about their daily business without shooting up the place does wonders.
Pinging fellow Open Carrier!
This America has been “suburbanized” and conditioned (Think housewives and grey flannel suits)to be afraid of anyone armed, with the exception of police.
They probably don't own a gun nor know anyone who does. In their America, only criminals and rednecks are packing.
It's a visual viewpoint not necessary a political one.
I don't agree but alot do...
It’s interesting that few of the comments have addressed the writer’s actual point, which is that the demonstrations have been detrimental to the gun rights movement. This seems to me self-evident.
It is entirely possible for an action to be legal and constitutional and still be politically disastrous.
I support the right of the open carry guys to do what they do. I just wish they wouldn’t do it.
Truly the rantings of a madman. Even if his statement that I made bold is correct, "society" is safer, I prefer knowing that "I" am safer. The criminal may still go about his crime. He will just move on right past me while looking for a victim.
Which is why we aim to gain some of that back.
I agree. May as well hold a big sign up saying...hey, look at me. My wife and our friends would feel very uncomfortable if I were to carry openly when we went out. I have no desire to upset my friends just because I can. If concealed carry without a permit were allowed, that’s different.
I like to visit a place where the criminals are so faint of heart. Having once worn both a badge and a gun, there was no shortage of individuals who considered it an invitation and a challenge to try and shove both up my butt. In my neighborhood, strength and resolve had to be proved constantly, and was never presumed. A hardened criminal is not deterred by the law, the cops, the threat of jail or death, or the sight of a gun.
I’m with you.
So this guys sites a couple AP hit pieces in evidence of his claim?
Guess that trumps the consitution any old day of the week.
Let's see. The last couple years, we've gained Constitutional Carry in AZ, Firearms Freedom in 7 states, Shall Issue in Iowa, and CCW in national parks, not to mention recent Castle Doctrine laws in states. Oh, right - and Heller vs. DC.
So... detrimental to the gun rights movement how?
They are carrying the firearms, not brandishing them.
I dont understand the idea behind people who use the word “brandishing” when describing an act that is clearly NOT brandishing.
For further enlightenment, visit www.opencarry.org
I think the issue there is that guns are being treated as something to hide in polite company. Something to be ashamed of. Something to be afraid of.
And any cop shop that would make a patrolman conceal must be in some Worker’s Paradise.
That's fine, that's why we have also fought for concealed carry.
However, I hope I do get noticed when I openly carry. I hope I teach people that civilians can own firearms legally and responsibly, without incident. I hope I teach criminals to move on to the next victim, that I won't be an easy target.
If you want to blend in with society, you're right, open carry is not for you.
Well put! I agree with you on both counts!
I don’t recall any open-carry demonstrations previous to the last few months. If you’re aware of any going back several years, please enlighten me.
The advances in gun rights are part of a very long term trend, and one that I’m concerned the open-carry people may damage.
My concern is that these demonstrations tie in perfectly with the portrayal of the Tea Party people as violent kooks. There’s obviously a lot of overlap between the two groups, although they’re certainly not identical.
My point is that it isn’t a good idea to give your enemies extra ammunition, even if it’s your legal and constitutional right to do so. I can guarantee you that a large majority of Americans view this behavior as scary and radical. I don’t agree, but the majority wins in this case.
What holster do you recommend?
“This seems to me self-evident”
How so? It seems to me gun rights are one of the only bright spots for conservatives these days.
So where’s the backlash you claim?
Blackhawk Serpa. Has a button-release mechanism preventing the gun from being removed without pressing (and is easily removed when pressing, unlike my Fobus - the whole paddle would come out with my gun).
“If youre aware of any going back several years, please enlighten me”
I believe they had one down at the Statehouse in Columbus OH several years back.. I hear it was credited with helping concealed carry pass.
I think I read about one in NH just this year too.
Absolutely, I have no desire to stand out in a crowd because I’m or while wearing a weapon. That is why I am for concealed carry without a permit.
A holstered pistol or a slung rifle or shotgun is not being "brandished". It's being borne.
Main Entry: 1bran·dish
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English braundisshen, from Anglo-French brandiss-, stem of brandir, from brant, braund sword, of Germanic origin; akin to Old English brand
Date: 14th century
1 : to shake or wave (as a weapon) menacingly
2 : to exhibit in an ostentatious or aggressive manner
Now that said, I do agree about the advantages of concealed over open carry... most of the time, and in most circumstances. But those other times it should not be prohibited. Plus there are issues with "failure to conceal", or concealing when one is dressed too lightly to effectively conceal a large enough weapon for the circumstances. (Or persons like myself. I have too much of me in my clothing to find a place much anything bigger than one of the newer downsized .380s)
Your idea of bowing down to what the majority may believe (though I feel this is a false premise) is contrary to how I feel we take back the country.
It sounds like a page from the RINO playbook saying we must "compromise" to win favor of the public.
I'm sorry, but I refuse. Rallies bring the attention to its legality, and it needs to be followed up with many ordinary people going about their business open carrying. Enter Starbucks, enter Walmart, enter Home Depot while open carrying. Let these people finally learn that responsible people owning guns is a plus. Give them a realization of how many people really do own firearms. It's not a couple of loons anymore, it's ordinary Americans that support the RKBA.
And I totally respect that mindset. Personally, do what's right for you. What worries me is the mindset of the author, and some of the posters, who think that Open Carry sets the movement back, because they assume guns frighten people, and there is no possible way to convince these people otherwise.
I respectfully disagree with this article’s headline and overall message.
There is more than one issue behind Open Carry. For some, it is the only legal way they are allowed to carry. For many, it is about being able to carry and exercise their 2nd Amendment right without government requiring them to have a government permit to carry (ie govt having ability to revoke their carry right). FOr many, it also is about being able to carry the way they want to carry, to use their own intellect to determine if they want to carry in the open, just like police officers do (without freaking the same people out), and no criminal does.
I’d be all for concealed carry only if I didn’t need a license to do it. The government has no problem with me exercising my right to carry in the open where I am, and in fact it’s the only way they allow me to, but I will be damned if I will trade in my right to open carry without a permit, for concealed carry that can be taken away with a permit the government can take away whenever they want. I should be able to determine for myself, given at any point in time, what makes more sense for me to do at that moment, either carry concealed or out in the open - without permits. If I have the right, I have the right and don’t need a license to exercise the right.
How many of these people wet their pants when officer speedtrap comes up to them open carrying?
Thug criminals also aren’t the kinds of people that walk around open carrying. They all conceal carry, they don’t want the attention or lose the element of surprise to an impending victim.
The questions open carry people get from sheep who see them open carrying is “Are you a cop (good guy)?” never “Are you a criminal (bad guy)?”
.22? Several of my high school classmates and I road down a main arterial street, in the state's second largest city (then about 125,000, now more like 175,000, IIRC) , if a somewhat older part of it, with 12 and 20 gauge shotguns accross the handlebars of our bicycles. We were on our way to do a little pheasant hunting, just outside of town. No one even tooted their horn at us. :)
Some years earlier I was talked to by a police officer on foot patrol in our little business district. He wanted to know where I was going with that BB gun, and what I planned to do with it. I told him I was headed to my Great Uncle's place just accross the highway, which I was. He said, fine, be careful, and have fun.
I totally agree. Well said.
The proponents of Open Carry fail to understand that the purpose of any political movement is to get the public on your side.
Public opinion eventually decides all issues. On every issue you have about 40% who see it one one, 40% see it the other way, and about 20% are undecided. The trick is to get the 20% undecided on yours side, not offend or scare them.
Open Carry supporters may make themselves feel good openly carrying their weapons, but their actions simply scare the undecided and drive them into the other camp.
A classic example was the anti-abortion protester who put huge pictures of aborted fetuses on the side of his truck and drove all over Florida. It offended huge numbers of people and swung public opinion against the Pro-Life movement for a decade.
It's the same sort of idiocy here. Remember, all we need to do (or do for the Dems) is to scare enough people into voting Dem so they can avoid all those “crazies with guns.”
Enough Dems and we get a SCOTUS that accepts the “Militia Requirement”, and the 2d Amendment is gone forever.
Carrying openly might be legal. So is dressing up in only a diaper and rolling around in squashed grapefruit and chocolate sauce in a public park.
Just because something may be legal does not make it smart.
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.