Why do YOU OC?

imported post

Why do YOU OC? Personally, I choose to CC. Reason being, NOBODY OC's around here. I don't think I have EVER seen anyone OC'ing. This means that if I did OC, I'd be the only one. So if anything did go down where I am needed in the manner of defense, I would be the first target taken out in such an event. This is the main reason I choose to CC.

(BORDERLINE RANT

Secondly, you can argue who said what when where and how and what the laws are, but in the end it does not matter. Most times when I read stuff on this site, I get the feeling that most people are just sheep. Like the justification for being able to OC (or CC) is because "insert names here" says I can. Like the supreme court rulings, case law, and AG opinions somehow give you permission. The fact of the matter is, if none of those existed, you still can OC if you really want to. Of course, I could be reading this the wrong way, as this is what is also used to wrap mental understanding of others around the idea that it is "OK" to OC.

Ultimately, it does not matter if they changed case law and stated in all caps and bold that "OC IS PERFECTLY LEGAL". Reason? Disorderly conduct charge. Why is nobody writing our state legislature about this problem? This is a huge HUGE problem within the justice system. This problem is not just tied to OC, CC, or anything else of the like. If I fart in public, I can be arrested. Instead of writing the legislature for clearer language on the legality of OC, why not write the state legislature to PREVENT certain actions or situations from being deem-able as "disorderly conduct".

One of the reasons that most cops will state that OC is illegal is because of the disorderly conduct charge. It doesn't matter if it's illegal or legal in the end.

Here is the short and sweet:

1. OC
2. LEO is called.
3. LEO says it's illegal, you show him that it is not".
4. LEO says it is because you're being charge with disorderly conduct.
5. You say OC is legal.
6. He says that might be true, but disorderly conduct is illegal.
7. End result = OC is legal, but disorderly conduct charge was indirectly created by the action of OC.

I guess my whole point in this is...why is there so much attention focused on OC, when the root of the problem (and yes, there is a problem - indirectly linking OC to being illegal) lies with the disorderly conduct charge?

And of course I was also curious for your personal reasons for OC.

imported post

very interesting. Well, I open carry for1 reason. It's my constitutional right. Now I agree that an LEO could slap you with a disorderly Conduct charge, but he is not a judge or a jury. He cannot convict you. The court system will decide if I broke the law. If I didn't, I will be let go. Now I don't want to go through all the legal crap. Hiring lawyers, going to court, expressing the law to the judge. BUT "A right not exercised is a right LOST!"

I would gladly go through the legal BS just to make sure my constitutional rights were not stolen from me.



-Tim

imported post

I'd agree with Hollowpoint on the DC charge... it's true, a cop could arrest you for it, but it's not convictable if you're carrying responsibly. Disorderly Conduct requires INTENT. And unless they can prove that, you're good to go. I also agree that I don't want to go through all that hassle and there will likely be repercussions... but I choose to take the risk, and if it happens, well someone has to stand up for our rights.

I also disagree with the whole "first target in the room" idea. Now I've never knocked off a convenience store... but if I did, I think that if I walked in and saw a guy with a gun, I'd just wait til he left. Or choose a different store! I mean heck, whenever we OC people assume we're cops; therefore if I walked in and thought I saw a cop, I'd be worried about his partner in the next aisle, or waiting in the car that's going to get me if i shoot this guy!

No, the criminal class is cowardly. I don't think they usually want a gunfight, they just want to intimidate the unarmed with their weapon. Therefore, since they're already choosing the path that avoids work in obtaining money, I think they'd also choose the path of least resistance when trying to do it!

I grant you that no two criminals are alike however, and the crazies may come in and first thing they do is shoot the guy with the gun. But you have to make choices, and you can't always be prepared for every possible situation. I choose to OC sometimes, and to CC sometimes. I guess I don't talk about the CC so much on here because that's not much of an issue in AL once you get your permit. OC is still very much an issue that needs hashing out with the local LE and all...

Just my .02

imported post

Hollowpoint38 wrote:

very interesting. Well, I open carry for1 reason. It's my constitutional right. Now I agree that an LEO could slap you with a disorderly Conduct charge, but he is not a judge or a jury. He cannot convict you. The court system will decide if I broke the law. If I didn't, I will be let go. Now I don't want to go through all the legal crap. Hiring lawyers, going to court, expressing the law to the judge. BUT "A right not exercised is a right LOST!"

I would gladly go through the legal BS just to make sure my constitutional rights were not stolen from me.



-Tim

Click to expand...

So your reason is because "you can" (a right)...and because the government told you they would not infringe upon said right (constitutional).

The problem I have with this is, I can do a lot of things...bad things, if I want to. Nobody has afforded me a "right" to do anything per say...also the government isn't exactly an honest entity. So that is my problem with the whole "constitutional right" argument. If there were no constitution at all, you would still have the capability of OC'ing if you wanted to. I don't just do things because "I can". Now, if it were simply "because I want to" then that's totally different.

imported post

dixieborn wrote:

I'd agree with Hollowpoint on the DC charge... it's true, a cop could arrest you for it, but it's not convictable if you're carrying responsibly. Disorderly Conduct requires INTENT. And unless they can prove that, you're good to go. I also agree that I don't want to go through all that hassle and there will likely be repercussions... but I choose to take the risk, and if it happens, well someone has to stand up for our rights.

I also disagree with the whole "first target in the room" idea. Now I've never knocked off a convenience store... but if I did, I think that if I walked in and saw a guy with a gun, I'd just wait til he left. Or choose a different store! I mean heck, whenever we OC people assume we're cops; therefore if I walked in and thought I saw a cop, I'd be worried about his partner in the next aisle, or waiting in the car that's going to get me if i shoot this guy!

No, the criminal class is cowardly. I don't think they usually want a gunfight, they just want to intimidate the unarmed with their weapon. Therefore, since they're already choosing the path that avoids work in obtaining money, I think they'd also choose the path of least resistance when trying to do it!

I grant you that no two criminals are alike however, and the crazies may come in and first thing they do is shoot the guy with the gun. But you have to make choices, and you can't always be prepared for every possible situation. I choose to OC sometimes, and to CC sometimes. I guess I don't talk about the CC so much on here because that's not much of an issue in AL once you get your permit. OC is still very much an issue that needs hashing out with the local LE and all...

Just my .02

Click to expand...

The problem with the DC charge is that it is TOO loose. About anything anyone does can possibly be construed as DC. Not sure about the intent part. I've never heard anyone actually say that (MPD).

As far as the target argument, it's a 50/50. It depends on the assailant. If he is a true criminal, then yes, you will be taken out first, then robbed (your weapons too) then he'll move on to the next victim. My point in this is, if a true criminal does come into a place with MULTIPLE OC'ers (hence why I don't OC - nobody does it), then he is out numbered, and extremely likely to leave without creating an altercation.

So to recap...

OC'ing can cause DC charges and possibly death (element of surprise from assailant).

Both of those could possibly be avoided by CC.

In this particular instance (every day activities in public), what advantage is there to OC?

imported post

Well, by that argument, you are saying I have a "capability" to open carry no matter. True. I could kill half my friends if I wanted to. It's called choice, and thelaw makes it illegal.

I'm not going to agrue with you and the legallity of law. That seems to be what you are driving for. You areright and every human has the capability to do what they want, constitution or not. But laws help make society stable so I will not agrue with you.

imported post

Good points by all. Coming from the POLICE STATE of N.J. Iam amazed of the rights that are present in other states. Sure all states are protected under the Constitution, so how come we don't get them?? Since living in Alabama I have used all of these rights. Is it because I can or because I should? If people do not use them andsupport them you could lose them. In Alabama you already see the affects of the rich out of state people running for office and making laws that are like the ones in other states {can't have a clothes line in back yard} its a start....

imported post

Hollowpoint38 wrote:

Well, by that argument, you are saying I have a "capability" to open carry no matter. True. I could kill half my friends if I wanted to. It's called choice, and thelaw makes it illegal.

I'm not going to agrue with you and the legallity of law. That seems to be what you are driving for. You areright and every human has the capability to do what they want, constitution or not. But laws help make society stable so I will not agrue with you.

Click to expand...

Let me be clear, I'm not trying to be offensive here. Just stating my opinion.

Fair enough. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. I happen to disagree with you. Stating law serves any purpose any more at this point as a blanket statement is purely subjective and frankly, dangerous IMO.

I'm not driving for the legality of it. What I am asking is the reasons someone may personally choose to OC, and also a brief rant on the DC charge issue. All a law is is something a group of people says that you can or cannot do, because they say so. At the end of the day, that is all a law is. Some are good, some are bad.

My point is, if your reason for OC'ing is because "look at the tri fold we have...it says it's legal so I can do it", then what's going to happen if they ban all semi-auto pistols? Gonna move on to revolvers at that point? Or if they ban black vehicles because they absorb more heat than light colored vehicles? How about if they say you "can" take 3 craps per day? My point in this is that you cannot lean on "law" for reasoning on why you OC, unless your reasoning is because you simply want to. The point about "capabilities" is that when you are born, no government official christened you with natural born rights and you magically were granted "things" from the entity known as the state.

I guess I was looking for more of a tactical reason for OC more than anything, or personal stories that influenced someone's decision as to why they choose to OC.

imported post

Apparently, I OC because I have a really tiny penis, a physiological characteristic which had until now escaped my attention.

Actually, I think I've been reading Brady Bunch commenters on HuffPo too much this week. :banghead:

imported post

BIGDAWGFOTCH wrote:

Good points by all. Coming from the POLICE STATE of N.J. Iam amazed of the rights that are present in other states. Sure all states are protected under the Constitution, so how come we don't get them?? Since living in Alabama I have used all of these rights. Is it because I can or because I should? If people do not use them andsupport them you could lose them. In Alabama you already see the affects of the rich out of state people running for office and making laws that are like the ones in other states {can't have a clothes line in back yard} its a start....

Click to expand...

Can't have clothes line in the back yard? Where?

Congrats on moving from N.J. I speak to people from CA and NY all the time and tell them to MOVE but they never do.

imported post

smttysmth02gt wrote:

Congrats on moving from N.J.  I speak to people from CA and NY all the time and tell them to MOVE but they never do.

Click to expand...

Maybe that's because you're not our mother.

imported post

marshaul wrote:

smttysmth02gt wrote:

Congrats on moving from N.J. I speak to people from CA and NY all the time and tell them to MOVE but they never do.

Click to expand...

Maybe that's because you're not our mother.

Click to expand...

So far you're 0 for 2 on the jokes.

imported post

Most Madison County subdivisions..can't park your boat ar camping trailer outside either.

imported post

smttysmth02gt wrote:

marshaul wrote:

smttysmth02gt wrote:

Congrats on moving from N.J.  I speak to people from CA and NY all the time and tell them to MOVE but they never do.

Click to expand...

Maybe that's because you're not our mother.

Click to expand...

So far you're 0 for 2 on the jokes.  

Click to expand...

That's because I haven't made any.

imported post

Ok. And when that happens... when the government starts having too much control and telling people, "you can't have a black car", and telling us what we can and can't have, it's time for another American Revolution. We would need to take up arms, and retake control of the country.

Do you even know what government is for? Read below:



The purpose of a government is to provide for the safety and protection of the citizens. It protects the nation from foreign and domestic enemies and violence, provides services like post office, fire protection, state and local police, armed forces, and regulates things like interstate commerce and trade with other nations. A government also has the obligation to protect the rights of the citizens, though not all governments do that. A national government must protect the rights of citizens and of states' rights. The government's functions are to provide social order, security, public services, and economic systems for the citizens.



The article stated above is proof that our government has too much control and we need to take it back. Not by force (unless needed). We, as a country, need to stand up and not bow down to ridiculous government law. If there were 10s of millions of people in our country not obeying the government. There is nothing they could do! Arrest us? They would need to tear down half the country and build prisons which would take MANY years and is just an impossible task. What would that be? American Revolution... and we would have a chance to remake the U.S. what so many people died for it to be.

imported post

Hollowpoint38 wrote:

Ok. And when that happens... when the government starts having too much control and telling people, "you can't have a black car", and telling us what we can and can't have, it's time for another American Revolution. We would need to take up arms, and retake control of the country.

Do you even know what government is for? Read below:



The purpose of a government is to provide for the safety and protection of the citizens. It protects the nation from foreign and domestic enemies and violence, provides services like post office, fire protection, state and local police, armed forces, and regulates things like interstate commerce and trade with other nations. A government also has the obligation to protect the rights of the citizens, though not all governments do that. A national government must protect the rights of citizens and of states' rights. The government's functions are to provide social order, security, public services, and economic systems for the citizens.



The article stated above is proof that our government has too much control and we need to take it back. Not by force (unless needed). We, as a country, need to stand up and not bow down to ridiculous government law. If there were 10s of millions of people in our country not obeying the government. There is nothing they could do! Arrest us? They would need to tear down half the country and build prisons which would take MANY years and is just an impossible task. What would that be? American Revolution... and we would have a chance to remake the U.S. what so many people died for it to be.

Click to expand...

Good post. I'm well aware of the definition of government. I believe my favorite is actually given in the AL constitution.

imported post

Don't tell them to move here!! Then our state will start to get as crappy as theirs!

No, that's why I don't really argue with people when they think Alabama is just a backwards, inbred, redneck state... cause if they believe that, maybe they'll just stay out.

imported post

There are numerous, legitimate reasons to OC all of which should be respected. In fact, if I were to say that you shouldn't speak your mind on social issues because you might offend or scare someone, most of you would clearly recognize that as a violation of your First Amendment rights and would refuse to comply. The same would be true if someone tried to violate your rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment. Why, then, are we so worried about exercising our Second Amendment rights?

With that said, another major reason that seems to have been omitted so far is comfort. Has anyone here tried to CC in AL in July or August while wearing a suit or sportcoat? When it's 90 F with 85% humidity and you get drenched in sweat just standing outside, you begin to look for alternatives to CC. Sure, sure, somebody's going to want to chime in and harass me for dressing up. But not everyone who chooses to carry a firearm wants to wear jeans and an untucked t-shirt or photographer's vest.

Also, I'd like to point out a recent incident at a GA Waffle House where (even the police agreed) just the presence of a couple of guys OC-ing prevented an armed robbery by multiple suspects.

http://www.examiner.com/x-5619-Atlanta-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2010m2d18-Open-carry-deters-armed-robbery-in-Kennesaw

According to the theory presented earlier in this thread, the forewarned suspects should have come in and shot the OC-ers first and then continued with the robbery, but that's not what happened. It only takes one real-life instance where OC worked to make the blanket, theoretical arguments against it fall apart.

imported post

Well here is another point for OC.....
1.) Driving, seat belt law requires gun not be concealed for access.
2. ) All those CA prisoners are going to be going somewhere, you can't steal
sheep already in poverty. OC states will see a lot less of them.
3.) Because the Government OC's and you don't want to be at a disadvantage
in a showdown. When they come for me for not buying health insurance there
will be a need for said insurance by someone. I have already informed my reps
that this will be the case. And if they don't like me now, just wait till I get out.
Unfortunately it is looking more and more like the government is going to be the
bigger threat in the future.
I long for the days when it was simple, you stop bad guy and went home.

As for the primary target....
It is called situational awareness, you don't let a hoodie wearing thug get on your 6,
and you don't have a problem. When thugs start robbing gas stations in 3 piece
suites then you need to change tactics as well.

imported post

SlackwareRobert wrote:

Well here is another point for OC.....
1.) Driving, seat belt law requires gun not be concealed for access.
2. ) All those CA prisoners are going to be going somewhere, you can't steal
sheep already in poverty. OC states will see a lot less of them.
3.) Because the Government OC's and you don't want to be at a disadvantage
in a showdown. When they come for me for not buying health insurance there
will be a need for said insurance by someone. I have already informed my reps
that this will be the case. And if they don't like me now, just wait till I get out.
Unfortunately it is looking more and more like the government is going to be the
bigger threat in the future.
I long for the days when it was simple, you stop bad guy and went home.

As for the primary target....
It is called situational awareness, you don't let a hoodie wearing thug get on your 6,
and you don't have a problem. When thugs start robbing gas stations in 3 piece
suites then you need to change tactics as well.

Click to expand...

That is true about situational awareness, however, like I said earlier...there are 2 types of criminals in this instance. Those who will back down, and those who will engage anyway. It is a crap shoot really.