Open Carry - Favor Please?

[rlspach]

I'll bet folks there can rationalize a reason why they are carrying these weapons, wherever they are at. Note also the magazines appear to be out. Or, maybe we just need to recruit more women activists.

 

[Al B]

I'll bet folks there can rationalize a reason why they are carrying these weapons, wherever they are at. Note also the magazines appear to be out. Or, maybe we just need to recruit more women activists.

It is ann ice cream shop in Israel. Mags out unless needed.

 

[The Spud]

Maybe it just depends on where you live.....

Everybody sing with me,

They're the three best friends anyone can have,
They're the three best friends anyone can have,
They're the three best friends anyone can have

 

[Michiana]

This type of action only hurts the gun community

I watched the entire video and it was obvious that at least one of these "right to OC" folks were looking to cause a scene and only made the police look professional and themselves rediculous. The OC people looked seedy, acted childish and thank God are not representive of any gun owner I deal with. The person in the group that came into the restaurant with a rifle made what has been an acceptable gathering in the past into an unacceptable situation for the restaurant manager. There is the right to protest and just being stupid; one is acceptable and the other is not. They took a good opportunity and screwed it up. Just my

The sight of a holstered sidearm is unusual enough for some people. Showing up at a family restaurant with an AR-15 slung over your shoulder is quite another. Oh, and conservative attire might help also. The restaurant owner was nice enough to welcome them, but then they had to see how far they could push his hospitality.

There is a right way and a wrong way to influence and/or desensitize people. Scaring the sh*t out of people wouldn't be the right way.

We also have the right to free speech, but screaming in someone's face isn't going to win you any friends.

To our Michigan/activist friends, please do us all a favor and try not to scare the sheep so badly that they vote against us? The idea is to be viewed as responsible gun owners.

Just a constructive suggestion.[/quote]

 

[jbombelli]

This is to remind you why I called you a drama queen.

Would you really think about different ways to put a bullet into a law abiding citizen?

Theres been several mentions of people who have carried long arms in the public in the last few years where no one died.

There is so much fail in this post the best I could come up with is calling you a drama queen.

I don't know they're law-abiding. Maybe they're law-abiding right this second. But what about this morning? What about 5 minutes from now? There's no guarantee that they're going to stay law-abiding. None whatsoever.


So yeah. I'll plan ways to put bullets in their heads, should they suddenly become not so law-abiding. I go through possible scenarios in my head all the time. I do that everywhere I go. I'm constantly planning on how to shoot my way out of places if I have to. I also pay attention to how people carry themselves. Who walks tough? Who doesn't? Who's adjusting the gun on his hip, or the shirt over his gun, when he sits down? Who refuses to take off his coat, even though it's warm in here? Who's eyeballin' people? Who keeps looking out the window or the door? Anybody look like a tweaker? Anybody looking nervous or anxious? Any nice *chests* in here? And what do all these people look like? I try to see things, not look past them like most people do, and I try to be prepared.

You call that drama; I call that foresight and good mental exercise.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Rosa Parks. Political protest happens on the bus.
Salt march. Political protest happens at the beach.
Libby Bridges. Political protest happens at school.

Political protest is not a place, it's something people do.

David I'm surprised at you, since this is a restaurant were discussing, maybe you should bring up something a little more appropriate.




Such as the Birmingham Lunch Counter protests.

Who's eyeballin' people? Who keeps looking out the window or the door?

 

[Delmar]

I watched the entire video and it was obvious that at least one of these "right to OC" folks were looking to cause a scene and only made the police look professional and themselves rediculous. The OC people looked seedy, acted childish and thank God are not representive of any gun owner I deal with. The person in the group that came into the restaurant with a rifle made what has been an acceptable gathering in the past into an unacceptable situation for the restaurant manager. There is the right to protest and just being stupid; one is acceptable and the other is not. They took a good opportunity and screwed it up. Just my

What good is any right if it isn't exercised from time to time? As far as the AR is concerned I think the guy does have a right to carry it in public. I also agree that he was stupid to take it into a crowded restaurant. If I had been a part of that group, I would have excused myself, as soon as he showed up, and locked my pistol in the car. Then I would have conversed with the guy about messing up a good thing.

If I had been the restaurant manager I would have asked the guy with the rife to put it in the car or leave. Given the fact that they had asked permission to carry, I really can't imagine that he would not have complied with this request. Since, however, the manager didn't seem to feel comfortable addressing it himself, calling the cops was OK.

I disagree that the police handled this in a professional manner. The manager asked them to leave. The police should have showed them to their cars, and watched them go. If they refused to go they should have been arrested. Detaining them at the entrance of the restaurant, and calling in more and more police was stupid, stupid , stupid, and created exactly the kind of seen that the manager was hoping to avoid!

 

[lashicoN]

I watched the entire video and it was obvious that at least one of these "right to OC" folks were looking to cause a scene and only made the police look professional and themselves rediculous. The OC people looked seedy, acted childish and thank God are not representive of any gun owner I deal with. The person in the group that came into the restaurant with a rifle made what has been an acceptable gathering in the past into an unacceptable situation for the restaurant manager. There is the right to protest and just being stupid; one is acceptable and the other is not. They took a good opportunity and screwed it up. Just my

The sight of a holstered sidearm is unusual enough for some people. Showing up at a family restaurant with an AR-15 slung over your shoulder is quite another. Oh, and conservative attire might help also. The restaurant owner was nice enough to welcome them, but then they had to see how far they could push his hospitality.

There is a right way and a wrong way to influence and/or desensitize people. Scaring the sh*t out of people wouldn't be the right way.

We also have the right to free speech, but screaming in someone's face isn't going to win you any friends.

To our Michigan/activist friends, please do us all a favor and try not to scare the sheep so badly that they vote against us? The idea is to be viewed as responsible gun owners.

Just a constructive suggestion.

[/quote]

What was one thing the cops did that looked professional? Standing around, doing nothing for 12 minutes doesn't count. They couldn't answer any questions, because they didn't know. They couldn't decide if the OCers were free to go or not. They blocked off the entrance to the building. They blocked off the parking lot. They ignored a car alarm. They lectured the OCers (they aren't judges they are cops), and they looked like a bunch of useless tax leeches in the video, in my opinion.

What did the OCers do that was irresponsible? Did a kid grab the AR15 or something? Was there a part three of the video that I missed?

 

[j706]

I watched the entire video and it was obvious that at least one of these "right to OC" folks were looking to cause a scene and only made the police look professional and themselves rediculous. The OC people looked seedy, acted childish and thank God are not representive of any gun owner I deal with. The person in the group that came into the restaurant with a rifle made what has been an acceptable gathering in the past into an unacceptable situation for the restaurant manager. There is the right to protest and just being stupid; one is acceptable and the other is not. They took a good opportunity and screwed it up. Just my

Well said. And in the second video the fat guy is acting like Perry Mason telling the officer that they can't run a license plate with out reasonable suspicion ect. What a bunch of goof balls! Very much of that kind of stuff we saw there and you will see changes in the laws. Some people are their own worst enemy's. Use a little common sense people...just a little.

 

[kingnereli]

What good is any right if it isn't exercised from time to time? As far as the AR is concerned I think the guy does have a right to carry it in public. I also agree that he was stupid to take it into a crowded restaurant. If I had been a part of that group, I would have excused myself, as soon as he showed up, and locked my pistol in the car. Then I would have conversed with the guy about messing up a good thing.

If I had been the restaurant manager I would have asked the guy with the rife to put it in the car or leave. Given the fact that they had asked permission to carry, I really can't imagine that he would not have complied with this request. Since, however, the manager didn't seem to feel comfortable addressing it himself, calling the cops was OK.

I disagree that the police handled this in a professional manner. The manager asked them to leave. The police should have showed them to their cars, and watched them go. If they refused to go they should have been arrested. Detaining them at the entrance of the restaurant, and calling in more and more police was stupid, stupid , stupid, and created exactly the kind of seen that the manager was hoping to avoid!

Can you expound further on why you condone calling the cops on fellow gun owners for obeying the law? Do you not see the nonsense there?

Through this whole thread there has not been one logical reason expressed why that man should not have had a rifle with him. It boils down to people (even RKBA supporters, apparently) being far to willing to accept the social norms the anti's have been successfully constructing for decades. I almost laugh at the argument that we shouldn't do it because nobody sees it done anymore. It doesn't take any wild imaginings to see that is the very reason to do it. The hope is to reverse the social trend by doing what is legal, yet currently socially unacceptable.

It is a shame we're fighting this battle on two fronts. We have to deal with the anti's who would take away our freedom and the complacent gun owners who are far more concerned with social propriety then they are individual liberty.

 

[Eddie]

I've been following this thread without comment since my original post.

I want to say that dburkehead's logic is sound and that I agree with him. The OCer's had every right to do what they did.

I had originally posted that I thought that the AR was a poor tactical choice if their goal was to desensitize the public towards open carry.

I will still stick by my opinion that the small number of OCer's. their appearance, their choice of a crowded restaurant for a venue, their choice of carrying an AR weren't the best options if their goal was desensitizing. Desensitizing can have the opposite effect if it isn't taken in small steps.

On the other hand, if their goal was to shock the public and get people talking about second amendment rights, then they were very successful because they got a lot of people on here talking about and debating those rights.

 

[kingnereli]

I've been following this thread without comment since my original post.

I want to say that dburkehead's logic is sound and that I agree with him. The OCer's had every right to do what they did.

I had originally posted that I thought that the AR was a poor tactical choice if their goal was to desensitize the public towards open carry.

I will still stick by my opinion that the small number of OCer's. their appearance, their choice of a crowded restaurant for a venue, their choice of carrying an AR weren't the best options if their goal was desensitizing. Desensitizing can have the opposite effect if it isn't taken in small steps.

On the other hand, if their goal was to shock the public and get people talking about second amendment rights, then they were very successful because they got a lot of people on here talking about and debating those rights.

That speaks to the point that we can affirm and support their goals even if their tactics and methods aren't ones we would choose. I can't say that I would bring a rifle to an OC event unless it was expressed that everyone (or most everyone) would be doing the same. It seems in this case it was intended to be a pistol OC event and a man brought a rifle.

My point has been that in spite of the fact that I would not have carried out the precise actions the man with the AR did. I completely support his right to do so and will not engage in calling him a fool or the myriad of other names that were used for him. His goals were in complete alignment with the RKBA issue and were completely legal.

 

[dburkhead]

That speaks to the point that we can affirm and support their goals even if their tactics and methods aren't ones we would choose. I can't say that I would bring a rifle to an OC event unless it was expressed that everyone (or most everyone) would be doing the same. It seems in this case it was intended to be a pistol OC event and a man brought a rifle.

My point has been that in spite of the fact that I would not have carried out the precise actions the man with the AR did. I completely support his right to do so and will not engage in calling him a fool or the myriad of other names that were used for him. His goals were in complete alignment with the RKBA issue and were completely legal.

QFT and nothing with which to disagree here.

 

[LEaSH]

I support their right to do what they did.
It wouldn't have hurt to dress up a little. Maybe make an effort to look clean and not unkempt.

People will judge others on that alone, EBR or not.

 

[Delmar]

Can you expound further on why you condone calling the cops on fellow gun owners for obeying the law? Do you not see the nonsense there?

The word condone might not quite cover my opinion. I did say that if I were the manager I would not have done it that way. What I probably should have said was if the manager got scared because one of them brought in a rifle and if he doesn't have what it takes to man up and ask the guy himself, he was within his rights to call the police. In that sense what he did was OK, because what he did was within his rights.

Through this whole thread there has not been one logical reason expressed why that man should not have had a rifle with him. It boils down to people (even RKBA supporters, apparently) being far to willing to accept the social norms the anti's have been successfully constructing for decades. I almost laugh at the argument that we shouldn't do it because nobody sees it done anymore. It doesn't take any wild imaginings to see that is the very reason to do it. The hope is to reverse the social trend by doing what is legal, yet currently socially unacceptable.

I agree the strategy of reversing the social trend, but I think it is pretty obvious that there is some level of armament that isn't going to be tolerated at the local cafe. Where do you draw the line? grenade launchers? machine guns? swords and battle axes? I personally am not surprised that this restaurant manager drew the line at an AR, and I were the manager of an urban eatery, I would draw the line at the same place. If I were the manager of a greasy spoon in the mountains somewhere, I'm pretty sure I would have no problem with a guy binging in his shot gun, or hunting rife. Lets remember this is all about freedom, and the person who runs a private business should be free to decide what goes on in his place.

It is a shame we're fighting this battle on two fronts. We have to deal with the anti's who would take away our freedom and the complacent gun owners who are far more concerned with social propriety then they are individual liberty.

I am afraid there is no way to avoid differing opinions.

 

[Delmar]

...My point has been that in spite of the fact that I would not have carried out the precise actions the man with the AR did. I completely support his right to do so and will not engage in calling him a fool or the myriad of other names that were used for him. His goals were in complete alignment with the RKBA issue and were completely legal.

true

 

[E5RANGER375]

i was reading earlier in this thread about the talk of peaceful gun rights protest. Im all for people who excercise the legal right to protest, but i never attend public protest because i dont like the feds taking my picture. its bad enough i have to submit to a drivers license photo and they use facial recognition to violate my right to privacy.

 

[IndyMonkey]

i was reading earlier in this thread about the talk of peaceful gun rights protest. Im all for people who excercise the legal right to protest, but i never attend public protest because i dont like the feds taking my picture. its bad enough i have to submit to a drivers license photo and they use facial recognition to violate my right to privacy.

Getting that drivers license must be a beothch every 4 years.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Getting that drivers license must be a beothch every 4 years.

yes it is. i have no criminal history, but i dont want them having my current photo in a database either. if i didnt need to drive, vote, work, buy alcohol, i'd refuse to get a liscense. but i have some ideas for next time. but thats a whole new thread. facial identification can be tricked,

 

[rhino]

Ah, you guys.

If nothing else, this topic has increased the size of my IGNORE list. I'm going to set a world record some day, methinks.

As far as long guns go . . . the only problem I see is that the manager didn't want it there.

In fact, I've been considering doing the same thing. Of course, since I'm close to 450 lbs (with all of my gear on me, anyway), I should probably stay at home because I don't want people to think that only 450 pounders care enough about their rights to actually demonstrate in public.

Seriously, though, the primary reason why I don't actually my AR all the time is convenience. I'm not going to carry it unloaded without any necessary support gear, because while it may make a good political statement, it offends my sensibility to have a useless firearm.

If and when I carry my AR in public, it means carrying a lot more stuff. Then I'll have to decide how many magazines I might need in an emergency, then double that number since I like redundancy. AR mags may not weigh as much as AK mags when loaded, but even carrying half a dozen is noticeable after a brief while.

Actually, this may be a case where those 5.11 and similar vests could really shine. They'd allow you to carry at least a small amount of rifle-related gear and ammo without too much problem, and would be more comfy and less obtrusive for every day tasks than a chest rig and related gear.

Now I need to consider this more carefully.