Open carry being HOTLY debated on MSN

jump in and elevate the conversation if you wish
http://now.msn.com/now/0612-gun-toting-protest

Ugh, the girl in the front needs to go away. -_-

She ain't that bad.

the girl in the front is the girlfriend of Sean Combs' brother (sean is the OC kid). speaking as someone who was there, it was really great to see his two brothers and mother come out and support sean. it's nice when families get behind each other. when it comes to OC why say someone needs to go away? we need to be accepting of everyone, it's the only way to normalize OC.
the article on MSN now has 1500 comments, it's on FIRE

I wish we had more information about this case than the short blurb from MSNBC. There really isn't a lot to go on here.

Jack House said:

Ugh, the girl in the front needs to go away. -_-

Click to expand...

Open carrying normally brings to non OCers minds feelings about masculinity and such. It seems to be part of human nature. The perception would be that the OCers are better prepared to take care of themselves. In many ways, an accurate perception.

When a non OCer man sees a woman OCing, it can bring an instant realization that his wang doesn't make him automatically somehow physically superior. This is why women get hassled while OCing much more often, and I don't mean by cops. Just jerks making a ruckus because females OCing makes them feel uncomfortable, and they feel as though they must challenge it so as not to have to question their manhood.

When you have a picture like this spread like wildfire on the news, it magnifies that effect tremendously. Backlash from a lot of anti gun men who have masculinity issues is to be expected. That however doesn't really mean much.

The point was that the PD was proven to be in the wrong in front of minimally tens of thousands of people who follow the news. Insecure men feeling further insecure, well, I consider that just a bonus.

here you go:

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...-carrying-loaded-rifle-in-downtown-Birmingham

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...ty-council-meeting-in-Birmingham-on-June-11th

http://troy.patch.com//articles/ope...ham-park-to-support-troy-teen#comment_3599354

smellslikemichigan said:

here you go:

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...-carrying-loaded-rifle-in-downtown-Birmingham

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...ty-council-meeting-in-Birmingham-on-June-11th

http://troy.patch.com//articles/ope...ham-park-to-support-troy-teen#comment_3599354

Click to expand...

Thanks.

I read some of the "dont want to offend anyone" They just pi$$ed me off. I just want to slap the sh$# out of them.

Hey white knights, look at the photo again, she's brandishing.

Jack House said:

Hey white knights, look at the photo again, she's brandishing.

Click to expand...

That was the FIRST thing I saw. I was like.... OMG! No wonder they (media) used that picture.:banghead:

merc460 said:

That was the FIRST thing I saw. I was like.... OMG! No wonder they (media) used that picture.:banghead:

Click to expand...

The others were too preoccupied with how she carried her weapons of mass distraction to notice how she carried her firearm.

Jack House said:

Hey white knights, look at the photo again, she's brandishing.

Click to expand...

as someone who was there, i can definitively state that she was not brandishing. please tell me what you see that qualifies as this:

she did nothing of the sort. in fact, she demonstrates perfect muzzle awareness and her finger is well off the trigger. the position she carried her rifle is known, in the USMC, as, "at the ready" not "brandishing"

smellslikemichigan said:

as someone who was there, i can definitively state that she was not brandishing. please tell me what you see that qualifies as this:

Verb:

Wave or flourish (something, esp. a weapon) as a threat or in anger or excitement.

she did nothing of the sort. in fact, she demonstrates perfect muzzle awareness and her finger is well off the trigger. the position she carried her rifle is known, in the USMC, as, "at the ready" not "brandishing"

Click to expand...

"At the ready" would be considered a "Threat".

Would you carry your pistol in public in this fashion?

merc460 said:

"At the ready" would be considered a "Threat".

Would you carry your pistol in public in this fashion?

Click to expand...

that's ludicrous, not only was she ready to use her firearm (as would anyone who carries in public) she was actually maintaining better positive control of her weapon than her boyfriend pictured to the left. anyone who tried for a grab would have had an easier time getting his than hers. again, what she did, does not qualify as brandishing, by dictionary definition.

Jack House said:

Hey white knights, look at the photo again, she's brandishing.

Click to expand...

That, dear fellow is open to interpretation and would ultimately have to be decided in a court, if she was charged.

"Brandishing" is a crime of intent in Michigan, and although the penalty for brandishing is defined in the MI criminal code, the TERM "brandishing" is NOT defined, and there are no opinions from the AG or case law precedents that define this term. (The AG has issued an opinion stating that OC of a pistol in a holster is NOT brandishing)

However, "brandishing" is generally viewed as a "crime of intent" and usually must have some component of threat, intimidation, terror, or implied threat to be a valid charge.

This woman DOES have her rifle on a sling--she is just carrying it in front as opposed to on her back. Perhaps her "stern" is a fluff as her "bow", and carrying on her back would cause the rifle to bounce around too much, due to proximity to a rhythmically-mobile tuchas.

This might just be a case of "it must be jelly, 'cause jam don't shake like that", and she's carrying in front with her hands on the grips to keep the rifle secure and maintain safe muzzle discipline. She DOES display safe trigger finger discipline, so she's got THAT going for her...

Just sayin'...

I think this photo has the potential to paint carriers in a negative light. I'll explain more when I get home and have an actual keyboard to use. That is if the thread isn't locked by then. It'd be awesome if it stayed open. But...

If the thread is locked by then, and you really want to know my thought process on this subject, feel free to PM me.

Jack House said:

I think this photo has the potential to paint carriers in a negative light. I'll explain more when I get home and have an actual keyboard to use. That is if the thread isn't locked by then. It'd be awesome if it stayed open. But...

If the thread is locked by then, and you really want to know my thought process on this subject, feel free to PM me.

Click to expand...

I get your point--she has her hands ON the rifle, as opposed to it just hanging on her body passively. And that posture might be interpreted by insane, paranoid anti-gunners as threatening in and of itself, even if she smiling, polite, and pointing it at the ground with her finger outside the trigger guard.

I understand how the paranoid ravings of the anti-gun media work, and I agree that carrying an AR like she is makes for potentially VERY bad PR for our cause. But it is NOT in violation of the law in MI, and it is NOT technically "brandishing" because brandishing is not formally defined under MI law, and is generally accepted to be a "crime of intent". If she's not INTENDING to threaten, intimidate, or terrorize someone, she is not "brandishing".

But yeah, I get the fact that logic, the letter of the law, and the concept of paranoia not being a valid reason to charge someone with a crime, are NOT useful arguments when you're talking about the anti-gun folks...

Dreamer said:

I get your point--she has her hands ON the rifle, as opposed to it just hanging on her body passively. And that posture might be interpreted by insane, paranoid anti-gunners as threatening in and of itself, even if she smiling, polite, and pointing it at the ground with her finger outside the trigger guard.

I understand how the paranoid ravings of the anti-gun media work, and I agree that carrying an AR like she is makes for potentially VERY bad PR for our cause. But it is NOT in violation of the law in MI, and it is NOT technically "brandishing" because brandishing is not formally defined under MI law, and is generally accepted to be a "crime of intent". If she's not INTENDING to threaten, intimidate, or terrorize someone, she is not "brandishing".

But yeah, I get the fact that logic, the letter of the law, and the concept of paranoia not being a valid reason to charge someone with a crime, are NOT useful arguments when you're talking about the anti-gun folks...

Click to expand...

btw, there is an applicable opinion, not directly about open carry/brandishing, but it can be used because it demonstrates how to apply the definition of brandishing to any situation. this situation does not qualify as brandishing, at least not by this opinion:
http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2000s/op10176.htm

In the absence of any reported Michigan appellate court decisions defining "brandishing," it is appropriate to rely upon dictionary definitions. People v Denio, 454 Mich 691, 699; 564 NW2d 13 (1997). According to The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition (1982), at p 204, the term brandishing is defined as: "1. To wave or flourish menacingly, as a weapon. 2. To display ostentatiously. –n. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish." This definition comports with the meaning ascribed to this term by courts of other jurisdictions. For example, in United States v Moerman, 233 F3d 379, 380 (CA 6, 2000), the court recognized that in federal sentencing guidelines, "brandishing" a weapon is defined to mean "that the weapon was pointed or waved about, or displayed in a threatening manner."
Applying these definitions to your question, it is clear that a reserve police officer, regardless whether he or she qualifies as a "peace officer," when carrying a handgun in a holster in plain view, is not waving or displaying the firearm in a threatening manner. Thus, such conduct does not constitute brandishing a firearm in violation of section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code.
It is my opinion, therefore, that a reserve police officer, by carrying a handgun in a holster that is in plain view, does not violate section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code, which prohibits brandishing a firearm in public.