• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Seeking guidance

RioDio

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
13
Location
Washington
Carrie Moats infers in her forum posts and interviews that she enjoys the shock value of OC and she likes it when people think she's law enforcement. But such sketchy remarks reflects poorly on rational, responsible gun owners. It makes people reluctant to have a serious discussion on gun rights. At a high level, open carry removes a significant crime deterrent and that’s the implicit fear that anyone could be carrying concealed. Concealment prevents avoidable challenge - nobody attempts to disarm the seemingly unarmed. The second amendment is endowed upon the private citizen to keep and bear arms and it guarantees the right to private gun ownership. The government cannot require a permit for anyone legally allowed to possess a firearm, to be in possession of a firearm when on their private property - this aligns with the right to privacy - when in private. Call that "gun privacy". There is however, no such thing as the right to privacy when in public. When you're in public, you have the right to "public". The government absolutely has the right - and responsibility - to require a permit (but may not refuse to issue such a permit if the individual is legally allowed to possess a firearm) for an individual to be in private possession of a firearm when in public. Governments typically don't issue open carry permits and private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public. This is usually a privilege restricted to law enforcement who need ready access to their weapon as a normal requirement of their daily duties. It's difficult to argue the justification for a private citizen having that same requirement. I seek the open carry community's wisdom in helping me to understand these issues. Thanks for taking the time.
 
Last edited:

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,884
Location
SC
The government absolutely has the right - and responsibility - to require a permit (but may not refuse to issue such a permit if the individual is legally allowed to possess a firearm) for an individual to be in private possession of a firearm when in public. Governments typically don't issue open carry permits and private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public. This is usually a privilege restricted to law enforcement who need ready access to their weapon as a normal requirement of their daily duties. It's difficult to argue the justification for a private citizen having that same requirement.

You believe this? :uhoh:
 

RioDio

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
13
Location
Washington
You believe this? :uhoh:

Hi. "private possession of a firearm in public" means concealment - sorry if that wasn't clear. I absolutely agree with the permit requirements for concealment. "Private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public" is a fact. You cannot generally travel while openly carrying. OC is prohibited by law in states such as Texas (surprised me too!), Florida and Illinois. And finally, do you really expect the private citizen to be purposefully engaged in situations requiring the same frequent access to and visibility of their weapon? Thanks for helping me to better understand OC!
 

Venator

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
6,462
Location
Lansing area, Michigan, USA
Carrie Moats infers in her forum posts and interviews that she enjoys the shock value of OC and she likes it when people think she's law enforcement. But such sketchy remarks reflects poorly on rational, responsible gun owners. It makes people reluctant to have a serious discussion on gun rights. At a high level, open carry removes a significant crime deterrent and that’s the implicit fear that anyone could be carrying concealed. Concealment prevents avoidable challenge - nobody attempts to disarm the seemingly unarmed. The second amendment is endowed upon the private citizen to keep and bear arms and it guarantees the right to private gun ownership. The government cannot require a permit for anyone legally allowed to possess a firearm, to be in possession of a firearm when on their private property - this aligns with the right to privacy - when in private. Call that "gun privacy". There is however, no such thing as the right to privacy when in public. When you're in public, you have the right to "public". The government absolutely has the right - and responsibility - to require a permit (but may not refuse to issue such a permit if the individual is legally allowed to possess a firearm) for an individual to be in private possession of a firearm when in public. Governments typically don't issue open carry permits and private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public. This is usually a privilege restricted to law enforcement who need ready access to their weapon as a normal requirement of their daily duties. It's difficult to argue the justification for a private citizen having that same requirement. I seek the open carry community's wisdom in helping me to understand these issues. Thanks for taking the time.
You have a serious misunderstanding of the 2nd Amendment. Keep doing research on the original intent of the amendment and don't believe the revisionists twist.
 

MSG Laigaie

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
3,239
Location
Philipsburg, Montana
RioDio said "And finally, do you really expect the private citizen to be purposefully engaged in situations requiring the same frequent access to and visibility of their weapon?"

No, that is why I wear my weapon. I OC to prevent contact with BGs. I see you are in Washington and new here. Welcome to OCDO. We meet for coffee and conversation in Bellingham, Sunday, 1000, Bakerview Starbucks. Come on down, we should talk.

Do you Open Carry or are you just looking for information?
 

RioDio

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
13
Location
Washington
You have a serious misunderstanding of the 2nd Amendment. Keep doing research on the original intent of the amendment and don't believe the revisionists twist.

Hi. I appreciate that you have taken the time, and while I'm trying to learn from the experienced community, I'm not sure how helpful are replies that are basically like 'You're wrong, go away and read more'. The mere fact that the 2nd Amendment does not explicitly address carry and concealment and leaves it up to continual judicial reinterpretation and that OC is outright banned in seven states makes your suggestion rather insulting. The very point that this is confusing is precisely the reason I'm seeking information from the experts in OC - those who live with it every day. I graciously approached this forum with my questions and would appreciate insightful responses. Thanks.
 

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,884
Location
SC
Hi. "private possession of a firearm in public" means concealment - sorry if that wasn't clear. I absolutely agree with the permit requirements for concealment. "Private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public" is a fact. You cannot generally travel while openly carrying. OC is prohibited by law in states such as Texas (surprised me too!), Florida and Illinois. And finally, do you really expect the private citizen to be purposefully engaged in situations requiring the same frequent access to and visibility of their weapon? Thanks for helping me to better understand OC!

The second Amendment specifically states "Shall not be infringed" which basically means the Government shall make no provision that interferes with how one CHOOSES to carry.

I'm truly glad you are seeking education on Open Carry, but if you really want to understand it, I recommend you check all the notions you have regarding it at the door, because they conflict with facts.

Open is legal in 43 states.

You CAN travel while openly carrying; my husband and I have done it many times through several states.

A private citizen carrying a gun and encountering a bad guy should have all the same convenience and access to their self defense firearm as any police officer. Why are cops special?

I'm (asking and stating) all of the above calmly, respectfully and sincerely.
 

45 Fan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
127
Location
Oregon
While I do not OC all time, I do always carry. I do have a CHL (Concealed Handgun License - I am in Oregon) and concealed carry often. The 2nd Amendment does not include OC or CC because that is the right of any person legally allowed to own a gun; it is a personal preference and should be left up to a legal gun owner.
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
The idea that law-abiding citizens during the Colonial era who were armed in their daily lives were all walking around with a Brown Bess slung over their shoulders and a brace of flintlock pistols in their belts is absurd. The archeological and historical record show that "pocket pistols" were incredibly common in that era, and the archeology of clothing shows that many topcoats of the era has specially-designed pockets in them for carrying small arms.

Carrying concealed was just the NORMAL way to carry small guns for years. Most gentlemen and businessmen of the time carried concealed--for many reasons. One, having guns hanging all over you wasn't "fashionable". Two, it made sense to have a small handgun somewhere on your person, because without ANY kind of organized police forces, citizens were LITERALLY on their own with regards to personal safety and crime prevention. Third, most street criminals didn't use guns back then because small handguns were expensive--they used knives, swords, bats and bludgeons. A handgun--even a small single-shot gun--could be a POWERFUL deterrent...

The government has no more right to require a permit to CC than it does to require a license to buy a laser printer, printers ink, or a religious text.

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not get?
 
Last edited:

RioDio

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
13
Location
Washington
RioDio said "And finally, do you really expect the private citizen to be purposefully engaged in situations requiring the same frequent access to and visibility of their weapon?"

No, that is why I wear my weapon. I OC to prevent contact with BGs. I see you are in Washington and new here. Welcome to OCDO. We meet for coffee and conversation in Bellingham, Sunday, 1000, Bakerview Starbucks. Come on down, we should talk.

Do you Open Carry or are you just looking for information?

Hi. I have real concerns. As you may know well, in many gun shops in WA, they sell the 'Workman' booklet ("Washington State Gun Rights and Responsibilities" by Dave Workman). My copy is the latest 2011 revision. In chapter 4, 'Concealed and Open Carry', the book, in no uncertain terms, claims that an individual may be arrested and 'rightfully so' for OC or even 'printing' while CC and charged with 'public menace' under RCW 9.41.270 AND have their CPL revoked! Either Workman is a liar, or I actually do 'roll the dice' each and every time I may accidentally show a portion of my holster or even weapon - let alone wear openly - that somebody may get nervous and call the police. Now, I actually do in fact have a legal team that could essentially string somebody up if this became a real issue for me. But why should I have to live with this anxiety every day of my life? I'm not trying to be crude, but this effectively puts the only true concealment - 'Where the sun don't shine' - if you catch my drift. :eek:
 

45 Fan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
127
Location
Oregon
he idea that law-abiding citizens during the Colonial era who were armed in their daily lives were all walking around with a Brown Bess slung over their shoulders and a brace of flintlock pistols in their belts is absurd. The archeological and historical record show that "pocket pistols" were incredibly common in that era, and the archeology of clothing shows that many topcoats of the era has specially-designed pockets in them for carrying small arms.

Carrying concealed was just the NORMAL way to carry small guns for years. Most gentlemen and businessmen of the time carried concealed--for many reasons. One, having guns hanging all over you wasn't "fashionable". Two, it made sense to have a small handgun somewhere on your person, because without ANY kind of organized police forces, citizens were LITERALLY on their own with regards to personal safety and crime prevention. Third, most street criminals didn't use guns back then because small handguns were expensive--they used knives, swords, bats and bludgeons. A handgun--even a small single-shot gun--could be a POWERFUL deterrent...

The government has no more right to require a permit to CC than it does to require a license to buy a laser printer, printers ink, or a religious text.

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not get?


^Seems most of us are in agreement...
 

RioDio

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
13
Location
Washington
The second Amendment specifically states "Shall not be infringed" which basically means the Government shall make no provision that interferes with how one CHOOSES to carry.

I'm truly glad you are seeking education on Open Carry, but if you really want to understand it, I recommend you check all the notions you have regarding it at the door, because they conflict with facts.

Open is legal in 43 states.

You CAN travel while openly carrying; my husband and I have done it many times through several states.

A private citizen carrying a gun and encountering a bad guy should have all the same convenience and access to their self defense firearm as any police officer. Why are cops special?

I'm (asking and stating) all of the above calmly, respectfully and sincerely.

I am open to real facts - I am here to learn. The reason I'm so confused is I keep hearing that things 'should be this way' or 'those laws violate the 2nd amendment', etc. I'm seeking reality. Hoping for an ideal world won't keep me from getting arrested, today. See my other post for context. Thanks for your help!
 

45 Fan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
127
Location
Oregon
If you scroll down to your state area, there should be more information concerning your physical location :)

but just because some guy writes a book, doesnt mean it isnt fiction....
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
RioDio - Are these your opinions or are you just quoting Carrie Moats?

If you claim ownership, it would seem that your thread title "Seeking Guidance" is somewhat misleading. You seem to be seeking contention and make numerous openly challenging remarks not supported by facts.

You challenge the right to open carry - the OP states that (1) "private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public and "It's difficult to argue the justification for a private citizen having that same requirement."

.....
(1) Private citizens do have the right to OC in public in a vast majority of states.

.....(2) It is very easy to argue that a private citizen's life has the same value as a LEO's.

All in all a strange posting for someone that implies they are an advocate.
 

RioDio

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
13
Location
Washington
RioDio - Are these your opinions or are you just quoting Carrie Moats?

If you claim ownership, it would seem that your thread title "Seeking Guidance" is somewhat misleading. You seem to be seeking contention and make numerous openly challenging remarks not supported by facts.

You challenge the right to open carry - the OP states that (1) "private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public and "It's difficult to argue the justification for a private citizen having that same requirement."

.....
(1) Private citizens do have the right to OC in public in a vast majority of states.

.....(2) It is very easy to argue that a private citizen's life has the same value as a LEO's.

All in all a strange posting for someone that implies they are an advocate.

I've presented all of my current understanding to the forum, which is admittedly lacking and includes the results of numerous conversations I've had with 'the other side' of this issue. I probably should have included my immediate underlying concerns in my original posting, so as to avoid any confusion. But I didn't yet know the temperature of the forum and how it would have been received. I'm not yet certain that I don't regret my decision to ask here.
 

45 Fan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
127
Location
Oregon
Hey rio, noone here is going to insult your ideas (unless they are trolls)...this forums is for you to connect to other gun owners across the country/globe and share ideas. As I said earlier, you should read around the 'Washington' area of the forums for a better idea in your state. :) we all should be friends and support each other in this endeavor to preserve the rights of our fellow countrymen by working within the laws and exercising our rights.
 

RioDio

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
13
Location
Washington
Hey rio, noone here is going to insult your ideas (unless they are trolls)...this forums is for you to connect to other gun owners across the country/globe and share ideas. As I said earlier, you should read around the 'Washington' area of the forums for a better idea in your state. :) we all should be friends and support each other in this endeavor to preserve the rights of our fellow countrymen by working within the laws and exercising our rights.

Thank you. I wonder if there are those who really make day-to-day decisions for themselves based upon what they believe is-or-is-not / should-or-should-not-be legal, or if they really give advice based upon such opinions. If I think I have the moral right to something, I'd better be willing to bet that I can explain my rationale well enough to the police or to a judge to get me out of a jam. Otherwise, such opinions can only be relevant in the context of legislative activism - actually starting a movement and working with my district's rep to get a proposition going. That's the very place I find myself now. Unanswered questions - assumptions and unnecessary risk. Thank you for the suggestion - I will certainly repost in the appropriate State forum. Take care.
 

45 Fan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
127
Location
Oregon
:) im just here to make friends and to learn a bit about the states...i do like to be in the 'know'...
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
At a high level, open carry removes a significant crime deterrent and that’s the implicit fear that anyone could be carrying concealed. Concealment prevents avoidable challenge - nobody attempts to disarm the seemingly unarmed.

I would posit that quite the opposite is true.
It's been suggested that there are about 6-million people licensed to carry firearms throughout the United States. For the sake of argument and because some states do not require licensing, let's wildly inflate that by three times, and suppose that there are 18-million firearm carriers in the USA. Currently the population of the country is in the neighborhood of 311-million. That's right around 2% of the population if my wild exaggerations of how many people carry arms on a daily basis are correct.
Given those figures, I think it can safely be said that unarmed citizens vastly outnumber the number of citizens carrying firearms.

I think we may reasonably draw a parallel between a mugger who wishes to avoid encountering an armed citizen and say, a bigot who wishes to avoid green-skinned people.
Let us also assume that, like concealed carriers, the green-skinned may hide among the non-colored population? I'm imagining that little scene in Blazing Saddles with the Klan meeting....
cleavon-little-klan-outfit.jpg


Now imagine that you're a mugger/bigot who wishes to avoid confronting the armed/green-skinned individual in the above photo.
You can either....
1) approach one of the people on the left who could be armed/green-skinned; but you can't be sure
.... or
2) approach one of the people on the right, both of whom there is no doubt about being armed and without a doubt not green-skinned.

Avoiding which group will maximize your chances of avoiding the armed or green-skinned?

With concealed arms, there is about a 2% chance that anyone you don't see carrying a firearm will turn out to be carrying arms; with open carry the odds that anyone you see carrying arms is unarmed is probably..... a bit less than 0%. If I was a mugger that wanted to go home alive and unperforated at the end of the day, I'd definitely chose to mug the people I couldn't see were carrying a pistol, the odds are quite high that they are unarmed.

With concealed arms, there is about a 2% chance that anyone encountered will be armed, with openly carried arms there is probably somewhere in the 100% range that anyone seen with a firearm is armed.
Since the majority of citizens are unarmed, carrying concealed only Increases the possibility that one will be confronted in the belief that 98% of those encountered will be unarmed.
With visible arms, there is about a 100% chance that you a
 
Last edited:

45 Fan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
127
Location
Oregon
Just remember, open carrying a firearm also marks you out. If i was robbing a bank and saw a gun on a hip, you would be the first one popped to gain control...just saying...CC does have its own advantage/disadvantage.
 
Top