You know what? emsjeep is right.
Rich B, while I appreciate and respect everything you are doing on this site, and your own site I feel emsjeep is right. You are portraying that open carrying in CT is a smart idea. When I first found this site, I thought about open carrying instead of concealed carrying. After all, the law is open to interpretation regarding open versus concealed carry. But after reading emsjeeps post, and reading and actually hearing your run ins, I feel you are causing a lot of turmoil that is unnecessary in our state. Why are you doing this? Why are you creating this hassle for yourself? What are you looking to gain?
Have you ever traveled to VT? It's an open carry state, how many people do you see actually exercise that right? I've been going up there my enter life and never once seen anyone carrying openly.
Why can't you just conceal like 99% of us do? After reading a few posts its really you and 4 other people who even contribute regularly. Do they actively open carry? I don't see many of them writing about their issues and recording their run ins.
Would I like to open carry, hell yea. Is it worth ruining my day over, nah, I just wear a long shirt and go about my daily life.
And one final thing. I listened to your run in on 10-16. You are not as confident on record as you are behind the keyboard.
OK, let me be clear:
1) Open carry, the very act itself, IS, to the best of my understanding, legal.
2) I have no issue with open carry, I have open carried, and I am not sold on the argument that open carry shouldn't be practiced when and where it might cause outrage leading to a restriction of those rights. While I don't believe this myself, I understand that many people do, and the point is not without its merits, but being somewhat principled, I would rather lose it by reactionary legislation than be frightened into abandoning the right on my own.
3) I believe that people can and should open carry but on a practical level, I believe that you should a) receive some training on retention and use a retention holster, b) be aware and fluent in the applicable laws, and c) be aware of the potential risks of engaging in the behavior; mischaracterization of the potential outcomes serves no ones interests in the end.
My concern is that the potential and likely outcomes, and the degree of protection afforded by the law, are being misrepresented here; the terms, "illegal detention," and "unlawful arrest" get thrown around, I see people stating, "You can't be lawfully arrested for DC/BOP just for peaceably open carrying," "Detentions for open carry are unlawful, Goldberg and Burgess were dismissed, now we are protected." Simply untrue. Goldberg and Burgess have not changed the law, policy, maybe, as indicated by the CSP policy statement, but local coverage may vary. OC, but be aware that you may be arrested, know the facts as provided in a CONSERVATIVE and objective assessment, and make your decisions based on that information. I think that is fair.