Wikipedia entry added: Open Carry

imported post

Both PDO and handgunlaws.us suffer from admins that instead of posting summaries of the law in each state, or actual quotes from the law,occasionally expound their own interpretations of the law.

I fully expect someone to get caught someday and sue one or both based on this.

imported post

The guy who inserted the NPOV tag stated his objection was two fold. One was not having a citation for the quote from the UCLA historian (and maybe for not having an anti quote) and his other object was not linking to anti sites. So I added a couple anti sites.

Maybe John could add a cite for the quote.

imported post

Thanks!

I added a cite for the quote as well as another quote from the book that was also relevant.

I noted this addition on the discussion page and asked what else needs to be done to eliminate the NPOV tag.

imported post

I also added cites for the 2004 VA encounters and added quotes from good old Bob Ricker to the opposition section.

Let's see what else the censors want for the article to get untagged.

imported post

I am willing to give the guy the benefit of the doubt that he just wants a NPOV. But being a lawyer from Chicago as his page indicates, I am suspicious.

imported post

The article looks better than ever. Thanks to everyone here, and special props to ilbob, Jperice and Murphys Law for their contributions.
It still has an NPOV tag. JChap is a dick.
I also plan to keep an eye on this Wiki. I was shocked to see that Wikipedia did not have an Open Carry entry, even though my original article was a bit unpolished you fellows pulled through and are really making this look good.

Strange that they forbid Bias on Wiki when the entire written history of the world is flooded with it. Some call Lincoln a Hero and other call him a tyrant, yet his makes no mention of this.

Notice also that the editors were not happy with the Concealed Carry wiki either... I am starting to belive that Wikipedia is Anti-Gun

for example from the gun politics wikie (considered NPOV)

Although Kellermann's papers themselves do not make any recommendations, they were immediately held up as support by advocates of gun control, and decried as bad science by proponents of gun rights. See Arthur Kellermann for the alleged flaws in the study. The findings are essentially what would be predicted a priori; the presence of any object which adds some degree of risk, no matter how small, will always mathematically increase the total risk.

Click to expand...

The author users the word alleged, often used to presume innocence or percieved guilt on the part of the uninformed by the media and then the author follows up by supporting the findings in a summary of priori.

See what I mean?

imported post

I suspect that there is a bias amongst the "wiki establishment" against firearms. There seems to be a bias amongst "academia" in general.

Having said that, we must learn to fight their words and procedural sniping with procedures and words of our own (sort of like out-lawyering a lawyer).

This will not only help to spread the truth about firearms and self-defense, but will also help to dispell the myth that gun owners are un-educated neanderthals.

You and everyone you mentioned have done a great job of pushing the envelope a little further in the right direction with this wiki. Not bad for a days work!

imported post

You are correct. Gun Politics are a conflict of ideas.
Organzation such as PNAC are trying to re-establish the government to the United States so that citizens completley entrust there welfare to the government. So many organizations believe that the private owneship of firearms is outdated and that citizens should entrust the police and military to matters of defense and security.

Firearms are good for hunting and self defense, this is true. But more importantly, before "sporting purposes", firearms keep free men free.

I oppose all gun laws, as congress is NOT empowered to right a single law or act concerning the ownership of firearms.


2nd Ammendment

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Dictionary.com defines INFRINGED as:

1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent.
2. Obsolete. To defeat; invalidate.

In other words, ANY law that invalidates or disparges a citzens right to keep and bear arms is unconstitutional, therefore all forms of gun control are unconstitutional.

"Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it .... No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it."-- American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Volume 16, Section 177

We need to bring another fight to the supreme court, shut down the NFA, GCA and the Brady Law. Lets take away to tools of opresssion once and for all!

imported post

I couldn't resist editing the resources section. I realized we had misidentified what opencarry.org and handgunlaw.us are about in the title, soI corrected it and added a couple of pro-gunowner sites to the resource section.

imported post

They may be tagging you for the OC map. It labels the free OC states as "Gold Star States" which might be considered bias in favor of Open Carry.

imported post

I don't think so. It seems to be he wants more experienced editors to come in and work on the article.

imported post

EXACTLY how does one go about editing an article in Wikipedia or any of the other online encyclopedias?

imported post

EagleFiveZero wrote:

EXACTLY how does one go about editing an article in Wikipedia or any of the other online encyclopedias?

Click to expand...

It is fairly easy with Wikipedia. You go to the Wikipedia Main Page and there will be a link in the upper right corner to Sign In/Create Account.

Just follow the process to create an account and then login. Once you are logged in, you can edit any of the articles. Be sure to try and follow the community standards so that anything you add or edit isn't flagged by others who might have an agenda.

Welcom to OpenCarry.Org!

imported post

Hey guys. I had an article published with Associated Content.

Here is the review of the article http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/38579/legal_week_in_review.html

and the article itself

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/36389/open_carry_laws.html

imported post

Did you get any specific feed back as to what questions he thought you left unanswered?

imported post

No, I sent them an e-mail but didn't get a response.

imported post

Hello everybody. My first post here.

I took a look at the wikipedia entry. It looks excellent, but I think it can be fixed to remove that NPOV tag. I was going to do it but something needs to be done to the map which I cannot access.

Please consider modifying the legend, changing the words "Gold Star" to "Unlicensed" (also, I would suggest changing the "Non Permissive Open Carry State" to "Not an Open Carry State" as the former is subject to possible misinterpretation).

In fact, if I may be so bold, you might go ahead and swap the green and gold (yellow) colors. Green generally means "go ahead" in a neutral interpretation, while yellow means "caution" and red "stop". I think that no one could dispute the neutrality of that selection of colors. Just a thought...

The other problem with the wiki is that the history section does not read neutral; for example it implies the low crime rate in the west is due to open carry (a suggestion I agree with, but it ain't neutral). I would take most of that information and put it in a new section called "Supporting views" just above the existing "Opposition" (renamed "Opposing views"). Then limit the discussion in "Open Carry in History" to neutral statements such as how prevalent it was, and where, at what time.

BTW, I imagine an awful lot of work must have gone into that map, and I appreciate it. I am going to use it in a study of overall freedom in the U.S. that I am participating in, and I'm very glad you folks have done the grunt work to figure this information out.

Take a look at my site, http://www.WyomingLibertyIndex.info , and also a favorite of mine, http://www.FreeStateWyoming.org (including the forum there), if you are interested in freedom overall (which I suspect most folks here will be ). We had a nice long discussion about open carry in Wyoming in this thread.

imported post

Thanks for that great unput, it will probably be neccesary to edit the map and re-post it since I belive it links directly to opencarry.org

The NPOV tag really doesn't hurt much though since whoever types in OPen carry is gonna get that page.

I am not sure that getting NPOV removed would be such a good thing anyway

imported post

Maybe John could make a new map just for wiki use?



Or maybe delete the map and just link to ocdo?

imported post

Nah, I think someone with some time on their hands could open up paint brush and edit the exsiting map. I could host it. no big.