g21sfpistol
Banned
you need to reread the article. and if you are claiming someone isn't credible you need to prove it. you made the claim you need to prove it. pretty standard here at OCDO
-
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.
-
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.
Attempted robbery of OCer in Washington state WalMart!
- Thread starter paramedic70002
- Start date
you need to reread the article. and if you are claiming someone isn't credible you need to prove it. you made the claim you need to prove it. pretty standard here at OCDO
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
I read the article and there is NO verifiable proof that the victim was OCing. NONE, NADA, ZIP. OTH I have list hundreds of incidents of CC permit holders being arrested and convicted for committing violent acts.
Read the links in posts #14 & #18 wherein the victim of the bat attack indicates he was open carrying.
Haven't seen any possible security video, but until shown otherwise I will accept this as most likely true.
Last edited:
BTW, IMHO i do believe bob changed his original article, can't prove it but it is not what i initially read, per se., but i do believe dad is the first to bring up the subject of OC'g...Yakima's newspaper strictly says the victim has CC permit) then bob put out his second tirade article lambasting OC'g, and then daveW's article i am still trying to grasp his point.
ipse
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
I didn't read those I went by the reports from bearing arms. So he was open carrying, and he let the guy get within striking distance with a bat. None of the reports indicate why the idiot hit him, he may not have even seen the firearm. But IF this was the case it would be extremely rare, extremely. Those jumping on one case when there are hundreds of cases of CC being attacked, or involved in crime makes them look foolish. SA is the most important part of carrying, and CC seem to get involved in more stuff than OC, IMO, due to lack of SA because they think they are anonymous.
g21sfpistol
Banned
that's because there is like 2 million people who CC as opposed to the very few who OC yet still CC in certain situations.
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
Please by all means show us where OCers have committed assaults, murders, road rage. This is a domain of the CC fanatics, Sonny Crocket wannabes.
And CC is the carry of choice for violent felons!
Last edited:
utbagpiper
Banned
I agree with you completely on all points above.
Here is where I will have to gently part company. In brief, in our desires to defend OC from those misguided gun owners who attack it, we should not allow--in any degree--ourselves to become what they are. We need allies not enemies and OCers should not attack or diminish the value of CC in any regard.
Within legal, peaceable limits, whether or what a man chooses to carry is far, far less important than how he chooses to carry.
What "seems" may not be what is. Our personal bias filters can be very strong. With both OCers and CCers being a fairly small proportion of society (Utah has active permits issued to about 10% of our population--with that many more issued to non-Utah-residents--and even still how many carry (OC or CC) on any given day is almost certainly a small proportion of that number) statistical data is hard to come by. Almost every newsworthy or reportable incident involving LACs who carry a gun might qualify as an outlier. We also know the media is lazy, ignorant, and hostile. Especially in States where permits are not private records, those who have permits can be reported as having permits regardless of whether a gun was involved or not, while those who don't have a permit obviously would not be reported as carrying unless it was obvious to the reporter he was. Finally, whether CCers "think they are anonymous", or don't benefit from looking like a hard target, or perhaps were motivated to obtain permits and then CC (rather than accepting whatever inconveniences or limitations might be in play for those without permits) because they are in a higher risk group of some sort, is also impossible to say at this point. Those on this discussion board, those who show up at OC events, are atypical and it can take significant awareness and effort not to allow our self-selection into this group, along with any other existing biases, to color our views of reality too much.
The bottom line is that all best evidence is that respecting the constitutional and natural rights of LACs to carry firearms for an effective self-defense has not resulted in increased levels of crime or mayhem. Whether carried visibly or discretely, LACs carrying guns have not become a source of guns for criminals. There is certainly no evidence of any pattern of OCers being targeted by criminals either to eliminate the OCer as a threat nor to steal his gun. Several studies indicate that respecting the right of LACs to carry guns in public reduces violent crime. And carrying a gun in public is a right, clearly enumerated by the 2nd amendment of the federal constitution and within most of the constitutions of the several States.
OC or CC or CCC is a personal decision that should be respected within the bounds of peaceful, legal conduct. Period.
Charles
utbagpiper
Banned
WalkingWolf, do you really intend to openly, and actively attack CC with the same kind of fallacies used by those who attack OC?
We can and should defend and encourage OC without attacking CC.
CC is a perfectly valid way to carry a firearm for self-defense and should not be attacked by those who OC.
Charles
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
Do you deny that violent criminals prefer to CC? Or the incidents of crime by CC permit holders? What I posted was factual, if it gets your knickers in a bind, look past it.
Most if not all violent criminals DO NOT OC. I am not attacking CC, I am attacking those morons who do CC. The rest of the CC crowd has nothing to be offended about.
g21sfpistol
Banned
can you even prove they were CCing to begin with? it just states they are holders. so you are showing a very rare occasion just like you claim the OP to be? haha. that proves your ignorance. either way, its off topic.
g21sfpistol
Banned
most are felons who shouldn't carry to begin with.
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
The crimes are committed by CC permit holders, let me repeat. The crimes are committed by CC permit holders. Most people who CC in states where it is permitted, have a CC permit. People without a CC permit who CC are likely violent criminals. No criminal in their right mind OC's. Most people even if they have a permit, will not announce their attention to commit a crime by OCing. So when a person decides that they are going to break the law with a firearm it is HIGHLY LIKELY they are CCing.
Criminals prefer CC!
Criminals prefer CC!
utbagpiper
Banned
Just because it is what I'm familiar with: In Utah, over the past 20 years we have revoked concealed carry permits for all causes at a pretty constant rate of about 0.2% (2 per 1,000). Currently, about 1 in 10 Utah adults (200,000) hold a permit to carry. I suspect about 10% of those actually do carry on a regular basis, the rest carry when hunting, camping, hiking, traveling, or when they have to run to the pharmacy at 2:00 am because a child has spiked a fever and they are out of Tylenol. (We also have about 300,000 non-resident permits valid).
It is a little more difficult to get numbers, but near as we can tell, police officers lose their certification at about the same rate. Ditto for school teachers, and doctors.
It is hard to find any reasonably large and diverse group that won't have 0.2% of the membership misbehave at some point.
Whether OCers are a large enough group for stats to kick in, or whether they are still small enough that self-selection is overcoming stats, I do not know.
What I do know is that we in the RKBA community do not do ourselves any favors when we allow our opponents to divide us. Remember how "sportsmen" didn't much care when short shotguns, machine guns and silencers were effectively banned? Or how many didn't seem to worry too much about bans on large magazines, "Saturday Night Specials", or "assault rifles"....until it became clear that such bans affected some popular hunting guns and that the next target (no pun intended) was obviously those "high powered sniper rifles" that happen to look just like common hunting rifles?
Those who are on the forefront of RKBA for self-defense should set the highest, best example of not attacking other segments of the RKBA community needlessly. Someone legally CCing does nothing to hurt RKBA nor OC.
Please, counter the attacks by OC without lobbing attacks against CC.
Charles
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
There is that statist ringtone. Most criminals should not carry, whether they have a felony or not. But if they do, they CC.
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
UB truth, and facts are not attacks. Get your knickers unknotted.
Point of fact ladies and gentlemen, OCDO welcomes all poeple who OC, CC, or noC.
We do not wish to criticize those that do not OC, we wish to educate them with every respect and courtesy being afforded them. There is never an excuse to insult or belittle - be part of the solution, not part of the problem to divide our ranks of those that embrace the RKBA in any of its forms: OC, CC, hunters, sport shooters, et al.
We do not wish to criticize those that do not OC, we wish to educate them with every respect and courtesy being afforded them. There is never an excuse to insult or belittle - be part of the solution, not part of the problem to divide our ranks of those that embrace the RKBA in any of its forms: OC, CC, hunters, sport shooters, et al.
utbagpiper
Banned
And yet criminals seem not to hesitate to flash their previously concealed guns when doing so makes them look tough.
Has it occurred to you that a large part of the reason most criminals CC may be due to the very laws we decry as unconstitutional. Most criminals have prior records and many are prohibited persons. Some of us oppose lifetime bans.
If a former convict could not be arrested on sight for having a gun, how many would feel compelled to CC, vs how many would carry openly to announce to rival gang members and others that there armed? IOW, to derive much the same benefit from OC that you and I do.
Charles
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
I am not criticizing, I am pointing facts in light of the accusations by one member that only comes to insult OC. There is no reason for anybody to feel insulting unless they are in that group that is being criticized(criminals).
utbagpiper
Banned
Sorry, WW, not buying it. In current context, your "facts" are not merely a defense of OC, nor are they an attack on criminals. Nobody is talking about criminals carrying. In current context, your "facts" are an attack on CC. And your repeated use of diminutive terms like "knickers" is an attack on my polite, civil efforts to encourage you against attacking CC. And a not very polite one at that.
You can do better, my brother.
Charles