• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Question about MOC's philosophy on use of open carry gatherings

Status
Not open for further replies.

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
Transcript of attached screenshot from MOC's Facebook page:
Jared A. Coyne: "Perhaps MOC should have some open carry gatherings in pistol free zones. This way SB 59 will look more appealing."
December 3 at 1:58pm

Phillip Hofmeister: "Jared A. Coyne: Funny, before I saw you post this, I have passed that in the back channel I have to Jase Bolger. :)"
December 3 at 7:18pm

I believe it is generally accepted by OC advocates, and reflected in the language of most OC organizations "mission statements" or "goals" (including this website and MOC's), that open carry exercise and gatherings are for the purpose of gaining acceptance of open carry by the public and authorities.

The comments above seem to suggest that MOC consider using open carry gatherings in PFZs, not to gain public or authorities acceptance of OC in PFZ's, but to drive the public or authorities to be attracted to SB 59's ban on OC in PFZs, thus "SB 59 will look more appealing." Phil, President of MOC, seems to agree and states that he's already mentioned that use of open carry gatherings in PFZ's to Jase Bolger, a Michigan politician.

Phil/MOC, would you please clarify this exchange?
 

Attachments

  • MOC_FB_1.JPG
    MOC_FB_1.JPG
    23.9 KB · Views: 136

scot623

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
1,421
Location
Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
Transcript of attached screenshot from MOC's Facebook page:


I believe it is generally accepted by OC advocates, and reflected in the language of most OC organizations "mission statements" or "goals" (including this website and MOC's), that open carry exercise and gatherings are for the purpose of gaining acceptance of open carry by the public and authorities.

The comments above seem to suggest that MOC consider using open carry gatherings in PFZs, not to gain public or authorities acceptance of OC in PFZ's, but to drive the public or authorities to be attracted to SB 59's ban on OC in PFZs, thus "SB 59 will look more appealing." Phil, President of MOC, seems to agree and states that he's already mentioned that use of open carry gatherings in PFZ's to Jase Bolger, a Michigan politician.

Phil/MOC, would you please clarify this exchange?

I OC'd in a library when I was told I couldn't. I OC'd in a police station and had my gun seized because I was told I couldn't. A large group of people OC'd rifles in downtown Birmingham because they were told they couldn't. I'm not sure any of those activities were done to "gain acceptance of open carry by the public and authorities". It was done to prove a point, for legal and political reasons.
 
Last edited:

detroit_fan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
1,172
Location
Monroe, Michigan, USA
Seems to me that MOC is open to using whatever(legal) means are necessary to try and advance a bill they support. How is that any different than what every other group does when trying to get a bill they support passed??
 

scot623

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
1,421
Location
Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
Dan, Phil and I also talked about events in PFZ's. The reasoning being, everyone is hitting the ceiling at the prospect of "losing" the ability to do so. After 59 passes, I plan on holding an OC dinner in a bar to prove the point that we CAN STILL OC in a PFZ. Based on the huge ground swell of people who want to OC in PFZ's, I expect it to be the largest event MOC has ever had.
 

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
I OC'd in a library when I was told I couldn't. I OC'd in a police station and had my gun seized because I was told I couldn't. A large group of people OC'd rifles in downtown Birmingham because they were told they couldn't. I'm not sure any of those activities were done to "gain acceptance of open carry by the public and authorities". It was done to prove a point, for legal and political reasons.

Rob, I stipulate that "gaining acceptance" does include the more assertive activity you mention to prove the points you cite. Sometimes, educating the public in that way about these points is the route to gaining their acceptance of OC.

Now, would you please offer your comments directly to the the following?
I believe it is generally accepted by OC advocates, and reflected in the language of most OC organizations "mission statements" or "goals" (including this website and MOC's), that open carry exercise and gatherings are for the purpose of gaining acceptance of open carry by the public and authorities.

The comments above seem to suggest that MOC consider using open carry gatherings in PFZs, not to gain public or authorities acceptance of OC in PFZ's, but to drive the public or authorities to be attracted to SB 59's ban on OC in PFZs, thus "SB 59 will look more appealing." Phil, President of MOC, seems to agree and states that he's already mentioned that use of open carry gatherings in PFZ's to Jase Bolger, a Michigan politician.
 

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
Seems to me that MOC is open to using whatever(legal) means are necessary to try and advance a bill they support. How is that any different than what every other group does when trying to get a bill they support passed??

I believe it is generally accepted by OC advocates, and reflected in the language of most OC organizations "mission statements" or "goals" (including this website and MOC's), that open carry exercise and gatherings are for the purpose of gaining acceptance of open carry by the public and authorities.

The quotes in the OP seem to suggest MOC may view use of open carry in PFZs, not to gain acceptance of it, but to use some people's distaste for it to drive them to get SB 59 through, with it's ban on OC in PFZs. That would be a 180 degree contradiction of this website's mission to "normalize" and gain acceptance of open carry, and I believe MOC's as well.
 

scot623

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
1,421
Location
Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
This is the most nonsence of a post I've ever seen on OCDO. So after a bill banning OC in PFZ's passes that MOC supported your going to have a event in a PFZ and you think more people with actually show up? The logic seems quite ludicrous.

I won't hold my breath for your RSVP then? Oh, and since your reading comprehension skills are lacking...OC WILL NOT BE BANNED IN PFZ's, it will just require permission now. Got it?
 
Last edited:

KYGlockster

Activist Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2010
Messages
1,842
Location
Ashland, KY
I won't hold my breath for your RSVP then? Oh, and since your reading comprehension skills are lacking...OC WILL NOT BE BANNED IN PFZ's, it will just require permission now. Got it?

Could you please cite this assertion? I was under the impression that the bill was useless unless it stated OC in these areas is now OFF-LIMITS, because the Governor would not sign it without these provisions.
 

xmanhockey7

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
1,195
Removed reference to deleted post.

On the surface yes, but there is more to it than that. Overall this bill is a great advancement for carry in the state of Michigan. Also open carriers get a bad rep among the concealed carry community. Other gun right groups in the state fully support this bill. If MOC opposed it, it would look rather bad on us. Point is this bill puts us in a better place than we are today. The no OC provision is something that will have to be worked out later (if possible). Granted it'd probably have to be an enhanced CPL to be able to CC or OC. If this passes we'll see what we can do next legislative session and future legislative sessions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

KYGlockster

Activist Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2010
Messages
1,842
Location
Ashland, KY

Well as I have stated before, they should change their name if they are not in total support of OC. Having the name "MOC" is quite misleading if they do not actually support OC in every sense. I believe it is quite sensible to believe an organization with the name "Michigan Open Carry" would be devoted to protecting the right to OC. If this isn't the case then the name should be Michigan Carry -- leave "Open" out of it.
 

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
Guys, can we not get too far off topic? The question is about "MOC's philosophy on use of open carry gatherings" and an attempt to clarify the comments quoted in the OP.

Your opinion on the material I presented and the concern I have is welcome.

Also, any authoritative representative of MOC is invited to clarify. The material implies that MOC might use open carry in PFZs to, in essence, irritate people or politicians about OC in PFZs and drive them to see SB 59 as more "appealing". Phil could too, but on another post he indicated he would only be announcing events from now on.
 
Last edited:

KYGlockster

Activist Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2010
Messages
1,842
Location
Ashland, KY
The bill has language in it to allow a CPL holder to OC with written permission. So if an OC gathering in a bar was organized with permission to OC then the attendees could OC in a PFZ.

Who will honestly give permission? I do not see any schools giving permission, and I would say very few churches would.

You all can support the bill all you want; I don't have to deal with the oppression so I will venture out of here. I will say it is bad for the Country as a whole. Legislation such as this could be used to further restrictions in every state by saying we still have a right to carry, but only if we obtain outrageous amounts of training and permission! If it is ok in one state then why not in all of them? I do NOT support it!
 

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
Who will honestly give permission? I do not see any schools giving permission, and I would say very few churches would.

You all can support the bill all you want; I don't have to deal with the oppression so I will venture out of here. I will say it is bad for the Country as a whole. Legislation such as this could be used to further restrictions in every state by saying we still have a right to carry, but only if we obtain outrageous amounts of training and permission! If it is ok in one state then why not in all of them? I do NOT support it!

Can we not get too far off topic? The question is about "MOC's philosophy on use of open carry gatherings" and an attempt to clarify the comments quoted in the OP.

Your opinion on the material I presented and the concern I have is welcome.

Also, any authoritative representative of MOC is invited to clarify. The material implies that MOC might use open carry in PFZs to, in essence, irritate people or politicians about OC in PFZs and drive them to see SB 59 as more "appealing". Phil could too, but on another post he indicated he would only be announcing events from now on.
 

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
They are in support of OC. But you are welcome to join MOC, attend the board meetings, and put forth your suggestions. :)

Can we not get too far off topic? The question is about "MOC's philosophy on use of open carry gatherings" and an attempt to clarify the comments quoted in the OP.

Your opinion on the material I presented and the concern I have is welcome.

Also, any authoritative representative of MOC is invited to clarify. The material implies that MOC might use open carry in PFZs to, in essence, irritate people or politicians about OC in PFZs and drive them to see SB 59 as more "appealing". Phil could too, but on another post he indicated he would only be announcing events from now on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top