Sharp as a Marble - Who needs the Bradys

<< "I think God only invented sex because he didn't think of this first." | Home | Enough with the drama >>

Who needs the Bradys

Anti-Rights Idiocy , Gun Rights , Open Carry

When your own side is firmly against you?

My earlier post had nothing to do with Sebastian directly. He just happened to, like clockwork, chime in about open carrying in his usual manner. You see, to Sebastian, everything is political and a PR stunt. There is a time and place to open carry, to exercise your rights, but so far, Sebastian has yet to find a single instance where he thinks it is OK to do so. And trust me, he believes his view on the matter is the final word. For example

I am not in any way, shape or form advocating open carry being illegal. I think it should be legal in all 50 states. I’m just saying if you do it, don’t pretend like you’re doing something great for the Second Amendment, because I don’t think you are.

Wow! Someone has an overinflated sense of their worth, don't they?

What if someone said this?

Maybe Sebastian should take down his blog. I am not in any way, shape or form advocating free speech being illegal. I think it should be legal in all 50 states. I’m just saying if Sebastian does it, he shouldn't pretend like he's doing something great for the Second Amendment, because I don’t think he is.

I'd like someone to maybe build a chart that shows me when it's ok to open carry. You know "In the bedroom, as long as the blinds are closed so the neighbors can't see", "At a gun range", and "At an IPSC Competition, but only during your run. Shirts should cover weaponry while not actively shooting lest we scare the sheep." Really, is there an approved roster I can check against?

The very nature of open carry means the weapon is openly displayed. There is no time and place where that is not considered in your face to people who have a problem with guns. To concede this point is no different than telling blacks to just keep sitting at the back of the bus because you don't want to negatively impact civil rights.

Just like I do with the anti's, I demand proof that action X results in Y. The argument that Open Carrying damages our image is nothing but opinion until I see stricter gun laws being put into effect due to an Open Carry event. Even in this particular instance, nothing happened. Sure some governmental asshole is going to claim they don't want guns near them because it's just one more method of control. They don't need an excuse to try to push anti-gun laws. But I don't see them succeeding much any more, and that puts the "OC = Bad Publicity" crowd in a bad position to argue from.

Is Open Carry the quintessential gun right? No, but it should be the default for all states. Every last free man and woman should be able to carry a weapon in plain sight and not be hassled by the government. I don't believe that Open Carry is the "one and only tool", but it is part of a larger set and should not be discouraged until it is demonstrably true that it is hurting the cause. Just because you believe it to be doesn't mean it is.

I can't OC because of the laws here. But it's nice to know that if the law was different, I'd have to worry both about the anti-gun bigots and some people ostensibly on my side deriding my efforts.

posted @ 10/12/2009 2:52:21 PM

Incoming Links

Changing attitudes on open carry « Stuff From Hsoi on 10/12/2009 4:13:18 PM

Snowflakes in Hell » Blog Archive » You Might Be Surprised, But I Agree on 10/12/2009 8:17:47 PM

The View From North Central Idaho - Open carry as a political statement on 11/15/2009 3:01:38 PM

missing out on all the fun | walls of the city on 2/19/2010 9:38:56 PM

Comments

wizardpc says:

on 10/12/2009 3:39:09 PM

That pretty much sums up my thoughts on his thoughts as well.

If you're doing something he wouldn't, you're wrong and hurting the cause. Even if you've made more progress than he has.

If it weren't for that attitude, I'd still read him.

Robb Allen says:

on 10/12/2009 3:48:35 PM

Meh, I still read him and will continue. This just happens to be the sore spot where I disagree with him... rather vehemently .

UBU52 says:

on 10/12/2009 4:06:23 PM

The argument that Open Carrying damages our image is nothing but opinion until I see stricter gun laws being put into effect due to an Open Carry event.

This already happened in California, a long time ago.

http://afroamhistory.about.com/od/blackpanthers/a/blackpanthers_2.htm

In order to help end police brutality, the party advocated carrying guns for self-defense. At the time, under California law it was legal to carry guns if not concealed

One noteworthy incident occurred when 30 Panther members armed with guns, went to the state legislature in Sacramento to protest a bill that would outlaw carrying weapons in public. According to Seale, the group intended to watch the proceedings from the spectator section, but they instead mistakenly ended up on the floor of the legislature. The scene caused quite a stir on the floor. After leaving the capitol without incident, two blocks away, the Panther members were arrested for disturbing the peace.

This is the reason you can only carry unloaded guns in California.

mike w. says:

on 10/12/2009 4:10:27 PM

Umm isn't exercising my 2nd Amendment right "doing something for the 2nd Amendment?"

It is in my book. We should't walk on eggshells worried we might offend the sheep. They're offended that we carry at all. The method is irrelevant.

Unix-Jedi says:

on 10/12/2009 4:12:03 PM

Which ought to be obvious even to you UBU52, that it had nothing to do with a real threat.

After leaving the capitol without incident, ...

The roots of all gun control tie back to racism, and the need to subjugate people.

Sean Sorrentino says:

on 10/12/2009 4:12:39 PM

I disagree with him pretty strongly as well, but i think that your tone is a bit strong. (i'm trying to say this without basically mirroring his argument against OC, isn't that funny)

I think you are absolutely correct that it's basically an argument that says, in the bedroom, with the blinds closed and the lights off. when i OC, no one says anything. i'm not convinced that they notice.

I OC walking the dog around here in Allentown & Bethlehem, PA. I've been asked about it in Cabellas, but aside from a really polite black man while i was out with the dog, no one else noticed. And he wanted to be very clear he "wasn't making trouble for me" ie. not calling the police.

i'm starting to wonder if i wasted all that money printing up PA Gun Rights flyers at the local Staples. where i OC'd. and Francisco said absolutely nothing even though i was standing right next to him for 45 minutes while he tried to make the No Guns-No Money cards work. I know he saw, how could he miss??? i was in khaki Rob Allen Tactical Shorts with a red t-shirt and a black full size XD.

the public really doesn't care. i can't spend my life worrying about the whiners. i can only use them as a bad example.

"See how they whine and cry? do you want to be a crybaby like them?"

Sebastian seems to be really worried about how the press sees us. the press, a bunch of liberal anti-gun weenies, will never like us, so i've stopped caring. as long as they quote me accurately, i'm happy. the people will decide.

God love Sebastian, as an NRA coordinator type he fights for our rights, probably much more than me. i just think he is a bit off base here. i still love him though. our side isn't really big enough that we can start looking for heretics to burn.

Robb Allen says:

on 10/12/2009 4:13:05 PM

Yup. Love how your side has to fight hard to keep the negroes from getting uppity.

Remember, gun control's roots are racist. This is further proof of such racism. Had the group been white, I'd be willing to be there wouldn't have been as big of a deal.

And that was a long time ago. The tides have turned on bigotry. Well, not for everyone. Some people still want to see the black man disarmed.

Ken says:

on 10/12/2009 4:16:25 PM

The thing about a politician is that he is a politician first and whatever else he is second.

Robb Allen says:

on 10/12/2009 4:19:54 PM

Sean, I'm ticked, and I'm sure it shows in my tone (which, if you read my post while imagining a robot-like voice, it's much better).

I'm not delinking SNIH, I'm not leading a crusade against him, no witch hunts or whatnot. But he is more read than my blog, and I feel it's important that I speak up when I feel something is wrong, lest others get the idea that one particular view dominates.

Peter says:

on 10/12/2009 4:27:11 PM

Robb, I live down in Obamaland, otherwise known as Palm Beach County. As you know, we have those hurricane things that visit from time to time. In the aftermath, the police are generally busy with other things, leaving We The People to deal with those who would take advantage of the situation.

Hypothetical: a group of bad guys evades the laughable security we have here and proceeds to mistreat all the grandmas that live here. Do I sit in the house until they get to my place, or do I stop them asap? Do I then have to worry about being arrested for openly displaying a weapon?

That law has gotta be changed.

Thirdpower says:

on 10/12/2009 4:50:49 PM

"Some people still want to see the black man disarmed. "

Wouldn't that be Jessie Jackson and the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition?

aczarnowski says:

on 10/12/2009 6:27:12 PM

Heh. This is turning into one heck of a subtle introduction for your near future co-workers Robb! :grin:

FWIW, I don't read Snowflakes. I much prefer the free wheeling comic drama here than drama lama drama there.

straightarrow says:

on 10/12/2009 7:03:15 PM

I don't read him, I don't respect him, and I don't like him.

But then I don't like anybody who thinks an invitation to conversation is a threat and he runs away.

Sebastian is real good at running away. Do not ever let him watch your six.

Wolfwood says:

on 10/12/2009 9:40:12 PM

Very interesting how Robb can say "I disagree with Sebastian" and get a lot of "I don't like Sebastian" comments in reply. Kind of a non sequitur.

I think what one thinks about the lead-up to the Civil War probably determines what someone thinks about open carry. The restrictions on gun use are wrong, and like slavery, should not be condoned by the government. That said, however, there's an entrenched culture now that is afraid of guns, just as there was an entrenched culture that was dependent on slavery.

The abolitionists were right that slavery needed to be abolished, but things like the John Brown raid spooked the South and made them even more defensive. Looking back, we see that slavery was already on a strong decline and that there's a very good chance that it would've been abolished even in the South before long. Instead, we had a very bloody Civil War that wrecked the South for generations and even now affects our country. In my opinion, the abolitionists would've done more for both slaves and for America if they'd tried harder to get some sort of compromise, such as working to find a way to compensate slaveowners for mandatory emancipation.

I think guns are in a similar category. It's not right that the public is afraid of guns, but pushing the issue through in-your-face methods has a good chance of stiffening opposition.

We're doing well right now: court decisions are breaking in our favor, states are legislating more in our favor, and the public's view of firearms is changing. While we have the right to insist on what's ours, why not let things go at their determined pace?

Sean Sorrentino says:

on 10/12/2009 9:55:45 PM

It's not right that the public is afraid of guns, but pushing the issue through in-your-face methods has a good chance of stiffening opposition.

That's just it. it isn't in-your-face. it's just walking around with a holstered pistol (or a slung rifle) Sure, i see you waving your pistol or rifle around and i'm going to react with force, because you are a deadly threat. but peaceably walking around with a gun on your hip isn't in your face at all. you should try it a few times. you'll find that most people don't even notice and almost no one cares.

if you are being a jerk with a gun, it isn't the gun, it's the jerk. so just don't be a jerk.

Robb Allen says:

on 10/12/2009 10:00:34 PM

Sorry Wolfwood, but you're claiming the same thing Sebastian is - that ANY open carry is in your face activism that is setting us back, and it's not.

We ARE winning. People who have open carried tend to report that OC doesn't generally end in people running and screaming. Sure, some idiots will do it poorly and the media will be quick to point out how awful us gun owners are, but I've given up on pretending the media will every see things our way.

I do not see the harm in Open Carry. Outside of a lot of emotional lines of reasoning, I don't see tons of laws being passed over it.

markofafreeman says:

on 10/12/2009 10:06:34 PM

if you are being a jerk with a gun, it isn't the gun, it's the jerk. so just don't be a jerk.

Bravo! Well said, Sean.

Wolfwood says:

on 10/12/2009 10:14:13 PM

I've actually OC'd before and no one's run screaming (although at least once I did get some very big eyes). I still think it's unnecessarily alienating, especially when I have a concealed permit. If my shirt hitches up and people see my gun then I'm fine with that, but it's not putting it in their faces.

From taking a lot of my friends shooting for their first time, I've learned that a lot of hostility toward guns is due to fear and that very little is due to sitting down and thinking about things. If someone's already afraid of guns, seeing folks walking OC'ing is just going to spook them further. Offering to take them to the range, or even letting it slip in conversation that you CC sometimes, has been far more effective in my experience. YMMV, of course.

Essentially, I'm saying that while I want to win, I think that winning slowly and getting broader acceptance is better than winning by a hair and making enemies unnecessarily. Again, YMMV.

doubletrouble says:

on 10/12/2009 10:20:09 PM

Spot on Robb.

BTW, "let things go at their determined pace?"-- who establishes that pace?

Peter says:

on 10/12/2009 10:54:49 PM

Wolfwood: "Very interesting how Robb can say "I disagree with Sebastian" and get a lot of "I don't like Sebastian" comments in reply. Kind of a non sequitur."

Not exactly. Sebastian is reaping just a bit of what he's sown, is all. He has an unfortunate tendency towards self-righteousness, and when he authors 'a blog post too far' such as this one, there is no shortage of folks waiting to hammer him.

Wolfwood says:

on 10/12/2009 10:59:20 PM

By "determined," I mean as in "He's determined to win," not "they determined that this was the best way." I believe that the pace we're on right now inevitably leads to the result we're looking for, which is why I'm not in favor of actions I think decrease the time until we get that result by exchanging potential goodwill. I could very well be wrong, but I don't like taking risks over something I believe will ultimately come to me anyway.

markofafreeman says:

on 10/13/2009 12:17:27 AM

http://markofafreeman.blogspot.com/2009/10/hunters-open-carrying-and-hate-crimes.html

ishida says:

on 10/13/2009 12:21:28 AM

I must say I agree with you, Robb.

And you too, Peter. He DOES have a self-righteous tendency, dare I say Ego?

UBU52 says:

on 10/13/2009 3:00:11 AM

I'm not so sure people who complain about open carry are afraid of guns. Some of them might be viewing OC as a lousy fashion choice. In California, where the gun has to be unloaded, it really is a fashion choice because you can't honestly call an unloaded gun a "self defense weapon."

So, as a taxpayer in the state of California, I really resent the time that is being wasted by LEO on people who make lousy fashion choices. Maybe we should hire some cheaper employees who could roam around as the Fashion Police and check weapons to make sure they are unloaded? Perhaps they could check for other loathsome things like tongue piercings and "tidy whitey" underwear at the same time? Maybe issue tickets for rundown heels? (Better pass that rundown heel ordinance first!) Personally, I would outlaw t-shirts with beer slogans on them and thong underwear on men.

I probably wouldn't like LOC much but I'm always ready to get into the spirit of any "movement." Is there some law that says the gun has to be in a holster on your hips?

Weer'd Beard says:

on 10/13/2009 6:00:30 AM

Or maybe you should cut the stupid out of your OC laws, and let people carry their guns in whatever condition they feel fit.

You'd certainly have a leg to stand on if somehow California had a low crime rate (it doesn't) or if all the states that allow some form of OC (something like 40+ states) could show that somehow those liberal laws were a problem.

But instead UBU52 you're sounds an awful lot like the bigots who keep saying because we let two men, or two women get married here, somehow Fathers will marry their daughters, and people will marry animals, ect ect.

If you had any proof you'd have an argument. But as it stands, you have bigotry, and scads of it!

DoubleTapper says:

on 10/13/2009 8:36:37 AM

I personally carry my Glock 17 in a kydex holster on my right hip with two 33 round Glock original magazines on my left hip.

Mrs. Double Tapper carries her Glock 26 in a Foubus holster on her right hip unless it clashes with her outfit.

Here in Israel, all permits are issued as carry permits. Period. Since guns are so prevalent, no one thinks twice about it.

It's nice to live in a normal place where firearms rights are respected by the average citizen.

DoubleTapper
DoubleTapper@gmail.com
DoubleTapper, blogging on Guns Politics Defense from Israel

Weer'd Beard says:

on 10/13/2009 9:11:53 AM

And Like America, bad things happen when criminals decide to start some shit, not people open carrying causing problems.

Tho in Israel I read a lot about good people with guns saving the day.

i read a lot about that here too.

Thanks for your service, DoubleTapper

mike w. says:

on 10/13/2009 10:59:46 AM

I really resent the time that is being wasted by LEO on people who make lousy fashion choices.

UBU - Who's fault is that? Certainly not the CA residents exercising their rights. If the LEO's would leave them be there'd be nothing for you to resent.

Maybe we should hire some cheaper employees who could roam around as the Fashion Police and check weapons to make sure they are unloaded?

Nope. The cops have no authority to stop me and remove my weapon from my possession just because I'm walking down the street OC'ing.

Tam says:

on 10/13/2009 11:13:48 AM

It's nice to live in a normal place where firearms rights are respected by the average citizen.

Then why do y'all's gun laws suck so bad? :p

RAH says:

on 10/13/2009 11:39:49 AM

Sebastian is influenced by his fears. He pays too much attention to the media articles as evidence that OC scares people and that more restrictive laws will result.

Other people who have seen the success of VCDL disagree that his sense of what is a good tactic disagree and are not so fearful of OC causinga backlash.

mike w. says:

on 10/13/2009 12:15:15 PM

CA is a normal place where firearms rights are respected by the average citizen.

You and I must have different definitions of the terms "normal" and "respected".... and probably "rights" as well.

Yu-Ain Gonnano says:

on 10/13/2009 12:16:52 PM

OMG, someone has an opinion I don't like, isn't that just horrible? What's next, someone going to opine against 1911/GLOCKs/9mm/.45ACP? /sarc

Boyd says:

on 10/13/2009 5:02:09 PM

I'm fortunate to live in what may well be the center of the open carry universe: Virginia.

When it comes to Virginia, anyone who says that open carry scares people or turns people off to guns or otherwise has a net negative effect just flat-out doesn't know what they're talking about. We have tons and tons (and tons) of folks 'round these parts who open carry all the time. Negative reactions are extremely rare, and engaging and rewarding conversations are numerous.

Where it's legal, just open carry as though it's a normal part of your daily routine (which it should be). This is not to say that bad things can't happen, and you should be prepared to deal with negative reactions (or avoid it altogether). But if you want to be a 2nd Amendment advocate, I'm hard-pressed to think of a better way to do than open carrying.

Now we just need to get great places like Florida and Texas to wake up and smell the coffee...

UBU52 says:

on 10/14/2009 5:09:45 AM

Why should people worry about the legality of open carry? If they don't worry about the legality of everything else (gun transfers, kids with guns, etc.) what difference does it make?

pdb says:

on 10/14/2009 5:13:25 AM

If they don't worry about the legality of everything else (gun transfers, kids with guns, etc.) what difference does it make?

What in the hell are you talking about? It is already a federal crime to sell a gun to a felon or a minor, and in most states it's even illegal to store guns such that minors can access them. What more needs to be done, and how does this indicate a lack of concern on our part?

Weer'd Beard says:

on 10/14/2009 8:37:23 AM

another proponent of gun control that has no idea how gun laws actually work!

Also I like how UBU52 felt no need to address my point that she advocates California-style open carry (gun cannot be loaded, or in any condition where it can be easily readied to fire) while the majority of this country has very liberal open carry laws...and no problem.

Unless you count bigots like her shitting their pants and calling the cop when they see somebody buying groceries, or walking in the park, or watching a little league game, or going to the movies with a gun on their hip.

Yu-Ain Gonnano says:

on 10/14/2009 4:03:03 PM

If they don't worry about the legality of everything else (gun transfers, kids with guns, etc.) what difference does it make?

*If* is a pretty big word.

Do gang members with multiple assaults and murders underneath their belts really care about laws against OC? Not really. Their only concern is that it's pretty hard to lie and say you're not breaking any laws when it's quite open that, in fact, you are. Robbers aren't exactly concerned with laws against stealing, but that doesn't mean they're going to do it in front of a cop.

Those of us that do follow the law regarding transfers, kids, etc. (even if we don't agree with them) must worry about the legality of OC.

UBU52 says:

on 10/14/2009 8:12:57 PM

Also I like how UBU52 felt no need to address my point that she advocates California-style open carry (gun cannot be loaded, or in any condition where it can be easily readied to fire) while the majority of this country has very liberal open carry laws...and no problem.

I DON'T advocate California-style open carry! I don't know where you got such a silly idea unless you mistook some of my sarcasm as real.

Weer'd Beard says:

on 10/14/2009 9:42:32 PM

I did.

What is your stance on OC? YOu got me curious now

Michael Bane says:

on 10/14/2009 10:50:23 PM

As the guy who ran the most successful progun media initiative ever (the NSSF Media Education Program), we got NOWHERE until we were willing to get in the media's and antigunner's faces. I personally pissed off a Major Media Person so badly he hung up on me...but in the end we won and the media outlet he still works for now routinely runs progun stories.

We spent decades trying to convince the media and the alleged "middle" that we were really really REALLY nicer than nicey nice, and all it ever got us was boned.

We will never be the people the antigunners or the antigun media want us to be because, duh, we have guns!

Michael B

RAH says:

on 10/15/2009 6:46:58 AM

OC if legal, to support the legality of OC. If the politicians start to murmur about making it illegal then flood the capital with OC activists and make the point crystal. Any action against OC will cause a major voter reaction.

Politicians have to be reminded that their laws can and will be watched and will have reactions . A little respectful fear of voters reactions is healthy.

The health care town halls was making that point very strongly.

It is a good thing if the politicians fear the public, it keeps them from going over the line into tyranny. The 2A was designed for that. It is a reminder that no free person can be forced.

The arrogance of politicians have been getting stronger and they should be reminded of the possible consequences are not just being voted out.

ChrisTheEngineer says:

on 10/16/2009 7:32:39 PM

I think Michael Bane says it all, especially his "duh."

Comments have been closed on this topic.