My great great great grandfather came to California during the Gold Rush and opened a Hardware Store in Nevada City, California. With a great amount of hard work, he was very successful.DaveK wrote:AB1934 has been introduced .... Arnie has been instructed to sign the bill when it reaches his desk.
We all may have different views and opinions on a variety of subjects. However, there's no need for derogatory comments.jgorm wrote:I always thought that "open carry" was for doing things like bringing your gun to the range. The only point of carrying around an unloaded gun in a holster is so the people look at you with fear in their eyes. Maybe that makes you feel big, but I'll just think you are a dumb ass. The guys with the loaded guns would rather everyone not stare and call the cops whenever they see you. I'm not a fan of using the police force, but i'd call them just to mess with the idiot walking around with a gun on his hip.
Very well stated John (BW). That about sums it up nicely.BorregoWrangler wrote:We all may have different views and opinions on a variety of subjects. However, there's no need for derogatory comments.jgorm wrote:I always thought that "open carry" was for doing things like bringing your gun to the range. The only point of carrying around an unloaded gun in a holster is so the people look at you with fear in their eyes. Maybe that makes you feel big, but I'll just think you are a dumb ass. The guys with the loaded guns would rather everyone not stare and call the cops whenever they see you. I'm not a fan of using the police force, but i'd call them just to mess with the idiot walking around with a gun on his hip.
With that said, different people open carry for different reasons. California is not a Shall-Issue CCW state, and most residents cannot get a concealed carry permit. For those choosing to carry a firearm for self-defense, it is the only legal means available. Some open carry as a form of legal civil protest of unconstitutional firearms laws and CCW issuance policies. Still others carry as a form of firearms community diplomacy, to dispel the myth that only cops and criminals carry guns, and to help reintroduce the general public and the law enforcement community to the reality that ordinary peaceful law-abiding citizens possess, use, and carry firearms. Not to feel big or cause fear in others.
While this may be true for a very few, I think you might be drinking the propoganda kool-aid if you are expecting anyone to believe those who support OC are doing so for educational or socially conscientious purposes...come in, that is ridiculous.BorregoWrangler wrote:With that said, different people open carry for different reasons. Still others carry as a form of firearms community diplomacy, to dispel the myth that only cops and criminals carry guns, and to help reintroduce the general public and the law enforcement community to the reality that ordinary peaceful law-abiding citizens possess, use, and carry firearms. Not to feel big or cause fear in others.
You make a lot of good points, Steve. However, you have some that i just don't understand. You say that you have converted people to the pro side, but that these OC people make it harder. I've done the same thing. Talked with folks who where either on or over the fence about firearms and these "OC people" have made it easier. They were not alienated, they did not look upon those who choose to OC as fools. You mention gold-diggers yet those who might be in it for that make up a tiny fraction of those who OC for honorable purposes. I've seen more than my fair share of media news stories covering the open carry movement in a good light. Look at what's happened in Oklahoma. A bill allowing those with concealed carry permits to openly carry weapons passed the Senate.ssc wrote:See this is what I have been saying all along. We need the majority who vote and instead too many gun advocates disregard the REALITY of the situation. We have a PR problem and some of the advocates actions reinforce this problem. There are more constructive ways to win the hearts and minds of the people, as opposed to OC which makes us look like idiots and even though we may win a small battle here and there and it may be a constitutional issue--the reality is that we need to get this majority on our side due to appropriate actions--not alienate them!!!!! Will the law to ban OC stand up to scrutiny, I think so under the states police powers and safety issues, not as stated by John in post 84. This OCM has pro gun people working backwards and causing a rift. I think ithe bill will pass. The committee passed it right through. Again as stated, OCM has attracted goldiggers who are looking for a buck via lawsuit, not to further gun rights. Further, many OC people can't see the big picture and are looking for their 15 minutes of fame--which the media is willing to give them and then edit the story to make them look like fools. When are we going to learn? There is a better way. I have converted my share of people to the pro side, but it gets harder with these OC people making us appear like fools. Remember the media edits the stories to say what they want!!! Why can't people understand.
Just sitting here in Arizona-in a whole different world. Also remember, the NRA supports police and the majority of police political positions are to ban OC. I think, the NRA will carefully choose their battles and this may not be one they will not want to weigh in on. Hence, if it passes, we only have the OCM to thank and then the antis may believe they have momentum and who knows what is next. Further, no matter how well you present the issue, alot of damage has been done and many people have changed their minds on the gun issue--and it is not in our favor.
In conclusion, I think this OCM in CA has done more harm to the gun rights issue then help. Even if the bill doesn't pass, it has helped the antis to bring to the attention of the neutral voting majority a negative image of gun advocates. Oh well, back to the Jimmy Buffett concert.
Just saying, Steve
Like I said, different people, different reasons. It's not ridiculous, Larry. It's very true. Yes, self-defense is probably the biggest reason and I don't think anyone does so in order to by chance assist the police.cruiserlarry wrote:While this may be true for a very few, I think you might be drinking the propoganda kool-aid if you are expecting anyone to believe those who support OC are doing so for educational or socially conscientious purposes...come in, that is ridiculous.
Since this quote has nothing to do with trying to be smarter than the anti's and winning support for our rights and beating them at their game, I will address it in a moment. Like I tell my clients,"This is a game and we must play it smarter then the other side. We have to look at all the angles. It is easyer to be standing on the top of the hill pushing boulders down then at the bottom pushing boulders up." Too may pro gun people fail to see this logic, but the anti's don't. Again, and one more time, I look at the reality of this situation and how can we advance gun rights and win the war as opposed to how can I make alot of temporary noise, maybe win a small battle, but lose the war. For better or worst, this is a game and we must play it smarter. You can either charge into the strongest part of your enemies line and take your loses, but I would rather flank them and hit them where they are exposed and roll up their flank.BorregoWrangler wrote:Shall we not exercise our free speech rights in order that they not be taken away? What kind of freedom is it when you fear it might be taken away? Free men don't fear exercising their rights. If you're afraid that your "freedom" to OC will be taken away, were you really free to OC in the first place? Hasn't it been said that these are God-given rights that our forefathers said preceded even our own existence? And that this country was established with these rights in mind?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
