Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Time Magazine - Profiles of 'Open Carry' Gun-Law Advocates

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Time Magazine - Profiles of 'Open Carry' Gun-Law Advocates

    http://www.time.com/time/photogaller...000412,00.html

    Amazingly pro-open carry photo spread in one of the world's most main stream and widely read media publications.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Baked on Grease's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sterling, Va.
    Posts
    652
    I think that was put together well, will have to link this so it spreads. Thanks for posting it!

    Sent using tapatalk
    Last edited by Baked on Grease; 10-06-2011 at 12:23 PM.
    "A Right Un-exercised is a Right Lost"

    "According to the law, [openly carrying] in a vehicle is against the law if the weapon is concealed" -Flamethrower (think about it....)

    Carrying an XDm 9mm with Hornady Critical Defense hollowpoint. Soon to be carrying a Ruger along with it....

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567
    "I had to load my gun one time," says Alaine, describing a moment when she feared for her safety, "and I was shaking. I don't know if I could have used it."

    Read more: http://www.time.com/time/photogaller...#ixzz1a25rgRUo
    Why would you say that to the media? Thats what the anti's want. LOOK! SHE WAS SHAKING AND UNSURE OF HER ACTIONS! AND WE WANT THEM CARRYING GUNS? THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!

    you don't know if you could use your gun or not? Maybe you shouldn't carry until you figure that one out lady.
    Last edited by Schlitz; 10-06-2011 at 03:47 PM.
    “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”
    [Miller vs. U.S., 230 F. Supp. 486, 489 (1956)]
    “There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights.”
    [Sherar vs. Cullen, 481 F2d. 946 (1973)]

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,201
    Looks well put together and shows a nice cross section of the American public that carries sidearms for protection. Thanks for sharing Mike!

  5. #5
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest
    Yes indeed, thanks for the share. I would never have seen it without the link.

    I am amazed to see from Kalifornistan no tatoos, piercings, sags, beards or other evidence of alternative lifestyles - and in TIME to boot!

  6. #6
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,769
    Well done. Only thing I would like to see would be another photo shoot of somewhere else in the U.S. It would probably be a severe shock to Time's readers to learn that there are folk who not only open carry, but do so with a loaded weapon!!

    It would also probably do a lot to normalize the carry of a firearm; one of our most sought-after goals.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Old?

  8. #8
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    Why is almost everyone in these pictures carrying at 1 o'clock?

    I wonder if pointing the muzzle at your femoral artery whenever you sit down (as depicted in the photos of the ladies at the beauty shop) is the "in" thing, nowadays?

  9. #9
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest
    Good observation! This couldn't be another case of exploding gastanks, could it?

    "Jan, we're from TIME and doing a story on abnormal normal carry of guns. Would you put this on, please? No, no, here, not there." SERPA holsters are well represented too.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Renton, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,201
    Yes, Jack House, this is old. I remember seeing it several months ago. Bittersweet memories for those in Cali, eh? No more unloaded open carry.
    Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world; it's the only thing that ever does.- Margaret Mead


    Those who will not fight for justice today will fight for their lives in the future,

    Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote. Benjamin Franklin

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by SFCRetired View Post
    It would probably be a severe shock to Time's readers to learn that there are folk who not only open carry, but do so with a loaded weapon!
    "OMG! It's loaded!"

    Of course it's loaded. You can't bake bread without flour.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    Why is almost everyone in these pictures carrying at 1 o'clock?

    I wonder if pointing the muzzle at your femoral artery whenever you sit down (as depicted in the photos of the ladies at the beauty shop) is the "in" thing, nowadays?
    Because appendix carry has its good points.

    I understand the absolute adherence to The Four Rules as a sure way to try and reduce the risk of negligent discharges and their consequences, but can you prove to me that all the guns in your safe are not pointing at something you do not want to destroy? What about the folks who carry anyewhere higher than ground level - especially if they carry inside a building? Or how about most of the folks out there whose holsters are canted from the vertical? Do I really need to go on?

    Carrying a firearm is an inherently risky business. Manufacturers have tried to remove the risks from mechanical failure. Humans can remove most of the rest of the risk just by keeping their booger hooks off the bang switch until they want the thing to work as intended. Keeping the thing in a secure holster goes a long way towards keeping the booger hook off the bang switch. But since the object of carrying a firearm is to be able to have one handy to use when you need to use it, safely carrying in a manner that makes it easy to use makes sense.

    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"
    ----Allahpundit

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran Verd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Lampe, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    381
    Good photospread! Too bad CA screwed the pooch with their new law.
    One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them. Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1796.
    If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. - Dalai Lama (Seattle Times, 05-15-2001).
    Find businesses that are pro gun and those that aren't. Support Friend or Foe by using it!

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Because appendix carry has its good points.
    I read your points and appreciate your having the type of mindset to explore them further. Perhaps we all should do so in depth before we chamber the first round.

    In the end, though heading out the door half-cocked is foolish. Heading out the door unloaded is asinine. The regulators made CA folks out to be asinine fools, when the ca folks should have called them on the carpets. They didn't. Instead, they took what they could get, and what they got was nonsense. Not they have nothing.

    Not progress, in my book.

    I understand the absolute adherence to The Four Rules as a sure way to try and reduce the risk of negligent discharges
    I don't!!! When have you EVER seen a "negligent discharge?" In 23 years of both OC and CC, as well as 20 years on the job, throughout the entire world (SA, NA, Asia, SWA, EU, AF, you name it), I've NEVER seen a "negligent discharge." The very idea of enacting a law preventing 1 ND in the wake of perhaps dozens of real-world incidents requiring AOC is utterly, HUA NEGLIGENT.

    But can you prove to me that all the guns in your safe are not pointing at something you do not want to destroy?
    Can you prove to me that some jerk won't drive off the street and plow us both through the back room wall?

    What about the folks who carry anyewhere higher than ground level - especially if they carry inside a building? Or how about most of the folks out there whose holsters are canted from the vertical? Do I really need to go on?
    No, and I get your point. Should have know better. You were playing the devil's advocate. I stand corrected, having observed you point out the obvious, with all sublime.

    Carrying a firearm is an inherently risky business. Manufacturers have tried to remove the risks from mechanical failure. Humans can remove most of the rest of the risk just by keeping their booger hooks off the bang switch until they want the thing to work as intended. Keeping the thing in a secure holster goes a long way towards keeping the booger hook off the bang switch.
    My reasoning behind why a properly holstered firearm is the least of a PD's worries.

    But since the object of carrying a firearm is to be able to have one handy to use when you need to use it, safely carrying in a manner that makes it easy to use makes sense.
    I think a properly-holstered firearm makes sense. I don't think an in-the-waist solution makes much sense. They're not trying to conceal it from the public at large by that measure. They're trying to conceal it from the target of their criminal robbery.

    Huge difference.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  15. #15
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Herington, Kansas, USA
    Posts
    1,005

    Unloaded?

    My Grandaddy God rest his soul, always told me..."Son there ain't but two really worthless things in the world, a dull knife and an empty gun"
    ‘‘Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.’’ Thomas Jefferson

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Kalamazoo, MI
    Posts
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Schlitz View Post
    Why would you say that to the media? Thats what the anti's want. LOOK! SHE WAS SHAKING AND UNSURE OF HER ACTIONS! AND WE WANT THEM CARRYING GUNS? THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!

    you don't know if you could use your gun or not? Maybe you shouldn't carry until you figure that one out lady.
    +1000

  17. #17
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by since9
    When have you EVER seen a "negligent discharge?"
    :: raises hand ::

    Early NOV, in the Milwaukee, WI area...
    at a posted mall...
    by an off-duty Milwaukee cop...
    carrying in-waistband...
    without a holster.
    Either the bullet or a piece of the floor hit a woman in the leg.

    The local city police (he wasn't in Milwaukee) didn't arrest or charge him.
    The Milwaukee County DA waited more than a month before charging him. (And I strongly suspect that was only because of public outrage when he wasn't arrested or charged.)
    The chief of Milwaukee police says it's a training issue & is "disappointed" the cop is being charged.

    Here's one thread,
    and an article.
    Last edited by MKEgal; 12-11-2011 at 04:22 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  18. #18
    Regular Member okboomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    1,164
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    When have you EVER seen a "negligent discharge?"
    Here ... sorry, I couldn't resist
    Last edited by okboomer; 12-12-2011 at 05:15 PM.
    cheers - okboomer
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Lead, follow, or get out of the way

    Exercising my 2A Rights does NOT make me a CRIMINAL! Infringing on the exercise of those rights makes YOU one!

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    OK and MKE, you're missing my point: "I've never SEEN a "negligent discharge.".[/quote]

    Sure, there are videos out there showing some. My point is that they're so rare, "the very idea of enacting a law preventing 1 ND in the wake of perhaps dozens of real-world incidents" is itself negligent. Laws which restrict our freedoms just to prevent that 1 incident in 1,000,000 are stupid. As an example, the GFSZA of 1990 comes to mind...
    Last edited by since9; 12-13-2011 at 05:18 PM.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  20. #20
    Regular Member okboomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    1,164
    cheers - okboomer
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Lead, follow, or get out of the way

    Exercising my 2A Rights does NOT make me a CRIMINAL! Infringing on the exercise of those rights makes YOU one!

  21. #21
    Regular Member MamaLiberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    884
    Since when has passing a "law" EVER prevented anyone from doing the stupid thing? People do stupid things all the time, and not because there are not enough laws.
    I will not knowingly initiate force. I am a self owner.

    Let the record show that I did not consent to be governed. I did not consent to any constitution. I did not consent to any president. I did not consent to any law except the natural law of "mala en se." I did not consent to the police. Nor any tax. Nor any prohibition of anything. Nor any regulation or licensing of any kind.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    north carolina
    Posts
    70

    thanking god

    reading these articals about cal. i got an overwhelming urge to get down on my knees and thank god i dont live in california

Posting Permissions

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