Open Carry vs Concealed Carry - a comprehensive response

[OC for ME]

Define your terms!!!

j/k We all know what you mean.

<o>

Careful, not everyone knows what a liberal is, especially liberals.

 

[marshaul]

Careful, not everyone knows what a liberal is, especially liberals.

Still a useless epithet of zero informational content.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

I agree, he's wrecking them.

My fear mongering was referring to things like the "threat of violence" thing. How supposedly everything we do is from some threat of violence from the .gov. Then heard some other guys comment that the .gov kills MILLIONS of people a year. It's fear mongering because it paints some crazy violent image of what we deal with. If someone read some of this stuff and wasn't aware it was US they would think it was China. It's not. remotely.

Again, I agree that our right are getting eroded by the administration. There is no doubt about that. As there is no doubt about we need to stand up and fight. But when you make extreme statements, you turn off alot of people who are in the middle that we NEED on our side. They do a drive by and see some of the comments and think "wow that's crazy" and move on. It then sparks conversations about us gun people that aren't in our favor.

It's the same battle we all fight. It's same reason the forum doesn't want bashers and anti leos and want's to keep the topics on topic. Because if this turned into a anti ANYTHING (.gov, leo, liberals, etc.) then it would turn off alot of people. We would be chalked up as more crazy gun people. Which alot of us aren't. But each to his own.

This is a personal judgment based on personal bias. Whose "side", what middle? How about the fact that people see the defense of liberty called "extreme" and they may not want to be on that side? Your continued subjective use of the term "extreme" points to your bias or your agenda.

I am not and will not cater to people who have their minds closed and that consider talking about liberty in its ultimate state as extreme, if they can't even be open for discussion they are not a friend of liberty and are not on "my side". I have disagreements with many on this forum and in my life I would still consider friends or associates and even on my side because they are liberty centric even their views of liberty don't go as far as mine, most are willing to debate and make an argument for their position.

 

[Primus]

This is a personal judgment based on personal bias. Whose "side", what middle? How about the fact that people see the defense of liberty called "extreme" and they may not want to be on that side? Your continued subjective use of the term "extreme" points to your bias or your agenda.

I am not and will not cater to people who have their minds closed and that consider talking about liberty in its ultimate state as extreme, if they can't even be open for discussion they are not a friend of liberty and are not on "my side". I have disagreements with many on this forum and in my life I would still consider friends or associates and even on my side because they are liberty centric even their views of liberty don't go as far as mine, most are willing to debate and make an argument for their position.

I'll attempt to make it clearer.

"Everything you do is because of the threat of violence from government." To a normal everyday person who doesn't carry, who doesn't vote liberal, who is just an average tax paying citizen, that would seem "extreme". Disclaimer: that is my opinion, but it's an educated guess based on numerous things.

"Our side"- the side that is pro 2a, that is for people being able to own firearms (and more in depth be able to Open Carry as the intent of this forum).

Middle- People who don't carry everyday to make a statement but still believe we should be able to. Pretty sure there's a whole thread dedicated to people's experiences with these "middle". The "I went to the store today and I was the only guy carrying, I talked with everyone else and they seemed open and asked some questions." Sure they meet you in person and see your gun and go home and think its great we carry. Then they peruse the internet and read that some guys feel that the only reason they pay taxes is because they are afraid of being shot in the face.

For example- 99% of what I put on the internet is with that "liberty centric" people. Not individuals that I speak with one on one. For example, I will never get you (and a few others) to see the police/ .gov can be a good thing when used properly. So when other guys post things that are going down the anti .gov/leo path, I try to counter IF possible. This is because those same people who are on the fence about gun control, may be for some other things. So they drive by and read the rhetoric (hide your kids hide your wife .gov is coming) and get a bad taste.

Believe it or not, I'm trying to help. I'm that guy when your at the bar s*** drunk and have the liquid courage that says "hey buddy lets take a walk it's not worth it", to keep you from looking like a JA to the rest of the bar.

 

[marshaul]

This is because those same people who are on the fence about gun control, may be for some other things. So they drive by and read the rhetoric (hide your kids hide your wife .gov is coming) and get a bad taste.

Believe it or not, I'm trying to help. I'm that guy when your at the bar s*** drunk and have the liquid courage that says "hey buddy lets take a walk it's not worth it", to keep you from looking like a JA to the rest of the bar.

Nobody who's liberty-centric is going to bat an eye over some frank discussion of government today. Fact is, most Americans are dissatisfied with government today. Do you suppose that dissatisfaction takes the form of uncritical love?

Fact is, most Americans are on the fence, and we're trying to bring them down on the side of right, justice, reason, and ultimately reform. And you're pushin' 'em right back the other way.

We don't need your "help", nor apologia for your apologia.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Nobody who's liberty-centric is going to bat an eye over some frank discussion of government today. Fact is, most Americans are dissatisfied with government today. Do you suppose that dissatisfaction takes the form of uncritical love?

Fact is, most Americans are on the fence, and we're trying to bring them down on the side of right, justice, reason, and ultimately reform. And you're pushin' 'em right back the other way.

We don't need your "help", nor apologia for your apologia.

+1

 

[sudden valley gunner]

I'll attempt to make it clearer.

"Everything you do is because of the threat of violence from government." To a normal everyday person who doesn't carry, who doesn't vote liberal, who is just an average tax paying citizen, that would seem "extreme". Disclaimer: that is my opinion, but it's an educated guess based on numerous things.

"Our side"- the side that is pro 2a, that is for people being able to own firearms (and more in depth be able to Open Carry as the intent of this forum).

Middle- People who don't carry everyday to make a statement but still believe we should be able to. Pretty sure there's a whole thread dedicated to people's experiences with these "middle". The "I went to the store today and I was the only guy carrying, I talked with everyone else and they seemed open and asked some questions." Sure they meet you in person and see your gun and go home and think its great we carry. Then they peruse the internet and read that some guys feel that the only reason they pay taxes is because they are afraid of being shot in the face.

For example- 99% of what I put on the internet is with that "liberty centric" people. Not individuals that I speak with one on one. For example, I will never get you (and a few others) to see the police/ .gov can be a good thing when used properly. So when other guys post things that are going down the anti .gov/leo path, I try to counter IF possible. This is because those same people who are on the fence about gun control, may be for some other things. So they drive by and read the rhetoric (hide your kids hide your wife .gov is coming) and get a bad taste.

Believe it or not, I'm trying to help. I'm that guy when your at the bar s*** drunk and have the liquid courage that says "hey buddy lets take a walk it's not worth it", to keep you from looking like a JA to the rest of the bar.

If people can't handle the truth they are part of the problem. The overwhelming majority of us who have our property stolen know we don't do it voluntarily it is only done because of threats of violence.

Have you ever thought that by your very argument you are turning people away from "our side" by your support of government violence?

 

[ixtow]

The reason that I suggest not sitting with your firearm exposed in a restaurant, even though you are comfortable with OC in general is that I think you have less control over retention when seated.

Crossdraw. Don't sit in a booth. Pay attention. Don't be a morbidly obese fatass. There are all kinds of ways to improve the situation... Why aren't you thniking of them? OR are you pushing an agenda instead of seeking truth?

Go ahead. Try to grab it.
In the words of Sonor Rebel: "You would sooner catch a rattlesnake's tongue."
In the dark.
With chopsticks.

The best safety is your brain.
The best retention is your brain.

BTW, don't people in wheelchairs, who are more in need of a firearm, inherently sitting down anyway?

I'm just not following. Sounds like an emotional plea about feelings, not a logical argument...

 

[larrynjr]

Open Carry vs Concealed Carry

I prefer to Open Carry because EVERY study shows that criminals will avoid armed persons.

I am a new OC'er and have seen this statement in various places. Is there someplace on the site or in the forums where those studies are linked?

Thanks!

 

[WalkingWolf]

I am a new OC'er and have seen this statement in various places. Is there someplace on the site or in the forums where those studies are linked?

Thanks!

Studies show WHO and under what circumstances victims become victims. The problem with providing you a cite that people are not attacked that open carry is obvious. There must be statistics of open carry victims, and there just is not, what there are studies is of unarmed victims, and in some cases concealed carry victims. There are not even enough statistics compiled of open carry persons who defended themselves because those figures do not exist. At least not any amount to worth compiling.

Hope that helps...

 

[eye95]

I am a new OC'er and have seen this statement in various places. Is there someplace on the site or in the forums where those studies are linked?

Thanks!

I want to answer this question, but don't have time right now, so here is a start. This video does not actually cite the studies, but it doe reference them. It is from ABC news in 2003:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RR9RN_iSKtg&desktop_uri=/watch?v=RR9RN_iSKtg


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[larrynjr]

Thanks guys!