-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Open carry in mass
- Thread starter lelo029
- Start date
mrsemman
Regular Member
imported post
While it is not against the law to carry openly in MA, in reality, it does create problems. First, people who don't know you will "freak out" and creates disturbances. Secondly, for what purpose do you wish to carry openly? If you regularly carry a large amount of cash as part of your job, especially during this economy, and you have a LTC, then you have a legal use for the weapon. If it is to impress someone, then what use is it?
A weapon is a tool, which, when used for a legal purpose poses no problem. However, common sense is a valuable asset.
Finally, most people who have an LTC can and usually do carry concealed.
While it is not against the law to carry openly in MA, in reality, it does create problems. First, people who don't know you will "freak out" and creates disturbances. Secondly, for what purpose do you wish to carry openly? If you regularly carry a large amount of cash as part of your job, especially during this economy, and you have a LTC, then you have a legal use for the weapon. If it is to impress someone, then what use is it?
A weapon is a tool, which, when used for a legal purpose poses no problem. However, common sense is a valuable asset.
Finally, most people who have an LTC can and usually do carry concealed.
imported post
mrsemman wrote:
mrsemman wrote:
i got that..the thing is i carry 90% of all time..and my main concern is in the summer time..im afraid having my gun printing especially with light cloths on..that means that people who ltc are goin to wear jacketsand long shirts cause u cant have guns printing on you..i carry a sig p226 and its hard in the summer to cc with that pistol.
mrsemman
Regular Member
imported post
Lelo,
If it is hard to carry a large weapon concealed, there are two options. First get a smaller weapon that is easier to conceal or two, don't carry.
Even as a cop, I rarely carried off duty. I planned my trips. If I went to a potentially dangerous place, I carried, and did not care if it showed or not. Which brings me to ask again why carry?
Lelo,
If it is hard to carry a large weapon concealed, there are two options. First get a smaller weapon that is easier to conceal or two, don't carry.
Even as a cop, I rarely carried off duty. I planned my trips. If I went to a potentially dangerous place, I carried, and did not care if it showed or not. Which brings me to ask again why carry?
Tazman2
Regular Member
imported post
mrsemman wrote:
mrsemman wrote:
Important parts highlighted. You get a slap on the hand if a cop is called because it was seen and we go to jail. THAT is the difference. If its a right then why question the guy on WHY he wants to do it? If he isn't breaking any laws then so be it. Let him do what he wants to do even if you don't like it!
timf343
Campaign Veteran
imported post
mrsemman wrote:
Since you are a cop (or former cop), I realize pretty much every situation is potentially dangerous to you. But as a non-cop, whether by profession, or whether you're off duty, isn't it prudent just to avoid potentially dangerous places?
Put another way, why should someone go anywhere while carrying a firearm that he or she wouldn't go if they were unarmed?
Especially for those of us without a background in law enforcement, and even more so for those with little to no training whatsoever, just remember your weapon is a defensive tool for unexpected situations, and it's not a shield of invincibility that protects you from the evils of the world. I would personally recommend that anyone carrying a weapon, openly or concealed, only do so in places where they would feel comfortable unarmed.
Aside from the emotional aspects of shooting someone, there are serious legal (potentially criminal, but definitely civil) consequences. You never want to have to shoot anyone. If you feel like you need a gun where you're going, it's best just to get the hell out of there. I have no actual experience in this matter, it's just a strong opinion.
As a real-world example, at a recent open-carry litter pickup here in Las Vegas, a participant recommended we meet in "the hood" known for it's high crime, heavy drug activity and prostitution. Yes it's legal. Yes it proves a point. But to what end? The voice of reason did take over and this individual changed his mind quickly.
I've read one of your previous posts in which you mentioned that people "freak out" at the sight of OC. Have OC'd here in Vegas, including the world-famous Las Vegas Strip, for 3+ years, I find that's simply not the case. Many OC'ers will agree with this and tell you that people either support you, don't care or don't notice.
Finally, I responded to this point because I feel the mentality you conveyed is worth discussion. On one hand, you suggest people will "freak out" with OC, but on the other hand say you carry in dangerous places in which you don't care whether you print (and thus are known to be armed). I would argue that the last person I would want to "freak out" around me is one of those individuals in one of those dangerous places.
mrsemman wrote:
Another poster had issues with another part of your post, but I wanted to comment on this one.
Since you are a cop (or former cop), I realize pretty much every situation is potentially dangerous to you. But as a non-cop, whether by profession, or whether you're off duty, isn't it prudent just to avoid potentially dangerous places?
Put another way, why should someone go anywhere while carrying a firearm that he or she wouldn't go if they were unarmed?
Especially for those of us without a background in law enforcement, and even more so for those with little to no training whatsoever, just remember your weapon is a defensive tool for unexpected situations, and it's not a shield of invincibility that protects you from the evils of the world. I would personally recommend that anyone carrying a weapon, openly or concealed, only do so in places where they would feel comfortable unarmed.
Aside from the emotional aspects of shooting someone, there are serious legal (potentially criminal, but definitely civil) consequences. You never want to have to shoot anyone. If you feel like you need a gun where you're going, it's best just to get the hell out of there. I have no actual experience in this matter, it's just a strong opinion.
As a real-world example, at a recent open-carry litter pickup here in Las Vegas, a participant recommended we meet in "the hood" known for it's high crime, heavy drug activity and prostitution. Yes it's legal. Yes it proves a point. But to what end? The voice of reason did take over and this individual changed his mind quickly.
I've read one of your previous posts in which you mentioned that people "freak out" at the sight of OC. Have OC'd here in Vegas, including the world-famous Las Vegas Strip, for 3+ years, I find that's simply not the case. Many OC'ers will agree with this and tell you that people either support you, don't care or don't notice.
Finally, I responded to this point because I feel the mentality you conveyed is worth discussion. On one hand, you suggest people will "freak out" with OC, but on the other hand say you carry in dangerous places in which you don't care whether you print (and thus are known to be armed). I would argue that the last person I would want to "freak out" around me is one of those individuals in one of those dangerous places.
mrsemman
Regular Member
imported post
Lelo,
While I agree with your comment regarding the right to carry v. reality. I merely wanted to point out that sometimes one side does not automatically correspond to the other. For example, you are carrying in a reputable neighborhood, where crime is virtually non-existent. You get stopped by the police, because of a complaint by a resident. The sight of your weapon can be intimidating to regular citizens. Especially when you see the shootings at colleges, work places, etc. Are the residents wrong in reporting suspicious behavior?
Common sense dictates that we, the lawful carriers of weapons, do not promote fear and distress in the area, that we travel through. A weapon is a tool. It has a purpose, and that purpose is not to distress lawful citizens.
Lelo,
While I agree with your comment regarding the right to carry v. reality. I merely wanted to point out that sometimes one side does not automatically correspond to the other. For example, you are carrying in a reputable neighborhood, where crime is virtually non-existent. You get stopped by the police, because of a complaint by a resident. The sight of your weapon can be intimidating to regular citizens. Especially when you see the shootings at colleges, work places, etc. Are the residents wrong in reporting suspicious behavior?
Common sense dictates that we, the lawful carriers of weapons, do not promote fear and distress in the area, that we travel through. A weapon is a tool. It has a purpose, and that purpose is not to distress lawful citizens.
mrsemman
Regular Member
imported post
Timf,
There are various cultural aspects throughout our great country. In LV, where there is open carry, you find that there is no problem. The Northeast, especially in MA, which is where Lelo asked about carrying, it is quite different. Especially, since MA has an extremely strict gun control law and LTC requirements. Here, the LTC costs $100 to get. Weapons and ammunition sales are strictly monitored. The liberals here freak out if you even talk about guns in their presence, much less wear one.
If you wear a weapon for personal protection, then why would you wear it in a place where you would be comfortable without wearing it? Granted, wearing a pistol in the "ghetto" may seem hazardous, and it is, but if you are there for lawful business, then you would need more personal protection there, than if you are in a comfortable area.
Continual weapons training is essential for everyone, otherwise, having a weapon is merely for "window dressing". Not knowing what to do in critical situations is as dangerous to you as not having a weapon. In fact, being prepared prior to entering any potentially dangerous situation is the most important aspect.
Timf,
There are various cultural aspects throughout our great country. In LV, where there is open carry, you find that there is no problem. The Northeast, especially in MA, which is where Lelo asked about carrying, it is quite different. Especially, since MA has an extremely strict gun control law and LTC requirements. Here, the LTC costs $100 to get. Weapons and ammunition sales are strictly monitored. The liberals here freak out if you even talk about guns in their presence, much less wear one.
If you wear a weapon for personal protection, then why would you wear it in a place where you would be comfortable without wearing it? Granted, wearing a pistol in the "ghetto" may seem hazardous, and it is, but if you are there for lawful business, then you would need more personal protection there, than if you are in a comfortable area.
Continual weapons training is essential for everyone, otherwise, having a weapon is merely for "window dressing". Not knowing what to do in critical situations is as dangerous to you as not having a weapon. In fact, being prepared prior to entering any potentially dangerous situation is the most important aspect.
timf343
Campaign Veteran
imported post
mrsemman wrote:
If I call about the bum on the side of the road soliciting money, police will respond, investigate, and take appropriate action. So long as said bum is not committing any crimes, police will move on to the next thing. I may not like that bum standing there with a sign, but my discomfort does not override his right to stand there.
In response to your reply to me, I understand there is a different between Las Vegas and Massachusetts, but one commonality is that we all have the same basic rights. Although Vegas is more open towards gun rights (and NV even moreso than Vegas), we still have our challenges. Not even 1 year ago, Vegas cops were stopping OC'ers. Official complaints and lobbying efforts have resulted in positive changes within the police department. I suspect the same will be true in Mass. It just takes time.
I know Boston and even some other metro areas in Mass may be larger and more urbanized than Las Vegas, but one undisputed fact is that we have visitors from all over the world coming here every day. Our open-carry get-togethers on the Las Vegas Strip, inside and outside major casinos, has never resulted in a single encounter with police, and to my knowledge, never a single 911 call. There have been isolated events of police interaction with a lone OC'er, but again, to my knowledge, not as a result of a citizen or visitor call.
This is not rural Nevada, where people are used to guns. This is the mixing pot of mixing pots. People from every city, state and country, all witnessing Americans exercising their rights. Proof positive that people do not panic at the mere site of a weapon, responsibly holstered by seemingly responsible adults, acting normally.
I would add that I am being a bit wordy her since I'm passionate about conveying the fact that in my experience, a gun does not automatically mean public panic. Courts in nearly every state have agreed that a lawfully carried firearm is not justification for "disturbance of the peace", "disorderly conduct", or other related criminal charges
mrsemman wrote:
No, a person is free to report any behavior he or she feels is suspicious. It is up to "law enforcement" to understand that people disagree, and accurately enforce laws and not opinions.
If I call about the bum on the side of the road soliciting money, police will respond, investigate, and take appropriate action. So long as said bum is not committing any crimes, police will move on to the next thing. I may not like that bum standing there with a sign, but my discomfort does not override his right to stand there.
In response to your reply to me, I understand there is a different between Las Vegas and Massachusetts, but one commonality is that we all have the same basic rights. Although Vegas is more open towards gun rights (and NV even moreso than Vegas), we still have our challenges. Not even 1 year ago, Vegas cops were stopping OC'ers. Official complaints and lobbying efforts have resulted in positive changes within the police department. I suspect the same will be true in Mass. It just takes time.
I know Boston and even some other metro areas in Mass may be larger and more urbanized than Las Vegas, but one undisputed fact is that we have visitors from all over the world coming here every day. Our open-carry get-togethers on the Las Vegas Strip, inside and outside major casinos, has never resulted in a single encounter with police, and to my knowledge, never a single 911 call. There have been isolated events of police interaction with a lone OC'er, but again, to my knowledge, not as a result of a citizen or visitor call.
This is not rural Nevada, where people are used to guns. This is the mixing pot of mixing pots. People from every city, state and country, all witnessing Americans exercising their rights. Proof positive that people do not panic at the mere site of a weapon, responsibly holstered by seemingly responsible adults, acting normally.
I would add that I am being a bit wordy her since I'm passionate about conveying the fact that in my experience, a gun does not automatically mean public panic. Courts in nearly every state have agreed that a lawfully carried firearm is not justification for "disturbance of the peace", "disorderly conduct", or other related criminal charges
mrsemman
Regular Member
imported post
Timf,
I am not disagreeing with you. If open carrying were a normal matter here in MA as it is in LV, then we, and Lelo would not have a problem. Unfortunately, it is not the case at present.
Here in MA, carrying openly could be viewed, especially by our court system*, as a breach of the peace, because it wouldcause a "normally prudent person" to believe that apossible crime might occur.While I would love to disagree with that view point, it is not up to me, but a judge or jury. Forget the state legislature, as it is a one party political system here. (Dems outnumber the GOP by 3:1)
*In MA, the justice system is considered just left of Communism, especially the SJC (Supreme Judicial Court).
Timf,
I am not disagreeing with you. If open carrying were a normal matter here in MA as it is in LV, then we, and Lelo would not have a problem. Unfortunately, it is not the case at present.
Here in MA, carrying openly could be viewed, especially by our court system*, as a breach of the peace, because it wouldcause a "normally prudent person" to believe that apossible crime might occur.While I would love to disagree with that view point, it is not up to me, but a judge or jury. Forget the state legislature, as it is a one party political system here. (Dems outnumber the GOP by 3:1)
*In MA, the justice system is considered just left of Communism, especially the SJC (Supreme Judicial Court).
imported post
mrsemman wrote:
its my rights to carry no matter where igo..thats why i have a ltc with no restriction.in my area where i live its very respecful and good people all around..but the area where i work its the opposite way..gang activities anddrugs, etc etc..i believe there should be open carry for all states in this country..especially for all lawabiding citizen with a lawful LTC..me personally i feel safer around people with open carrybecause i believe if you have a LTC its because you are a law abiding citizen with nothing to hide!!!
mrsemman wrote:
mrsemman
its my rights to carry no matter where igo..thats why i have a ltc with no restriction.in my area where i live its very respecful and good people all around..but the area where i work its the opposite way..gang activities anddrugs, etc etc..i believe there should be open carry for all states in this country..especially for all lawabiding citizen with a lawful LTC..me personally i feel safer around people with open carrybecause i believe if you have a LTC its because you are a law abiding citizen with nothing to hide!!!
mrsemman
Regular Member
imported post
Lelo,
I agree with you on everything that you wrote. I believe that we all have that right based on the 2nd Ammendment to the Constitution. However, do your rights supercede someone else's? Or do their rights supercede yours? As I wrote earlier, if you travel or work in a bad area, carry your weapon. The reason I would conceal my weapon in those areas, is simple. I don't want the bad guys trying to get my weapon. Most times they did not even see it, or if they did, they thought I was a cop.
I used to work as a criminal investigator for the State Public Defenders Office back in the early 70's. I carried a Colt Trooper MKIII .357 in a Bill Jordan quick draw holster under a sport jacket. It definitely showed a large bulge. I only had one incident where a bad guy tried to do me harm, until he saw the wrong end of the revolver in his nose. Nobody else ever messed with me.
Lelo,
I agree with you on everything that you wrote. I believe that we all have that right based on the 2nd Ammendment to the Constitution. However, do your rights supercede someone else's? Or do their rights supercede yours? As I wrote earlier, if you travel or work in a bad area, carry your weapon. The reason I would conceal my weapon in those areas, is simple. I don't want the bad guys trying to get my weapon. Most times they did not even see it, or if they did, they thought I was a cop.
I used to work as a criminal investigator for the State Public Defenders Office back in the early 70's. I carried a Colt Trooper MKIII .357 in a Bill Jordan quick draw holster under a sport jacket. It definitely showed a large bulge. I only had one incident where a bad guy tried to do me harm, until he saw the wrong end of the revolver in his nose. Nobody else ever messed with me.
imported post
mrsemman wrote:
A right doesn't supercede anyone else's rights. Reasonable people can disagree. I think the flaw in your thinking is that we all have to worry about not hurting someone else's feelings. If the law says that you can OC then it is irrelevant what someone else thinks about it. At what point do we stop excersizing our own rights because someone doesn't like it or gets unreasonable scared.
And it sounds like you came to a good decision for you to not carry when you didn't feel that you needed to. But that decision for for you, not me. You have no right to impress your beliefs or decisions on me or anyone else. If I want to carry at the quickie mart in an affluent town then that is my choice and your thoughts don't really matter.
So do what you feel works for you and everyone else do what they feel works for them all within the law of course. At the end of the day, you need to be comfortable with your own decision and take responsibility for your own actions.
For me, I live in MA and I would not OC but always CC. I think that it could cause problems or give a bad guy the idea to follow me home and try to steal my weapons, etc. Just like I am a black belt in martial arts but I don't wear Tap Out shirts or my gi to the mall. I would rather not tip my hand on my ability to defend myself to a bad buy whether it be with a firearm or my fists. But like I said, that works for me but maybe not you.
mrsemman wrote:
A right doesn't supercede anyone else's rights. Reasonable people can disagree. I think the flaw in your thinking is that we all have to worry about not hurting someone else's feelings. If the law says that you can OC then it is irrelevant what someone else thinks about it. At what point do we stop excersizing our own rights because someone doesn't like it or gets unreasonable scared.
And it sounds like you came to a good decision for you to not carry when you didn't feel that you needed to. But that decision for for you, not me. You have no right to impress your beliefs or decisions on me or anyone else. If I want to carry at the quickie mart in an affluent town then that is my choice and your thoughts don't really matter.
So do what you feel works for you and everyone else do what they feel works for them all within the law of course. At the end of the day, you need to be comfortable with your own decision and take responsibility for your own actions.
For me, I live in MA and I would not OC but always CC. I think that it could cause problems or give a bad guy the idea to follow me home and try to steal my weapons, etc. Just like I am a black belt in martial arts but I don't wear Tap Out shirts or my gi to the mall. I would rather not tip my hand on my ability to defend myself to a bad buy whether it be with a firearm or my fists. But like I said, that works for me but maybe not you.
hopnpop
Regular Member
imported post
Wow - I'm sorry to have to say so, but there's ignorance being spoken here. One of you said you "only carry if going to a potentially dangerous place". That stands alone as a rediculously ignorant statement. Random crimes are called random crimes because they are, well, random! That means that any place, anywhere can be potentially dangerous. Where do people get attacked? The ghetto. Alleys. Dark, dangerous, shady places. ...and in stores, malls, homes, "nice" neighborhoods, suburbs, rural areas, etc. People become victims everywhere. Sure, chances of having to defend yourself are lesser and greater in different places but in all reality, there's always that chance no matter where you are.
The former LEO here asked "why carry"? And to that, I ask "Why should anyone have to justify why they carry?" It's none of anyone's business. I certainly don't have to justify why I carry to anyone - not my friends, neighbors, or even LEOs. It's my business.
(edit): I'm not calling anyone here ignorant- I'm only saying that the statement or statements is/are ignorant. Upon further reading I see that our former LEO is making for rational discussion. I thought, with reading his 1st post, that he was going to bash people who carry or the act of carrying in itself. I see now that he's actually discussing the aspects instead of being dismissive towards those who carry for personal reasons. And thanks for that - it definitely adds to credibility.
Wow - I'm sorry to have to say so, but there's ignorance being spoken here. One of you said you "only carry if going to a potentially dangerous place". That stands alone as a rediculously ignorant statement. Random crimes are called random crimes because they are, well, random! That means that any place, anywhere can be potentially dangerous. Where do people get attacked? The ghetto. Alleys. Dark, dangerous, shady places. ...and in stores, malls, homes, "nice" neighborhoods, suburbs, rural areas, etc. People become victims everywhere. Sure, chances of having to defend yourself are lesser and greater in different places but in all reality, there's always that chance no matter where you are.
The former LEO here asked "why carry"? And to that, I ask "Why should anyone have to justify why they carry?" It's none of anyone's business. I certainly don't have to justify why I carry to anyone - not my friends, neighbors, or even LEOs. It's my business.
(edit): I'm not calling anyone here ignorant- I'm only saying that the statement or statements is/are ignorant. Upon further reading I see that our former LEO is making for rational discussion. I thought, with reading his 1st post, that he was going to bash people who carry or the act of carrying in itself. I see now that he's actually discussing the aspects instead of being dismissive towards those who carry for personal reasons. And thanks for that - it definitely adds to credibility.
hopnpop
Regular Member
imported post
timf343 wrote:
1) avoiding potentially dangerous places. That's essentially a no-brainer, armed or not. The flaw there is what I mentioned above. I wear a gun every day, and it's not so I can go ghetto-cruising. I wear it wherever I go - not because I go anywhere that's considered dangerous, but because you never know.
I'vecome to equate carrying a pistol to wearing a seatbelt. You put it on every day, knowing that there's very little chance of needing it - but in the rare event that you do need it, there's no substitute, and it is, indeed, needed. You're not forewarned that you're going to be in an accident, just as there's no forewarning that you will be targeted for an attack/assault. When you leave the house or driveway, you don't know with 100% certainty that you won't be involved in an accident, and the exact same goes for being an assault victim. What harm is there in wearing a seatbelt when you end up not needing it? None. And again, the same goes for carrying. No harm done if you don't need it, but if you do need it and don't have it, the mistake could cost you your life. Some say that you have to be paranoid to carry a gun. By that logic, you'd have to be paranoid to wear your seatbelt every day, and yet, it was made a law! Guns, like seatbelts, when used properly, are life-saving devices.
2) Next is the second statement, of "If you feel like you need a gun where you're going...". We're not psychic, none of us. How, again, is anyone supposed to know if they'll need a gun where they're going? I plan on running to the grocery later today. Do I know whether I'll need my gun or not? Of course not. Again, chances are very good that I won't need it, but what if? I consider myself a sheepdog. Sorry if this steps on the former LEO's toes, but I stand firm in my belief that you don't need a uniform to be a sheepdog. The clothes don't make the man. Being a sheepdog (a trained, armed "good guy"), I feel it irresponsible to leave the house without it. Like I once read: "If you're a trained, armed good guy, or sheepdog, who feels like leaving (his) gun at home; take that first step out of your house, take a nice deep breath, and say "Baah", because you're now among the rest of the sheep."
3) Lastly, the issue of OC "freaking people out". I'm in Michigan, where OC in the past year or two has made ample progress. Here, apparently like in Nevada, it doesn't get much attention and it's becoming even more common. Thankfully,our AG stated that an openly carried firearm does not constitute "disturbing the peace" or "creating a public disturbance", or the like. This bleeds into my next post, which is in reply to another comment that was posted...
timf343 wrote:
1) avoiding potentially dangerous places. That's essentially a no-brainer, armed or not. The flaw there is what I mentioned above. I wear a gun every day, and it's not so I can go ghetto-cruising. I wear it wherever I go - not because I go anywhere that's considered dangerous, but because you never know.
I'vecome to equate carrying a pistol to wearing a seatbelt. You put it on every day, knowing that there's very little chance of needing it - but in the rare event that you do need it, there's no substitute, and it is, indeed, needed. You're not forewarned that you're going to be in an accident, just as there's no forewarning that you will be targeted for an attack/assault. When you leave the house or driveway, you don't know with 100% certainty that you won't be involved in an accident, and the exact same goes for being an assault victim. What harm is there in wearing a seatbelt when you end up not needing it? None. And again, the same goes for carrying. No harm done if you don't need it, but if you do need it and don't have it, the mistake could cost you your life. Some say that you have to be paranoid to carry a gun. By that logic, you'd have to be paranoid to wear your seatbelt every day, and yet, it was made a law! Guns, like seatbelts, when used properly, are life-saving devices.
2) Next is the second statement, of "If you feel like you need a gun where you're going...". We're not psychic, none of us. How, again, is anyone supposed to know if they'll need a gun where they're going? I plan on running to the grocery later today. Do I know whether I'll need my gun or not? Of course not. Again, chances are very good that I won't need it, but what if? I consider myself a sheepdog. Sorry if this steps on the former LEO's toes, but I stand firm in my belief that you don't need a uniform to be a sheepdog. The clothes don't make the man. Being a sheepdog (a trained, armed "good guy"), I feel it irresponsible to leave the house without it. Like I once read: "If you're a trained, armed good guy, or sheepdog, who feels like leaving (his) gun at home; take that first step out of your house, take a nice deep breath, and say "Baah", because you're now among the rest of the sheep."
3) Lastly, the issue of OC "freaking people out". I'm in Michigan, where OC in the past year or two has made ample progress. Here, apparently like in Nevada, it doesn't get much attention and it's becoming even more common. Thankfully,our AG stated that an openly carried firearm does not constitute "disturbing the peace" or "creating a public disturbance", or the like. This bleeds into my next post, which is in reply to another comment that was posted...
hopnpop
Regular Member
imported post
mrsemman wrote:
Starting to get the "slippery slope" feeling here. The sight of an OC'd weapon can be intimidating to some. But am I supposed to forfeit my legal and moral right to self protection to appease someone's (unjustified) feelings? I say NAY. What about the many instances where someone has thanked an OCer for carrying? Surprisingly, even to me, it happens fairly frequently. Apparently there are many who "get it" and appreciate there being someone armed nearby to help deter any criminal intentions and/or even inadvertantly provide a low level of security. I'm sorry if the sight of my OC'd weapon makes you uncomfortable - that's not my purpose or intent. And as long as we're talking feelings, what about my own? I've grown accustomed to having that gun on my hip. It feels awkward now to NOT wear it. So, where my OC'd gun may make someone uncomfortable, being without it makes ME uncomfortable. And what makes their feelings any more important than mine?
You ask if citizens are wrong in reporting suspicious behavior. That depends on what you (and/or others) consider suspicious behavior. Simply going about my normal everyday business, while armed, isn't suspicious is it? If I'm going about my business while concealing, obviously no one knows I'm armed, so it wouldn't be given a 2nd thought. But doing the same things while visibly armed makes it suspicious? I don't think so. Going down an isle in the grocery and picking out a cereal isn't exactly a suspicious activity, armed or not. Sitting and enjoying ameal at the local diner isn't suspicious, right? Even with a gun on my hip? My mode of carry doesn't change my intentions. Actually, the fact that I'm OCing should be indicative that I don't have ill intentions because at least to date, criminals don't OC. They hide their weapons.
I openly carry often and at the same time, I don't "promote fear and distress" where I carry. There's very rarely any reaction at all. No one's ever yelled "he's got a gun!", or went running for the hills. Hell, most of the time, parents don't even reel in their kids! By and large, it goes unnoticed. When it is noticed, it's given very little attention. Other factors weigh in to that, i,e; your clothing, the way you carry and present yourself, your mannerisms, etc. When OCing, it's highly recommended that you be courteous, polite, and decent. You'd probably be surprised at how well you're recieved.
You said "A weapon is a tool. It has a purpose, and that purpose is not to distress lawful citizens." You're 100% correct - it's purpose isn't to distress lawful citizens. It's purpose is to provide security and protection to lawful citizens. The "distress" of lawful citizens is an unwanted side-effect of a lawful citizen's carrying a weapon in a legal manner for its appropriate purpose.
Again, I can only speak from my experiences in Michigan, where it's become more common. Keep in mind, tho, how it has become and is becoming more common - which has been through the efforts of a couple small organizations andby people DOING IT.
mrsemman wrote:
Starting to get the "slippery slope" feeling here. The sight of an OC'd weapon can be intimidating to some. But am I supposed to forfeit my legal and moral right to self protection to appease someone's (unjustified) feelings? I say NAY. What about the many instances where someone has thanked an OCer for carrying? Surprisingly, even to me, it happens fairly frequently. Apparently there are many who "get it" and appreciate there being someone armed nearby to help deter any criminal intentions and/or even inadvertantly provide a low level of security. I'm sorry if the sight of my OC'd weapon makes you uncomfortable - that's not my purpose or intent. And as long as we're talking feelings, what about my own? I've grown accustomed to having that gun on my hip. It feels awkward now to NOT wear it. So, where my OC'd gun may make someone uncomfortable, being without it makes ME uncomfortable. And what makes their feelings any more important than mine?
You ask if citizens are wrong in reporting suspicious behavior. That depends on what you (and/or others) consider suspicious behavior. Simply going about my normal everyday business, while armed, isn't suspicious is it? If I'm going about my business while concealing, obviously no one knows I'm armed, so it wouldn't be given a 2nd thought. But doing the same things while visibly armed makes it suspicious? I don't think so. Going down an isle in the grocery and picking out a cereal isn't exactly a suspicious activity, armed or not. Sitting and enjoying ameal at the local diner isn't suspicious, right? Even with a gun on my hip? My mode of carry doesn't change my intentions. Actually, the fact that I'm OCing should be indicative that I don't have ill intentions because at least to date, criminals don't OC. They hide their weapons.
I openly carry often and at the same time, I don't "promote fear and distress" where I carry. There's very rarely any reaction at all. No one's ever yelled "he's got a gun!", or went running for the hills. Hell, most of the time, parents don't even reel in their kids! By and large, it goes unnoticed. When it is noticed, it's given very little attention. Other factors weigh in to that, i,e; your clothing, the way you carry and present yourself, your mannerisms, etc. When OCing, it's highly recommended that you be courteous, polite, and decent. You'd probably be surprised at how well you're recieved.
You said "A weapon is a tool. It has a purpose, and that purpose is not to distress lawful citizens." You're 100% correct - it's purpose isn't to distress lawful citizens. It's purpose is to provide security and protection to lawful citizens. The "distress" of lawful citizens is an unwanted side-effect of a lawful citizen's carrying a weapon in a legal manner for its appropriate purpose.
Again, I can only speak from my experiences in Michigan, where it's become more common. Keep in mind, tho, how it has become and is becoming more common - which has been through the efforts of a couple small organizations andby people DOING IT.
hopnpop
Regular Member
imported post
timf343 wrote:
timf343 wrote:
Excellent post and points, with my added emphasis in RED. You're hitting the nail on the head.
mrjam2jab
Regular Member
imported post
timf343 wrote:
That right there is the whole issue in a nutshell. If open carry is legal in the state, then the LEO on the street responding to the MWG call needs to use judgment. If I'm walking down the street OC, and LEO observes me and see no suspicion of a crime afoot, then there is no basis to even stop me.
timf343 wrote:
That right there is the whole issue in a nutshell. If open carry is legal in the state, then the LEO on the street responding to the MWG call needs to use judgment. If I'm walking down the street OC, and LEO observes me and see no suspicion of a crime afoot, then there is no basis to even stop me.
hopnpop
Regular Member
imported post
mrjam2jab wrote:
Right, exactly. Like here, it's been established that a gun openly carried does NOT constitute PC (probable cause) or RAS (reasonably articulated suspicion), which is necessary for detainment, and I think, even a Terry stop.
mrjam2jab wrote:
Right, exactly. Like here, it's been established that a gun openly carried does NOT constitute PC (probable cause) or RAS (reasonably articulated suspicion), which is necessary for detainment, and I think, even a Terry stop.