Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
john-in-reno wrote:
john-in-reno wrote:
can somebody YouTube just theOC movement part?
-
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.
New PBS news series debuts tonight with story on the open carry movement!
- Thread starter Mike
- Start date
Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
A couple of comments - I think Ed and his folks did great - vey calm, normal appearing etc.
Studies - When Ed was confronted with the issue of "studies" saying guns = crime/death in homes, he did good by pointing out that these studies are the ones touted by the anti-gun group but Ed did not get in the 2d point that the antis don;t bring up all the other more recent studies which conlude that gun ownership does not lead to more crime, murder, suicide, e.g., prof Kates study published by harvard, Prof. Centerwall's study cited by kates, the U of Maryland/U of Michigan study showing gun show restrictions do not reduce crime, etc. This is a softball question - a must have answer is a 1-2 combination to deal with it effectively - the competing studies response works great - the policy issue becomes a tie, moot, and the right to bear arms wins
Locked and cocked carry - at one point Ed was confronted by a bystander for carrying his gun witht he trigger back - somebody muttered somthing about the safety being on - a more effective response would be to concisely explain that "in order to engage the safety on this gun, the hammer must be locked back." The locked and cocked gun problem though is a real problem - I believe it was raised as a fact in the "fish or man" prosecutiion in Washington state as somthing liklely to raise alarm in public places. I think that open carry of these types of locked and cocked type guns should be avoided for exactly this reason - in the vast majoirty of people, it is seem as an unsafe act to carry a gun like that, and ragrdless, simply scarry because the gun looks like it could go off at any moment. I realize that this is not factually correct, but it is true none the less that the gun will appear to be far more dangerous and intimidating than a normal gun carried with the hammer down.
This is a publicity game and when you carry a gun, small facts matter largely.
A couple of comments - I think Ed and his folks did great - vey calm, normal appearing etc.
Studies - When Ed was confronted with the issue of "studies" saying guns = crime/death in homes, he did good by pointing out that these studies are the ones touted by the anti-gun group but Ed did not get in the 2d point that the antis don;t bring up all the other more recent studies which conlude that gun ownership does not lead to more crime, murder, suicide, e.g., prof Kates study published by harvard, Prof. Centerwall's study cited by kates, the U of Maryland/U of Michigan study showing gun show restrictions do not reduce crime, etc. This is a softball question - a must have answer is a 1-2 combination to deal with it effectively - the competing studies response works great - the policy issue becomes a tie, moot, and the right to bear arms wins
Locked and cocked carry - at one point Ed was confronted by a bystander for carrying his gun witht he trigger back - somebody muttered somthing about the safety being on - a more effective response would be to concisely explain that "in order to engage the safety on this gun, the hammer must be locked back." The locked and cocked gun problem though is a real problem - I believe it was raised as a fact in the "fish or man" prosecutiion in Washington state as somthing liklely to raise alarm in public places. I think that open carry of these types of locked and cocked type guns should be avoided for exactly this reason - in the vast majoirty of people, it is seem as an unsafe act to carry a gun like that, and ragrdless, simply scarry because the gun looks like it could go off at any moment. I realize that this is not factually correct, but it is true none the less that the gun will appear to be far more dangerous and intimidating than a normal gun carried with the hammer down.
This is a publicity game and when you carry a gun, small facts matter largely.
Forty-five
Regular Member
imported post
Mike wrote:
Mike wrote:
I think that those with little to no firearms knowledge wouldn't know cocked and locked from condition 3. This group would likely either be scared or indifferent, regardless of condition of carry.Those with just a bit of knowledgeto recognize condition 1could view it as scary (albeit incorrect), but I don't think that this represents the vast majority. The last group, being themost knowledgeable, would appreciate the safety of condition 1.
Dreamer
Regular Member
imported post
cloudcroft wrote:
Well, not supporting PBS would be pretty difficult, unless you live in a cave. They get substantial funding from the Federal Government, which comes from your tax dollars. One of their major contributors is the Rockefeller Foundation, so if you use coal or oil, or anything that is powered by coal or oil, they get your money there. IBM is also a major sponsor of PBS, so if you use the internet, they're getting your money there. BP, Shell, and Exxon all are major contributors, so if yo buy those brands of gasoline, they're getting your money.
It's like The Partnership for a Drug Free America (remember those old "this is your brain on drugs" commercials?) Their MAIN corporate sponsor was Frito-Lay. I always found it ironic that every stoner in America was contributing to their own demise when they got the munchies...
See, the "economy of propaganda" of our country is so intertwined and incestuous, that it's difficult to live in our society without inadvertently "donating" money to a cause you disagree with.
cloudcroft wrote:
Well, not supporting PBS would be pretty difficult, unless you live in a cave. They get substantial funding from the Federal Government, which comes from your tax dollars. One of their major contributors is the Rockefeller Foundation, so if you use coal or oil, or anything that is powered by coal or oil, they get your money there. IBM is also a major sponsor of PBS, so if you use the internet, they're getting your money there. BP, Shell, and Exxon all are major contributors, so if yo buy those brands of gasoline, they're getting your money.
It's like The Partnership for a Drug Free America (remember those old "this is your brain on drugs" commercials?) Their MAIN corporate sponsor was Frito-Lay. I always found it ironic that every stoner in America was contributing to their own demise when they got the munchies...
See, the "economy of propaganda" of our country is so intertwined and incestuous, that it's difficult to live in our society without inadvertently "donating" money to a cause you disagree with.
2a4all
Regular Member
imported post
Forty-five wrote:
I've talked to a number of police officers that carry SA/DA pistols, and they carry with the hammer down. They don't seem to be bothered by the 1st shot being a harder trigger than those that follow. Also, I seem to remember a "5th rule" from years ago (Boys Life Magazine?): "Never trust the safety on any gun.". I do carry my M&P40c with a round chambered, but there's no "public exposure", and it's not fully cocked (or so I'm told), because these same POs told me that there won't be time to rack the slide.
I was glad to hear Blumberg say that firearms laws are a matter of states' rights. Now if he'd only confine his activities to his state...
Forty-five wrote:
I have to agree with Mike on this. Appearances do matter. As Open Carriers, we set ourselves up for such confrontations because we draw attention to ourselves. (A gun carried openly in public is still very much an anomoly.) Many people will recognize the hammer being cocked back, and consider it risky. Some may even take it to mean that the carrier is an aggressive sort, as opposed to one who carries for self-defense. (Ed did seem to get a little red while this individual berated him.)
I've talked to a number of police officers that carry SA/DA pistols, and they carry with the hammer down. They don't seem to be bothered by the 1st shot being a harder trigger than those that follow. Also, I seem to remember a "5th rule" from years ago (Boys Life Magazine?): "Never trust the safety on any gun.". I do carry my M&P40c with a round chambered, but there's no "public exposure", and it's not fully cocked (or so I'm told), because these same POs told me that there won't be time to rack the slide.
I was glad to hear Blumberg say that firearms laws are a matter of states' rights. Now if he'd only confine his activities to his state...
Forty-five
Regular Member
imported post
2a4all wrote:
2a4all wrote:
I wasn't disputing the point that appearances count, and agree that they do.
imported post
sprat wrote:
Bloomberg conveniently forgets to relay the fact that the murder rate nationwide is at a 35 year low. New York's lower murder rate is a result of that fact and not Bloomberg's draconian gun laws which has nothing to do with public safety and has nothing to do with keeping guns out of the wrong hands.
Each time that fool opens his mouth on a national platform the NRA gains members. It is no accident the NRA has gained over 300,000 new members in the last 18 months.
sprat wrote:
Bloomberg conveniently forgets to relay the fact that the murder rate nationwide is at a 35 year low. New York's lower murder rate is a result of that fact and not Bloomberg's draconian gun laws which has nothing to do with public safety and has nothing to do with keeping guns out of the wrong hands.
Each time that fool opens his mouth on a national platform the NRA gains members. It is no accident the NRA has gained over 300,000 new members in the last 18 months.
paul@paul-fisher.com
Regular Member
imported post
I thought overall it was a good segment. Even Bloomberg didn't sound as bad as he acts. Of course he's a lying sack of poop.
I also enjoyed when the president of GOA asked about the gunfight on 9/11 in the planes.
I thought overall it was a good segment. Even Bloomberg didn't sound as bad as he acts. Of course he's a lying sack of poop.
I also enjoyed when the president of GOA asked about the gunfight on 9/11 in the planes.
Rush Creek
Regular Member
imported post
The NRA is beginning to exhibit a little courage regarding the growing movement to restore open carry in the public square. The leadership of the NRA prefers moderate baby - steps aimed at redressing gross grievances, rather than risking their hard earned reputation as a "moderate" gun rights association by taking a firm non-negotiable postion regarding "shall not be infringed". Larry Pratt and GOA have taken the lead in the unapologetic line-up. I suspect the NRA fears advocating open carry will weaken their "moderate" image. They will eventually get on board - when they decide it's safe to do so. Thus far the NRA has been embarrassingly silent on the OC subject. Perhaps they need to refresh themselves on what the RKBA is really all about. It's not about state licensing for concealed carry.
Ditto - all in all the , the PBS "Need to Know" reportwas a positive thing for the OC movement - I think.
The NRA is beginning to exhibit a little courage regarding the growing movement to restore open carry in the public square. The leadership of the NRA prefers moderate baby - steps aimed at redressing gross grievances, rather than risking their hard earned reputation as a "moderate" gun rights association by taking a firm non-negotiable postion regarding "shall not be infringed". Larry Pratt and GOA have taken the lead in the unapologetic line-up. I suspect the NRA fears advocating open carry will weaken their "moderate" image. They will eventually get on board - when they decide it's safe to do so. Thus far the NRA has been embarrassingly silent on the OC subject. Perhaps they need to refresh themselves on what the RKBA is really all about. It's not about state licensing for concealed carry.
Ditto - all in all the , the PBS "Need to Know" reportwas a positive thing for the OC movement - I think.
imported post
Please-Please-Please. Before you post a comment at the PBS website - think, think, think and proofread, proofread, proofread. One comment with a poor choice of words, spelling errors, etc. will undo any benefit. It is more important to be thoughtful and correct than first.
Please-Please-Please. Before you post a comment at the PBS website - think, think, think and proofread, proofread, proofread. One comment with a poor choice of words, spelling errors, etc. will undo any benefit. It is more important to be thoughtful and correct than first.
okboomer
Regular Member
imported post
I watched and have been thinking about this since last night and there are a couple of things that bothered me and most of them have been aired here. But, the biggest grievance I have with the piece was the characterization of concealed carry gun owners on airplanes and the use of the "gun fight" on the plane.
I believe that all concealed carriers still have to pass a nationwide background check and have a 'clean' record before any state will issue the license. So, as a CCL I have 'proven' to my state that I am an upstanding citizen. And what have terrorists done to show their responsible behavior? NOTHING. They are TERRORISTS and do not want any governmental scrutiney which I believe will preclude them from seeking a CCL, so they will not be on a plane with a gun, which means that there won't be 'gun fights' in the air, there will be the application of deadly force to stop the threat ... one (or more CCL) guns. I also thought the reporter's expression was classic as the GOA president made the point about 1 gun on any one of the 9/11 planes would have made a difference.
I also have to wonder just what kind of 'artistic' editing was done to scale back the OCer's looking too good.
I did think that all OCers represented the average OCDO member very well. Thanks to all who participated!!!
Along those same lines, I also was glad to see the point made that a fire extinguisher is not necessary all the time, but when it is needed, it should be there to be used.
While all 'our' points were not made, enough of the core points were made that I hope some fence-sitters will look into the topic with more of an open mind.
I also thought Bloomie bringing up the Brady Bunch report card on Obabbler was quite the red herring. For some reason, Bloomie didn't mention Eric Holder's position on gun control at all ... nor Napolitano's stated position. A classic case of misdirection IMHO.
As for LaPierre not appearing ... well, you have to choose your battles and this platform would not have been one to serve the NRA's agenda ... sad, but there it is. We can always hope Ted will win the NRA presidency soon :lol:As it is, when I voted on the board members I chose folks who had public statements of support for OC, or were women.
I watched and have been thinking about this since last night and there are a couple of things that bothered me and most of them have been aired here. But, the biggest grievance I have with the piece was the characterization of concealed carry gun owners on airplanes and the use of the "gun fight" on the plane.
I believe that all concealed carriers still have to pass a nationwide background check and have a 'clean' record before any state will issue the license. So, as a CCL I have 'proven' to my state that I am an upstanding citizen. And what have terrorists done to show their responsible behavior? NOTHING. They are TERRORISTS and do not want any governmental scrutiney which I believe will preclude them from seeking a CCL, so they will not be on a plane with a gun, which means that there won't be 'gun fights' in the air, there will be the application of deadly force to stop the threat ... one (or more CCL) guns. I also thought the reporter's expression was classic as the GOA president made the point about 1 gun on any one of the 9/11 planes would have made a difference.
I also have to wonder just what kind of 'artistic' editing was done to scale back the OCer's looking too good.
I did think that all OCers represented the average OCDO member very well. Thanks to all who participated!!!
Along those same lines, I also was glad to see the point made that a fire extinguisher is not necessary all the time, but when it is needed, it should be there to be used.
While all 'our' points were not made, enough of the core points were made that I hope some fence-sitters will look into the topic with more of an open mind.
I also thought Bloomie bringing up the Brady Bunch report card on Obabbler was quite the red herring. For some reason, Bloomie didn't mention Eric Holder's position on gun control at all ... nor Napolitano's stated position. A classic case of misdirection IMHO.
As for LaPierre not appearing ... well, you have to choose your battles and this platform would not have been one to serve the NRA's agenda ... sad, but there it is. We can always hope Ted will win the NRA presidency soon :lol:As it is, when I voted on the board members I chose folks who had public statements of support for OC, or were women.
PavePusher
Regular Member
imported post
My evaluation on another forum:
1. Mendacity through ommision.
2. Carefully non-nuetral phrasing by the narrator.
3. Openly pushing a political position.
So much for unbiased reporting.
Edit: And no counter-weight for self-contradicting, bald-faced liar Bloomberg? Nope, no bias here folks, step right up and pay your nickel, this way to the egress...
My evaluation on another forum:
1. Mendacity through ommision.
2. Carefully non-nuetral phrasing by the narrator.
3. Openly pushing a political position.
So much for unbiased reporting.
Edit: And no counter-weight for self-contradicting, bald-faced liar Bloomberg? Nope, no bias here folks, step right up and pay your nickel, this way to the egress...
KBCraig
Regular Member
imported post
While I understand the notion that "appearances matter", that's exactly the same argument used by the CC folks who fret that OC will result in rolling back their rights.
So, no thanks: carry a quality gun in a quality holster, and understand (and be prepared to explain) how it operates.
While I understand the notion that "appearances matter", that's exactly the same argument used by the CC folks who fret that OC will result in rolling back their rights.
So, no thanks: carry a quality gun in a quality holster, and understand (and be prepared to explain) how it operates.
Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
KBCraig wrote:
KBCraig wrote:
OK, but remember its more than just appearences - open carry is speech - expressive conduct - communicating a message - successful communication calls for clarity - carrying a gun that looks to the average person, even many or most gun owners, like it is improperly maintained because the trigger back and about to go off like popocorn does have its downside.
john-in-reno
Regular Member
imported post
Ok here are the videos on YouTube
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=198vCe9mkzE
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLvckvmn8JA
Enjoy!!!
Ok here are the videos on YouTube
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=198vCe9mkzE
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLvckvmn8JA
Enjoy!!!
Two Hands
Regular Member
imported post
I think all thatneeds to be said here is...GREAT JOB ED!
I think all thatneeds to be said here is...GREAT JOB ED!
Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
john-in-reno wrote:
Thanks for the team work!
And good job putting in the message "To learn more go to OpenCarry.org"
Take a look at the main page of OpenCarry.org now
The next publication I'd like to get to cover the movement is Newsweek, and then 60 minutes
john-in-reno wrote:
Thanks for the team work!
And good job putting in the message "To learn more go to OpenCarry.org"
Take a look at the main page of OpenCarry.org now
The next publication I'd like to get to cover the movement is Newsweek, and then 60 minutes
imported post
The NRA will , in time, actively support the open carry movement. For now, please keep in mind the NRA is over 4.3 million members. Many trap and skeet shooters, antique weapon collectors, hunters thatutilize manual action long gunsthat are taken out once or twice a year for the sole purpose of going after game. In other words, their mainmotives for owning and using firearms are not driven by self defense.Many are older people, including myself, that harken back to the days when carrying concealed was a rare activity because the issuance of permits in the vast majority of states were needs based. The reason of simply self defense was much too vague and therefore the permit was denied. The common practice of open carry is a new concept that is not quickly grasped by even many seasoned handgun owners, young and old.
The NRA is not a perfect organization, if it was, it would not have me as a member. In the last 50 years and during some bad times when the gun lobby was not nearly as large or well organized, the NRA stopped many pieces of bad legislation. The anti-gun legislation they could not stop, the NRA managed to lessen the intended strength. I don't want to conduct a history lesson, but if it wasn't for the NRA one would probably not be able to own many types of guns that are commonly used for both concealed and open carry.
The NRA will , in time, actively support the open carry movement. For now, please keep in mind the NRA is over 4.3 million members. Many trap and skeet shooters, antique weapon collectors, hunters thatutilize manual action long gunsthat are taken out once or twice a year for the sole purpose of going after game. In other words, their mainmotives for owning and using firearms are not driven by self defense.Many are older people, including myself, that harken back to the days when carrying concealed was a rare activity because the issuance of permits in the vast majority of states were needs based. The reason of simply self defense was much too vague and therefore the permit was denied. The common practice of open carry is a new concept that is not quickly grasped by even many seasoned handgun owners, young and old.
The NRA is not a perfect organization, if it was, it would not have me as a member. In the last 50 years and during some bad times when the gun lobby was not nearly as large or well organized, the NRA stopped many pieces of bad legislation. The anti-gun legislation they could not stop, the NRA managed to lessen the intended strength. I don't want to conduct a history lesson, but if it wasn't for the NRA one would probably not be able to own many types of guns that are commonly used for both concealed and open carry.
cloudcroft
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Maybe 20 years ago, there were about 30 million hunters that were not NRA members, so they were completely useless as they were not part of any organized pro-gun effort. I mean, just think of 30 million new NRA members (on top of the 3 million IIRCthen) and what that might mean politically? I don't know how many hunters there are today, nor how many of them have joined a pro-gun entity.
So yes, certain categories of gun owners see no reason to support other categories...but that has been true for decades.
-- John D.
Maybe 20 years ago, there were about 30 million hunters that were not NRA members, so they were completely useless as they were not part of any organized pro-gun effort. I mean, just think of 30 million new NRA members (on top of the 3 million IIRCthen) and what that might mean politically? I don't know how many hunters there are today, nor how many of them have joined a pro-gun entity.
So yes, certain categories of gun owners see no reason to support other categories...but that has been true for decades.
-- John D.