Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 93

Thread: Reason Number 1 why OC is better than CC

  1. #1
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    You're CCing in a Shopping Mall with your 7 year old Son. Someone comes from behind and grabs him. By the time you manage to draw your weapon from deep cover CC, you own child has become the kidnapper's human shield.

    Now, what good is your 'element of surprise?'

    Go ahead and tell me how the kidnapper would have just attacked me first. Cite examples of the prior in one hand, and the former in the other hand, and tell me which one fills up first.

    I don't think a kid deserves to go through that. OC prevents, CC does not.

    If you were OCing in that mall, do you honestly believe that kidnapper would have done that, after seeing the gun in plain view? Do you not think kidnappers watch and 'case' a person before doing such a thing?

    The only 'surprise' CC grants, is for those who do meet with the need, and realize that CC falls horribly short. The only person who can argue that CC present a tactical advantage of surprise, is that person who has never actually needed it. The 'surprise' is all on you when you find yourself in such a position.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Decoligny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rosamond, California, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    ixtow wrote:
    You're CCing in a Shopping Mall with your 7 year old Son. Someone comes from behind and grabs him. By the time you manage to draw your weapon from deep cover CC, you own child has become the kidnapper's human shield.

    Now, what good is your 'element of surprise?'

    Go ahead and tell me how the kidnapper would have just attacked me first. Cite examples of the prior in one hand, and the former in the other hand, and tell me which one fills up first.

    I don't think a kid deserves to go through that. OC prevents, CC does not.

    If you were OCing in that mall, do you honestly believe that kidnapper would have done that, after seeing the gun in plain view? Do you not think kidnappers watch and 'case' a person before doing such a thing?

    The only 'surprise' CC grants, is for those who do meet with the need, and realize that CC falls horribly short. The only person who can argue that CC present a tactical advantage of surprise, is that person who has never actually needed it. The 'surprise' is all on you when you find yourself in such a position.
    I agree that open carry is a deterrant, but your situation is full of holes.

    Any person who would openly grab a child from their parent in a crowded mall isn't playing with a full deck. If he would grab your kid from your side in a mall, he wouldn't think twice about your having a gun visible. He's a nutjob.

    Cite me some examples of kids being grabbed from an attentive parents side, in a mall. They are usually snatched when they get seperated from their parents. And usually from an area where the perp will be less noticable. Not from right beside an ATTENTIVE PARENT. Any person who carries either openly or concealed, should alway be aware of what is going on around them. Never walk around in condition white.



  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    I don't intend to be confrontational or combative, but your holes are full of holes. In a crowded area, people walk by each other every half second or so, anyone can make a grab, attentive parent or not. Been to the mall at Christmas?

    Just because someone is crazy, doesn't make them batshit stupid crazy. A 'nut job' is not a bin into which everyone who is unpleasant will fit. For some, it is a business. Risk vs Payoff. Parent with no gun, low risk, high payoff. Parent with gun, way too high risk, no payoff.

    And, as usual, I don't cite. I am not the fact welfare. I demonstrated this scenario because it DOES happen, and anyone who wishes to research it themselves will soon see so. The most heinous liars are always those who present only the facts that they want cited, so I don't do it. Find your own facts, that way they can be trusted.

    The sad deficiency is that they rarely have a gun, concealed or open. Refer to Risk vs Payoff.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Decoligny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rosamond, California, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    Quote #1:"Cite examples of the prior in one hand, and the former in the other hand, and tell me which one fills up first."

    Quote #2: "And, as usual, I don't cite. I am not the fact welfare."

    I want what I want and everyone else can go pound sand sounds like your stance in a discussion. "Cite something, but don't expect me to cite something!"

    WORTHLESS!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , Oregon, USA
    Posts
    269

    Post imported post

    The OP's hypothetical situation aside, I think that anyone who analyzes the matter rationally would agree that the only people in a position to use "the element of surprise" are the ones who don't actually need it. After all, the definition of a criminal attack is that the assailant has already began his assault against you.

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    Decoligny wrote:
    Quote #1:"Cite examples of the prior in one hand, and the former in the other hand, and tell me which one fills up first."

    Quote #2: "And, as usual, I don't cite. I am not the fact welfare."

    I want what I want and everyone else can go pound sand sounds like your stance in a discussion. "Cite something, but don't expect me to cite something!"

    WORTHLESS!
    You're the one arguing a contradiction. It's up to YOU to provide evidence that your position even exists. I know mine does because I've seen it. It isn't hypothetical.

    You're damn right you better be able to cite something if you take a position that defies both logic and documented reality. My position does not, and in you quest to find something to back your position, I'm sure you'll find plenty that proves my own.

    I'm not spoon-feeding you no matter how much you wish to insult me.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    Heartless_Conservative wrote:
    The OP's hypothetical situation aside, I think that anyone who analyzes the matter rationally would agree that the only people in a position to use "the element of surprise" are the ones who don't actually need it. After all, the definition of a criminal attack is that the assailant has already began his assault against you.
    I'm glad someone is paying attention.

    CC doesn't prevent, because there isn't anything to see to makes you look like any less of a target.

    In a way, I've begun to wonder if CC is/was meant as a sort of baiting protocol. It serves the anti agenda more than it serves the pro interest of safety and common-sense.

    The Liberals like it because the person carrying has to wait until they are already being attacked, and this still gives the criminals the upper hand.

    How many aggressors are stopped and turned away just by drawing the weapon, simply making it visible? Why not have it visible to begin with and avoid the whole mess?

    I just makes sense.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358

    Post imported post

    ixtow,

    I'm starting to think that you are actually a shill working for Brady, rather than someone who genuinely looking for valid opinions on CC vs OC. Your posts are confrontational, rude, and have a snarky tone to them. From the tone of your posts, you come across as one of those people who probably SHOULDN'T be carrying in ANY configuration, because it sounds like you have a REALLY big chip on your shoulder, and are looking for a reaon to pull your weapon...

    Situational Awareness is the NUMER ONE deterrent against random criminal acts. BGs like to prey on people who are unaware and otherwise engaged. People who are aware of their surroundings are NOT "easy targets".

    If you have your eyes and ears open, you should never have to open your holster...

    Relax, bro. Some of use are genuinely interested in being active, productive, PEACEFUL members of our communities, and carry because we want to be prepared for those VERY rare situations where some total nutjob crosses the line. Some of use would rather be on good terms with our neighbors, local business owners, and LEO's and discretely carry concealed most of the time. Some of use pick our opportunities to educate people on OC and 2A rights when we know the time is right, because we know we're more likely to get a sympathetic ear if the person we're addressing isn't eyeballing our OC firearm and coming into the situation thinking we're some sort of "cowboy" or "gun nut". Some of use like to present the appearance of being "just like everyone else" because people are more likely to listen to our opinions if they think we are "just like them".

    Some of us don't feel that we NEED to strut around with a gun on our hip for all the world to see. Some of us prefer to "speak softly and carry some big iron", rather than go through life as "in-your face activists".

    I'm just as pro 2A as the next guy. I believe that an armed society is a polite society. I prefer to OC, because it's more comfortable, faster to deploy, and a great conversation starter when I'm around other pro-gun folks.

    But I'd rather not spend my precious free personal time fielding hassles from LEO's and explaining to hysterical soccer moms in parking lots why I have a gun on my hip. I'm a "quiet activist". I prefer to pick and choose my "educational situations". I prefer to have my interactions with LEO's be friendly, calm, and non-confrontational, because most of them (around here, anyway) are actually pretty good folks, and don't need the added stress of fielding MWAG calls because some OC activist is strutting around an otherwise small, quiet, peaceful town with a 1911, Glock, or Smith & Wesson on his hip. Personally, I'd rather the local cops were chasing REAL criminals, rather than responding to hysterical MWAG calls from every twitchy soccer mom and leftist hipster business owner in town, and I'm pretty sure the police agree with that position.

    I'd rather know it's there when I need it, and leave everyone else to think I'm just like them. I think the BG's know I'm different by the way I carry myself, and to be honest, it's worked pretty well for me for over 20 years.

    Take a deep breath, bro, and relax...

    If you want to be an "in your face" activist, then that is your right. But don't denigrate those of us who take a more calm, quiet, and socialized approach. We're no less concerned with our own safety and that of our loved ones that you. We just walk on a different path, that's all. There are many paths to enlightenment. The one I choose is just a LOT smoother and quieter than yours. Your path is no more noble, honorable, or glorifed than mine, it's just different.

    Get over yourself, man, and grow up a little. From the tone of your posts, you have a LOT of growing up to do before you should even consider carrying a firearm in public...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    Dreamer wrote:
    ixtow,

    I'm starting to think that you are actually a shill working for Brady, rather than someone who genuinely looking for valid opinions on CC vs OC. Your posts are confrontational, rude, and have a snarky tone to them. From the tone of your posts, you come across as one of those people who probably SHOULDN'T be carrying in ANY configuration, because it sounds like you have a REALLY big chip on your shoulder, and are looking for a reaon to pull your weapon...

    Situational Awareness is the NUMER ONE deterrent against random criminal acts. BGs like to prey on people who are unaware and otherwise engaged. People who are aware of their surroundings are NOT "easy targets".

    If you have your eyes and ears open, you should never have to open your holster...

    Relax, bro. Some of use are genuinely interested in being active, productive, PEACEFUL members of our communities, and carry because we want to be prepared for those VERY rare situations where some total nutjob crosses the line. Some of use would rather be on good terms with our neighbors, local business owners, and LEO's and discretely carry concealed most of the time. Some of use pick our opportunities to educate people on OC and 2A rights when we know the time is right, because we know we're more likely to get a sympathetic ear if the person we're addressing isn't eyeballing our OC firearm and coming into the situation thinking we're some sort of "cowboy" or "gun nut". Some of use like to present the appearance of being "just like everyone else" because people are more likely to listen to our opinions if they think we are "just like them".

    Some of us don't feel that we NEED to strut around with a gun on our hip for all the world to see. Some of us prefer to "speak softly and carry some big iron", rather than go through life as "in-your face activists".

    I'm just as pro 2A as the next guy. I believe that an armed society is a polite society. I prefer to OC, because it's more comfortable, faster to deploy, and a great conversation starter when I'm around other pro-gun folks.

    But I'd rather not spend my precious free personal time fielding hassles from LEO's and explaining to hysterical soccer moms in parking lots why I have a gun on my hip. I'm a "quiet activist". I prefer to pick and choose my "educational situations". I prefer to have my interactions with LEO's be friendly, calm, and non-confrontational, because most of them (around here, anyway) are actually pretty good folks, and don't need the added stress of fielding MWAG calls because some OC activist is strutting around an otherwise small, quiet, peaceful town with a 1911, Glock, or Smith & Wesson on his hip. Personally, I'd rather the local cops were chasing REAL criminals, rather than responding to hysterical MWAG calls from every twitchy soccer mom and leftist hipster business owner in town, and I'm pretty sure the police agree with that position.

    I'd rather know it's there when I need it, and leave everyone else to think I'm just like them. I think the BG's know I'm different by the way I carry myself, and to be honest, it's worked pretty well for me for over 20 years.

    Take a deep breath, bro, and relax...

    If you want to be an "in your face" activist, then that is your right. But don't denigrate those of us who take a more calm, quiet, and socialized approach. We're no less concerned with our own safety and that of our loved ones that you. We just walk on a different path, that's all. There are many paths to enlightenment. The one I choose is just a LOT smoother and quieter than yours. Your path is no more noble, honorable, or glorifed than mine, it's just different.

    Get over yourself, man, and grow up a little. From the tone of your posts, you have a LOT of growing up to do before you should even consider carrying a firearm in public...
    As soon as I saw you say 'strut around with a gun...' I tuned you out and walked away.

    This tired old projection argument, again? You then proceed to make more ego-based maturity-level insults...

    I've not declared you below me. I've demonstrated 2 of 4 circumstances that really have happened to me, in the form of a hypothetical, just to watch the attitude problems start flying...?

    You've already dragged out the 'strut' line, when I've demonstrated clear and proper cause that has not a damn thing to do with any ego or maturity problems. I've made no statement at all that can even be stretched into anything of that sort, yet have been attacked by those who should look in the mirror as they speak...

    This house is divided by the very propaganda it claims to oppose.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358

    Post imported post

    In one of your scenarios, I will agree with "Decoligny", in that it is full of holes.

    Kidnapping is generally a crime performed by professional criminals or members of your own family. In fact , child abductions are statistically much more likely to be perpetrated by an ex spouse or other immediate family member than an absolute stranger.

    Would Oc deter this? Probably not. In kidnapping-by-relations scenarios, there is a LOt of irrational emotion, unsettled thinking, and bizarre thinking in the process, and it is highly unlikely that OC would be a deterrent.

    Secondly, you said in that scenario that the abductor used the child as a "human shield". This implies that the abductor did NOT immediately run away with the child and disappear into the crowd, but rather lingered and invited a confrontation. You did not say the abductor had a weapon. You did not say the abductor was physically harming the child. It was in a crowded mall. So even if you could deploy a firearm quickly, you'd end up in a world of hurt in the courts. Wouldn't it have just been easier to chase down the abductor and tackle them or body-check them so that they would release the child? Wouldn't it be pretty effective to start shouting "that person stole my child" at the top of your lungs, pointing and chasing them? If the mall was that crowded, shooting them would be a pretty risky proposition anyway, and besides, if it was that crowded they couldn't make a speedy getaway anyway...

    It's an interesting scenario. It has a LOT of tactical challenges to overcome. But the sad fact is, most child abductions occur in public places, and are perpetrated by someone the child knows--probably a blood relative.

    If you had heightened situational awareness, you should have been aware of where the child was at all times, and had a "backup plan" in your head. You've got fists, feet, and lungs. Use them. A gun is probably NOT your best tool in this scenario (unless you are some sort of Mossad-trained super-shooter who can double-tap a mobile BG in the head and keep it in a 1/2" group). If the mall were that crowded that you can't maintain a "personal space bubble", deploying a firearm probably isn't such a good idea, and BESIDES, if it were that crowded, a BG probably wouldn't even SEE that you were OC.

    Holes, holes, holes...

    I'm not saying that CC is the ultimate answer. It's not. It's tactically awkward, physically uncomfortable, and requires a complete recalibration of one's wardrobe.

    But OC isn't the ultimate answer either. It's not a deterrent for a true wack-job bent on mischief--in some cases OC may actually be an aggravating factor. It's not going to prevent someone who is really hell-bent on doing you harm. It can be problematic in crowded venues if you don't have a VERY good physical retention system on your holster. And in many places, its just going to draw attention to you, and most likely introduce an inordinate amount of hassle into your life. And that hassle only works against our cause, be it OC or CC.

    I hope that some day we can have a society where OC is once again considered the "norm", and a pistol on someone's hip is considered no more odd than a cell phone. I hope that someday, people will be as open to the exercise of our 2A rights as they are to the exercise of 1A. I also hope that someday, there will be no violent criminals, crackheads, psycho-killers, and power-hungry fascist civil "servents", but I'm not holding my breath on ANY of those scenarios...

    I just want to get our message across with the least amount of fussing and fretting I can. Our current culture, wrong or right, has a LOT of anti-gun sentiment. Organized OC protests are one thing, but proposing way-out mall-ninja scenarios is an entirely different thing altogether. Such scenarios are interesting metnal exercises on a forum such as this, but they really serve no purpose in the field of activism...

    If you want to be a proponent for OC, and get anywhere with the anti's, you're using the wrong tactic when you start throwing out far-out abduction scenarios and the like. You'd be much better served to focus on the deterrent factor of OC, the human rights angle of self-protection, and the racist/misogynist roots of gun control.

    Try again...

    BTW, Although I've stated that I CC about 99% of the time, it's probably more like 90%. I almost always OC when I visit gun shops, because most of them around here are pretty cool with it, and I'm pretty unlikely to meet people in the parking lot there who are going to blow a gasket or call the cops. And I OC at home about 50% of the time...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    Ya know Dreamer, ixtow may not always present his views in a homogenized politically correct fashion, but at least he IS active in defending our 2A rights. Something you sir, don't seem to be as willing to do, from what you have stated above.

    By your own admission, you are not willing to put yourself out to help in the re-normalization of OC. You'd rather take the easy route, letting others do the trench work, while you reap the benifits of their efforts. Dang, if you don't sound like some of these folks that want stuff, aren't willing to work for it, and waiting for someone else to get it for them.

    If you are afraid of a little confrontation once in awhile, you are already a surrendered slave of the state.

    You mention OC in a "small, quiet, and peacefiul community", "strutting" around with a 1911. I live in one of those types of communities and I sometimes OC a SA .45 revolver (Colt .45 clone) and the LEO's here don'tgive me any crap aboutit. In fact, as far as I know, no body gets in a tizzy over it. IOC everyday, everywhere I go.I think some of your concerns about what your community may think might be unfounded.

    Political correctness is for wienies.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358

    Post imported post

    My stance is not based in "political correctness". It's based in the fact that I don't want to have to explain to my wife and my daughters why my trip to Food Lion turned into a 4-hour fiasco involving a trip to the county lockup, and why I'll have to go to court in a few weeks to try and get a spuriously-levied GATTTOTP charge dropped.

    Activism has many faces. Propaganda has many methods and modes. Overt activism is just one method, and it has proven to be one of the least effective. That is why I do things the way I do. I talk to a LOT of people about OC. I hand out a LOT of pamphlets and copies of the NC Firearms statutes. I get the word out through insinuating it into casual conversations with people I meet every day. I don't need a prop to initiate my conversations.

    The "anti's" have succeeded in getting a LOT of law-abiding people to voluntarily hand over their guns in many cities by repeating the same lies, logical fallacies, and twisted statistics over and over and over again. It's a prove fact that people will eventually believe ANYTHING if you repeat it enough. I just prefer to use words to make my point. It's not that I don't want to "do the work" or "be in the trenches", it that I don't see the point in intentionally putting myself in the position of having to be on the defensive all the time for my cause. I'd rather sneak into the anti's brains and then slowly deconstruct their misconceptions and illogical beliefs from the inside, than enter into the discourse with them already on the attack.

    It's not less work to do things this way. It's just a lot less confrontational, and it has been my experience (professionally and personally) that people are more willing to change their mind on long-held, deeply emotional issues if you ENGAGE them rather than throw your issue in their face. The anti's may be brainwashed sheeple, but they are still human beings, and we shouldn't look at them like they are somehow not worthy of our respect. Given the right information, they CAN make the right decisions on this issue.

    Read my other post in the "Number 2" thread.

    And then ask yourself, "what HAVE I done for the OC movement lately besides OC?"

    I do plenty. I just don't feel the need to get all up in people's faces when I do it, and I'm having a bit of difficulty understanding why so many people in this movement apparently DO.

    I've said it before and I'll say it again. Let's not re-invent the wheel. A LOT of VERY successful "movements" have already hammered out the psychological, sociological, and intellectual tactics of changing people's minds on deeply-held and emotionally charged issues. It's time the 2A movement in general and the OC movement in particular get to a library and look into how OTHER movements have done things. We could learn some VERY valuable lessons from Madison Avenue and Montgomery Alabama...

    Let the anti's scream. I'll just sit back, smile, and then let them know that the position they hold so dear is demonstrably racist and misogynist, and watch as they try to overcome the cognative dissonance of that information interfacing with their illogical beliefs.

    Just because I work for this cause primarily with my head and voice and not my hands and feet does not make my work any less valid or valuable.

    Remember, "populism" can be just as virulently discriminatory as elitism, and can be a very attractive and easy trap to fall into. Just ask the people in Cambodia who wore glasses in the early 1970's...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    Dreamer wrote:
    My stance is not based in "political correctness". It's based in the fact that I don't want to have to explain to my wife and my daughters why my trip to Food Lion turned into a 4-hour fiasco involving a trip to the county lockup, and why I'll have to go to court in a few weeks to try and get a spuriously-levied GATTTOTP charge dropped.

    Activism has many faces. Propaganda has many methods and modes. Overt activism is just one method, and it has proven to be one of the least effective. That is why I do things the way I do. I talk to a LOT of people about OC. I hand out a LOT of pamphlets and copies of the NC Firearms statutes. I get the word out through insinuating it into casual conversations with people I meet every day. I don't need a prop to initiate my conversations.

    The "anti's" have succeeded in getting a LOT of law-abiding people to voluntarily hand over their guns in many cities by repeating the same lies, logical fallacies, and twisted statistics over and over and over again. It's a prove fact that people will eventually believe ANYTHING if you repeat it enough. I just prefer to use words to make my point. It's not that I don't want to "do the work" or "be in the trenches", it that I don't see the point in intentionally putting myself in the position of having to be on the defensive all the time for my cause. I'd rather sneak into the anti's brains and then slowly deconstruct their misconceptions and illogical beliefs from the inside, than enter into the discourse with them already on the attack.

    It's not less work to do things this way. It's just a lot less confrontational, and it has been my experience (professionally and personally) that people are more willing to change their mind on long-held, deeply emotional issues if you ENGAGE them rather than throw your issue in their face. The anti's may be brainwashed sheeple, but they are still human beings, and we shouldn't look at them like they are somehow not worthy of our respect. Given the right information, they CAN make the right decisions on this issue.

    Read my other post in the "Number 2" thread.

    And then ask yourself, "what HAVE I done for the OC movement lately besides OC?"

    I do plenty. I just don't feel the need to get all up in people's faces when I do it, and I'm having a bit of difficulty understanding why so many people in this movement apparently DO.

    I've said it before and I'll say it again. Let's not re-invent the wheel. A LOT of VERY successful "movements" have already hammered out the psychological, sociological, and intellectual tactics of changing people's minds on deeply-held and emotionally charged issues. It's time the 2A movement in general and the OC movement in particular get to a library and look into how OTHER movements have done things. We could learn some VERY valuable lessons from Madison Avenue and Montgomery Alabama...

    Let the anti's scream. I'll just sit back, smile, and then let them know that the position they hold so dear is demonstrably racist and misogynist, and watch as they try to overcome the cognative dissonance of that information interfacing with their illogical beliefs.

    Just because I work for this cause primarily with my head and voice and not my hands and feet does not make my work any less valid or valuable.

    Remember, "populism" can be just as virulently discriminatory as elitism, and can be a very attractive and easy trap to fall into. Just ask the people in Cambodia who wore glasses in the early 1970's...
    Almost every sentence in your arguments is self-defeating.

    Not get in peoples' faces? All you've done is get in OCers' faces and tell them to screw off.

    You've not presented one single logical argument against OC, you've just blabbed a bunch of inflammatory rhetoric torn right from the pages of the Brady Campaign, and then accused OCers of doing it...

    You hide in secrecy like some latent flasher in a trench coat, then accuse those who realize there isn't anything taboo about it of waving their junk around...

    Wooo, I have a gun an nobody knows!!! And you're just offended that how juvenile that attitude is, is being exposed.

    I'm all for CC in places and circumstances where there isn't any choice. All I'm getting at is that it DOES NOT provide a 'tactical advantage of surprise.' It's all nice sounding talk to someone who has never had to use theirs before, but the reality I have presented, that you rail against because it bursts a bubble, is all you'll get when that day comes. This isn't about 'strutting' or scaring people. It's about the cold hard truth that I have been faced with and learned the hard way; CC is sadly ineffective when seconds count, and it does nothing to further a prevention of that need.

    My intent is not to insult, but to underscore the fact that CC makes you FEEL safer, but doesn't at all DO the things that even I was once lead the believe it could. I used to preach the same old lines about surprise and not scaring people. I used to lob the tired old and dead insults about phallic deficiencies, etc. But the simple reality is that a gun unseen doesn't prevent anything. If some fragile-minded politico wants to wet their panties over it, oh well. Not my intent to cause it, but fear is in the mind of the beholder, not my gun. Fear of rhetoric is the norm you try to defend, and every accusation you make falls flat. It isn't a personal attack, I used to be the one that fell for it, too. Part of good propaganda is to frame the truth as an insult, and you have responded exactly as trained to with insults of your own.

    My purpose is to show that it is unlikely that everyone who CCs will have the need, but for those who do, it is still a craps shoot. Like the anti-gun Liberal who becomes a convert when faced with the cold, hard reality of being assaulted or raped, etc... I realized I was promoting a line of bull about CC, and would simply like others to not have to learn the hard way that propaganda and reality are not the same thing.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358

    Post imported post

    OK, ixtow,

    I apologize. Now I know where you're coming from, it's clear that we are on COMPLETELY different sheets of music. If maybe you'd explained that you live in a battle zone before hand, and the city in which you live was so devoid of law and order that a reasonable person couldn't expect to make it through a day without being victimized, I might not have come down so hard on your OP. It must suck to be living in a place like that.

    I'm a little unsure about your assessment of my post though. I can't, for the life of me, find one reference to penis size in any of my posts, or any "Brady-esque" references, or anything that's really "politically correct". I've kept a relatively civil, rational tone with my posts, and you've met them all with name-calling, ad-hominem attacks, and presumptions about my experience, training, and personal beliefs.

    And yet, you say over and over again how you don't OC to intimidate, and then, in the same paragraph, you say you do it EXACTLY for intimidation of BGs. It's either one or the other. I think we ALL know and agree that the primary purpose of OC is, in fact, to intimidate and deter BGs from seeing us as "easy prey". You can at least own that, rather than denying it, and then blaming people who aren't comfortable with guns for feeling put out when they see on on your hip.

    I'm not trying to argue the tactical advantages of OC vs. CC. I think we can agree that OC has the clear tactical advantage in a real-world defense situation, and that it does, in fact, have some significant deterrent effect as well.

    What I AM arguing is the sociological, intellectual, and psychological tactics of educating the public and trying to get them over to our way of thinking. We're not going to do that by regaling them with tales of terror and bravery. We're going to do it by appealing to their sense of human decency, their belief in basic human rights, and their inherent sense of what is right and wrong. And I'm just saying that it's a LOT harder to do that when you are wearing something on your hip that, to them, is a symbol of fear and evil. That mindset is wrong, we can at least agree on that. But breaking through that brainwashing is going to be a lot harder when they are eyeballing your gun. That's all I'm saying.

    The public has been fed a steady diet of fear and negative propaganda regarding guns for decades. Many of them believe the lies. Appealing to their logic, their belief in human rights, and their beliefs that all law-abiding people have a natural right to defend themselves is our best tactic, in my opinion.

    I'm going to stop. Although we probably agree on the combat tactical advantages of OC, we obviously disagree on the grounds of tactics for the movement from a political, sociological, and psychological stance.

    You obviously need to OC, because your environment is, from your reports, fairly dangerous and full of insane predators. That sucks, and I feel bad for you if that is the case. If your environment is that dangerous, then I FULLY support your right to OC, because it's not merely a matter of "activism", it's a matter of survival. Your reasons for OC are a LOT more practical than a lot of the folks on this forum. You've got a tough row to hoe, and I don't envy you that.

    But for those of us who live in places that are relatively peaceful and orderly, OC isn't a matter of survival. It's a choice, and it's an outward statement of our belief in certain legal, moral, and civil rights.

    Your main antagonists are, from your report, mainly insane criminals, thugs, and BGs. Again, I don't envy you that. There but for the grace of God go I.

    My main antagonists (when I'm not at work), where I currently live, are generally going to be uninformed LEO's and hysterical soccer moms. I carry because I work the "graveyard shift" as a night auditor in a hotel on the edge of a "dicey" neighborhood. We've had some pretty dangerous episodes in the last few months--on our property, and in the adjacent neighborhoods. My employer doesn't want me to OC while on the clock, but doesn't have a problem with me CC. I'd rather have my Para "tucked" than not at all, so that's why I CC at work. I hope I never have to pull my firearm, but I've got no problem--mentally, ethically, or morally--with using it if I must, because I want to come home every morning in the same condition I left home in. I love my family too much to be a victim.

    I CC when I'm out on the town because I have had death threats from some of the "lower-case G's" that used to frequent the bar that we had in the hotel (until it was shut down last month because they lost their liquor license because of violations). My daily routine takes me through and to that same neighborhood, and this is a REALLY small city, so, again, I'd rather have the Para "tucked" than not at all.

    This is a relatively peaceful town. Most of the folks that live here are quiet, polite, and genteel. There are a few bad apples, just like any small city. It's pretty well known, among the people I have regular dealings with, that I have a CHP, and am almost always armed. Even those thug types probably know--this is a small city and word gets around pretty quickly down here. Personally, I don't think, in my situation, that it's worth the potential headache to OC all the time. I live outside the city limits, in a very nice neighborhood, and know all my neighbors. In almost ALL of my daily life, I am pretty safe. But I understand that BGs can come at any time, and so I carry, because I own my responsibility for my own safety and that of my family.

    It sounds like you are in a very different situation. I don't envy you that. I'm not arguing that YOU, in what has now been revealed as a VERY dangerous environment, should not OC. What I'm postulating is that in places where people are NOT in fear for their lives and safety every minute of the day, OC seems to be more about making a political statement than serving a practical purpose, and I don't know that OC, in those situations, is the best way to serve our goals.

    Let's just agree that we disagree on this. You are talking about practical, tactical issues in what appears to be a ****-hole of a city. I'm talking about political and sociological tactics. These are two entirely different issues, and although you seem to think we are at complete odds, I think that we actually agree on a LOT more points than we disagree on. I'm sorry you can't see that. I think that the OC movement would be much better served if the "street tactical" and "social engineering" folks could have a civil conversation and join forces, rather than the "tactical" folks thinking anyone who doesn't OC 24/7 is a wuss, and accusing them of being "closet Brady-ites"

    But I'm tired of explaining myself, and I'm tired of you making all sorts of accusations and presumptions about where I'm coming from or what my abilities are.

    So, I guess, you win. Once again, you've intimidated someone, and stopped them from engaging you. It's just that this time, the person you've intimidated into walking away was actually on your side at the root level. A Pyrrhic victory at best...

    You think I'm a slick talker who is trying to chatter my way into changing the world. And I think you are a confrontational cowboy, and the kind of person who will eventually do something that sets our movement back 20 years. I doubt we'll ever have a meeting of the minds on the social or psychological tactics with regards to OC activism, because apparently we live and move in VERY different worlds.

    This is a big country, and most of it is pretty peaceful. I hope someday you find a nicer place to live, and have a much more peaceful existence...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    Dreamer wrote:
    And yet, you say over and over again how you don't OC to intimidate, and then, in the same paragraph, you say you do it EXACTLY for intimidation of BGs. It's either one or the other. I think we ALL know and agree that the primary purpose of OC is, in fact, to intimidate and deter BGs from seeing us as "easy prey". You can at least own that, rather than denying it, and then blaming people who aren't comfortable with guns for feeling put out when they see on on your hip.

    I'm not sure "intimidation" is the proper word, but it is in the ballpark. I don't think I would 'intimidate' a bad guy, just make it clear that my immediate vicinity is a bad place to be a bad guy. Police don't intimidate me with their guns or their uniforms. It is a matter of threat perception. If you aren't planning anything bad, then there is nothing to be intimidated be.

    What I AM arguing is the sociological, intellectual, and psychological tactics of educating the public and trying to get them over to our way of thinking. We're not going to do that by regaling them with tales of terror and bravery. We're going to do it by appealing to their sense of human decency, their belief in basic human rights, and their inherent sense of what is right and wrong. And I'm just saying that it's a LOT harder to do that when you are wearing something on your hip that, to them, is a symbol of fear and evil. That mindset is wrong, we can at least agree on that. But breaking through that brainwashing is going to be a lot harder when they are eyeballing your gun. That's all I'm saying.

    I disagree. If they don't see it, and a total disassociation of my persona from what they have been fed, nothing will change for the better. Sure, it may be a shock to the system, but once they watch and see that I'm just another decent human being, not the wild crazy maniac they've been told, they are forced to call into question a great many lies they've fallen for. Maybe some people just aren't that bright. Maybe some are too absorbed in their anti-gun crusade. For these, nothing will work anyway. But for all of the more active, personal, and time consuming methods of de-programming the lies (as effective as they may be) nothing compares to the sheer volume of contact that just walking around with a gun can generate. This is part of what CC was about; no one talks or thinks about it. Out of sight, out of mind. The anti propaganda still flourishes without any counter. Google quotes from anti's who conceded support for CC laws and licenses. They're all about 'being glad' that Big Brother has a short leash on 'those kind of people.' nobody knows that 'gun toting' isn't comprised of 'those kind of people' unless the gun can be seen as it is toted. The whole straw man visage of only manics having guns is the crux of their position, and unless the public actually SEES what a lie that is, it will stand.

    The public has been fed a steady diet of fear and negative propaganda regarding guns for decades. Many of them believe the lies. Appealing to their logic, their belief in human rights, and their beliefs that all law-abiding people have a natural right to defend themselves is our best tactic, in my opinion.

    I couldn't agree more. But the anti's have mass media trumpeting their agenda for free on every TV and newspaper on the planet. We need something equally massive. 1 and 2 people a year being gradually convinced is nothing compared to the sea of suckers the anti's make with their drive-by media. A visible gun has many purposes at once, regardless of the intent of the carrier. Even if a guy is ego-tripping off of it, 'strutting' as you say, the world still sees that he isn't on a killing spree, and cannot deny what they observe with their own eyes. Do their brains process it.... Maybe, maybe not. But a person's own perception is more convincing than any agenda driven word. And that is how they see 'the gun lobby,' because their TV tells them to see it that way.

    You obviously need to OC, because your environment is, from your reports, fairly dangerous and full of insane predators. That sucks, and I feel bad for you if that is the case. If your environment is that dangerous, then I FULLY support your right to OC, because it's not merely a matter of "activism", it's a matter of survival. Your reasons for OC are a LOT more practical than a lot of the folks on this forum. You've got a tough row to hoe, and I don't envy you that.

    It always happens 'where you least expect it.' "But this is such a good neighborhood..." All 4 of my incidents have occurred in places 'you wouldn't expect it.' Upscale parts of town, well lit, etc... I 'feel' safer in the ghetto, because nothing bad has ever happened to me there.

    Your main antagonists are, from your report, mainly insane criminals, thugs, and BGs. Again, I don't envy you that. There but for the grace of God go I.

    Bad guys don't say in 'their own part of town.' Who can you rob in the ghetto? Everyone there is broke anyway, what's the point?

    My main antagonists (when I'm not at work), where I currently live, are generally going to be uninformed LEO's and hysterical soccer moms. I carry because I work the "graveyard shift" as a night auditor in a hotel on the edge of a "dicey" neighborhood. We've had some pretty dangerous episodes in the last few months--on our property, and in the adjacent neighborhoods. My employer doesn't want me to OC while on the clock, but doesn't have a problem with me CC. I'd rather have my Para "tucked" than not at all, so that's why I CC at work. I hope I never have to pull my firearm, but I've got no problem--mentally, ethically, or morally--with using it if I must, because I want to come home every morning in the same condition I left home in. I love my family too much to be a victim.

    I carry because I am a tool-using human. I have no more details for my reasoning. I just want to use my tools in the most effective manner possible, and have learned the hard way that CC isn't it. You might call CC the next best thing, but it doesn't prevent, and 'surprise' is wasted because if someone is already attacking you, they sprung the jig, and there is no surprise to be had... Except that reaching into your pocket for your gun could get you dead. I prefer eliminating that possibility, not trying to call it some kind of advantage.

    This is a relatively peaceful town. Most of the folks that live here are quiet, polite, and genteel.

    That's exactly my point. Read any report of violence, and that's what they all say.

    I think that the OC movement would be much better served if the "street tactical" and "social engineering" folks could have a civil conversation and join forces, rather than the "tactical" folks thinking anyone who doesn't OC 24/7 is a wuss, and accusing them of being "closet Brady-ites"

    I haven't said any such thing. Just that those who try to pass off an obvious deficiency as an advantage, will get a very rude wake-up if/when their number is up. People who fall for it are at least still carrying. But the division over this matter is a sad case of propaganda surviving even in the face of those who would claim to do away with it. I rarely state my intent, nor do I cite, becasue I want people to use their own brains to wake up and realize "Woah, I've been had!" No reason to take my word for it. And I greatly prefer people not having to learn the hard way. Not everyone mentally prepares themselves for the circumstances I've been in, I cannot keep a straight face and imagine what might have been were I as mentally ill-prepared as I have been accused of. The fact that my son and I have survived it intact is quite enough proof to the contrary.

    But I'm tired of explaining myself, and I'm tired of you making all sorts of accusations and presumptions about where I'm coming from or what my abilities are.

    I've only returned the insult and sarcasm to show how silly it is.

    You think I'm a slick talker who is trying to chatter my way into changing the world. And I think you are a confrontational cowboy, and the kind of person who will eventually do something that sets our movement back 20 years. I doubt we'll ever have a meeting of the minds on the social or psychological tactics with regards to OC activism, because apparently we live and move in VERY different worlds.

    Exposing this matter is precisely my ulterior motive.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    5

    Post imported post

    I personally had to join this forum just to say a few things to this topic.

    I cc because I feel that that ocing is painting a target on my head. That and I don't carry just to protect me but others as well. So what if the kiddnapper doesn't kidnap your kid because you are ocing but he will just go after another kid whose parents are most likely unarmed. As a carrier it's your responsibility to protect you and everyone around you.

    Go ahead and take my kid while I'm ccing. The kidnapper will learn to think twice on who go take. A crowded mall all you have to do is yell that my kid has been taken. He'd be lucky to get out alive. Either by my pt111 or from people beating him to death.

    Now if I was to oc the kidnapper would find some kid who belongs to a new scared mom. Shed have a panic attack and not know what to do. What makes your sons life matter more than hers?

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    juturna wrote:
    I personally had to join this forum just to say a few things to this topic.

    I cc because I feel that that ocing is painting a target on my head. That and I don't carry just to protect me but others as well. So what if the kiddnapper doesn't kidnap your kid because you are ocing but he will just go after another kid whose parents are most likely unarmed. As a carrier it's your responsibility to protect you and everyone around you.

    Go ahead and take my kid while I'm ccing. The kidnapper will learn to think twice on who go take. A crowded mall all you have to do is yell that my kid has been taken. He'd be lucky to get out alive. Either by my pt111 or from people beating him to death.

    Now if I was to oc the kidnapper would find some kid who belongs to a new scared mom. Shed have a panic attack and not know what to do. What makes your sons life matter more than hers?
    Wow! Just plain wow!

    Paragraph 1:

    a) FEEL?
    b) EXACTLY! It IS my responsibility, and a gun unseen prevents nothing.

    Paragraph 2:

    But it wasn't prevented, and you're just "gonna teach that boy a lesson." It almost sounds like you're using your own child as bait for an excuse to go after someone. You're actually willing to let someone drag your kid off and then you are going to fight to get him/her back, maybe, if you're lucky? Yell? You have very clearly not thought this scenario though, at all. You're just trying to defend a bubble.

    Now, please tell me, which is more valuable, a political view steeped in propaganda, or your child? Can you drop the ego and put your child as a priority? Will you (and your son/daughter) have to find out the hard way?

    Is my child more important than that? Hell yes! I most definitely do value my family more than those who would use them as bait.

    Paragraph 3:

    Again; EXACTLY. Panic attack? That is your excuse?

    Seriously, look at the level of ridiculous these excuses stack up against... Can you really keep defending CC as any kind of tactical advantage.?

    To re-iterate. I am NOT anti-CC. I am simply opposed to the ridiculous notion that it has any kind of social or personal advantage. This theory, tested, fails almost every time, but persists only because few (fortunately) end up testing it. CC is better than nothing, but nothing is the one and only thing it is better than. I have never seen, nor can I imagine a what-if in which this is not true. I played out all the same tired lines myself... Until I found out the hard way.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    juturna wrote:
    snip
    What makes your sons life matter more than hers?
    Seriously? You seriously are asking that question???

    What makes my son's life matter more to me than hers is that it is MY son! I have personal, moral, ethical, social and biological obligations, among others, to protect my own children first.

    You admit in your post that OC will likely reduce the likelihood of risk to your own child. So then to argue that by protecting your own child that you could put another less well protected child at risk from a bad guy so therefore you will choose NOT to protect your child to the very best of your ability first and foremost at best makes you a crappy parent.

    While I certainly would not hesitate to protect others in my community and nation, I don't carry primarily to protect everyone around me. I carry to protect my family and myself. And protecting myself also protects my family as if I am killed by a BG it would cause them great hardship emotionally, physically and financially. That is my first obligation day to day barring extremely unusual circumstances. I will NOT hang any loved one out essentially as prospective bait to entice evil away from someone who is unwilling to protect their own.

    ETA: grammatical correction
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    deepdiver wrote:
    juturna wrote:
    snip
    What makes your sons life matter more than hers?
    Seriously? You seriously are asking that question???

    What makes my son's life matter more to me than hers is that it is MY son! I have personal, moral, ethical, social and biological obligations, among others, to protect my own children first.

    You admit in your post that OC will likely reduce the likelihood of risk to your own child. So then to argue that by protecting your own child that you could put another less well protected child at risk from a bad guy so therefore you will choose NOT to protect your child to the very best of your ability first and foremost at best makes you a crappy parent.

    While I certainly would not hesitate to protect others in my community and nation, I don't carry primarily to protect everyone around me. I carry to protect my family and myself. And protecting myself also protects my family as if I am killed by a BG it would cause them great hardship emotionally, physically and financially. That is my first obligation day to day barring extremely unusual circumstances. I will NOT hang any loved one out essentially as prospective bait to entice evil away from someone who is unwilling to protect their own.

    ETA: grammatical correction
    I feel your position deep, but you let it block your mind to what the writer revealed about min/her-self. Truthfully, I would take responsibility for them all, if I could. But I am one man. I have to draw the line somewhere, or find myself stretched too thin to be of any good to anyone at all.

    He/she doesn't value his/her children that much, and is offended by the fact that someone else does. It makes the writer look like a bad parent when someone else is willing to risk public ridicule by propagandists, and he/she places not being ridiculed above his/her own child's safety. This makes any argument about 'what others will think,' be it good or bad, all the more telling. Immediately came the casting of 'strutting' about. but I don't care what anyone thinks, so what good would strutting do? The WRITER is the one who is so concerned with collectivism, and projected that in an insulting way.

    The writer has presented no argument on the topic, you might note, only reaching and grasping for ways to explain that an accusation never made, but internally perceived, is not going to stand on his/her watch... Even though the whole process was in the writer's own head...... It has immediately become an ego contest, who will win the argument, etc, when there wasn't even an argument in the first place.

    Good propaganda always frames the truth as an insult. The most telltale sign is that those who are 'offended' by it come out swinging... The evidence stacks up, kill the messenger, straw man, etc... But they are blinded by the anger and hate that the propaganda subtly fostered... You can only hope they can step out of their own head for a moment and notice.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    5

    Post imported post

    Ah ha that's the reaction I was aiming for. As. a parent your child is number one in your life right and it's your job to protect them. Their life value is more than the other kids because they are yours. And honestly once I have kids it will be the same for me. But my point is by ocing you may scare off a person but they will just find another kid in which they will feel the same way as the reaction you all just gave to me.

    Here are the facts though we are just dealing with IFs saying ocing or even ccing is better than the other is like saying shorts are better than jeans. Shorts will keep you cool but you MIGHT hit a thorn bush. It's all the same. How? Simple. It's all what you believe is right for you and there is no wrong answer. Just like how you choose your kid over another anyday. Because it's yours. It's your preference so it's always going to be the best.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    juturna wrote:
    Ah ha that's the reaction I was aiming for. As. a parent your child is number one in your life right and it's your job to protect them. Their life value is more than the other kids because they are yours. And honestly once I have kids it will be the same for me. But my point is by ocing you may scare off a person but they will just find another kid in which they will feel the same way as the reaction you all just gave to me.

    Here are the facts though we are just dealing with IFs saying ocing or even ccing is better than the other is like saying shorts are better than jeans. Shorts will keep you cool but you MIGHT hit a thorn bush. It's all the same. How? Simple. It's all what you believe is right for you and there is no wrong answer. Just like how you choose your kid over another anyday. Because it's yours. It's your preference so it's always going to be the best.
    No need to bait people for the discussion....

    Juturna, stick around and you will find that there isn't necessarily a lot of disagreement. In the companion to this thread title something like "Reason Number 2" in this subforum I make much of your 2nd paragraph argument. Prior forum polling shows that the vast majority of OCDO members have a concealed carry license/permit where required to CC and choose CC or OC depending on a number of factors. One of the primary aspects of OCDO for me is that we do have that choice we can make.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    juturna wrote:
    Ah ha that's the reaction I was aiming for. As. a parent your child is number one in your life right and it's your job to protect them. Their life value is more than the other kids because they are yours. And honestly once I have kids it will be the same for me. But my point is by ocing you may scare off a person but they will just find another kid in which they will feel the same way as the reaction you all just gave to me.

    Here are the facts though we are just dealing with IFs saying ocing or even ccing is better than the other is like saying shorts are better than jeans. Shorts will keep you cool but you MIGHT hit a thorn bush. It's all the same. How? Simple. It's all what you believe is right for you and there is no wrong answer. Just like how you choose your kid over another anyday. Because it's yours. It's your preference so it's always going to be the best.
    Just because you can make an analogous statement, does not make it a valid one.

    If my car doesn't start, and the sky is blue at the time, one cannot say that my car did not start BECAUSE the sky was blue. No matter how loud or often you argue that, it still won't be rational. Shorts and long pants.

    Your emotional response was and still is indefensible. Backpedaling won't fix it.

    You claim to be the delivery boy of facthood, yet revert straight back to nonsense with no basis in reality or even in what-if land. this is not an insult. this is me pointing a finger straight at the obvious BS that is filling up the room, and asking you if that is really what you want to do? Presuming that you are a rational, thinking person, is that a course you want to continue upon? Do you see how nonsensical your own position is? By your own logic this doesn't make sense.

    I've never OCed a day in my life. See the Location by my Name? But it is still my preference because I have experienced, repeatedly, that a hidden weapon offers an unpleasant surprise to no one but it's owner; when reality cuts the BS and you are just as helpless as the unarmed. The very same thing has been reported by many who have been pressed into the unenviable position of using their weapon.

    I don't roll the dice. That is the only real difference. I want to be the maximum effective, and you settle for good-enough but don't want to burst the propaganda bubble and admit it. I did not consciously make such a choice, and I doubt you are reprehensible enough to deliberately promote a lie. But pride and ego can be tough to set aside in admitting you've been had. I am no exception; I had to learn the hard way.

    I only offer these tidbits to those who are wise enough to learn from the mistakes of others (me). The rest, perhaps I've cast pearls before swine. The difference will always make itself known.

    I was so proud of my Government Issued Privilege, no one was ever going to tell me it had shortcoming that could make it almost completely worthless. That pride and arrogance in being 'approved' by the great collective false-authority almost put an end to the only thing in life worth living for. And I stand enduring attacks from those I offered it to. If that doesn't prove to you how completely 'had' you are, nothing will. You've closed your mind the same way I did. Only the business end of a razor knife against my son's throat got the through to me. I suggest only that you not be like me, and you loose the dogs...

    Your loss.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  23. #23
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    Tell me, in the several times you've had to draw your weapon, which of these thoughts crossed your mind (don't actually answer, you would never pick the incriminating one publicly anyhow):

    1) "Crap, I'm going to have to kill this guy. ****, damn, ****, hell, why me! No time to bitch, let's roll."

    2) "Ha! Just what I've been waiting for! I get to kill this guy!"

    Now, did I tell you which one you are? Were you preparing a defensive response AS IF I had, even though I did not?

    Your thoughts are not your own.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    5

    Post imported post

    I've never been the one to clearly post my thoughts on forums. They come out wrong and taken thenwrong way:

    I was just simply stating that ocing or ccing has been argued over and over on which is better. Their are pros ans cons for both and neither is wrong. I can give several reasons why ocing would be wrong and so I can also tell you reasons for ccing that is wrong.

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    juturna wrote:
    Ah ha that's the reaction I was aiming for. As. a parent your child is number one in your life right and it's your job to protect them. Their life value is more than the other kids because they are yours. And honestly once I have kids it will be the same for me. But my point is by ocing you may scare off a person but they will just find another kid in which they will feel the same way as the reaction you all just gave to me.
    Repsonding to the bold.

    The other kids parents may not feel the same way as those of us that OC (or CC for that matter), because most of them have chosen to be unarmed to protect their child from potential preditors. In fact, many don't even want law abiding citizens to carry their tools for defense into parks where children are most likely to be found playing, and often times the hardest place to keep up with them.

    What I'm saying is, We that carry side arms (OC or CC) seem to take our responsibility of protecting our children more seriously that those parents/grandparents that do not carry. Those of us that OC believe thatit has a better chance of preventing a crime from being initiated than CC. We also know that it isn't in any way a gaurantee that it won't.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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