Open carry is mor than open carry [Archive]

Venator12

10-01-2008, 11:21 AM

Open carry is more than open carryBrian G. Jeffs

It’s true that open carry has many advantages: a faster draw, a larger caliber handgun and greater round capacity; sure it’s been shown to deter crime, and it is immensely more comfortable in warm weather, but it is much more than that.

Open carry brings gun ownership out of the closet. It shows your friends and neighbors, your state and your country that you are not afraid of taking on the responsibility of protecting your self and the ones you love from evil. Open carry is a visible expression of our natural right to self preservation. Open carry makes a statement that we are not afraid to stand up to the “politically correct” ideology that has created a nanny state, where the government is there to help us if we just do as they say, and a pox on anyone that disagrees.

Open carry can lead us out of this stupor and deliver us once again to the days when a man could stand tall and be proud of his community, his state, and his country.

When you open carry you are saying to the world, I’m my own man, I’m able and willing to defend myself, my family, and if need be my community, my state, and my country. It also states that I’m willing to stand up and speak truth to authority. It’s shameful that we as law abiding citizens must stand up to authority, the very authority that we have empowered, when questioned about our lawful right to openly carry a firearm. But stand up we must. The open carry of a firearm speaks volumes and it’s says much more than just open carry.

How's this size?

who dat

10-01-2008, 11:43 AM

Venator12

10-01-2008, 12:13 PM

Brian,

It's not that any of us disagree with the right to OC. What I believe we object to is the "in your face" attitude you seem to have. It's even further exacerbated by your choice of font for this post/rant.

You don't need to yell. None of us needs that type of attention. Speak softly...

Well Okay, I don't know how the font has anything to do with it, I used times new roman, pretty common, and I just enlarged it so that people like me that are far-sided could read it more easily. I don't have all caps which is traditionally used to shout. And I don't think this was written with an in your face tone. I also think it's hardly a rant. Perhaps we are all getting too touchy. I'm trying to be kinder and gentler...peace and love

fbuckner

10-01-2008, 12:18 PM

I think all the gunfire around here and the fact I always with somesort of firearm nearby says I am a proud gun owner.

I though some of my neighbors would have thought me to be a nut. All of them either have firearms or have taking a class or two.. Good to have pro gunners as neighbors when there is a whole lot of shooting going on here on a weekly basis.

Done Deal

10-01-2008, 12:32 PM

Brian,

It's not that any of us disagree with the right to OC. What I believe we object to is the "in your face" attitude you seem to have.

I will second that.

And, I will add that I am not the only one that finds the inferences that that CC fans are among other things....fearful and gutless.

dougwg

10-01-2008, 01:08 PM

Open carry is more than open carry
Brian G. Jeffs

It’s true that open carry has many advantages: a faster draw, a larger caliber handgun and greater round capacity; sure it’s been shown to deter crime, and it is immensely more comfortable in warm weather, but it is much more than that.

Open carry brings gun ownership out of the closet. It shows your friends and neighbors, your state and your country that you are not afraid of taking on the responsibility of protecting your self and the ones you love from evil. Open carry is a visible expression of our natural right to self preservation. Open carry makes a statement that we are not afraid to stand up to the “politically correct” ideology that has created a nanny state, where the government is there to help us if we just do as they say, and a pox on anyone that disagrees.

Open carry can lead us out of this stupor and deliver us once again to the days when a man could stand tall and be proud of his community, his state, and his country.

When you open carry you are saying to the world, I’m my own man, I’m able and willing to defend myself, my family, and if need be my community, my state, and my country. It also states that I’m willing to stand up and speak truth to authority. It’s shameful that we as law abiding citizens must stand up to authority, the very authority that we have empowered, when questioned about our lawful right to openly carry a firearm. But stand up we must. The open carry of a firearm speaks volumes and it’s says much more than just open carry.

Is that better? Small, pink and Times New Roman font (same as news print)

Some of you self proclaimed pro-OC people are just like obama saying that he's pro-2A

who dat

10-01-2008, 01:11 PM

Open carry is more than open carry
Brian G. Jeffs

It’s true that open carry has many advantages: a faster draw, a larger caliber handgun and greater round capacity; sure it’s been shown to deter crime, and it is immensely more comfortable in warm weather, but it is much more than that.

Open carry brings gun ownership out of the closet. It shows your friends and neighbors, your state and your country that you are not afraid of taking on the responsibility of protecting your self and the ones you love from evil. Open carry is a visible expression of our natural right to self preservation. Open carry makes a statement that we are not afraid to stand up to the “politically correct” ideology that has created a nanny state, where the government is there to help us if we just do as they say, and a pox on anyone that disagrees.

Open carry can lead us out of this stupor and deliver us once again to the days when a man could stand tall and be proud of his community, his state, and his country.

When you open carry you are saying to the world, I’m my own man, I’m able and willing to defend myself, my family, and if need be my community, my state, and my country. It also states that I’m willing to stand up and speak truth to authority. It’s shameful that we as law abiding citizens must stand up to authority, the very authority that we have empowered, when questioned about our lawful right to openly carry a firearm. But stand up we must. The open carry of a firearm speaks volumes and it’s says much more than just open carry.

Is that better? Small, pink and Times New Roman font (same as news print)

Some of you self proclaimed pro-OC people are just like obama saying that he's pro-2AFrom one extreme to the other. And you wonder why we say you guys are "in your face"?

I tried to give a calm reasoned response to an obvious concerned post of Brians. You respond with this crap? Give it a rest doug.

dougwg

10-01-2008, 02:06 PM

From one extreme to the other. And you wonder why we say you guys are "in your face"?

I tried to give a calm reasoned response to an obvious concerned post of Brians. You respond with this crap? Give it a rest doug.

Talk about in your face.

Brian was asked about the "other things" OC is. He wrote what I think is a well thought out, concise and possibly eloquent post about OC and all you can do is bitch about the font and size of font he used.

Talk about responding with a load of crap.

who dat

10-01-2008, 03:38 PM

Done Deal

10-01-2008, 06:04 PM

Talk about in your face.

Brian was asked about the "other things" OC is. He wrote what I think is a well thought out, concise and possibly eloquent post about OC and all you can do is bitch about the font and size of font he used.

Talk about responding with a load of crap.

Well, I addressed the characterizations that he made about those that prefer to CC. Like others, I take exception to those misrepresentations.

Obviously, the OC crowd seems to have no problem alienating other gun owners.

Joeywhat

10-01-2008, 06:10 PM

In before thread lock :roll:

Leader

10-01-2008, 06:14 PM

Well, I addressed the characterizations that he made about those that prefer to CC. Like others, I take exception to those misrepresentations.

Obviously, the OC crowd seems to have no problem alienating other gun owners.

Now now.. Don't start doing what you are complaining about.

Dansjeep2000

10-01-2008, 06:28 PM

I consider myself part of the "OC" crowd, even though I'm a newer member. With everything we are facing right now as a country we fellow gun owners need to stick together. Lets face it Obama has a fair chance of being the next president, and we live in a blue state. We as a group need to keep our gun views front and center for everyone in politics to remember, we vote to! The Dems count on Michigan to always vote blue. We need them to remember that they speak for US and we want our right to keep and use our firearms.:getsum2:

End of Rant.

dougwg

10-01-2008, 06:29 PM

Now now.. Don't start complaining about what you have done in the past.

Fixed it for you. :spiral:

DD, I see no where in his post that he even mentions those that conceal carry.

It would also be very hypocritical if he did as I know he also CC's as do I and most of the others that OC.

Done Deal

10-01-2008, 06:59 PM

DD, I see no where in his post that he even mentions those that conceal carry.

The inference is undeniably there, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

dougwg

10-01-2008, 07:14 PM

The inference is undeniably there, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

:roll:

I think they have pills for paranoid delusions.:coocoo:

:rofl:

ghostrider

10-01-2008, 07:14 PM

Brian,

It's not that any of us disagree with the right to OC. What I believe we object to is the "in your face" attitude you seem to have.
Care to explain what you mean by “in your face”? Some examples maybe? About the best example I’ve seen of it is some people thinking that OC’ers are criticizing CC’ers, and IMHO it’s usually an unfounded offense that I chalk up to oversensitivity in a desire to support a oppositional viewpoint. I say unfounded because I’ve rarely seen OC’ers criticize those who don’t for their choice to not do so.

People say the same thing about those who chose to carry a gun concealed (in your face). It’s my opinion that it’s for the most part unfounded. There are some who have taken it as far as a role of activism, and that will always be considered “in your face”, because that is a large part of activism.

When people claim one party has an “in your face” attitude, it implies a certain aggressive nature, that is intended to antagonize. This can be an employed role of activism, and often draws the ire of those who either don’t support the cause, or are against it. I’m sure there are many who don’t like the “in your face” tactics of the homosexual movement, holding parades in broad daylight. Some might consider it “in your face” because “they should just go back in the closet”.

I keep hearing about this “in your face” attitude (usually just the refference, without any anecdotal reference), but outside of the activism role, I rarely observe it (other than the accusation). Because of this, I’m starting to believe that it’s more of a derogatory reference to the act of OC’ing in places or areas that the particular accuser does not approve of. For example, one might find it offensive for another person to OC in downtown Grand Rapids, or Lansing. That offended party might consider the act in and of itself to be “in your face”, never mind that the OC’er was merely going about his business, or that the offended party (who thinks the OC‘er is being “in your face“) wasn‘t even there. To the offended, it is seen as an aggressive affront to ones sensibilities, even though the OC‘er has done nothing specifically to the offended. It isn’t like the OC’er is walking up to the offended party and drawing attention to said object by exclaiming out loud it’s presence, nor is the OC’er doing any pointing to the weapon, or even impeding the progress of the offended. The OC’er is merely peacefully going about his day, minding his own business. Yet, someone disapproves, so they must find a validation for that disapproval. Since they cannot possible be unjustly offended, the only conclusion is that offense was created through an aggressive role by the other party.

If one is offended by the actions of another, which do not directly affect the offended, it is not because the offender acted in a “in your face manner“ (people use the same argument against gun ownership). The offense stems not from the actions of the targeted party, but from the desire to justify one‘s own disapproval.

I could easily say that I find the baggy clothing and tattoos of today‘s youth to be offensive, and that they are too “in your face“ about it. Time was when that was actually considered by some to be true, and truth be told, such things are done with the intention of making an impression upon others. Tattoos are designed to attract attention, and even when it isn’t the goal of the wearer, it is most certainly to be expected. Baggy cloths are a style that is currently in fashion yet, if the youth’s peers constantly ridiculed him for wearing them, chances are he’d find other peers, or different cloths. However, just because I think they are “in your face” doesn’t mean they actually are. None of them have done anything to make me feel like I am being targeted in such a manner. I may find the fact that they “flaunt them in public” to be “in your face”, but my viewpoint doesn't make it so.

There have been some reports I’ve read where I got the impression that the OC’er was “going out” in anticipation of some sort of conflict (mainly just to see how local LE would respond), but that was my impression, and it is a part of activism. I’ve never read a report of an OC’er who accosted another citizen in an effort to antagonize. It's even further exacerbated by your choice of font for this post/rant.

You don't need to yell. None of us needs that type of attention. Speak softly...I’ve understood that speaking in caps, or all bold faced is considered yelling, but I actually like it when people used a larger font, for the very reason Venator stated. I think this is a very poor example of “in your face”.

Like I said before, lets build bridges, and stop throwing each other under the bus. Unfortunately, it seems (to me at least) that some would rather have everybody else do things “their way”, at the expense of an “all or nothing” mentality. Most of the anti-OC’ers I’ve observed give me the impression of sounding like Jim Zumbo did when he blogged against EBR’s. Not all, but most.

I will second that.

And, I will add that I am not the only one that finds the inferences that that CC fans are among other things....fearful and gutless.I’ve seen no such inferences. Mind quoting some in context?

I have seen comments that “it takes more courage to OC than CC”, but that doesn’t mean that CC fans are “fearful and gutless”. That would be an example of taking a statement, and crediting the author for words to which he has no claim. I personally think it can take more courage to OC than CC, but that is just my opinion based on my own situation, and it most certainly does not mean that people who don’t OC are “fearless and gutless”. To suggest that it is a direct implication, is manipulative. OTOH, maybe there are people who call CC fans fearless and gutless. Just as there are CC fans who call those who chose not to CC “sheep”. When I go over to the CC forums, I see many (too many) references to “sheep”. I find that a comedy of irony since, those of us who CC are only following the direction of our leaders.

who dat

10-01-2008, 08:07 PM

Care to explain what you mean by “in your face”? Some examples maybe? About the best example I’ve seen of it is some people thinking that OC’ers are criticizing CC’ers, and IMHO it’s usually an unfounded offense that I chalk up to oversensitivity in a desire to support a oppositional viewpoint. I say unfounded because I’ve rarely seen OC’ers criticize those who don’t for their choice to not do so.

People say the same thing about those who chose to carry a gun concealed (in your face). It’s my opinion that it’s for the most part unfounded. There are some who have taken it as far as a role of activism, and that will always be considered “in your face”, because that is a large part of activism.

When people claim one party has an “in your face” attitude, it implies a certain aggressive nature, that is intended to antagonize. This can be an employed role of activism, and often draws the ire of those who either don’t support the cause, or are against it. I’m sure there are many who don’t like the “in your face” tactics of the homosexual movement, holding parades in broad daylight. Some might consider it “in your face” because “they should just go back in the closet”.

I keep hearing about this “in your face” attitude (usually just the refference, without any anecdotal reference), but outside of the activism role, I rarely observe it (other than the accusation). Because of this, I’m starting to believe that it’s more of a derogatory reference to the act of OC’ing in places or areas that the particular accuser does not approve of. For example, one might find it offensive for another person to OC in downtown Grand Rapids, or Lansing. That offended party might consider the act in and of itself to be “in your face”, never mind that the OC’er was merely going about his business, or that the offended party (who thinks the OC‘er is being “in your face“) wasn‘t even there. To the offended, it is seen as an aggressive affront to ones sensibilities, even though the OC‘er has done nothing specifically to the offended. It isn’t like the OC’er is walking up to the offended party and drawing attention to said object by exclaiming out loud it’s presence, nor is the OC’er doing any pointing to the weapon, or even impeding the progress of the offended. The OC’er is merely peacefully going about his day, minding his own business. Yet, someone disapproves, so they must find a validation for that disapproval. Since they cannot possible be unjustly offended, the only conclusion is that offense was created through an aggressive role by the other party.

If one is offended by the actions of another, which do not directly affect the offended, it is not because the offender acted in a “in your face manner“ (people use the same argument against gun ownership). The offense stems not from the actions of the targeted party, but from the desire to justify one‘s own disapproval.

I could easily say that I find the baggy clothing and tattoos of today‘s youth to be offensive, and that they are too “in your face“ about it. Time was when that was actually considered by some to be true, and truth be told, such things are done with the intention of making an impression upon others. Tattoos are designed to attract attention, and even when it isn’t the goal of the wearer, it is most certainly to be expected. Baggy cloths are a style that is currently in fashion yet, if the youth’s peers constantly ridiculed him for wearing them, chances are he’d find other peers, or different cloths. However, just because I think they are “in your face” doesn’t mean they actually are. None of them have done anything to make me feel like I am being targeted in such a manner. I may find the fact that they “flaunt them in public” to be “in your face”, but my viewpoint doesn't make it so.

There have been some reports I’ve read where I got the impression that the OC’er was “going out” in anticipation of some sort of conflict (mainly just to see how local LE would respond), but that was my impression, and it is a part of activism. I’ve never read a report of an OC’er who accosted another citizen in an effort to antagonize. I’ve understood that speaking in caps, or all bold faced is considered yelling, but I actually like it when people used a larger font, for the very reason Venator stated. I think this is a very poor example of “in your face”.

Like I said before, lets build bridges, and stop throwing each other under the bus. Unfortunately, it seems (to me at least) that some would rather have everybody else do things “their way”, at the expense of an “all or nothing” mentality. Most of the anti-OC’ers I’ve observed give me the impression of sounding like Jim Zumbo did when he blogged against EBR’s. Not all, but most.

I’ve seen no such inferences. Mind quoting some in context?

I have seen comments that “it takes more courage to OC than CC”, but that doesn’t mean that CC fans are “fearful and gutless”. That would be an example of taking a statement, and crediting the author for words to which he has no claim. I personally think it can take more courage to OC than CC, but that is just my opinion based on my own situation, and it most certainly does not mean that people who don’t OC are “fearless and gutless”. To suggest that it is a direct implication, is manipulative. OTOH, maybe there are people who call CC fans fearless and gutless. Just as there are CC fans who call those who chose not to CC “sheep”. When I go over to the CC forums, I see many (too many) references to “sheep”. I find that a comedy of irony since, those of us who CC are only following the direction of our leaders.
Let me point out to you and to doug, the salutation of my post was as follows: "Brian,"

As such my comments were directed at Brian. That's all.

Done Deal

10-01-2008, 08:27 PM

I’ve seen no such inferences. Mind quoting some in context?

I have seen comments that “it takes more courage to OC than CC”, but that doesn’t mean that CC fans are “fearful and gutless”. That would be an example of taking a statement, and crediting the author for words to which he has no claim. I personally think it can take more courage to OC than CC, but that is just my opinion based on my own situation, and it most certainly does not mean that people who don’t OC are “fearless and gutless”. To suggest that it is a direct implication, is manipulative.

If youv'e seen no inferences...you haven't been reading much on this board. But, just to make things simple...lets look no further than the opening post in this very thread. You yourself have alluded to more courage to OC so...would you mind explaining to us exactly what less courage is?

Now, let us go back to the original post for a few of those quotes in context that you seemingly don't want to acknowledge.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Open carry is more than open carry
Brian G. Jeffs

It’s true that open carry has many advantages: a faster draw, a larger caliber handgun and greater round capacity; sure it’s been shown to deter crime, and it is immensely more comfortable in warm weather, but it is much more than that.

Open carry brings gun ownership out of the closet. It shows your friends and neighbors, your state and your country that you are not afraid of taking on the responsibility of protecting your self and the ones you love from evil. Open carry is a visible expression of our natural right to self preservation. Open carry makes a statement that we are not afraid to stand up to the “politically correct” ideology that has created a nanny state, where the government is there to help us if we just do as they say, and a pox on anyone that disagrees.

Open carry can lead us out of this stupor and deliver us once again to the days when a man could stand tall and be proud of his community, his state, and his country.

When you open carry you are saying to the world, I’m my own man, I’m able and willing to defend myself, my family, and if need be my community, my state, and my country. It also states that I’m willing to stand up and speak truth to authority. It’s shameful that we as law abiding citizens must stand up to authority, the very authority that we have empowered, when questioned about our lawful right to openly carry a firearm. But stand up we must. The open carry of a firearm speaks volumes and it’s says much more than just open carry.

+++++++++++++++++++++++

So, if we don't do this open carry, we are closet, fearful, stupid, not my own man, and on and on....

Geez, I don't open carry except when hunting so....I am not impressed in the least by your claims. But....while I may not exhibit your particular brand of courage....I have enough sense to know that lots of folks get lots of excercise for their neck....shaking their head at some of antics displayed by the OC crowd. You can flaunt your bravado all you want....I guess that, should the need arise, I would prefer to announce mine with the first muzzle flash. I don't feel the need to strut my stuff to feel confident that I could protect me and mine.

Oh, and by the way...while you may have "never read a report about an OC'er who accosted another citizen in an attempt to antagonize" I can tell you for a fact that I have had a couple of encounters in the last few years that had they escalated....the OC'er would have been bleeding before they would have ever been able to clear leather (so much for that fast draw capability that is perhaps being foolishly touted).

ghostrider

10-02-2008, 01:15 AM

Let me point out to you and to doug, the salutation of my post was as follows: "Brian,"

As such my comments were directed at Brian. That's all.
No offense intended. If you don‘t care to engage in a discussion on such things, I‘ll gladly respect your wish in such matters.

In my defense, I truly am curious to know of examples of this “attitude“. I understand that Venator‘s opening post reeks of attitude, but it‘s also on a gun board, so I just didn‘t see it as qualifying. Especially since it‘s on the “Open Carry“ sub forum.

My apologies if I came of in a bad way. You yourself have alluded to more courage to OC so...would you mind explaining to us exactly what less courage is? If I say that it isn’t meant to imply that you are fearful and gutless, then it really doesn’t matter what “less courage” is in my case. Just because it takes more courage for me to do something, doesn’t mean that you are fearful and gutless because of your choice not to. That type of absolute is absurd. I also think it takes courage to decide to carry concealed (providing the bearer initially gave careful forethought)., but that doesn’t mean that I think that everyone who chooses not to is a coward. I also think it takes courage for a man to wear a pink shirt into a honky tonk (either that or foolishness), but that doesn’t mean that someone else is a coward for choosing against the idea.

I will say this: if you are not OC‘ing because you are afraid of doing it for one reason or another, then you probably are fearful to some extent (since that's what being "afraid" is). Mind that I am using the term “you“ in a general manner, and it is not directed at any individual. So, if we don't do this open carry, we are closet, fearful, stupid, not my own man, and on and on.... If that’s how you feel about it, then you might look into seeing someone about that. I certainly don’t feel that way, and could care less if someone else is simple minded enough to actually believe such nonsense. The parts you bold faced in Venator‘s post make no such claim. If that‘s his intention, then he made his point poorly. If you think that‘s what he meant, then you should seek clarification by asking him. Jumping to conclusions only makes you look argumentative, as putting words in someone‘s mouth supports one‘s argument better than being proven wrong in one‘s assumption after seeking clarification.

Geez, I don't open carry except when hunting so....I am not impressed in the least by your claims. nothing wrong with that. I’m not either, although I do appreciate someone who stands up for gun rights.
But....while I may not exhibit your particular brand of courage Sounds like your answering Venator’s post, as opposed to mine, but it sure sounds like your understanding that his brand of courage doesn‘t negate or disparage yours.
....I have enough sense to know that lots of folks get lots of excercise for their neck....shaking their head at some of antics displayed by the OC crowd. It might be more constructive to actually describe or quote some of those antics. I‘d actually like it if we concentrated more on those incidents, providing it‘s done in a constructive manner. So far, most of the incidents I‘ve read about were usually initiated by people other than the OC‘er.
You can flaunt your bravado all you want....I guess that, should the need arise, I would prefer to announce mine with the first muzzle flash. I don't feel the need to strut my stuff to feel confident that I could protect me and mine. Sounds like your still talking to Venator.

Oh, and by the way...while you may have "never read a report about an OC'er who accosted another citizen in an attempt to antagonize" I can tell you for a fact that I have had a couple of encounters in the last few years that had they escalated....the OC'er would have been bleeding before they would have ever been able to clear leather (so much for that fast draw capability that is perhaps being foolishly touted). I sit corrected. I do remember reading that post. I also thought it was vague, yet I also realize that there may well be a valid reason for that. I also seem to remember that you were trying to make it sound like there was an implied threat, but that it was hard to tell without actually being there. It seemed like one needed to “read between the lines” when deciphering it, but it’s been a while since I read it so I could be off on that. Any chance you have the post handy to link? I’d like to go back and reread it if it’s not too inconvenient.

Are you saying that someone accosted you in an attempt to antagonize you with the fact that they are OC’ing? That sounds like an interesting read.

fbuckner

10-02-2008, 01:56 AM

ghostrider

10-02-2008, 02:59 AM

fbuckner

10-02-2008, 03:13 AM

ghostrider

10-02-2008, 03:44 AM

Dansjeep2000

10-02-2008, 05:41 AM

Done Deal

10-02-2008, 08:43 AM

I sit corrected. I do remember reading that post. I also thought it was vague, yet I also realize that there may well be a valid reason for that. I also seem to remember that you were trying to make it sound like there was an implied threat, but that it was hard to tell without actually being there. It seemed like one needed to “read between the lines” when deciphering it, but it’s been a while since I read it so I could be off on that. Any chance you have the post handy to link? I’d like to go back and reread it if it’s not too inconvenient.

Are you saying that someone accosted you in an attempt to antagonize you with the fact that they are OC’ing? That sounds like an interesting read.

Sorry, I don't have a clue how to easily search for it. Maybe I was vague...I really don't recall. But to clear up their intent....well, both were posturing, one outright told why when asked and the other had the hammer thong off as he was on his tirade.

And I still think it is foolish to believe that as an OC fan that you can outdraw anybody just because of open carry. I know...you weren't the one that made those claims but....I betcha there are some perforated people that discovered it wasn't so easy to do. Surprise trumphs speed any old day.

ghostrider

10-02-2008, 10:04 AM

Sorry, I don't have a clue how to easily search for it. Maybe I was vague...I really don't recall. But to clear up their intent....well, both were posturing, one outright told why when asked and the other had the hammer thong off as he was on his tirade. Understandable, but realize that I must take into account that you’re the type who reads into to peoples statements things that aren’t always there.

And I still think it is foolish to believe that as an OC fan that you can outdraw anybody just because of open carry. I know...you weren't the one that made those claims but....I betcha there are some perforated people that discovered it wasn't so easy to do. Surprise trumphs speed any old day. I think it probably depends more on the individuals and their abilities, rather than a single element of surprise. Furthermore, the scenarios you recounted aren’t really applicable since you were not OC’ing. It’s comparable to a bank robber or mugger OC’ing, and doesn’t apply.

Done Deal

10-02-2008, 12:32 PM

Understandable, but realize that I must take into account that you’re the type who reads into to peoples statements things that aren’t always there.

That is an assumption on your part and you know what they say about assuming? I would also think that you or any other poster would want to take into account the different ways that readers might interpret what you have to say. Obviously, when there is 'history', different perspectives come into play.

sorry...had to pause...just got into a lively discussion in the office when a big wig brought up getting guns off the street....eeehhhhhaaaaaaaaaa.

Anyway....

I think it probably depends more on the individuals and their abilities, rather than a single element of surprise.

True but...I don't care how fast you are if you are responding to the threat with holes already in ya.

Furthermore, the scenarios you recounted aren’t really applicable since you were not OC’ing. It’s comparable to a bank robber or mugger OC’ing, and doesn’t apply.

I have to disagreee....even though I wasn't OC'ing, I am glad that I wasn't.
In fact, I believe that because I was CC'ing, I was in a better position to defuse both situations without them escalating. Sure, I have been in armed encounters before (I know what it is like to be on both ends of the muzzle) and in every case, not a shot was fired.

Gosh darn it this work thing keeps getting in the way...

Anyway...any time somebody goes looking for a confrontation armed with a gun...the possibility for bad things happening might just increase. I CC and, if I can help it...I don't intend to let somebody draw down on me. Period.

If somebody doesn't know that I can defend myself, that might just give me the edge I need.

So...there you have it...although it may be disjointed because of the time frames and I was distracted with phones and customers...

dougwg

10-02-2008, 01:15 PM

OC-CC it doesnt matter it's a choice we are all part of the same family of gun owners. this reminds me of that failed Dove vote we had.
The deer hunters didnt care about the dove hunters , the duck hunters dont care about the pheasant hunters so the whole thing fell apart and failed. The antis will pick us apart smal group at a time obviously the OC group is the smaller of the two sides if you will. They will be the first target to put restrictions on. We need to stand together as one group of gun owners and that is it. Nuff Said Carry how you wish and keep it at that.

Have you seen this?

http://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?t=29174

Standing together is the whole point of my posting that thread. Whether you agree with OC or not or agree with dove, deer, or duck hunting, we ARE on the same side. It doesn't matter if you like me or hate me we ARE on the same side. It doesn't matter if you like it or not, we ARE on the same side.

Either you are Pro-2A or you are not! (obama is lying when he says he is pro2a).

Those that hunt deer DO NOT want everyone else to hunt deer. They only want others to acknowledge their RIGHT to do so.

Those that OC do not demand that everyone OC. We understand that we "already have the right" to OC. All we want is the acknowledgment that we have the right. This would mean we wish that LEO's would leave us alone and don't illegally harass us when we do OC. If they do need to confront us we simply ask that they remain professional and we will do the same.

I'm sure someone will say that the OC'er better watch what they say to the LEO because when all is said and done, the LEO will be going home at the end of the day. My response to that is lets remember that the LEO is the one who will be making the first contact with the lawful OC'er and THEY [the LEO's] are the ones that will set the tone for the conversation that follows.

All this said, YES I do realize that there are "bad apples" in every group, OC'ers as well as LEO's. Hopefully in time those bad apples are weeded out and yes I realize there will be more bad apples falling from the tree. All we can do is hope for the best as it is IMPOSSIBLE to control everyone.

Done Deal

10-02-2008, 02:53 PM

Either you are Pro-2A or you are not!

Unfortunately, such an over simplification doesn't hold much water when discussing he pro's/con's of OC v CC and as such, is a divisive statement that benefits no gun owner.

dougwg

10-02-2008, 02:55 PM

Unfortunately, such an over simplification doesn't hold much water when discussing he pro's/con's of OC v CC and as such, is a divisive statement that benefits no gun owner.

That is an assumption on your part and you know what they say about assuming?

That is an opinion on your part and you know what they say about opinions?

Done Deal

10-02-2008, 03:28 PM

Sure, it is an opinion....based in fact.

So, why don't you share your definition of Pro2A with the readers here....just so everybody that wants to can evaluate the extent of your over simplifcation.

dougwg

10-02-2008, 03:58 PM

Done Deal

10-02-2008, 04:25 PM

It is my belief as well as many others that the 2A is there to help protect us against the government. In order to fight government with advanced arms we should also have access to those same types of arms. If you are a law abiding american, you should be armed with what you choose as well as how you choose.

To make it more clear: As long as someone doesn't tread on someone else's rights, They should be able to do as they please.

Now I'll wait for you to respond with some crap "putting words in my mouth" post.

Well, if it is all or nothing (based solely on the definition that you provided), I guess it goes a whole lot further than OC or CC because you probably are gonna have a helluva time toting that RPG you might want to carry concealed. Between that and belt fed....it does put a the decription of bigger guns and more ammo on an entirely different playing field.

Your definition is a little too far out there for my liking...but you go for it. Meanwhile, I will try a little more sensible approach to preserving my rights under the Constitution.

And damn...I guess this open carry stuff is about a little more than just open carry....yikes....

dougwg

10-02-2008, 04:33 PM

Please share your definition of a sensible approach to the 2A.

Clipper

10-02-2008, 04:39 PM

Please share your definition of a sensible approach to the 2A

Yes, by all means, please enlighten us ignorant peons with the TRUE meaning of the 2A...

warlockmatized

10-02-2008, 05:19 PM

The more i read the more bothersome i find the replies contained in the thread. You two need to agree to disagree and just call it a day, and leave it at that. Not trying to come across as offensive but, jebus rice already. So many things said back and forth. Some are good points, others are just digs and slams.

I personally have nothing against the CC "only" crowd. Being free allows you to make that choice for yourself. I also feel there is no advantage to one form of carry versus the other. I believe it is up to the individual carrier to decide for "him/herself" which is the best form of carry for "them".

When i OC i do not do it to be "in your face". Most people don't even notice i am carrying. I "carry" for one reason...personal protection. I OC for two basic reasons. 1. To exercise my "right" to OC. 2. To educate those that do notice i am OC'ing and upon questioning me, that it is in fact legal. I do NOT seek them out nor i do force literature down their throats. There is no machismo, chest pounding, or any other attribute that says "look at me".

I will stand tall next to DD, Doug, or anyone else that feels there 2A rights are in jeopardy and wants to do something about it. I don't care about your color, creed, sexual orientation, religion, how fat or skinny your wallet may be and finally your "choice" of carry.

Whether you CC or OC aren't we part of the same family basically...proud, free, gun owners? You would "think" we could get behind one another.

Done Deal

10-02-2008, 06:03 PM

Please share your definition of a sensible approach to the 2A.

Well, to me sensible is a reasonable approach to preserving those rights.

I don't think that the "they can pry my cold dead fingers...." is particularly reasonable.

Sensible is taking a proactive approach that is not so likely to alienate the masses.

Doug....if you advocate being able to possess anything and everything that somebody might want to....well, there are those that might say that you are not a rational thinker.

That being the case...I would not deem it a sensible approach.

Done Deal

10-02-2008, 06:09 PM

I will stand tall next to DD, Doug, or anyone else that feels there 2A rights are in jeopardy and wants to do something about it. I don't care about your color, creed, sexual orientation, religion, how fat or skinny your wallet may be and finally your "choice" of carry.

Whether you CC or OC aren't we part of the same family basically...proud, free, gun owners? You would "think" we could get behind one another.

Well, while I might agree in principle...after having read some of the posts made....I am not so certain that I would be quite so sure about who all I would want standing behind me.

And, while I agree that I would stand behind those that are willing to do some things about it...that doesn't mean that I am willing to stand with just anybody that might want to do just about anything about it.

I have balls but...I am not an extremist. I don't think extremist views will win the hearts and minds of America just yet either.

warlockmatized

10-02-2008, 06:30 PM

SNIP: I have balls but...I am not an extremist.

Just for clarification and NOT to get in the middle of the ongoing debate/argument. Do you view OC'ers as extremists?

Done Deal

10-02-2008, 06:43 PM

Just for clarification and NOT to get in the middle of the ongoing debate/argument. Do you view OC'ers as extremists?

OC, in and of itself, is not at all extremist in my opinion.

How this thread got from OC to where we are now is apparently the "OC is more than open carry" assertion that some of them seem to be making...and, has very little to do with simply the OC v CC debate.

If that is the club I gotta belong to....count me out. Although, I would love to have a mini-gun that pops out of an SUV (and the financial wherewithall to be able to shoot it).

dougwg

10-02-2008, 09:15 PM

I asked "Please share your definition of a sensible approach to the 2A."
I guess you may have tried to define it but I'm sorry but you have failed.

Well, to me sensible is a reasonable approach to preserving those rights.

That is an obama type answer. Dancing around the issue and never really giving an answer.

I don't think that the "they can pry my cold dead fingers...." is particularly reasonable.

So you are against the NRA or at least some of their ideals and MANY members of this message board

Sensible is taking a proactive approach that is not so likely to alienate the masses.

Please give examples

Doug....if you advocate being able to possess anything and everything that somebody might want to....well, there are those that might say that you are not a rational thinker.

So we shouldn't be able to own full auto? So we shouldn't be able to own silencers? So we shouldn't be able to have M16's and M4's? So we shouldn't be able to own M60's

That being the case...I would not deem it a sensible approach.

Maybe you're just not Conservative enough

Done Deal

10-03-2008, 10:27 AM

I don't consider the generalization of having cold dead fingers particularly sensible but...if you do....feel free.

I don't claim to reject or support all the "ideals" of others but....ideally, one has to be breathing to express them. I have been an NRA Life Member certainly for more years than some of the members here have been breathing and probably for more years than I have remaining.

Let me say this....I don't follow anybody or anything blindly. I have a mind of my own and I actually use it.

And, if in your mind you think that you will ever be able to get sufficient support that enables anybody and everybody to sport all the weapons that have been mentioned....well sir, you are out of that mind of yours....

dougwg

10-03-2008, 11:18 AM

Still side stepping the question.

Done Deal

10-03-2008, 11:33 AM

Brian,

It's not that any of us disagree with the right to OC. What I believe we object to is the "in your face" attitude you seem to have. It's even further exacerbated by your choice of font for this post/rant.

You don't need to yell. None of us needs that type of attention. Speak softly...

Sensible is...agreement with the advice given way back at the beginning of the thread...before it got off on the "more" stuff that you continue to advocate.

And taking more time to try and get you to understand...would seem to be a waste of time and I certainly don't need the keyboard practice.

who dat

10-03-2008, 11:43 AM

Sensible is...agreement with the advice given way back at the beginning of the thread...before it got off on the "more" stuff that you continue to advocate.

And taking more time to try and get you to understand...would seem to be a waste of time and I certainly don't need the keyboard practice.
:cheers:

dougwg

10-03-2008, 11:44 AM

Still side stepping the question.

Kimberguy1371

10-04-2008, 04:35 AM

I have been watching this thread for a while, and I don't even know what the argument is about anymore.

I CC all the time, I prefer OC. But when I OC, people ask, it take more time, it is more of a hassel, and me personally, I like that, I like to talk about it. I love being the person who helps educate people on their rights. But when I'm out with friends, the fieance, most anyone else, or I just don't feel like talking to anyone, I CC. I see nothing wrong with either, both have advantages and dissadvantages that we could argue until our deaths. But as a resident of Michigan, you get a choice!!! How cool is that?

So, while I will agree that OC takes some balls, and does make a statement, it in no way makes some one who CCs a coward or a wimp. Either way, we are willing to defend our selves, our family's and people who may or may not notice you piece. I don't care if you feel the element of suprise is better than the hopes of your fire arm being present detering a crime or not. We all carry, we are all ready to help save inocent lives, no matter who they may be, and that is what it really comes down too. We get caught up in all the little petty crap that doesn't mean a thing, forget the little issues and stick to the big problems. Now I will say, I believe that our right to bear arms should not be infringed PERIOD! I don't believe in laws "regulating," with "common sense" legislation. Our right to bear arms is to protect our selves from the government, and we should be able obtain anything obtainable by them. i don't know where i'm going any more... i'm going to bed.

Done Deal

10-04-2008, 07:49 AM

Ya'all lemme know when I can get that mini-gun installed....

warlockmatized

10-04-2008, 12:19 PM

Ya'all lemme know when I can get that mini-gun installed....
Again confused and seeking clarification/enlightenment. OC = mini-gun?

Raspberrysurprise

10-04-2008, 04:45 PM

I think this is one topic where we are going to have to agree that each side has its points and acknowledge that some peoples positions won't be changed.

I understand that some people think that those who open carry are simply fueling the fire for those that would take our rights away. But instead of trying to stop them from carrying we need to be ready to stand next to them and say "I'm a hunter, and I support OC" or "I'm a permit holder and I support OC" because we would want them to stand next to us if someone were to try and stop us from carrying concealed.

I also understand that those that OC may think that those who CC are trying to hide their guns from people and aren't helping to promote firearms ownership. But just because you don't carry visibly doesn't mean you can't help. You can still take new people shooting and show them safe gun handling. You can still talk with fence sitters and show them that firearms are objects with no will or intent of their own, that it takes a person behind the gun with malice at heart to cause harm to others.

I'm not trying to stifle debate here. I just ask you to remember that there is another person on the other side of the conversation, and to try and make them your friend and not your enemy.

We must all stick together hunters, target shooters, those that OC, those that CC, those that don't carry at all. United we stand, divided we fall.

Done Deal

10-04-2008, 04:49 PM

Again confused and seeking clarification/enlightenment. OC = mini-gun?

Go back and read the thread....according to some...OC is more than open carry.

Done Deal

10-04-2008, 04:53 PM

warlockmatized

10-04-2008, 04:56 PM

Go back and read the thread....according to some...OC is more than open carry.
Re-read in it's entirety. Being a participant of OC, i can see where OC is more than the mere act of OC'ing. I also fail to see the link between the OP's post and mini-guns. Maybe something Doug has posted led you to mini-guns, but i don't see the connection between the OP and mini-guns. Even though the thread is WAY off track....isn't it "supposed" to be about the topic started by the OP?

ETA: For myself personally OC IS more than just OC'ing. By practicing lawful OC I have made myself and instant target for dismissal from places of business and even some of my own family members homes. I am almost guaranteed to have a run in with an uninformed member of the public or LE. I open myself up to ridicule from my pro 2A peers. I find myself constantly looking over my shoulder, and re-evaluating my surroundings a whole lot more than when i am not OC'ing. I become a self proclaimed educator/activist as I have discussions and pass out information on the subject to those that wish to learn more, including but not limited to LE, newspapers, TV news etc etc. Last but definitely not least, I am simply exercising a right. A right that some believe i do NOT have even though I clearly do. I think all of the above (as I have stated anyways) says beyond shadow of a doubt that OC'ing IS more than simply strapping on and walking down the street.

dougwg

10-04-2008, 05:36 PM

Re-read in it's entirety. Being a participant of OC, i can see where OC is more than the mere act of OC'ing. I also fail to see the link between the OP's post and mini-guns. Maybe something Doug has posted led you to mini-guns, but i don't see the connection between the OP and mini-guns. Even though the thread is WAY off track....isn't it "supposed" to be about the topic started by the OP?

No, it's all about how who dat and Done Deal know best and by God we better listen to them. It's about their fears and speculations, it's about their opinions based on nothing but what they perceive as the truth. It's about the fact that those that OC are all a bunch of morons and WD and DD are just politely trying to show us how wrong we are..... and how right they are.:bowdown:

I think they are going about it wrong though. Their approach is way too "in your face". Maybe they never heard of the whole catching more bees with honey quote.:thup:

Brian made a great post about OC and all they could do is torpedo it by grasping at straws. Instead of rationally and maturely discussing the positives of OC they choose to bash Brian for the choice of font he used and the fantasy in their mind of how his post or OC'ers in general are too "in your face". That's very despicable and petty if you ask me.

They want to say that OC'ers are "in your face" but I doubt either of them has ever encountered an OC'er outside of their minds.

Now before DD jumps in and spews some BS....

I know that DD has stated that he encountered 2 guys OC'ing. They were drunk and causing problems.

They were NOT OC'ers who were drunk.

They were drunken idiots that happen to be carrying guns in the open.

If you can't or refuse to see the difference then there is NO hope for you at all.

There are good people and bad people. It is wrong to group all of them together just as it is wrong for people to group the good, hard working and honest LEO'ers with the bad apples.

Sure, it's easy to group people together but it is not a wise thing to do.

Done Deal

10-04-2008, 06:12 PM

It's about the fact that those that OC are all a bunch of morons...

Is that an admission I read?????

But, after reading the rest of your malarky....it is painfully clear that you don't know WTF you are talking about.:shake: :shake:

except....I won't group the other OC guys together with the likes of you....that wouldn't be a good thing.

dougwg

10-04-2008, 06:26 PM

Is that an admission I read?????

But, after reading the rest of your malarky....it is painfully clear that you don't know WTF you are talking about.:shake: :shake:

except....I won't group the other OC guys together with the likes of you....that wouldn't be a good thing.

Well it's official, there is no hope for you. I bet you agree with "sensible gun laws" too.

You may be a member and a moderator no less, of this Pro-gun, Pro-2A website but you clearly seem to be a liberal at heart and I truely do feel sorry for you.:shake: :shake:

except... I wouldn't piss on the likes of you if you were on fire.... but I bet it would be good if someone tried to beat out the flames with a hammer.

warlockmatized

10-04-2008, 09:01 PM

Well i also know this to be true regarding ALOT of things in life. NOT just OC...

http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/4619/regulationsgb0.jpg

Johnson16

10-04-2008, 09:49 PM

Done Deal

10-04-2008, 09:56 PM

So has anything been accomplished via this thread? Just some hatin' is all I can see. I don't really have an opinion on OC, other than I don't really see the benefits other than expressing 2A rights. However, does anyone feel that OC might make you more vulnerable at times? There is the thought that no one will mess with you if they see you have a gun, but on the other side of that coin lies the fact that some perp knows exactly how to approach you. Furthermore it seems it would be much easier to disarm you and use your weapon against you. The element of surprise associated with CC seems like it could be a benefit at times. I have no experience with either type of carry (yet!) so perhaps these aren't legitamate concerns?

They are very legitmate concerns. But, as stated in the OP, this thread is not just about the pro's and con's of OC v CC.

This thread is about assertions that open carry is more than open carry and...some hints on what the "more" entails.

What does any of that have to do with the manner of carry? Your guess is as good as mine... but it doesn't seem to have a darned thing to do with the manner of carrying one iota.

Tucker6900

10-05-2008, 01:58 AM

Well, it doesnt look like things have changed much in my time away.

Its disappointing to see fellow gun owners behaving like children. All Ive seen in this post is people deliberately tearing into each other. And for what? Because you dont agree with what the other person is saying! Give it up. All of you. Its pathetic.

Leader

10-05-2008, 07:22 AM

So has anything been accomplished via this thread? Just some hatin' is all I can see. I don't really have an opinion on OC, other than I don't really see the benefits other than expressing 2A rights. However, does anyone feel that OC might make you more vulnerable at times? There is the thought that no one will mess with you if they see you have a gun, but on the other side of that coin lies the fact that some perp knows exactly how to approach you. Furthermore it seems it would be much easier to disarm you and use your weapon against you. The element of surprise associated with CC seems like it could be a benefit at times. I have no experience with either type of carry (yet!) so perhaps these aren't legitamate concerns?

Well that is one of the first arguments that pro CC people come up with but they have no facts to back it up. It just doesn't happen. We have been looking for an example of it but can't find one. Now... people getting hit by lightning on the otherhand.... happens quite regularly. As does airplanes falling out of the sky. But someone snatching an open carriers gun and shooting him.... no. Someone being shot first in a robbery because he/she had a gun openly carried ... no.

who dat

10-05-2008, 06:30 PM

No, it's all about how who dat and Done Deal know best and by God we better listen to them. It's about their fears and speculations, it's about their opinions based on nothing but what they perceive as the truth. It's about the fact that those that OC are all a bunch of morons and WD and DD are just politely trying to show us how wrong we are..... and how right they are.:bowdown:

I think they are going about it wrong though. Their approach is way too "in your face". Maybe they never heard of the whole catching more bees with honey quote.:thup:

Brian made a great post about OC and all they could do is torpedo it by grasping at straws. Instead of rationally and maturely discussing the positives of OC they choose to bash Brian for the choice of font he used and the fantasy in their mind of how his post or OC'ers in general are too "in your face". That's very despicable and petty if you ask me.

They want to say that OC'ers are "in your face" but I doubt either of them has ever encountered an OC'er outside of their minds.

Now before DD jumps in and spews some BS....

I know that DD has stated that he encountered 2 guys OC'ing. They were drunk and causing problems.

They were NOT OC'ers who were drunk.

They were drunken idiots that happen to be carrying guns in the open.

If you can't or refuse to see the difference then there is NO hope for you at all.

There are good people and bad people. It is wrong to group all of them together just as it is wrong for people to group the good, hard working and honest LEO'ers with the bad apples.

Sure, it's easy to group people together but it is not a wise thing to do.
Wow...just wow. I write a response to one guy and get ambushed by this guy and he wonders why I say the prevalent attitude is "In your face"?

I agree with DD and can only say WTF. Doug, kindly leave me out of your rants unless I address you specifically.

dougwg

10-05-2008, 08:41 PM

Wow...just wow. I write a response to one guy and get ambushed by this guy and he wonders why I say the prevalent attitude is "In your face"?

I agree with DD and can only say WTF. Doug, kindly leave me out of your rants unless I address you specifically.

No where did I see Venator ask YOU to respond to him. No where did he ask "Hey Who Dat, please critique my post". Nor has he asked you to critique his actions.:grin:

If you respond with BS like you did in your post you can bet I will be here to call you on your prevalently moronic attitude.:slap:

Ambushed? What kind of sissy "he's picking on me" crap is that? You may be older than me but you sure do sound childish and naive. This IS a public message board unless you have forgotten. If you can't handle someone else responding to your off the wall, out in left field, grasping at straws posts, might I suggest not posting them.;)

Maybe if you didn't want anyone to say anything about your post, you should have just PM'ed Venator, ever think of that?:scratch:

You have a nice night now.... ok. :thumbup:

fbuckner

10-06-2008, 12:46 AM

Well that is one of the first arguments that pro CC people come up with but they have no facts to back it up. It just doesn't happen. We have been looking for an example of it but can't find one. .

Wild Bill Hickock Theres an example. ! LOL

Leader

10-06-2008, 06:13 AM

Wild Bill Hickock Theres an example. ! LOL

Well Thank You Mr. Buckner....
I don't recall the details of that incident but I'll try to check on it later today.
Something happening once in 200 years is certainly reason to assume it is a common occurrence.and should be feared. Especially in such a small sample as 300,000,000 + people left around today in the U.S.

fbuckner

10-06-2008, 09:24 AM

He was shot in the back of the head by a coward while Wild Bill was playing cards. Legend has it that is where the Ace's and 8's came from as he was hlding a full house Ace's over 8's.

Venator12

10-06-2008, 09:31 AM

Wild Bill Hickock Theres an example. ! LOL

That's a good one, how about something in this century? LOL

Done Deal

10-06-2008, 09:32 AM

Something happening once in 200 years is certainly reason to assume it is a common occurrence.and should be feared.

How much training do OC guys typically get?

How many attempts at gun grabs take place nation wide annually?

How many criminals train to disarm people carrying weapons?

How many cops have people try and disarm them and train to prevent it?

And lastly....have you ever felt the shitty feeling that ya get when somebody is trying to grab your gun from behind?

But, this thread reportedly isn't so much about pro's/cons of open carry as it is all that other stuff....

dougwg

10-06-2008, 11:19 AM

How much training do OC guys typically get?

Well it seems that almost all OC people get the EXACT same training that CC'ers get. This is because MOST people that OC have their CPL.
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/16677.html

Maybe if you didn't already know everything you would try to learn more about OC before passing judgement.

Venator12

10-06-2008, 12:29 PM

How much training do OC guys typically get? About 80% of "us" OC guys have a CPL.
How many attempts at gun grabs take place nation wide annually? I don't know do you? Please post if you have data, we can't seem to find any cases of this happing.
How many criminals train to disarm people carrying weapons? Well at Michigan Criminal College it's an elective, but I haven't heard of any criminals training in disarming people. There was a USDJ report that found criminal prefer unarmed victims.
How many cops have people try and disarm them and train to prevent it? Lot's but then we are not cops and don't generally face desperate people facing prison terms if caught, so by the nature of their work cops have to worry a great deal more than a Joe OCer.

And lastly....have you ever felt the shitty feeling that ya get when somebody is trying to grab your gun from behind? No, but please share your experience with us. But only if the experience was when you where OCing as a average citizen and not an LEO.

Peace and love.

Done Deal

10-06-2008, 12:37 PM

Well it seems that almost all OC people get the EXACT same training that CC'ers get. This is because MOST people that OC have their CPL.
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/16677.html

Maybe if you didn't already know everything you would try to learn more about OC before passing judgement.

I don't need to go visit another site....especially one that has bad mouthed members of this site...to get the facts that are probably immaterial anyway.

And, if you actually knew half as much as you try and get people to believe, you would know what readers know...that providing an evasive response to but a portion of the questions that you responded to shows just how unable or unwilling you are to provide details....

Do you suppose that commons sense would tell OC fans to get specific training in firearm retention before they walk out in the streets of Laredo?

Done Deal

10-06-2008, 12:45 PM

Peace and love.

Peace and love wasn't the discussion when I viewed training material when I took classes in weapon retention. And ya know what...there was actually video of folks at criminal college practicing...they call it prison smart ass and criminals do practice, whether you are informed enough to know it or not.

And, if a criminal has the balls to try and grab a uniformed cops gun from behind....what makes you think that somebody might not get the idea to snatch one from some clown at the stop and rob or gas station or wherever?

Play Russian Roulette once if ya want....odds are only what that you will go out with a big bang? Play the game long enough though and....

PS I will never be an "average citizen" so...does that mean you don't want others to benefit from real experiences or just that you don't want them to read/hear facts that don't support your cause?

dougwg

10-06-2008, 12:56 PM

I don't need to go visit another site....especially one that has bad mouthed members of this site...to get the facts that are probably immaterial anyway.

Thats right, you already know everything. There isn't any reason for you to try to learn any more.
Are you saying that members of THIS site haven't bad mouthed members of that site?
Facts are never immaterial, unless you already know everything.

And, if you actually knew half as much as you try and get people to believe, you would know what readers know...that providing an evasive response to but a portion of the questions that you responded to shows just how unable or unwilling you are to provide details....

I've never proclaimed to know anything. As far as responding, I'm just following your lead and doing the same thing you do.
You still haven't answered my question about your definition of the 2A.

Do you suppose that commons sense would tell OC fans to get specific training in firearm retention before they walk out in the streets of Laredo?
Yes, and we also suggest people do just that. You should already know this, remember you know everything

I wonder what it's like to be omniscient.

Done Deal

10-06-2008, 12:59 PM

I wonder what it's like to be omniscient.

Based upon your posts...there is a helluva lot that you have to be wondering about...

dougwg

10-06-2008, 01:03 PM

Yes, unlike the great omniscient Done Deal, the more I learn the more I realize the less I know.

Done Deal

10-06-2008, 01:50 PM

Yes, unlike the great omniscient Done Deal, the more I learn the more I realize the less I know.

You are mistaken...again....

That is a truth that we both seem to recognize.

Venator12

10-06-2008, 02:35 PM

And, if a criminal has the balls to try and grab a uniformed cops gun from behind....what makes you think that somebody might not get the idea to snatch one from some clown at the stop and rob or gas station or wherever?

PS I will never be an "average citizen" so...does that mean you don't want others to benefit from real experiences or just that you don't want them to read/hear facts that don't support your cause?

Please cite your references, cops guns are grabbed during a take down or pursuit and a struggle, the grabber is desperate to get away, they must be, they face being shot and killed. Cite where a cop had a gun grabbed from behind just by walking down the street? I'm not saying a gun grab can't happen, but if it does it doesn't happen very often, at least not that the thousands of members on open carry nationwide can find. Again carry concealed if you want I DON'T CARE.

I realize you are nowhere near average, but my point was for you to share any experience you have had with a gun grab while you were out of uniform. We have already established that cops by the nature of their jobs are at greater risk than the normal or abnormal citizen of a gun grab. And we would all benefit from your experiences if you would only share them.

Love and Peace:angel:

Leader

10-06-2008, 03:17 PM

Wild Bill Hickock Theres an example. ! LOL

Now Fred (may I call you Fred?) that doesn't count. We were looking for an example of someone open carrying and having their gun snatched.
Being shot from behind while sitting at a poker table doesn't fit.

dougwg

10-06-2008, 03:22 PM

Now Fred (may I call you Fred?) that doesn't count. We were looking for an example of someone open carrying and having their gun snatched.
Being shot from behind while sitting at a poker table doesn't fit.

True. The only place you can gamble is at a casino and they are all CEZ.

Done Deal

10-06-2008, 03:26 PM

Please cite your references, cops guns are grabbed during a take down or pursuit and a struggle, the grabber is desperate to get away, they must be, they face being shot and killed. Cite where a cop had a gun grabbed from behind just by walking down the street? I'm not saying a gun grab can't happen, but if it does it doesn't happen very often, at least not that the thousands of members on open carry nationwide can find. Again carry concealed if you want I DON'T CARE.

I realize you are nowhere near average, but my point was for you to share any experience you have had with a gun grab while you were out of uniform. We have already established that cops by the nature of their jobs are at greater risk than the normal or abnormal citizen of a gun grab. And we would all benefit from your experiences if you would only share them.

Love and Peace:angel:

Can't tell you the year but it was over twenty ago....but I still remember the bar it was in front of that we were trying to break up a disturbance. It was crowded. Suddenly, I felt somebody yanking on my pistol from behind. Back in those days, security meant a simple thumb break so....in otherwords, no security. I don't know whose face I felt crunch at receiving end of my elbow because of the crowd. All I know is that had I not been trained regarding weapon retention....the outcome could have been very different.

I am glad you don't care about my preference for civilian concealed carry because for others, out of sight is out of mind and for me....that is the way that I want to keep it. You folks strut your stuff if you want to....

I have asked this question before...if OC is so great...how come cops don't enjoy the advantages you tout when they are off duty? Could it be the training that they have received??????

warlockmatized

10-06-2008, 03:40 PM

Advantages/disadvantages/personal opinions aside....

I think the one thing that everyone overlooks in regards to OC, is that alot of times it is done to just be informative. With education in mind. It IS a legal act, that most are unaware of. For me "personally" i try to keep it educational without being confrontational. The ONLY time (for me anyways) it has been confrontational is when an uninformed LEO tries to deny me of my legal "right" to OC. Even while on my own "private" property.

Garbo

10-06-2008, 04:38 PM

You'll find more of those than you wont unfortunatly

Venator12

10-06-2008, 04:44 PM

Can't tell you the year but it was over twenty ago....but I still remember the bar it was in front of that we were trying to break up a disturbance. It was crowded. Suddenly, I felt somebody yanking on my pistol from behind. Back in those days, security meant a simple thumb break so....in otherwords, no security. I don't know whose face I felt crunch at receiving end of my elbow because of the crowd. All I know is that had I not been trained regarding weapon retention....the outcome could have been very different.

I am glad you don't care about my preference for civilian concealed carry because for others, out of sight is out of mind and for me....that is the way that I want to keep it. You folks strut your stuff if you want to....

I have asked this question before...if OC is so great...how come cops don't enjoy the advantages you tout when they are off duty? Could it be the training that they have received??????

Thanks for sharing your experience, it is appreciated. You were in uniform and as stated before more likely to have a gun grab attempt.

I could ask the same, if CC is so great why don't cops do it while in uniform? Though I'm sure some cops OC while off duty somewhere in the US, maybe even some in Michigan.

Thanks again for sharing.

warlockmatized

10-06-2008, 04:54 PM

You'll find more of those than you wont unfortunatly

I know.....

But see.....That is where "active" participation comes in. So far it has been through active participation and education that PD's and the general public are slowly seeing the light. It is a slow process but it IS happening. Burton, Hastings, Warren, legislators at the state capitol and others got their "educations" this summer. Hopefully the beat goes on.

fbuckner

10-06-2008, 05:00 PM

Thanks for sharing your experience, it is appreciated. You were in uniform and as stated before more likely to have a gun grab attempt.

I could ask the same, if CC is so great why don't cops do it while in uniform? Though I'm sure some cops OC while off duty somewhere in the US, maybe even some in Michigan.

Thanks again for sharing.

I dont want a debate but most cops I have alked to wont OC. Their reason is they dont want to be singled out and put their familiy in danger. Criminals are not stupid I on the other hand have been told I am ! That being said If i were a criminal and was to jack a party store and seen one guy armed he's getting my attention first. Once e is down the rest will most likely comply with my needs.

Venator12

10-06-2008, 05:13 PM

Leader

10-06-2008, 05:14 PM

ghostrider

10-06-2008, 06:42 PM

I dont want a debate but most cops I have alked to wont OC. Their reason is they dont want to be singled out and put their familiy in danger. Criminals are not stupid I on the other hand have been told I am ! That being said If i were a criminal and was to jack a party store and seen one guy armed he's getting my attention first. Once e is down the rest will most likely comply with my needs.Mr. Buckner,

I've heard this many times, but never really thought of something until I saw you (a CPL instructor) say it. I don't believe that you, as as CPL instructor would do such a thing. I find it so hard to believe that a CPL instructor would actively seek out armed conflict. One of the necessary tools of a CPL holder is conflict avoidance/deescalation. It's something we are trained to do. Going after an armed individual flies in the face of all of that. It doesn't even make sense.

I realize that it's more speculation than anything, but when it's validated by the writer as something "he" would do, then even then I find it dubious at best, since we tend to work towards avoiding such actions.

Think about it for a minute without the knee-jerk reaction part. Do you really think that you would attack an armed individual (in preparation for a stop and rob), as opposed to waiting until said armed individual left the premises. It's a nice, emotional, reactionary thought, but it just doesn't pass the sniff test. I realize that we often think of things in terms of strategy, and that we ourselves when faced with such adversity would take out the immediate threat, but that type of situation presents a different set of dynamics.

fbuckner

10-06-2008, 07:09 PM

Mr. Buckner,

I've heard this many times, but never really thought of something until I saw you (a CPL instructor) say it. I don't believe that you, as as CPL instructor would do such a thing. I find it so hard to believe that a CPL instructor would actively seek out armed conflict. One of the necessary tools of a CPL holder is conflict avoidance/deescalation. It's something we are trained to do. Going after an armed individual flies in the face of all of that. It doesn't even make sense.

I realize that it's more speculation than anything, but when it's validated by the writer as something "he" would do, then even then I find it dubious at best, since we tend to work towards avoiding such actions.

Think about it for a minute without the knee-jerk reaction part. Do you really think that you would attack an armed individual (in preparation for a stop and rob), as opposed to waiting until said armed individual left the premises. It's a nice, emotional, reactionary thought, but it just doesn't pass the sniff test. I realize that we often think of things in terms of strategy, and that we ourselves when faced with such adversity would take out the immediate threat, but that type of situation presents a different set of dynamics.

Hey Sport My statement was If i was a bad guy and determined to carry out a crime Im not going to let the guy with a firearm that I can see keep that firearm. This is what they call strongarm robbery the bad guy doesnt care that there "COULD" be a gun. They need the money for some heroin and they will do whatever it takes to get it. A junkie will go to any lengths to get his next fix. They have been known to kill their dealers if they are out. Therefor they could really care less about joe blow on the street. as with anything on this board it is to make people think and nothing more. If we all thought the same way life would be boring.

Its really jus a spin on what a law abiding citizen would do. If you are in danger and there are 2 bad guys one holding a pipe 10 feet away and one witha gun 10 feet away who you going to take out first? Yea I thought so your going to take out the guy withthe gun first. But there is no winning with some of you guys anyways so it's pointless.

ghostrider

10-06-2008, 08:13 PM

Hey Sport My name isn't Sport, and my post wasn't meant to be offensive. I was respectful in my post to you, I don't think it's too much to ask the same. My statement was If i was a bad guy and determined to carry out a crime Im not going to let the guy with a firearm that I can see keep that firearm. That’s obvious, but would you actively seek out an armed victim, or would you prefer an unarmed victim? Would you rob a place in which you knew one of the patrons was visibly armed, or would you wait until that patron had left the premises before commencing the act?

I can understand if that armed individual is an security guard (in which case said guard would have to be part of the equation), but were not talking about there being a threat that needs to be dealt with (armed security guards, just like LEO don‘t apply to regular citizen OC‘ing). One of the reasoning’s that the firearms community has used in support of “shall Issue“ laws, is that it will cut down on crime because criminals are less likely to attack an armed person. There was even a study done on it where prisoners were interviewed, that revealed as much. The consensus is that more armed law abiding citizens would cut down on crime because criminals fear an armed victim. Yet, that gets completely turned around when that armed victim is OC‘ing (BTW, I think most of those “criminal elements“ are unaware that people are armed) . Now, It makes the armed citizen less feared because it is known that the person has a gun. This is what they call strongarm robbery the bad guy doesnt care that there "COULD" be a gun. That’s not been the mantra of proponents of “shall issue” laws, and criminals themselves (in studies) have stated quite the opposite. They need the money for some heroin and they will do whatever it takes to get it. A junkie will go to any lengths to get his next fix. They have been known to kill their dealers if they are out. Therefor they could really care less about joe blow on the street. as with anything on this board it is to make people think and nothing more. If we all thought the same way life would be boring. On this point I agree. There are times when I think it’s best to not OC. Drug dealers, are much in the same boat as LEO, and security guards. They are the target of a crime, and the aggressor knows in advance that they are armed. Therefore, being armed is not necessarily a deterrent against such criminal acts. OC‘ing in such an environment could possibly attract criminal attack, or it could deter it.

Its really jus a spin on what a law abiding citizen would do. That’s been my point. We’re looking at it from our perspective, when the criminals have already stated that they’ll most likely avoid an armed victim (and we’ve used this mantra to support “shall Issue”). If you are in danger and there are 2 bad guys one holding a pipe 10 feet away and one witha gun 10 feet away who you going to take out first? Yea I thought so your going to take out the guy withthe gun first. That‘s just what I‘ve been trying to convey. That is looking at it from the perspective of someone who is law abiding. Not a predatory criminal. This scenario is a complete obfuscation. In that situation, I am forced to deal with both threats, so I‘d of course neutralize the greatest threat first. However, if the roles were reversed, and I had a choice of robbing a individual with a gun, or a individual with a pipe. I‘d choose the guy with the pipe every time, and I think you would also.

Saying that “if I were a BG looking to rob a place, I‘d take out the armed patron first“, is like saying that, “If I were a BG looking to mug someone, I‘d pass up every unarmed individual and wait for the armed victim just to make it more challenging“. Maybe some criminals are that stupid, but it just doesn‘t compute coming frome someone who teaches. But there is no winning with some of you guys anyways so it's pointless. Don’t know what you mean by “you guys”. I thought we were all in this together.

Venator12

10-10-2008, 10:31 AM

Im not innocent of bad behavior on some of these threads. I want some sort of legal opinion on some of these carry issues. The Big one is on school grounds. Until someone does it and gets off I wont be doing it nor telling people it is legal. There was a federal law I thought in 1990
This guy OCs in a school: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/11799-28.html

"For the past month I have been oc everywhere I go around Linden, Fenton and Flint. The list is very long. From restaurants, grocery stores, book stores, car parts, banks.

The only bank that was a prob was National City on Flushing rd in Flushing. after cashing a check drawn on their bank the etller asked me if I wanted to open an acct. Said "no thanks" then she stated "we dont allow guns in here". I asked if that was official corp policy to which she said "yes".

Today went to Argentine school to drop off some paperwork for the kids. Went to the office. 3 ladies there. All eyes got very big but not a word said. Wasnt there long for anything to happen. Will go back to pick up kids early for another encounter sometime soon."

Done Deal

10-10-2008, 10:47 PM

This guy OCs in a school: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/11799-28.html

Today went to Argentine school to drop off some paperwork for the kids. Went to the office. 3 ladies there. All eyes got very big but not a word said. Wasnt there long for anything to happen. Will go back to pick up kids early for another encounter sometime soon." [/B]

Did the guy get off????

Venator12

10-11-2008, 02:18 PM

Did the guy get off????

Big time!

Done Deal

10-11-2008, 03:21 PM

Big time!

I am confused I guess.

I didn't see any mention of the authorities every being called about the man with a gun in school so....exactly how was it that he got off "big time"?

Oh my....you don't mean that he got so excited that......naw.......

Venator12

10-11-2008, 03:56 PM

I am confused I guess.

I didn't see any mention of the authorities every being called about the man with a gun in school so....exactly how was it that he got off "big time"?

Oh my....you don't mean that he got so excited that......naw.......

Sure ya did, say what you want about me but I don't miss much. And as for your "legitimate" inquiry his post speaks for itself.

Done Deal

10-12-2008, 08:34 AM

Sure ya did, say what you want about me but I don't miss much. And as for your "legitimate" inquiry his post speaks for itself.

Say what????

who dat

10-12-2008, 12:00 PM

Say what????
That's what I was thinking. I think V12 was replying to another post, because this one made no sense.

dougwg

10-12-2008, 12:34 PM

Did the guy get off????

It makes just as much sense as this post.

Done Deal

10-12-2008, 05:42 PM

It makes just as much sense as this post.

10-2008, 09:31 AM #92
Venator12
Activist
Associate Member

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lansing, MI area
Posts: 310 Quote:
Originally Posted by fbuckner
Im not innocent of bad behavior on some of these threads. I want some sort of legal opinion on some of these carry issues. The Big one is on school grounds. Until someone does it and gets off I wont be doing it nor telling people it is legal. There was a federal law I thought in 1990

This guy OCs in a school: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/11799-28.html

"For the past month I have been oc everywhere I go around Linden, Fenton and Flint. The list is very long. From restaurants, grocery stores, book stores, car parts, banks.

The only bank that was a prob was National City on Flushing rd in Flushing. after cashing a check drawn on their bank the etller asked me if I wanted to open an acct. Said "no thanks" then she stated "we dont allow guns in here". I asked if that was official corp policy to which she said "yes".

Today went to Argentine school to drop off some paperwork for the kids. Went to the office. 3 ladies there. All eyes got very big but not a word said. Wasnt there long for anything to happen. Will go back to pick up kids early for another encounter sometime soon." __________________

Perhaps if you would start reading the entire thread....things would make more sense to you.

Based on what I read on the school caper, it was not the example of somebody getting off that was referenced in the first post on getting off.

Understand????

But that Venator response to me was really out there.....can you explain it?

dougwg

10-15-2008, 10:31 AM

snip.....can you explain it?

Not to you. You refuse to learn besides as you have already said, you "don't think like normal people do".

Done Deal

10-15-2008, 12:41 PM

Not to you. You refuse to learn besides as you have already said, you "don't think like normal people do".

You continue to contribute oh so well....:roll: :roll:

dougwg

10-15-2008, 01:30 PM

You continue to contribute oh so well....:roll: :roll:

As do you.

Done Deal

10-15-2008, 03:42 PM

As do you.

Well sir, I never have tried to be an open carry advocate like some...

dougwg

10-15-2008, 05:09 PM

True, you simply try to be as big of an asshole as you can be, not that I'm calling you an asshole though.

Done Deal

10-15-2008, 06:12 PM

True, you simply try to be as big of an asshole as you can be, not that I'm calling you an asshole though.

Simply impressive....betcha ya do well bantering with the elementary kids on recess don't ya....

Yup, you would make a mighty fine spokes person for the OC crowd....:rolleyes:

Venator12

10-15-2008, 07:02 PM

10-2008, 09:31 AM #92
Venator12
Activist
Associate Member

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lansing, MI area
Posts: 310 Quote:
Originally Posted by fbuckner
Im not innocent of bad behavior on some of these threads. I want some sort of legal opinion on some of these carry issues. The Big one is on school grounds. Until someone does it and gets off I wont be doing it nor telling people it is legal. There was a federal law I thought in 1990

This guy OCs in a school: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/11799-28.html

"For the past month I have been oc everywhere I go around Linden, Fenton and Flint. The list is very long. From restaurants, grocery stores, book stores, car parts, banks.

The only bank that was a prob was National City on Flushing rd in Flushing. after cashing a check drawn on their bank the etller asked me if I wanted to open an acct. Said "no thanks" then she stated "we dont allow guns in here". I asked if that was official corp policy to which she said "yes".

Today went to Argentine school to drop off some paperwork for the kids. Went to the office. 3 ladies there. All eyes got very big but not a word said. Wasnt there long for anything to happen. Will go back to pick up kids early for another encounter sometime soon." __________________

Perhaps if you would start reading the entire thread....things would make more sense to you.

Based on what I read on the school caper, it was not the example of somebody getting off that was referenced in the first post on getting off.

Understand????

But that Venator response to me was really out there.....can you explain it?
All the information I have on this OC experience is what is posted. I can't add to it or answer your question.