Difference between a rifle and pistol and how to prove it to cops who arrest you for open carrying ?

imported post

Thundar wrote:

slowfiveoh wrote:

I think this thread has prompted me to purchase a AR based pistol.

Click to expand...

The Sig 556 is awesome, but the Keltec PLR-16 is a lot cheaper!

Click to expand...

Kel-tecs seem nice, but the ammo costs more, the gun costs more than an AK pistol, you have to buy barrel shrouds, and I think it only comes with a 10 round mag.

AK pistols are guaranteed to be banned in the next gun grab, they are cheap right now at $350, they just have a cool look that anyone can apprciate and instantly recognize.

imported post

kwikrnu wrote:

Thundar wrote:

slowfiveoh wrote:

I think this thread has prompted me to purchase a AR based pistol.

Click to expand...

The Sig 556 is awesome, but the Keltec PLR-16 is a lot cheaper!

Click to expand...

Kel-tecs seem nice, but the ammo costs more, the gun costs more than an AK pistol, you have to buy barrel shrouds, and I think it only comes with a 10 round mag.

AK pistols are guaranteed to be banned in the next gun grab, they are cheap right now at $350, they just have a cool look that anyone can apprciate and instantly recognize.

Click to expand...

All very logical, well thought out answers to why an AK. Hopefully those that are quick to condemn you read and understand that it isn't "crazy" just different. Are you AK bashers feeling ashamed yet?

imported post

kwikrnu wrote:

Thundar wrote:

Straightforward an unabashed support for gun rights is what SAF, JPFO and some other gun rights organizations are all about. Incrementalist nonsense is what the NRA pushes with mixed results.

You appear to me to be more of a SAF Gun rights supporter than an NRA support some gun rights advocate.

Click to expand...

The NRA is a moderate to left organization that seems more interested in money and power than actually doing something. I'm not sure about the others.

Click to expand...

I really don't like the NRA either.

imported post

I will point out that it takes money and power to get things done in this country, period. Lobbying is expensive. Advertising is expensive.

Armed insurrection to assure whatever right you want is not acceptable. That is why we have a system and a constitution everyone believes in. But I can understand why one may not like an organization like the NRA.

imported post

tekshogun wrote:

Armed insurrection to assure whatever right you want is not acceptable. That is why we have a system and a constitution everyone believes in.

Click to expand...

No one here is advocating an "armed insurrection".

imported post

slowfiveoh wrote:

I'm sorry. I supposeI should know my place. Somewhere between actually believing in the 2nd amendment completely, and being a US Army qualified expert on several weapon platforms, I got confused and disoriented, and didn't realize that my status as an FNG on this forum clearly places my outlook in the back seat.

How dare I defend an individual for possessing a lawful arm, and then being criticized for it by people who claim to be proponents of opencarrying lawful arms.

I should know my role....right? :lol::quirky

Click to expand...

Appreciate your service.

Nope not right, not even close, but I think you know that unless you are seriously over caffeinated. Didn't refer to you as a FNG either, its not my style.

Its just simply more productive to discuss the issue than it is to get in somebody's face. Gives a better image of us on this very public forum too.

[font="Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"]5) While you may disagree strongly with another poster based upon their opinion, we will NOT tolerate any personal attacks or general bashing of groups .....etc.[/font]
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum1/1.html

Hope you will take it in the spirit intended, choose to stay and contribute.

Yata hey

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

slowfiveoh wrote:

I'm sorry. I supposeI should know my place. Somewhere between actually believing in the 2nd amendment completely, and being a US Army qualified expert on several weapon platforms, I got confused and disoriented, and didn't realize that my status as an FNG on this forum clearly places my outlook in the back seat.

How dare I defend an individual for possessing a lawful arm, and then being criticized for it by people who claim to be proponents of opencarrying lawful arms.

I should know my role....right? :lol::quirky

Click to expand...

Appreciate your service.

Nope not right, not even close, but I think you know that unless you are seriously over caffeinated. Didn't refer to you as a FNG either, its not my style.

Its just simply more productive to discuss the issue than it is to get in somebody's face. Gives a better image of us on this very public forum too.

[font=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica]5) While you may disagree strongly with another poster based upon their opinion, we will NOT tolerate any personal attacks or general bashing of groups .....etc.[/font]
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum1/1.html

Hope you will take it in the spirit intended, choose to stay and contribute.

Yata hey

Click to expand...

I'm a bit of a pitbull when it comes to things that are such blatant common sense, that no explanation should be necessary. However, I will try to tone down the foam helmet comments and the like, as to not break any rules, or hurt some overly sensitive feelings.

Thanks for the greeting I suppose.

imported post

kwikrnu wrote:

tekshogun wrote:

Armed insurrection to assure whatever right you want is not acceptable.  That is why we have a system and a constitution everyone believes in. 

Click to expand...

No one here is advocating an "armed insurrection".

Click to expand...

Correct, I was merely pointing out that we have few options and must take what we can get by working the system as designed and/or work to change it to make it easier, short of using violence.

imported post

Thundar wrote:

kwikrnu wrote:

Thundar wrote:

slowfiveoh wrote:

I think this thread has prompted me to purchase a AR based pistol.

Click to expand...

The Sig 556 is awesome, but the Keltec PLR-16 is a lot cheaper!

Click to expand...

Kel-tecs seem nice, but the ammo costs more, the gun costs more than an AK pistol, you have to buy barrel shrouds, and I think it only comes with a 10 round mag.

AK pistols are guaranteed to be banned in the next gun grab, they are cheap right now at $350, they just have a cool look that anyone can apprciate and instantly recognize.

Click to expand...

All very logical, well thought out answers to why an AK. Hopefully those that are quick to condemn you read and understand that it isn't "crazy" just different. Are you AK bashers feeling ashamed yet?

Click to expand...

I don't recall any of us "bashing" the AK's.

Seems that kwikrnu can't make up his mind if he has a rifle or a handgun. Of course, the average person that doesn't know much about firearms wouldn't be able to tell teh difference either. To them, it's going to look like a special ops commando assault weapon.

Sooner or later, kwikrnu is going to carry that pitol somewhere and cause a panic:what:, that may very well result in a SWAT team being called into action.

But hey, it's his right.

imported post

Understand your point Task Force 16

I can imagine the reaction if 3-4 walked into a shopping mall tonight carry such.

Even my adrenaline would peak.

Yata hey

imported post

Seems that kwikrnu can't make up his mind if he has a rifle or a handgun. Of course, the average person that doesn't know much about firearms wouldn't be able to tell teh difference either. To them, it's going to look like a special ops commando assault weapon.

Sooner or later, kwikrnu is going to carry that pitol somewhere and cause a panic:what:, that may very well result in a SWAT team being called into action.

But hey, it's his right.

Click to expand...

I have rifles and handguns. My open carry handgun of choice right now is my ak-47 pistol.

I don't understandhow I could cause a panic. Maybe someone else would cause a panic, but I fully obey all carry laws.

imported post

kwikrnu wrote:

Dreamer wrote:

Weird guns draw attention, and we're not OCing to draw attention to ourselves. We do it because it's a RIGHT, not because our firearms are some sort of fashion statement.

Click to expand...

I am carrying this ak-47 pistol because it is my right.

Click to expand...

You carry the thing slung on your back like a rifle and want to get pissed cause the cops stop you for carrying the ridiculous thing.

People carry Glocks, 1911's, Sigs, Rugers, etc because it's their right. You carry the AK just to goad cops into a reaction.

imported post

kwikrnu wrote:

I have rifles and handguns. My open carry handgun of choice right now is my ak-47 pistol.

I don't understandhow I could cause a panic. Maybe someone else would cause a panic, but I fully obey all carry laws.

Click to expand...

Different laws in different states.

In Va. just gripping an OC handgun can be considered brandishing - its kind of a hands-off policy. Case law that I am not going to look up right now.

So yes, under certain circumstances you might have difficulties, but I do get your point.

Yata hey

imported post

kwikrnu wrote:

Seems that kwikrnu can't make up his mind if he has a rifle or a handgun. Of course, the average person that doesn't know much about firearms wouldn't be able to tell teh difference either. To them, it's going to look like a special ops commando assault weapon.

Sooner or later, kwikrnu is going to carry that pitol somewhere and cause a panic:what:, that may very well result in a SWAT team being called into action.

But hey, it's his right.

Click to expand...

I have rifles and handguns. My open carry handgun of choice right now is my ak-47 pistol.

I don't understandhow I could cause a panic. Maybe someone else would cause a panic, but I fully obey all carry laws.

Click to expand...

OK.

Tell ya what,kwikrnu. Why don't you carry your current "pistol of choice" to the nearest Wally world tonight or tommorrow night, while the store is crowded with last minute Christmas shoppers. Let us know how that works out for ya.

Like Grapeshot, I'd be suspicious if I saw some one sporting one of these things about town. I'd dang sure keep an eye on 'em for awhile.

imported post

You carry the thing slung on your back like a rifle and want to get pissed cause the cops stop you for carrying the ridiculous thing.

People carry Glocks, 1911's, Sigs, Rugers, etc because it's their right. You carry the AK just to goad cops into a reaction.

Click to expand...

How else am I going to carry an AK-47? I asked the question on a few gun forums and was banned for asking the question and posting a picture of the handgun. I decided a two point quick adjustable and quick release would be best for me based upon my own research. I may have taken someone else's advice if it had been offered when I asked.

So, it is only a right if you carry a gun that you approve of? You're perfectly okay with a sig556 pistol and not an ak47 pistol?

imported post

Task Force 16 wrote:

OK.

Tell ya what,kwikrnu. Why don't you carry your current "pistol of choice" to the nearest Wally world tonight or tommorrow night, while the store is crowded with last minute Christmas shoppers. Let us know how that works out for ya.

Like Grapeshot, I'd be suspicious if I saw some one sporting one of these things about town. I'd dang sure keep an eye on 'em for awhile.

Click to expand...

I have plans for Christmas so I will not be trying this, also as I stated on a previous post I do not want to put in jeopardy my recently orderd nfa item. State Parks are good places to carry because they are owned by the State. The Tennessee Legislature has approved them for carry. Unlike Walmart, which is private property, they can't put a sign up or tell you and thus prohibit carry. I'm unclear on whether or not they can ban people from the State Park for simply carrying a handgun, but I think not.

imported post

Dreamer wrote:

I have to agree with HawkFlyer on this one...

It's one thing to buy and own a specific handgun because it's a weird novelty, and you think it's cool. It's another thing altogether to carry something like this around OC. Do you have a holster for it? Who makes a holster for a pistol version of the AK-47?

You didn't get hassled because you were carrying, you got hassled because of WHAT you were carrying, and from the sounds of it, you sort of "courted" the encounter, because you've been hassled before, and now you're carrying a miniturized AK-style "handgun".

I mean, really, WTF did you THINK would happen?...

As Tommy Lee Jones said in that movie "Get rid of that Chrome-plated Sissy Pistol, and get a Glock..."

I would LOVE to carry around a dual brace (that's 4 pistols--2 on each side) of matched Scottish Wheel Locks with gold inlays and cloisonne enamel work. It would look WAY cool, and would certainly be a "statement". But it would be neither practical or prudent (even though 4 rounds of .50 caliber ball would be VERY effective as "defense rounds!).

So I carry a double-stack 1911 instead. It does the job, doesn't draw too much attention, and there is NO room for discussion about it's status as a legal, appropriate firearm for lawful carry.

Weird guns draw attention, and we're not OCing to draw attention to ourselves. We do it because it's a RIGHT, not because our firearms are some sort of fashion statement.

If you live somewhere that requires you carry a miniturized AK-47 to maintain your safety, then I would HIGHLY recommend that you put MORE effort into finding different living arrangements, and LESS time into finding wacky, over-the-top "novelty" firearms.

Put your ego away, son, and get a Glock, Sig, Taurus, or 1911 like everyone else...

Click to expand...

AMEN!

imported post

kwikrnu wrote:

You carry the thing slung on your back like a rifle and want to get pissed cause the cops stop you for carrying the ridiculous thing.

People carry Glocks, 1911's, Sigs, Rugers, etc because it's their right.  You carry the AK just to goad cops into a reaction.

Click to expand...

How else am I going to carry an AK-47? I asked the question on a few gun forums and was banned for asking the question and posting a picture of the handgun. I decided a two point quick adjustable and quick release would be best for me based upon my own research. I may have taken someone else's advice if it had been offered when I asked.

So, it is only a right if you carry a gun that you approve of? You're perfectly okay with a sig556 pistol and not an ak47 pistol?

Click to expand...

I think you and some of the more vocal here have missed the point of my original post.

First you are not likely to get Banned or have the thread locked on this forum so long as the conversation stays civil and the topic is related to open carry. No problem on the latter, but it appears that the former may become an issue if people are not careful with the insults.

NOBODY here has said that it is not your absolute right to carry whatever contraption you want that throws rocks at the other guy, and is legal in your area. If you want to carry an AK, AR or AWhatever, that is just fine.

However, the reality is that you will experience more unwanted conversations with local LEO's than a person under identical conditions carrying a more conservative sidearm. That view is not ANTI as some have claimed, it is just a fact. Moreover, I think you have already proven the truth of that view in this thread. Add to that the confusion as to weather this is a rifle or a handgun among LEOs and there are bound to be issues. Heck you couldn't even avoid referring to this weapon as both a rifle and a handgun in this thread, how are the police supposed to know what it is. To them it first appears to be a sawed off rifle, and that is not unreasonable for an uninitiated person.

So the question is ... What is your purpose in carrying a weapon that will generally attract more attention, and specifically unwanted attention? You have to answer that question for yourself. I think if you are honest you would have to admit that a person would not select that sort of weapon to carry if one of their major goals was to be inconspicuous. Clearly you are trying to make a statement. Well the people around you are hearing you loud and clear. No judgement here, just fact.

Nobody here has any problem with people pushing the envelope on OC. However, I think it is amazing to hear someone do that and then express surprise at the attention they get. These two things are not congruent. People push the edges here all the time. Typically it is a different edge than you have chosen but it is no less brave when they do than when you do.

Among other things I fly Ultralight airplanes. These things look a lot like lawn chairs with wings. I do not expect to park my UL next to a 727 or Cessna spam can at an airport and not get a few looks and questions from the pilots of more conventional aircraft. I also do not expect to land at airports with FAA personnel present and not get a ramp check. That is just the nature of the game. Is my airplane legal? You bet. Do I have a right to fly it? You bet. Do I have a right to use public airports? You bet. Should I expect to be "detained" by the FAA at almost every opportunity? You bet. Why? Because it is outside their normal enforcement experience. That does not make it right, but it is still a fact.

The point is, you have a right to push the envelope, and more power to you. But stop whining about getting the exact reaction that a reasonable thinking person would expect when you do. You are teaching the LEOs in your area about the law and legal firearms. Sometime the student takes more time than you might like.

Regards

imported post

Hawkflyer wrote: [suB][suP][/suP][/suB]

...However, the reality is that you will experience more unwanted conversations with local LEO's than a person under identical conditions carrying a more conservative sidearm. That view is not ANTI as some have claimed, it is just a fact.

Click to expand...

So. Your view of conservative should be accepted. A Ruger Super Redhawk for example would be outside the realm of "conservative" for you as well then am I right? You only support wholly, the rights of individuals to bear arms, but limit yourself in the definition of "arms". You claim the premise of said commentary is not posturing in the "anti" sense, but rather that he should have expected confrontation while carrying a weapon strapped to his back, in no position in which it could be implied that he is "brandishing"?


I am sorry, but I see a fair bit of hypocrisy there. Can you please elaborate if I am in error?

Click to expand...

Moreover, I think you have already proven the truth of that view in this thread. Add to that the confusion as to weather this is a rifle or a handgun among LEOs and there are bound to be issues. Heck you couldn't even avoid referring to this weapon as both a rifle and a handgun in this thread, how are the police supposed to know what it is. To them it first appears to be a sawed off rifle, and that is not unreasonable for an uninitiated person.

Click to expand...

So you are reasoning that it is acceptable to detain him for 45 minutes, while they attempt to figure out what the definition of "pistol" is? Would it not be acceptable to believe that the self-proclaimed firearms "experts", that is to say those who we are often expected to be stopped, and inspected by, could not tell the difference between the two weapon classifications?

Click to expand...

So the question is ... What is your purpose in carrying a weapon that will generally attract more attention, and specifically unwanted attention? You have to answer that question for yourself. I think if you are honest you would have to admit that a person would not select that sort of weapon to carry if one of their major goals was to be inconspicuous.

Click to expand...

You would choose a firearm for personal defense based on its inconspicuous nature? Wherein did this gentlemen say he was trying to be "inconspicuous"? Frankly, isn't a more "visible" firearm something that law enforcement agencies would agree is "better" to be carried around because it could not be confused for a "concealed" weapon?

Click to expand...

Clearly you are trying to make a statement. Well the people around you are hearing you loud and clear. No judgement here, just fact.

Click to expand...

So again, it is acceptable to detain him because of the firearm he chose to carry, but not acceptable to stop and otherwise detain an individual who is carrying a less conspicuous firearm?

Click to expand...

Nobody here has any problem with people pushing the envelope on OC. However, I think it is amazing to hear someone do that and then express surprise at the attention they get. These two things are not congruent. People push the edges here all the time. Typically it is a different edge than you have chosen but it is no less brave when they do than when you do.

Click to expand...

I notice a question in the title field of this thread, wherein he was asking a very specific question, as opposed to asking what everybody thought of the firearm he chose to carry. The question is, "Difference between a rifle and pistol and how to prove it to cops who arrest you for open carrying?"

Click to expand...

.Among other things I fly Ultralight airplanes. These things look a lot like lawn chairs with wings. I do not expect to park my UL next to a 727 or Cessna spam can at an airport and not get a few looks and questions from the pilots of more conventional aircraft. I also do not expect to land at airports with FAA personnel present and not get a ramp check. That is just the nature of the game. Is my airplane legal? You bet. Do I have a right to fly it? You bet. Do I have a right to use public airports? You bet. Should I expect to be "detained" by the FAA at almost every opportunity? You bet. Why? Because it is outside their normal enforcement experience. That does not make it right, but it is still a fact.

The point is, you have a right to push the envelope, and more power to you. But stop whining about getting the exact reaction that a reasonable thinking person would expect when you do.

Regards

Click to expand...

You do not have a constitutionally protected "right" to fly ANY aircraft. The choice of analogy isn't that great.



I am simply making the point that you either unilaterally support OC, and the US Constitution, or you do not. If you wish to impose your ideology of what an "appropiate" sidearm is to carry, then perhaps you could pull up a chair at a mohogany desk of an anti-firearm organization and pen your ideology. If you allow for law enforcement officials to operate without universal acceptance, then you open the door to prejudice and "common sense" enforcement policies.

Just sayin....:uhoh:

imported post

Hawkflyer wrote:

...However, the reality is that you will experience more unwanted conversations with local LEO's than a person under identical conditions carrying a more conservative sidearm. That view is not ANTI as some have claimed, it is just a fact.

Click to expand...

Moreover, I think you have already proven the truth of that view in this thread. Add to that the confusion as to weather this is a rifle or a handgun among LEOs and there are bound to be issues. Heck you couldn't even avoid referring to this weapon as both a rifle and a handgun in this thread, how are the police supposed to know what it is. To them it first appears to be a sawed off rifle, and that is not unreasonable for an uninitiated person.

Click to expand...

I don't think I was whining too much. I filed the complaints so that I would have a record of the occurance. I will send out letters so they have no excuse to violate my rights in the future. I sincerely doubt anything will come of my complaints, but someone will investigate and they might come to a decision that 2.5 hour detentions are not necesary.

I think I have rifle on the brain.:lol: