Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Of Q-ships and Today:

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    92

    Post imported post

    Q-ships were Britain's WWI answer to surface German U-boat attacks; the Q-ship would wait until the U-boat surfaced then frantically ran to bring hiddendeck guns into play. Since the Germans already were manningtheir guns, Q-ships were often sunk; there's no faster draw than an already drawn gun.

    Concealed carry is too complicated for mytastes, you handgun could snag inside your jacket; your handgun could snag in a boot holster. Open carry issimpler and better. The less complex somerhing is, the less liable it is to fail. Why be a Q-ship when you be a U-boat?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Western, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    308

    Post imported post

    The same fallacies of CC are brought out by the OC crowd again and again.
    Quote Originally Posted by Open Carry.org Member View Post
    I really disgree with this one! That means that we can have any yahoo running around with a gun with out the proper training. This really scares the hell out of me. Just my two-cents!
    Quote Originally Posted by KansasMustang View Post
    Joe Schmedlap out there with a loaded weapon thinking he's going to deter crime and he's not even trained to fire his weapon safely just kinda makes my hair on the back of my neck stand up.

  3. #3
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,616

    Post imported post

    They are not fallacies, they are opinions or preferences and I am not normally thought of as a crowd.

    This site is dedicated to OC and I am a firm believer in the benefits thereof: deterence, speed, comfort, education et al, even the only legal way I can carry in alcohol serving restaurants.

    I've listened with an open mind to the negative reasons and find them all baseless.

    Am I anti CC - absolutely not - I do so occasionally myself.

    I really don't care how you carry - just be responsible and safe.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Western, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    308

    Post imported post

    Grapeshot wrote:
    They are not fallacies, they are opinions or preferences and I am not normally thought of as a crowd.

    This site is dedicated to OC and I am a firm believer in the benefits thereof: deterence, speed, comfort, education et al, even the only legal way I can carry in alcohol serving restaurants.

    I've listened with an open mind to the negative reasons and find them all baseless.

    Am I anti CC - absolutely not - I do so occasionally myself.

    I really don't care how you carry - just be responsible and safe.

    Yata hey
    I do agree, GS, and based on that I can counter the fallacies of CC Mini14 posted with fallacies of OC

    CC vs OC
    1) you handgun could snag inside your jacket vs a badguy can grab your gun.
    2) your handgun could snag in a boot holster vs you're the first target in an armed robbery.

    Just as people who open carry hate the fallacies posted about their means of carry, the feelings are mutual.

    I can count, on one hand, the number of times I have open carried. Concealed is how I roll. Why should one group be offended at the other, yet make just as ignorant statements in the same breath? But, we're all in this together and, much like you said GS, be responsable and safe
    Quote Originally Posted by Open Carry.org Member View Post
    I really disgree with this one! That means that we can have any yahoo running around with a gun with out the proper training. This really scares the hell out of me. Just my two-cents!
    Quote Originally Posted by KansasMustang View Post
    Joe Schmedlap out there with a loaded weapon thinking he's going to deter crime and he's not even trained to fire his weapon safely just kinda makes my hair on the back of my neck stand up.

  5. #5
    Regular Member VAopencarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The 'Dena, Mаяуlaпd
    Posts
    2,147

    Post imported post

    catass, The thread was posted in a topic area titled Why Open Carry? The OP was stating 'why'.

    If you don't like the notion of people espousing the benefits of OC vs CC, then DON'T VISIT A FORUM DEDICATED TO FRIKKIN OPEN CARRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    CC and OC both have possible pros and cons. A thinking person who has a concealed carry license, will weigh the pros and cons in each situation and make a decision as to which is more appropriate for him/her. I do not think that either is appropriate or preferable in every situation.

    Catass, what you probably haven't seen on the forum is that about 75% of us have concealed carry permits/licenses according to previous polls on the forum. Of the 25% who don't, a significant portion cannot obtain a concealed carry permit/license for various reasons, most commonly age, ie being to young to obtain one. As those number make obvious, very few people out of our 8,000+ members are anti-CC or adverse to CC when appropriate.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  7. #7
    Regular Member Eeyore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    on the move
    Posts
    558

    Post imported post

    deepdiver wrote:
    CC and OC both have possible pros and cons. A thinking person who has a concealed carry license, will weigh the pros and cons in each situation and make a decision as to which is more appropriate for him/her. I do not think that either is appropriate or preferable in every situation.
    +1
    Guns don't kill people. Drivers on cell phones do.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    deepdiver forgot to mention those of us who refuse to obtain permission for something we have a fundamental right to do.

    I will CC the day I don't have to get permission to do so.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    deepdiver forgot to mention those of us who refuse to obtain permission for something we have a fundamental right to do.

    I will CC the day I don't have to get permission to do so.
    I didn't forget about you guys. Even made sure to have a category for you in the poll this thread motivated me to post. I didn't address it in my above post and actually excluded you guys intentionally by adding "who has a concealed carry license" so I didn't muddy my point. I respect the conviction. As a practical matter, being that I live in an "ambiguous OC state" and live in a city with an no-OC ordinance, I had to obtain a CC license to carry through 95% of my life.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    I didn't see the poll until after I read this thread, for whatever reason.

    But fair enough, you did give us a category. Seems there's about 5% of us.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona, U.S.
    Posts
    625

    Post imported post

    One of the main things I don't like about concealed carry is that I feel like I am always having to worry about how concealed it actually is. With open carry, I do have to be very aware of my surroundings including anyone who is behind me that I cannot see. I'd rather just have it open in the first place than have to worry about the gun accidently becoming half visible when the wind blows or I bend over to pick up dropped keys. Not to mention the issue of printing or if you put it in your pocket like I often do if I must conceal it or feel it is absolutely necessary is whether or not the shirt is long enough to cover the outline of a gun that may show through the jeans. Or perhaps worrying about placing the gun in a bag and other things in your pocket to distort the shape so no one will notice. Again with simple IWB you still need a shirt long and loose enough that you don't have to worry about accidental exposure. I've always believed that the simpler something is, the more effective it is likely to be. With open carry, all you do is simply wear it and thus you don't have to fool with all this nonsense.



  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona, U.S.
    Posts
    625

    Post imported post

    post deleted by protector84

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    Mini14 wrote:
    Q-ships were Britain's WWI answer to surface German U-boat attacks; the Q-ship would wait until the U-boat surfaced then frantically ran to bring hiddendeck guns into play. Since the Germans already were manningtheir guns, Q-ships were often sunk; there's no faster draw than an already drawn gun.

    Concealed carry is too complicated for mytastes, you handgun could snag inside your jacket; your handgun could snag in a boot holster. Open carry issimpler and better. The less complex somerhing is, the less liable it is to fail. Why be a Q-ship when you be a U-boat?
    I think you have used the Q-ships vs U-boatsas a poor analogy, or comparison, to OC vs CC.

    When a WWII sub surfaced, it's deck gun WAS NOT already drawn and ready to fire. The gunnery crew had to come topside after the deck was above the warteline. They had to pull the plug from the barrel, and bring ordinance from below to load into the gun. They had to bring the gun to bare on the target, often using handcranks, before they could fire. IF the sub was "rolling" any, they had to wait for the sub to come to neutral list to fire, or else they would over/under shoot their target.

    While the sub crew was doing all of this, the gunnery crews of the Q-ship would be readying their own guns. They had to uncover their guns, load them, and bring them to bear, often in the same manner that the U-baot crew, with hand cranks. The Q-ships gunnery crew also had to deal with ship "roll" while firing.

    So what you had here, in a U-baot vs Q-ship engagement, was partly a fast draw gun fight at sea. But it didn't really matter who drew faster as much as it came down to who could shoot straighter after the guns were drawn. Q-boats didn't fair well in these gun fights due to the difference in vessel profiles. Asurface vessels profile is larger than that of a surfaced submarine, which meant that the Q-ship was the bigger target and easier to hit.

    There's also the fact that the surfacing sub had to be ID'd as friend or foe before it was fired on, too.

    Naval gunships have their guns openly displayed (OC). Ever hear of a sub trying to take on one by surfacing and using it's deck guns? No. They stayed below the surface and used torpeodes. If the subs ran into multiple ships (DD/DE)baring guns (OC) they stayed below surface and tried to get away without detection.

    There are pros and cons to both OC and CC. Either way you do it, you may find yourself wishing your were carrying the other way, if you find yourself in a sticky situation.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    *sigh*

    Why do we have ANOTHER OC vs CC topic around here? Particularly one that is misleadingly named?
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Western, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    308

    Post imported post

    AbNo wrote:
    *sigh*

    Why do we have ANOTHER OC vs CC topic around here? Particularly one that is misleadingly named?
    Exactly. I, for one, am for sticking together to protect our rights.
    Quote Originally Posted by Open Carry.org Member View Post
    I really disgree with this one! That means that we can have any yahoo running around with a gun with out the proper training. This really scares the hell out of me. Just my two-cents!
    Quote Originally Posted by KansasMustang View Post
    Joe Schmedlap out there with a loaded weapon thinking he's going to deter crime and he's not even trained to fire his weapon safely just kinda makes my hair on the back of my neck stand up.

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    AbNo wrote:
    *sigh*

    Why do we have ANOTHER OC vs CC topic around here? Particularly one that is misleadingly named?
    It looks as though the OP only started the thread and never responded afterwards. Another troll.

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Poor posting habits perhaps, but I fail to see how he rises to the level of "troll."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •