Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: It's a right that should not be infringed, but ...

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    North Chesterfield VA

    Post imported post

    Check out TGZBlog (The Gun Zone Blog) decides that discreet carry is better than open carry while trying to defend open carry:

    Open Carry: Boom for 2A Rights or Bust by “Bozos?”

    Wall Street Journal editorial board member Nancy DeWolf Smith offers a thought-provoking piece on the subject of open carry. It is hard to argue with her that some of the people pressing this point may be doing more harm than good, and fall into “a special category of bozos.” But there is also merit to the view that “if open carrying were to become more common, even those of us who are uneasy now in the presence of public firearms would get used to seeing them around.”

    More fundamentally, should it matter that some people feel uncomfortable when others are exercising their rights peacefully? (And make no mistake: carrying a firearm openly for self-protection, and without intent to use it unlawfully, is carrying “peacefully.”) We know that lots of people were uncomfortable when black Americans decided they within their rights to attend the same schools, sit at the same lunch counters, and ride in the front of the bus with white Americans. We do not, and should not, let others’ discomfort determine the exercise of civil rights.

    Open carry doubtless works better than concealed carry in some situations, but it seems to me that the benefits of lawful concealed carry ordinarily outweigh lawful open carry. Concealed carry maintains an element of surprise against would-be attackers, reduces the chance somebody will try to grab the gun away, keeps one off the radar screens of nervous types and police unfamiliar with carry laws, and promotes the general “we don’t know who’s armed” perception among criminals.

    Still, those wishing to carry openly should give some thought as to whether they are doing so in order to be intentionally provocative, and if so, whether–as Ms. DeWolf suggests–”such demonstrators may yet turn out to be a godsend for the antigun crowd.”

    This entry was posted on April 30, 2010, 08:00 and is filed under RKBA Commentary. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.


    • #1 by Dean Speir on April 30, 2010 - 08:53


      The editorial writer’s personal views on the subject of firearms is apparent from the jump with references to "the OK Corral" and the unappealing image of a fly on a cake.

      (And is that really why it was called "the wild West?")

      Nor does Ms. DeWolf Smith have clue the first about guns in general when she conjures up the image of the open carry of a "Hammerli 208S target pistol." (And what does a ".416 Rigby," a cartridge not a firearm, or an AK-47 knock-off have to do with open carry?)

      I find her entire piece less a provocative exploration of the issues surrounding open carry than an exercise in clever (in the most opprobrious sense) writing, and the only valid point raised, "I don’t know a soul among gun owners who is itching to prance around showing everybody what is in their holster," is lessened by her use of the word "prance."

      And what was that stuff about "a thoroughly modern Millie" and a lawsuit? Was something inadvertantly cut in the editing?
      #2 by Rob Firriolo on April 30, 2010 - 09:05


      “There are three federal lawsuits pending in Connecticut that challenge the way the state enforces gun laws. In one, Goldberg is suing Glastonbury over his arrest three years ago, claiming he was charged even though there is no state law against openly carrying a sidearm.”
      #3 by DSL. on April 30, 2010 - 10:09


      I’ve just posted an article from 1960 on African American sit-ins, as its insights on the need for a discipline greater than that of one’s opponents may be adapted to other forms of grassroots action at other times and places; the quote from an editorial in Jack Kilpatrick’s then-paper, the Richmond News-Leader, “certainly no proponent of integration”, was striking:

      “Many a Virginian must have felt a tinge of wry regret at the state of things as they are, in reading of Saturday’s ’sit-downs’ by African American students in Richmond stores. Here were the colored students, in coats, white shirts, ties, and one of them was reading Goethe and one was taking notes from a biology text. And here, on the sidewalk outside, was a gang of white boys come to heckle, a ragtail rabble, slackjawed, black-jacketed, grinning fit to kill, and some of them, God save the mark, were waving the proud and honored flag of the Southern states in the last war fought by gentlemen. It gives one pause.”
    my comment to these folks who still believe one method of carry is "better" and "safer" and "less scary" than another:

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    So it’s perfectly improper for someone’s feeling of being “uncomfortable” to stand in the way of exercising a right, except when that right concerns the possibility that doing so might provide additional paranoid ammunition for the illogical, irrational and false assumptions of the “antigun crowd” – those folks who seek to control the behavior of others to the n-th degree by controlling even their ability to provide for effective self protection.

    Or did I miss something?

    Now if you can provide me with a bone fide example of someone open carrying who is also brandishing (actually holding the gun outside the holster and pointing it in a menacing manner, I will agree with you that THAT specific example of open carrying is not good for “the cause”. But a safely holstered firearm at my/your side while strolling in the park, enjoying a meal with family/friends, or picking up groceries, should draw no more attention than a cell phone.

    Let’s not add fuel for the anti’s fire by saying discreet carry is better than, or favorable to, open carry. Both are, presumably, being done legally. If so, there ought to be no distinction between the two.
    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Caldwell, Idaho, USA

    Post imported post

    good reply

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009

    Post imported post

    Well said.

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Suwannee County, FL

    Post imported post

    I'm curious how OCers are a godsend for the anti-gun crowd.

    So far, they have absolutely had their asses handed to them in such an extreme fashion, it's almost funny! They haven't mustered anything more than making themselves look like enormous asses.

    All the while carrying a near supermajority....... And still they have lost more ground than at any other time thus far recorded in the history of violating the 2nd??

    Really? A godsend?
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."

    "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.

Posting Permissions

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