What I fail to see is how conceal carry can in any way increase public awareness or alter perception. That is the crux of this discussion.
And that is where you are basically implying motives that I don't have.
Like I said, I try to focus my work on informing people as individuals, not the public in general. It's a very narrow, but critical distinction.
That and the perks-4-permits conundrum in which the argument is presented time and again that permit-holders have taken some government-approved course, submitted a fee and voluntarily REGISTERED themselves in order to get special privileges.
And I don't like that any more than you do. I put up with it only because it's the legal requirements to be allowed to conceal for now. I would love to do away with it entirely.
Changing laws to provide additional permit-based advancement is not evolutionary, it is de-evolutionary.
For every change to the law which allows greater privilege to permit holders they would be less inclined to support the concept of Constitutional carry because many of them are AGAINST lawful open carry. Look at Texas, for example. Open Carry is ILLEGAL there, but permitted conceal carry is lawful.
I would argue that it can be de-evolutionary, but that it can also be evolutionary.
If you are taking something that is currently legal for everyone and then restrict it only to permit holders, I would call that de-evolutionary. On the other hand, if you take something that is prohibited to everyone, and use an exemption for permit holders to get support to open it up for everyone, then it would be evolutionary.
Your Texas example would be de-evolutionary, because at one point they did allow open carry. An evolutionary example would be more like Arizona, where the carry permits were used to ultimately move towards constitutional carry.
I have read far too many posts on other sites by self-proclaimed "advocates" who advocate conceal carry by permit as the ONLY acceptable manner because they like having perks. They like being special. They do not care about everyone else and they certainly are not going to support having their "special" status revoked.
These very same people argue have on their side those who argue that public safety is a factor and the "permitted" carrier has completed a government-approved safety course and is more qualified, somehow, to carry a weapon for instance of self defense. That is a preposterous conclusion... but a common one.
Take away the permitting system and some members of this forum see a lot of their bread-and-butter clientele dry up overnight. Can't have that. Municipal revenues would suffer (slightly). Law enforcement wouldn't know who is or is not carrying a firearm...
WHOOPS! They already do not know.
Here's the real problem in this discussion. I have never made any of these arguments, and just because other people have made them is no reason for you to assume that
I either am or will make them.
I'm not them, and my arguments aren't theirs. If you go back and read every one of my posts in this thread, I have consistently stated that my goal is constitutional carry, not perks. By assuming that I am actually trying to make the arguments you describe above, you are essentially labeling me a liar.
Please respond to the arguments that I am actually making, and don't start assigning me positions that I do not hold and have not advocated.
Conceal carry - as an ACT - does nothing to increase awareness or alter perception.
As a "permitted" policy it evokes, until abolished, extra privilege for its holders over those who choose to exercise their rights without asking their government for permission.
Again, in my experience, the act of concealed carry has helped change the perceptions of several of my friends, mostly through my revealing it to them after the fact. It has forced them to realize that they are already around people who carry every day, without their knowing it.
I don't care as much about trying to change public perception all in one go, because I realize that I won't make that much of a difference (especially in an area like NoVa). However, I can make a much greater difference on the individual level to convince people to change their minds. Because of that, that is where I tend to direct my focus.
