Ah...let's think about the children people! Isn't that what the anti's and Liberals say? My gun must be broken cause every time I OC and walk by the children the dammed thing doesn't go off. But I digress:
Not every incident, Not every platform and Not every circumstance needs to be hard lined,
Dave, what does it mean to be "hard lined" when it comes to matter of the Constitution. I mean either you are or you aren't, right?
If ones was to go about normalizing open carry, how many would have changed their minds that day if he refused and an issue blew things out of proportion. Sometimes letting something go, more is gained then lost.
Well, if one is to normalize nudity one must be nude to do so, correct? One cannot be clothed and bring awareness to nudity with any integrity. Again, you amongst others on the board are illogically tethering disagreement with some or remote belligerent action. It never fails to amaze me how we continue to make the case for the antis and will confront (not to be confused with "confrontational") big box retailers, court houses and even police, citing RCW, recording and posting the event, asking for corporate policies, organizing Saturday Meet Ups, coordinating letter writing campaigns but when ONE person comes up to us we find excuses to cover up because of children? The almost schizophrenic postures we take spins my head.
There are more appropriate places and platforms to promote lawful carry open and concealed.
Well if children being the yard stick to use as a measure of "appropriate place and platform" then you will quickly find yourself OC'ing to within only the confines of your living room. Stop giving the anti's political and civic ammo!
Again, as we can see the OP clearly made a proper parenting choice that day, for him, not for you or anyone else. why is that so hard to understand. He too had a "FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT", and exercised it, I think some of you should go find an ANTI to bash instead of bashing a carrier of firearms.
No. Truth be told he chose to give up a RIGHT and substitute it with a PRIVILEGE. That is a wide chasm of a difference. Please know your rights and your privileges lest you get the two confused.
The bottom line is this: Does the OP have the choice to not stand his ground ? Yes. That's not the argument. No one is saying what he did was illegal. As a matter of fact NvyLtCmdr called him out when he said something to the effect of it being more tactically sound to carry concealed because of "the element of surprise" and asked him if it is true why does he open carry. At the end of the day it is HIS CHOICE, but that doesn't mean we cannot respectfully disagree, question, examine or even brow beat him for it. As I have said before: I am glad he is a proponent of the Second Amendment and glad he is on the broad team. Are we arguing nuance ? Sure, but the devil and the Constitution both reside in the details.