Doug Huffman
Banned
Some of US. Others, many, NRA 'members', see permitted carry as reasonable and acceptable gun control from the right.
-
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.
OC getting hammered on another pro-2A site
- Thread starter kootsoup
- Start date
eye95
Well-known member
That was a robbery at gunpoint. I still don't know of a single documented case of a gun-grab, or the opportunistic snatch of an unconcealed weapon.
At gunpoint, CC weapons can be taken too. The unsupported argument against OC is that someone will simply take the gun out of your holster. That is what has not happened yet--as far as anyone here knows. (And, I can't imagine we wouldn't hear about it.)
cscitney87
Regular Member
The way I see it.. OC and CC share the same side of the carry coin. Either you carry or you don't carry.
I OCed first, before getting my CHP, and fully support dismantling my State's CHP requirements in favor for a free and more liberating set of laws. Would that really chap my sack if concealed carry became suddenly Free after I paid a grand on my setup? No. I did what I had to do and it wasn't pretty (financially). I understand having No permit requirement for concealed carry is the more American way to roll.
I OCed first, before getting my CHP, and fully support dismantling my State's CHP requirements in favor for a free and more liberating set of laws. Would that really chap my sack if concealed carry became suddenly Free after I paid a grand on my setup? No. I did what I had to do and it wasn't pretty (financially). I understand having No permit requirement for concealed carry is the more American way to roll.
hp-hobo
Regular Member
Please point out to me where I called you stupid. You can't because I didn't. I called you wrong, which oddly enough has an entirely different meaning than stupid.
I compared your "statement and attitude" to an anti-gun/anti-freedom argument and implied that they both sounded stupid.
While you're at it, point out to me where I called you anti-gun or anti-freedom. Once again it didn't happen, so you can't.
If you want to maintain any credibility, you'll need to stick to the facts and not use emotional arguments.
You were the first one to call a name. That is a documented fact. Calling names is the sign of someone who has run out logic and facts to support their viewpoint. Good job. You should be very proud of yourself.
This will be my last post on this subject. Have a nice day.
kwikrnu
Banned
The facts are that many firearms forums condone concealed carry and condemn open carry. I haven't seen a moderator on this forum ban anyone for asking about concealed carry or telling a story about concealed carry...
Many people who conceal carry oppose open carry because they are scared of people who haven't gone through background checks. Most who open carry can careless if people conceal.
Many people who conceal carry oppose open carry because they are scared of people who haven't gone through background checks. Most who open carry can careless if people conceal.
elixin77
Regular Member
Then I was wrong to say that. I apologize for what I said. I put the :monkey to put humor into the mix, but it was contextually wrong.
To me, this sounds like you are calling me anti-gun and anti-freedom. I interpreted it wrongly, and made a rash judgment. However, even if you didn't call me those, I still did not appreciate the comment.
I personally do not feel I used emotion to counter what you said, and I even laid out how I came to the conclusion I did. Is that considered an emotional argument?
My stupid statement was more meant for humor then anything. However, sarcasm does not translate well at all into pixels. I was hoping the monkey would give it away. For that, I am, again, sorry for what I said.
I have come to the conclusion that each forum has its own 'personality.' I have also learned I am still getting used to this forums 'personality.' I am used to a more jovial atmosphere on other forums, and I also use humor to make light of any situation I'm in. I understand that it is a character flaw, however, it helps me get through the day, and it is part of my nature to do so.
And with that, Adieu.
wrightme
Regular Member
And some NRA members see all Carry as valid. And some non-NRA 'members' also see permitted carry as reasonable and acceptable gun control from the right. Your divisive bias is showing.
Wastelander
Regular Member
I'm new to the whole concept of right-to-carry, since I used to live in Illinois, so my opinion really isn't worth much.
That said, I don't really care what method of carry someone chooses. I'm also not all that concerned about how I carry once I pick up my handgun from layaway. I hate inside-waistband-anything, so that's out of the question, and in Arizona as of July 29th you don't need a permit to conceal anyway, so if I put on a baggy shirt and it hides it, great, and if not, that's great too. Maybe I'm just not as much of an activist? There are merits to both methods and I personally think that it comes down to preference.
That said, I don't really care what method of carry someone chooses. I'm also not all that concerned about how I carry once I pick up my handgun from layaway. I hate inside-waistband-anything, so that's out of the question, and in Arizona as of July 29th you don't need a permit to conceal anyway, so if I put on a baggy shirt and it hides it, great, and if not, that's great too. Maybe I'm just not as much of an activist? There are merits to both methods and I personally think that it comes down to preference.
eye95
Well-known member
I agree. We should avoid painting groups with broad brushes. Such generalization tells more about the artist than about the subject!
Anyway, I have no problem with licensing concealment, as long as unconcealed carry is unlicensed. In that situation, it is not the carry that is being licensed, but the concealment.
That particular light bulb came on for me when a reporter for Channel 42, who was reporting on our blood drive, did a bit where she wore a gun openly and commented that it was perfectly legal until... (and then she adjusted her jacket to cover the weapon), stating that now you need a license. When she did that, it hit me.
Perhaps it's true your opinion has yet to be formed by lots of experience, but I'd debate that your opinion is worth any less than anyone else's.
I'm with you. I've heard the term "indifferently concealed", and carried that way myself from time to time. Carry. Open, concealed, whatever, but carry when you can.
Sonora Rebel
Regular Member
I 'open carried' for years before AZ invented it's CWP to allow 'Zonies to carry in ... 'Texas' mostly. 'Wasn't called that. You were either heeled or not and there was no question about bein' armed or not. You just did it... or didn't. It's part of gettin' dressed.
As of 29 July 2010... the CWP requirement goes away (HB 1108 goes into effect, within the borders of Arizona at least) 'cause the 'permit' really is in conflict with the state constitution (AZC Art 2 Sec 26). My sack however... has hardly been chapped in that I only bought a Bianchi vertical clamshell rig to hold my 1911 .45 if I have to 'cover up'.
The CCW 'only' folks are inculcated, indoctrinated and otherwise mind-stamped in statist 'permission. If there is no 'permission'... then therefore it must not be allowed. Only the chosen have such permission. Such people feel that rights are given by the state (As they were indoctrinated to believe in government schools) and to be blessed by the state with a permit to carry a firearm makes them especially 'special'. Some of these are the types who will buy CCW badges with their state seals and firmly believe that concealment has some sort of tactical advantage to surprise the bad guys. We (I think) know better.
These CCW only folks are also self-concious and highly succeptible to 'what people think'. That's sort of a projection 'cause I've only encountered a few of those who've given me the stink-eye or 'said something'. They are easily handled. I also think the CCW folks harbor some sort of gleeful guilt, like the little boy with a frog in his pocket in church. Their 'little secret' as it were.
Last edited:
since9
Campaign Veteran
My advice would be to leave them in the dust. Seriously, if they're fanatical about CC, let 'em. The best way to counter irrational arguements and statements is to simply ignore them.
If only it was a perfect world where both sides would agree to listen to the opinion of the other. Then either accept it, reject it and move on.
I do not let anti 2A in any form deter me from what I believe in and I try to not push the issue with those that are unwilling to listen to an opposing opinion.
So far besides my father and my father in law everyone I deal with or have had dealings with in the past year have been supportive of my choice to both CC and OC my side arm.
Only once has a friend asked me to cover it up because he did not want it visible with the children playing in the backyard.
I have been lucky in having just about zero response that could even remotely be considered negative in regards to my carrying.
I do not let anti 2A in any form deter me from what I believe in and I try to not push the issue with those that are unwilling to listen to an opposing opinion.
So far besides my father and my father in law everyone I deal with or have had dealings with in the past year have been supportive of my choice to both CC and OC my side arm.
Only once has a friend asked me to cover it up because he did not want it visible with the children playing in the backyard.
I have been lucky in having just about zero response that could even remotely be considered negative in regards to my carrying.
since9
Campaign Veteran
Having either moderated or admined message forums since 1986, and as a member of that forum (though I last frequented it in March), I was curious about this issue, so I reviewed their rules. Here's what I found:
- "The DefensiveCarry.com forums have grown tremendously and we thank all of you for being part of this community committed to concealed weapons carry."
- "9. We have learned from bitter experience that discussions of certain subjects (politics, religion, abortion, sexual orientation, etc) often degenerate quickly. For this reason, we prohibit these subjects in our discussions. We also discourage "caliber wars" and the virtues of "open carry" topic; strongly encouraging you to take these discussions to other forums where these topics are the focus." (emphasis mine)
Given these two statements, they've made it quite clear they don't want to hear anything about open carry. Apparently, they'll tolerate it if it's mentioned in passing, but if you begin to extol its virtues, to them, you're proselytizing, and that's verbotten on a forum dedicated to concealed carry.
As an administrator, I'm saddened when I see mods and admins opt for censure instead of active moderation. I've admined/moderated many forums about which all the "hot topics" mentioned in Rule 9 were allowed, and we didn't have a tenth the problem some forums seem to have while discussing how long it takes paint to dry. Then again, while we encouraged "spirited debate," we also had a few well-written, clear and concise, as well as unwaivering rules as to how to conduct that "spirited debate," and if people went over the edge, there was a long drop.
Still, we never permabanned anyone. We simply kept tabs on how many times they'd been suspended and kept increasing the number of days they'd have off before returning, usually using prime numbers as our list. It didn't take long before they either conformed to the rules, or quit trying.
- "The DefensiveCarry.com forums have grown tremendously and we thank all of you for being part of this community committed to concealed weapons carry."
- "9. We have learned from bitter experience that discussions of certain subjects (politics, religion, abortion, sexual orientation, etc) often degenerate quickly. For this reason, we prohibit these subjects in our discussions. We also discourage "caliber wars" and the virtues of "open carry" topic; strongly encouraging you to take these discussions to other forums where these topics are the focus." (emphasis mine)
Given these two statements, they've made it quite clear they don't want to hear anything about open carry. Apparently, they'll tolerate it if it's mentioned in passing, but if you begin to extol its virtues, to them, you're proselytizing, and that's verbotten on a forum dedicated to concealed carry.
As an administrator, I'm saddened when I see mods and admins opt for censure instead of active moderation. I've admined/moderated many forums about which all the "hot topics" mentioned in Rule 9 were allowed, and we didn't have a tenth the problem some forums seem to have while discussing how long it takes paint to dry. Then again, while we encouraged "spirited debate," we also had a few well-written, clear and concise, as well as unwaivering rules as to how to conduct that "spirited debate," and if people went over the edge, there was a long drop.
Still, we never permabanned anyone. We simply kept tabs on how many times they'd been suspended and kept increasing the number of days they'd have off before returning, usually using prime numbers as our list. It didn't take long before they either conformed to the rules, or quit trying.
hopnpop
Regular Member
Want something to "help" these people? Try this
Kidding, of course... but I know a few who've been so adimate and closed-minded on the issue that I'd offer 'em one of these...lol
Dealt with it many times. I quit trying to sway them toward the obvious truth that it doesn't result in gun grabs, offending the public, and DOES have a tendency to deter BGs. I'm done trying. I just keep going back to it being a personal preference. I like having the options to CC or OC and both methods of carry have pros and cons. Not to mention, many who OC have a concealed BUG. Best of both worlds if you ask me. If I'm verbally attacked for being a proponent of OC, I quickly point out that BOTH methods of carry have (+)'s and (-)'s, therefore, to each his/her own. I won't try and sway someone who's strictly CC to OC and therefore don't expect someone to try and sway me from OC. It is what it is. Agree to disagree, basically. We're still on the same team (for the most part).
ODA 226
Regular Member
Are you offering the reward? How much is it?
ODA 226
Regular Member
Except those who attempt to conceal they are carrying a real AK by painting the muzzle international orange!
Sheriff
Regular Member
If we are going to discuss open carry and how many people have had their guns taken away from them, we have to include cops in the summary. Why would we not include them? There's been quite a few cops shot and/or executed in the last 20 after their guns were taken away from them.
Brimstone Baritone
Regular Member
And I'm sure someone who paints their AK pistol orange doesn't care if people conceal. What is a 'real' AK? What shade of orange is 'international' orange. That one wasn't in my box of Crayolas. What was your point, anyway?
Brimstone Baritone
Regular Member
Why would we include cops? That is comparing apples and tangelos.
*The myth is that OC makes us more of a target. Cops are targeted by criminals regardless of how they carry.
*The myth is that someone will come up behind us and try to disarm us. Cops are disarmed when they are wrestling with a suspect who is resisting arrest.
If you want to include cops, you need to adjust for the ones who initiated contact with the suspect, the ones who were in uniform, and the ones who were disarmed while attempting to make an arrest. Otherwise the statistics would be inflated.