Posted on 07/10/2016 9:33:24 PM PDT by Theoria
As a demonstration against police shootings made its way downtown here on Thursday, it differed from others around the country in one startling way: Twenty to 30 of the marchers showed up with AR-15s and other types of military-style rifles and wore them openly, with the straps slung across their shoulders and backs.
In Texas, it was not only legal. It was commonplace.
The state has long been a bastion of pro-gun sentiment and the kind of place where both Democrats and Republicans openly talk about the guns they own and carry, on their person, in their vehicles, at their offices, at their homes and even in the halls of the Texas Capitol. And in recent years, as gun rights continued to expand, activists have exploited a decades-old freedom to openly carry a rifle in public by showing up at demonstrations with their so-called long guns.
Advocates have carried their rifles at the Alamo in San Antonio and outside mosques in the Dallas suburbs. But city and county leaders said the presence of armed protesters openly carrying rifles on Thursday through downtown Dallas had created confusion for the police as the attack unfolded, and in its immediate aftermath made it more difficult for officers to distinguish between suspects and marchers.
Two men who were armed and a woman who was with them were detained, fueling an early, errant theory by the police that there was more than one gunman.
Mayor Mike Rawlings of Dallas suggested in an interview on Sunday that, in the wake of the attack, he supported tightening the state’s gun laws to restrict the carrying of rifles and shotguns in public.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Mulford act redux coming??
Oh, please!
This is the NYTs ... where’s the: “Policing Open Carry in Texas: Women and Minorities Hardest Hit” angle?
Those guys are slipping!
Yessiree pards ! Every week I visit Houston it is hell. I can barely walk down the damn sidewalk ‘cause of them AK47s swaggerin’ around off of those tea-party’n Texans. Yee haaww !
As far as I know, you’ve never needed a permit of any kind to openly carry a long gun in Texas. That was the only type of display of open carry I saw at the Dallas rally/protest.
Sounds like the snowflakes at the Old Grey Lady saw the one photo of the guy with the rifle over his shoulder, and hyperventilated all the way to their safe space.
Hard to identify? Maybe this will help dear NYT. The people running for cover in fear for their lives (with or without firearms) probably not a suspect. The guy with his firearm up, aiming and firing at police, probably a suspect.
Open Carry is ‘In Your Face’. While the carriers feel that this is their right I believe it brings things to a head and alienates more that it helps. As far as safety and security it reduces the carrier’s options. I am certain to arouse the ire of many Open Carry people. I am a retired federal officer, 35 years and a staunch 2 Amendment supporter but I believe discretion is needed. Especially in a situation such as occurred in Dallas. Carrying openly during protests is just asking for trouble. Let’s protect our Amendment Rights by using common sense.
I’ve long believed open carry is for making a political statement and concealed carry is for defense. Now, there is probably some tipping point, where enough routine open carry becomes a real deterrent to crime. Not sure how often a criminal would have to see armed people around to decide to leave and not simply come back some other time.
What an odd little adjective.
I prefer concealed carry, but have open carried occasionally to observe peoples' reactions here in Western North Carolina.
The armed BLMers were anticipating shooting the cops if they got their hoped for confrontation.
“I agree. In the Dallas riots last week, with open carry, how are the cops supposed to know who the bad/good guys are?”
The bad guys are the ones shooting at the cops.
The good guys either are shooting away from the cops (an unlikely event in itself), or their weapons are holstered or slung towards the sky or ground.
I understand. Unfortunately, in a riot situation the picture might not be so clear,especially with cops in rit gear wearing masks. Then again, I’m not a combat veteran, so what do I know?
If you’re at a protest where people are chanting about killing pigs, they’re probably not talking about feral hog hunting.
>> Open Carry is ‘In Your Face’. While the carriers feel that this is their right I believe it brings things to a head and alienates more that it helps. [...]
>> I am a retired federal officer, 35 years and a staunch 2 Amendment supporter but I believe discretion is needed. [...]
>
> I agree. In the Dallas riots last week, with open carry, how are the cops supposed to know who the bad/good guys are?
Er, dvan might really disagree there — this makes for a pretty solid gun-control argument:
“If guns were illegal then the cops could readily identify the bad-guys: anyone with a gun.”
It’s internally consistent, not hard to do with two suppositions, but it completely subverts the 2nd amendment and utterly ignores the legal fact that the police have no obligation to protect any particular citizen.
I have no issue with open carry. It’s my God given and Constitutional right. However, if I were walking through the middle of hundreds of rioters and law enforcement officers, I would not being carrying openly for a variety of reasons.
True -- The prudent man would probably try to avoid that area altogether.
Open Carry is ‘In Your Face’. While the carriers feel that this is their right I believe it brings things to a head and alienates more that it helps. As far as safety and security it reduces the carrier’s options. I am certain to arouse the ire of many Open Carry people. I am a retired federal officer, 35 years and a staunch 2 Amendment supporter but I believe discretion is needed. Especially in a situation such as occurred in Dallas. Carrying openly during protests is just asking for trouble. Let’s protect our Amendment Rights by using common sense.
__________________________________________
I couldn’t disagree with you more. Stop and analyze. Why did the shooter go alone to the rooftop? Do you think he would have preferred to to be a crowd of armed citizens? Ears can quickly tell you where the rounds are coming from. Additionally, I am sure with the location of the victims, it was easy to determine the shooter was not at ground level in the crowd. If the crowd was not armed, he would have likely been in the gun free zone and indiscriminately sweeping both police and protestors. It’s a proven fact, armed citizens are always a deterrent, not an encouragement to such acts.
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.