Philosophocally yes, reality no!
I need some help understanding something. There appears to be some support for UOC, but it seems that it stops at the exact point where confidence ends and the risk of some kind of negative encounter begins. Am I to understand that there are members here (more particularly in the vicinity of Long Beach) that would like to meet in the relative safety of a group, but would rather remain on the sidelines than to put their feet to their beliefs as a solo open carrier?
This dependency upon numbers or for others to organize or give direction gives me (and probably others) the impression that this need for reassurance or acceptance more important than carrying for self defense or political speech. If that is an actuality rather than just a misconception of an observer, I can tell you- this movement doesnt need that. Am I hitting a nerve with anyone yet?
What California open carry does need is individuals intrepid enough to stand on their own, who do not require others to do for them what they ought to be doing for themselves- That means getting out there and hitting the pavement in spite of your misplaced fears and being the example for your community that gunowners arent scary camo-wearing hayseeds.
Some of us have paid a dear price in order educate forum readers, law enforcement, and various naysayers. I would appreciate it if that isnt put to waste because of this unfounded need to wait for a 'meet up' or for someone to organize a one-time event for the purposes of shock and awe. If you believe, and have the means, go and do it- permission is not required and you dont need a date and time to schedule.
I think we all have a reason to be armed- and we should use that reason to integrate our means of self defense into our routine- this natural demonstration is what the public really needs to see... not a well populated social event to reassure ourselves of our position.
Condition Three:
On a philosophical plane, I agree with you--nuff said on that plane of thought.
On a reality plane of thought, I disagree.
Lets use me as an example. I made some decisions in my life that lead me to my current financial situation. I married a blood-sucking hateful person who feels that I owe her to this day. I bought into the idea that marriage is for life (bulls..t!) I now pay spousal support to a woman who still sits on the sofa and eats ice cream all day.
Another bad decision: I did not get a professional degree from a prestiguous institution.
I invested wisely, but my biggest mistake (x-wife) took that from me with the help of our legal system.
I have made some other costly mistakes (nothing illegal).
My point is:
I don't have the money or the time to defend myself in court. Our court system is similar to gambling. I am willing to OC in organized groups and to communicate with police chiefs and Sheriffs. And, I have done so.
I can't rely on charity or a foundation for defense money. Mark's money-well has run dry.
Please except that some of us don't have $500 to purchase a gun or to pay a lawyer for defense costs. I certainly don't have a million dollars set aside for a SCOTUS ruling. Obamanomics has seriously crimped my ability to earn money. I have been squeezed from both sides.
Sorry! Can I be helpful in other ways?
Also, single issue people who furvently demand that others follow their dogma don't get many followers to help promote their just cause. Tactical comprimise is always neccessary.
markm