Excellent question. For an excellent purpose.Why do you want to open carry?
I plan to write all of Florida's reps, and try to get a dialog going, so I would like to hear from you first, about why you would prefer to carry openly.
Try reading the rest of the post before responding.ABNinfantryman wrote:You shouldn't trust the civilian populace with their weapons. However, that is no reason to infringe upon their rights to self defense by requiring them to pass a training course or pay for a permit. It is one of the risks of freedom that we must accept in order to maintain that freedom.If I can't trust fellow US military with their weapons, why should I trust the civilian populace with their's?
Heck, in Iraq I had to load a Chief Petty Officer's (E-7) M9 magazines for him because he kept trying to put the rounds in backwards, but that in no way negates his right to self defense should he choose to arm himself as a civilian.
ABNinfantryman wrote:I did.NavyLT wrote:Try reading the rest of the post before responding.You shouldn't trust the civilian populace with their weapons. However, that is no reason to infringe upon their rights to self defense by requiring them to pass a training course or pay for a permit. It is one of the risks of freedom that we must accept in order to maintain that freedom.
Heck, in Iraq I had to load a Chief Petty Officer's (E-7) M9 magazines for him because he kept trying to put the rounds in backwards, but that in no way negates his right to self defense should he choose to arm himself as a civilian.
I didn't, so at what point did you read the rest of the post? Jeez, Navy can't shoot and can't read either. :lol:With that said, I'm for open carry because the law is not meant to make me feel safer about the possible stupidity of others, but to protect my inherent rights, and their's even if I'm not comfortable around them. The government has no business telling me that I can not defend myself, nor can it tell me how I can defend myself. My method of self defense should be left to me to decide what I feel comfortable with. If I'd rathernot broadcast thatI'm carrying, I should be able to conceal, if I want to broadcast that I'm carrying as a deterrent from having to even draw the weapon, I should be able to. Just because you don't like something I do doesn't give you the right to tell me I can't do it, period.
I don't understand your mixing stories about Crew-Served Weapons and long guns in the same breath as OC. It's irrelevant. If you worry abouteveryone carrying, OC or CC, you'll drive yourself crazy. The bottom line is that good old 2nd Amemndment. There are no adjectives or modifiers in the language about how you bear arms. It just says you have the right to, period. And when criminals see people OC'ing, they tend to go somewhere else- quick, fast, and in a hurry.I am very cautious about open carry, not because I lack confidence in myself, but because I lack confidence in others. In my profession there are those who handle weapons all of the time and there are those who simply carry it around because they have to or "just in case." These same people are the ones who shoot themselves with M9 Berettas because they don't know how to clear the weapon properly or don't practice with it. The same people who shoot each other in the throat because they didn't clear their weapon prior to breaking the weapon down for cleaning. The same people who half c0ck a machine gun so the sear wears down and causes a runaway gun or discharges when someone attempts to clear the gun. Ever had a .308 round go off in your face in a 5x5x6 cement guard tower after you lift the feed tray to clear the weapon? It ain't cool. If I can't trust fellow US military with their weapons, why should I trust the civilian populace with their's? I'm not worried so much about crime, I'm worried about that idiot who bought his weapon for protection or to look cool and never practicing with it or learning anything about how it works.
With that said, I'm for open carry because the law is not meant to make me feel safer about the possible stupidity of others, but to protect my inherent rights, and their's even if I'm not comfortable around them. The government has no business telling me that I can not defend myself, nor can it tell me how I can defend myself. My method of self defense should be left to me to decide what I feel comfortable with. If I'd rathernot broadcast thatI'm carrying, I should be able to conceal, if I want to broadcast that I'm carrying as a deterrent from having to even draw the weapon, I should be able to. Just because you don't like something I do doesn't give you the right to tell me I can't do it, period.
Are you speaking tongue-in-cheek or are you serious about not trusting the civilian populace with their weapons? From the rest of your post, it seems you're serious. What empirical evidence do you have to support this sweeping generalization? A risk of freedom to maintain that freedom? That is a nonsequitir as well as nonsensical. The forefathers didn't seem to have this distrust, as you do, when they wrote the Constitution.ABNinfantryman wrote:You shouldn't trust the civilian populace with their weapons. However, that is no reason to infringe upon their rights to self defense by requiring them to pass a training course or pay for a permit. It is one of the risks of freedom that we must accept in order to maintain that freedom.If I can't trust fellow US military with their weapons, why should I trust the civilian populace with their's?
Heck, in Iraq I had to load a Chief Petty Officer's (E-7) M9 magazines for him because he kept trying to put the rounds in backwards, but that in no way negates his right to self defense should he choose to arm himself as a civilian.
I want the 'option' to open carry.Why do you want to open carry?
I plan to write all of Florida's reps, and try to get a dialog going, so I would like to hear from you first, about why you would prefer to carry openly.