OC makes me nervous

imported post

I'm an NRA life member, NRA certified instructor, ex-IPSC/Steel Challenge shooter, hunter, and I am definitely pro-gun and pro-CCW. I've been shooting, reloading for about 50 years and know my way around a firearm.

HOWEVER: the idea of allowing ANY legal firearm owner to open carry makes me VERY nervous. There are just too many people out there who are careless and/or naive, and a carelessly carried weapon is a danger to everyone. I'm sorry, but I've spent too many hours at shooting ranges and in the fields, and seen too many idiots who have no business even owning a gun, much less carrying one in public. The idea of some of these people walking around with an exposed, loaded firearm sends cold shivers down my spine.

There would be people carrying guns cocked, bullet in the chamber, and the safety off. There would be people pulling out their guns and showing them to people. Fumblebums pulling out their guns and dropping them, or guns falling out of misfit holsters. Guns that are dirty or jammed with cheap ammo, or the wrong ammo, or crooked sights. People who would stand too close to a little kid who might reach up and grab the gun. People who would put on their guns after Happy Hour. People who would use it in self-defense and miss, sending bullets through innocent bystanders or nearby houses. The possible scenarios are endless. Let's face it. You know how people are. This is reality.

Can you imagine allowing some yahoo to walk around with a .45 ACP on his belt without having even TOUCHED a gun before, much less a gun safety course? Under the proposed OC law, he could. Like I said, it makes me very nervous.

Don't get me wrong: I fully, FULLY support allowing open carry. But something like the CCW course should be required in order to do it. In my opinion, we should keep the current CCW permit system, and just expand it to include open as well as concealed carry. Just my opinion.

Ruark

imported post

I would bet you are from Texas since open carry seems to be new to you. Please browse through the forum, and read people's experiences with open carry. I think you will find most of your concerns will be resolved as you read.

If you are not interested in spending some time learning about open carry, don't expect that your comments will be taken seriously, though. Many come and go. I would prefer that a few more would stay on, and share their opinions so we might learn from each other.

imported post

Welcome to OCDO!

OC has been legal in VA since prior to the Founding. Haven't heard of any who mishandled while OCing with any more frequency than say just on a range, or in the parlor and bagged grandma with an "unloaded" gun.

I understand that OC is not too uncommon in some of the western states, even prior to OC.org.

I understand what you are saying. However, I think your fears are unfounded. Impossible? Of course not. But, not to any degree of likelihood we have to worry about on a societal level.

Same for CC.

People have a fundamental human right to self-defense. There should be little if any regulation. What happens to the person who becomes a victim while awaiting approval? His fundamental human right is not lessened just because he's not been approved. Government has clearly established that it cannot be trusted to regulate this or any other right.

Letsnot even discuss the fallacy behind prior restraint.

We could just as easily legalize OC and CC--no restrictions--and then start a big publicinformation campaign to educate people. We'd get the same or better results, and we'd have government the hell out of regulating it.

As Marshaul says on another thread, "If you don't like it, well, freedom can be scary. What else can I say?"

imported post

Hcidem wrote:

I would bet you are from Texas since open carry seems to be new to you. Please browse through the forum, and read people's experiences with open carry. I think you will find most of your concerns will be resolved as you read.

If you are not interested in spending some time learning about open carry, don't expect that your comments will be taken seriously, though. Many come and go. I would prefer that a few more would stay on, and share their opinions so we might learn from each other.

Click to expand...

Dont know if you read entire previous post, but the person explains that he believes a person needs to take a class before carrying. This is nothing but the truth. Any person carrying a firearm needs to attend and pass firearm training class before carrying around a weapon. Those laws allowing any person to carry openly need to be banned. The thought of that is just ludacris.

imported post

Citizen wrote:

Welcome to OCDO!

OC has been legal in VA since prior to the Founding. Haven't heard of any who mishandled while OCing with any more frequency than say just on a range, or in the parlor and bagged grandma with an "unloaded" gun.

I understand that OC is not too uncommon in some of the western states, even prior to OC.org.

I understand what you are saying. However, I think your fears are unfounded. Impossible? Of course not. But, not to any degree of likelihood we have to worry about on a societal level.

Same for CC.

People have a fundamental human right to self-defense. There should be little if any regulation. What happens to the person who becomes a victim while awaiting approval? His fundamental human right is not lessened just because he's not been approved. Government has clearly established that it cannot be trusted to regulate this or any other right.

Letsnot even discuss the fallacy behind prior restraint.

We could just as easily legalize OC and CC--no restrictions--and then start a big publicinformation campaign to educate people. We'd get the same or better results, and we'd have government the hell out of regulating it.

As Marshaul says on another thread, "If you don't like it, well, freedom can be scary. What else can I say?"


Those wild west days are over. This is what we have to deal with these days. We cant allow people to carry without being regulated in some way. Too many nut jobs out there.

Click to expand...

imported post

TN_TITANS wrote:

Hcidem wrote:

I would bet you are from Texas since open carry seems to be new to you. Please browse through the forum, and read people's experiences with open carry. I think you will find most of your concerns will be resolved as you read.

If you are not interested in spending some time learning about open carry, don't expect that your comments will be taken seriously, though. Many come and go. I would prefer that a few more would stay on, and share their opinions so we might learn from each other.

Click to expand...

Dont know if you read entire previous post, but the person explains that he believes a person needs to take a class before carrying. This is nothing but the truth. Any person carrying a firearm needs to attend and pass firearm training class before carrying around a weapon. Those laws allowing any person to carry openly need to be banned. The thought of that is just ludacris.

Click to expand...

Yeah, and then after that, we can license free speech, so we don't have to put up with aural pollution from nutcases.

imported post

TN_TITANS wrote:

Hcidem wrote:

I would bet you are from Texas since open carry seems to be new to you. Please browse through the forum, and read people's experiences with open carry. I think you will find most of your concerns will be resolved as you read.

If you are not interested in spending some time learning about open carry, don't expect that your comments will be taken seriously, though. Many come and go. I would prefer that a few more would stay on, and share their opinions so we might learn from each other.

Click to expand...

Dont know if you read entire previous post, but the person explains that he believes a person needs to take a class before carrying. This is nothing but the truth. Any person carrying a firearm needs to attend and pass firearm training class before carrying around a weapon. Those laws allowing any person to carry openly need to be banned. The thought of that is just ludacris.

Click to expand...

Everyone buying or transfering a handgun in Ca is supposed to receive and perform a "safety demonstration" showing the proper use of a gun lock and how to clear a weapon.

To me...that is more than adequate. Would I LIKE people to get training...sure...should they be required? HELL NO!!!

imported post

Theseus wrote:

To me...that is more than adequate. Would I LIKE people to get training...sure...should they be required? HELL NO!!!

Click to expand...

I think a lot of us look at these issues from our own eyes, and not from a broader, more realistic perspective. Sure, you may think YOU don't need any training, but this isn't about you. It's about public policy that includes everyone, including the guy who walks around with his safety off, or who thinks a "shootout" will be like a Bruce Willis movie. Shoot the bad guy, put your arm around the pretty girl and go home. Um, no, it doesn't happen like that. Not even close. Ever read, "In the Gravest Extreme"?

Guns are too dangerous to be carried openly without some kind of regulation or requirements. I think OWNERSHIP should be unregulated, and I don't believe in gun registration, either. And even the NRA supports instant, on the spot background checks.

But when it's an object that endangers other people, then some regulation needs to be present, to protect the public. "Public education campaign"? Oh, please. Yeah, public education has eliminated drug abuse, AIDS, crime, etc. hasn't it?

I can't believe that any rational person would support allowing a person who has never even touched a gun before to walk around in public with a .44 magnum on his belt, without so much as even a one-evening gun safety class, without even learning the most BASIC legal ramifications of the simple act of pulling out your gun and pointing it at somebody. Oh, my God.

Ruark

imported post

Ruark wrote:

Theseus wrote:

To me...that is more than adequate. Would I LIKE people to get training...sure...should they be required? HELL NO!!!

Click to expand...

I think a lot of us look at these issues from our own eyes, and not from a broader, more realistic perspective. Sure, you may think YOU don't need any training, but this isn't about you. It's about public policy that includes everyone, including the guy who walks around with his safety off, or who thinks a "shootout" will be like a Bruce Willis movie. Shoot the bad guy, put your arm around the pretty girl and go home. Um, no, it doesn't happen like that. Not even close. Ever read, "In the Gravest Extreme"?

Guns are too dangerous to be carried openly without some kind of regulation or requirements. I think OWNERSHIP should be unregulated, and I don't believe in gun registration, either. And even the NRA supports instant, on the spot background checks.

But when it's an object that endangers other people, then some regulation needs to be present, to protect the public. "Public education campaign"? Oh, please. Yeah, public education has eliminated drug abuse, AIDS, crime, etc. hasn't it?

I can't believe that any rational person would support allowing a person who has never even touched a gun before to walk around in public with a .44 magnum on his belt, without so much as even a one-evening gun safety class, without even learning the most BASIC legal ramifications of the simple act of pulling out your gun and pointing it at somebody. Oh, my God.

Ruark

Click to expand...

So--if I understand what you're saying--
You think that somebody should be forced to have training before carrying around a gun when he's fully awake and alert.

On the other hand, you think that it's perfectly acceptable for somebody who had never had any training to have a gun available to them when they'rejolted awake by the sound of a burglarentering their house, so thatthey canfumble around in the dark for and try to usean unfamiliar weapon when they're onan adrenaline rush.

imported post

I believe the assumption is being made that everyone will carry.

Only the people who want to will carry. These people will most likely have some sort oftraining. I don't know a single person who has a gun who has not taken it to a range at least once.

imported post

Flyer22 wrote:

Ruark wrote:

Theseus wrote:

To me...that is more than adequate. Would I LIKE people to get training...sure...should they be required? HELL NO!!!

Click to expand...

I think a lot of us look at these issues from our own eyes, and not from a broader, more realistic perspective. Sure, you may think YOU don't need any training, but this isn't about you. It's about public policy that includes everyone, including the guy who walks around with his safety off, or who thinks a "shootout" will be like a Bruce Willis movie. Shoot the bad guy, put your arm around the pretty girl and go home. Um, no, it doesn't happen like that. Not even close. Ever read, "In the Gravest Extreme"?

Guns are too dangerous to be carried openly without some kind of regulation or requirements. I think OWNERSHIP should be unregulated, and I don't believe in gun registration, either. And even the NRA supports instant, on the spot background checks.

But when it's an object that endangers other people, then some regulation needs to be present, to protect the public. "Public education campaign"? Oh, please. Yeah, public education has eliminated drug abuse, AIDS, crime, etc. hasn't it?

I can't believe that any rational person would support allowing a person who has never even touched a gun before to walk around in public with a .44 magnum on his belt, without so much as even a one-evening gun safety class, without even learning the most BASIC legal ramifications of the simple act of pulling out your gun and pointing it at somebody. Oh, my God.

Ruark

Click to expand...

So--if I understand what you're saying--
You think that somebody should be forced to have training before carrying around a gun when he's fully awake and alert.

On the other hand, you think that it's perfectly acceptable for somebody who had never had any training to have a gun available to them when they'rejolted awake by the sound of a burglarentering their house, so thatthey canfumble around in the dark for and try to usean unfamiliar weapon when they're onan adrenaline rush.

Click to expand...

Fair question.

First question: Yes. Being fully awake and alert has nothing to do with knowing what you need to know before you pull out a firearm and point it at somebody. The issue here is danger to the public. I can not under any circumstances agree with letting somebody who has never touched a gun before, who has no idea how to even hold it, or what the safety's for, or how to aim and fire it, walk around in public with a loaded, cocked firearm on his belt without so much as a one-evening class.

Second question: It's unfortunate in the example you used, but I strongly support the private, unregulated, unregistered ownership of firearms by non-criminals. If a person chooses NOT to get practice with his gun, that could have tragic consequences, but that's a price we pay for freedom. If you don't like it, then don't burglarize somebody's house in the middle of the night.

Ruark

imported post

JDriver1.8t wrote:

I believe the assumption is being made that everyone will carry.

Only the people who want to will carry. These people will most likely have some sort oftraining. I don't know a single person who has a gun who has not taken it to a range at least once.

Click to expand...

You're right. Same here. But aiming and shooting is about 5% of what you need to know about using a firearm in self defense.

Ruark

imported post

Somehow, the phrase "shall not be infringed" from the Second Amendment kept popping into my mind as I read through this thread. We can color it or sugar coat it or just come out and say ban them, but anyway you paint it, any sort of impediment to private ownership, carrying, and use of arms is a violation of the Second Amendment. I suspect all members of this forum would readily agree to that, otherwise why on earth are they here?

In my state, we enjoy perhaps the best per capita safety record in the entire country when it comes to citizens owning and carrying firearms. So we must be doing something right. For a CCW (actually CHP), a course is mandatory, but open carry is virtually unrestricted. We just don't see crazy things happening with legally carried firearms.

The real danger in requiring training for ownership and/or bearing of arms is it gets government involved and we all know where that can lead. A right then becomes a privilege and privileges can be revoked.

imported post

Ruark wrote:

HOWEVER: the idea of allowing ANY legal firearm owner to open carry makes me VERY nervous. There are just too many people out there who are careless and/or naive, and a carelessly carried weapon is a danger to everyone.

Click to expand...

Here in AZ, Open Carry/NoLicense-NoCertificationhas been the law since territorial days. We do not have any such problems as you fear. You are sounding very much like the old anti-CC's, with "blood will run in the streets if we issue concealed weapon permits".

People who openly carry firearms are some of the most polite, cautious people I've ever seen.

I know the concept of actually utilizing your Rights is foreign to many of us nowadays, but don't advocate legislating them away!

imported post

It is a tough call. We require new drivers to take a class, learn the rules of the road, etc. in an attempt to ensure the public's safety. Now, to require a prospective gun owner to take a class in order to carry a gun, is another story. While they may appear to be the same, they are not. Driving is a privilege, one that can be taken away if one does not handle the responsibility afforded them. Gun ownership is a God given right, one that the Founding Fathers saw fit to enumerate in the Bill of Rights.
Let's follow the train of thought to require classes... as a government or any body in power, one can simply say the classes are full, perhaps there are income restrictions on the classes. Perhaps there are no restrictions, aside from the classes must be approved by said body and those classes which are approved cost $1000, or any number which makes it prohibitive to "Joe Plumber" (remember him?).
Of course, the flip side is the individual who potentially threatens mine or my family's lives is a definite problem for me. To combat this threat, I train, I practice, and I educate; however, I do not ask the government to regulate this, nor would I want them to.

imported post

TN_TITANS wrote:

...Dont know if you read entire previous post, but the person explains that he believes a person needs to take a class before carrying. This is nothing but the truth. Any person carrying a firearm needs to attend and pass firearm training class before carrying around a weapon. Those laws allowing any person to carry openly need to be banned. The thought of that is just ludacris.

Click to expand...

Oh, I did read the entire post. I also caught his meaning entirely. I just tend to disagree with much of what he said, particularly the portion you have emphasized.

I cannot figure out what part of "shall not be infringed" is unclear to anyone who has read our Bill of Rights. The 2nd amendment acknowledges our pre-existing, inalienable right to self-defense, but it does not acknowledge any corresponding responsibility to passing a test to keep that right.

If Ruark's presumptions of anarchy in the streets are correct, why haven't we had the corresponding, free-for-allof irresponsibility in those states which already allow open carry? The facts do not support his presumptions.

That is why I asked him to thoroughly read through the boards. Many of his arguments havealready been covered.

I'll admit that I was also skeptical about the idea of open carry when I first ran across this forum. I have learned much since that time, and have had time to personally reflect on many ideas presented here. Most of these ideas pass muster when they are thoughtfully considered.

imported post

Ruark, I understand your concern. However, the freedom fighter in me prevents me from wanting the government to require training. Lets face this reality too. Taking a safety class to get a conceal permit doesn't exactly make one prepared to use their gun in self defense. There are a lot of chuckleheads out there, some carry guns.

I see many, many first time gun buyers who also want to get a carry permit or inquire about open carry. The vast majority are smart enough to know they do not know enough to just start carrying.

Welcome to OCDO

imported post

Ruark wrote:

I can't believe that any rational person would support allowing a person who has never even touched a gun before to walk around in public with a .44 magnum on his belt, without so much as even a one-evening gun safety class, without even learning the most BASIC legal ramifications of the simple act of pulling out your gun and pointing it at somebody. Oh, my God.

Click to expand...

Yes, but nobody here does support that. We simply are aware that OC is and has been legal most in most states for quite some time, and the reality is that few, if any, people do strap on that .44 without learning some gun safety. The vast majority of people are too nervous to go armed visibly in public until they know their way around guns AND the laws that go with them. THIS is the reality, not your paranoid fantasy.

And, I find it amusing that you're an instructor. Of course you're made nervous by CCW: your whole life is oriented around the premise that people need training (training you incidentally happen to provide) to carry a gun. :lol:

Thesueus makes a good point. Why should people be allowed to possess guns they're not allowed to carry? Logically, if people need training to carry firearms, they should probably have that training to buy them. But you don't want that, because you're afraid of the government regulating your right to keep arms. Well, I'm afraid of the government regulating my right to bear arms. And I should be. I live in California.

Now, I'm going to have a little fun, and quote Citizen quoting myself from another thread: :lol:

Citizen wrote:

As Marshaul says on another thread, "If you don't like it, well, freedom can be scary. What else can I say?"

Click to expand...

imported post

JDriver1.8t wrote:

I believe the assumption is being made that everyone will carry.

Only the people who want to will carry.  These people will most likely have some sort of training.  I don't know a single person who has a gun who has not taken it to a range at least once.

Click to expand...

Exactly right.

imported post

If I choose to open carry, I'd better have all my ducks in a row, so to speak, to deal with all the ramifications that come with open carry. Does open carry make me nervous? Well, yes. Only because I do not want to be arrested for exercising my right. It sounds to me as if being around aOC makes you nervous. Nothing wrong with that. Being around my firearms makes me nervous. A little nervous, or rather, cautious. I carry my firearm around my house and as long as I follow the basic safety rules, everyone is safe.

Dale