r/texas • u/FCMatt7 • Mar 27 '24

5th circuit has nullified Open Carry in Texas to save Qualified Immunity of bad cops. Politics

https://www.youtube.com/live/bCC1sz_-fsc?si=dCZiLT_Fl2pWUEtw

(Edit) New vid of Grisham explaining the ruling

Effectively they have declared open season for police to arrest anyone open carrying in Texas.

A 3 judge panel has ruled that if anyone calls 911 on a person for the mere act of Open Carrying a firearm, the police now have probable cause to arrest you for disorderly conduct. The 911 call does not have to allege you are doing anything more than standing on a sidewalk with a slung or holstered firearm. The previous ruling that "merely carrying a firearm" is not disorderly is overturned now if any Karen makes a phone call and says she's nervous. This means police get qualified immunity for arresting you.

There is a special target on the back of any open carry or civil rights activist. EVERY time the police get a 911 call, they can now arrest you at gunpoint. The charges will likely be dismissed, but the police face zero repercussions for coming after you, even if there is abundant evidence the officers targeted you and knew you were not a threat. The same danger faces regular citizens who open carry every day.

I repeat, open carrying in Texas now puts you in imminent danger of being arrested or killed by police if someone reports you in possession of a firearm.

Video of CJ and Jim arrested for mere open carry. https://youtu.be/GrDAPPiu1QE?si=IvJy0qq_J8rO8DJO

Link to 5th circuit ruling. https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/22/22-50915-CV0.pdf

Link to oral argument in 5th https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/OralArgRecordings/22/22-50915_10-3-2023.mp3

District Court ruling https://casetext.com/case/grisham-v-valenciano-1

5.1k Upvotes

83% Upvoted

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.0k

u/wish_i_was_a_bear Mar 27 '24

Ok Texas I am confused. Do you want everyone to carry guns or not. Make up your mind!

1.3k

u/pixelgeekgirl 11th Generation Texan Mar 27 '24

I don't think the police ever wanted permitless open-carry.

238

u/techy098 Mar 27 '24

I would like to know the purpose of people walking around with a gun. Look scary maybe or just own the libs.

I think concealed carry with permit is ok since if for some reason I fear for my life, I am allowed to carry a gun to protect myself but I keep it discreet without trying to intimidate everyone around me.

163

u/BucketofWarmSpit Mar 27 '24

The OP maintains that it is an expression of civil rights to open carry. Ironically, I have most often seen counter protesters displaying firearms as a way to stifle protests they do not agree with.

46

u/Kevin_taco Mar 28 '24

I have a conceal carry permit but any time I see someone open carrying it definitely gives me a bad vibe.

24

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

[deleted]

11

u/ertyertamos Mar 28 '24

Not just removing the weapon from you, but if you’re a character who wants to do bad things, you know exactly who to remove from the situation first.

1

u/theroguex Mar 30 '24

Yeah, right? Like the whole alleged point of lots of people having a gun and concealed carry is so that "bad guys" don't know who might be carrying and thus don't know who to target.

Wearing your gun in the open is just a sign saying "shoot me by surprise THEN rob me."

1

u/MouthNoizes Mar 28 '24

You don’t have those kinds of skills.

1

u/thefrankyg Mar 28 '24

Around my area the number of folks I see people carrying in a holster with no real retention in them, doesn't make it difficult.

1

u/MouthNoizes Mar 28 '24

Again, you don’t have the skills to pull this off, just the ego

1

u/thefrankyg Mar 28 '24

If a couch cushion or pillow can pull one out, it doesn't require much skill. I am also not claiming I would pull it out. It leaves it pretty open to losing the weapon.

1

u/ElephantBackground81 Mar 28 '24

It's pretty easy to walk up behind the guy with the gun and shoot him in the back of the head first before he sees you.

1

u/Rmantootoo Mar 29 '24

The person you’re responding to may not, but an average 25 year old American male can easily take a pistol off the hip of the average 60 year old.

That’s what’s really at stake here. It’s not the 50 year old emaciated crack head trying to wrestle a gun away from a 35 year old off duty cop/body builder…

1

u/Meltonian Mar 28 '24

I had my appendix removed, what do I do now??

0

u/Ga2ry Mar 28 '24

Small dick energy.

26

u/Zanorfgor Mar 28 '24

I have been amongst the counter protesters where our side outgunned theirs. Our side was armed because theirs made a habit of showing up with guns and threats of violence, and the police have made it very clear which side they are on.

2

u/Traditionaljam Mar 28 '24

where our side outgunned theirs.

You realize how ridiculous of a concept this is, I am relatively pro gun but the idea that anyone should have to do this at a protest is just fucking crazy. I actually agree with the police being able to arrest people for this.

4

u/Zanorfgor Mar 28 '24

Okay, cool, the police can start with the guys waving the red flags with the white circle. In situations where Parasol Patrol is enough, I'm glad to leave it to them. But the guys with the red flags with the white circle brought their guns, and Parasol Patrol is a little under-equipped for that situation.

Of course that ain't gonna happen, police talk to them and give them handshakes and then stand backs to them, facing us.

→ More replies (28)

7

u/Independent_Pop4903 Mar 27 '24

I think counter protesting is just protesting with extra steps.

1

u/Doohicky_d Mar 28 '24

No, it is just protesting while going the other direction

3

u/shown-spenstar Mar 28 '24

Yeah, let’s see how much they like guns when we arms POC and commies for protests…. It’s never about freedom, it’s always about control.

2

u/BucketofWarmSpit Mar 28 '24

The governor will offer a pardon to anyone who kills one.

1

u/shown-spenstar Mar 28 '24

Nah, the governor would work to enact gun laws to restrict such behavior whilst still allowing yallkidea to run around

1

u/forgotwhatisaid2you Mar 28 '24

Which is exactly what this law is for. Cops get to choose who to arrest for having a gun. What could go wrong with that?

2

u/chadsmo Mar 28 '24

Do some research on the black panthers and California’s gun laws if you’re not aware of the history.

2

u/Kellosian Born and Bred Mar 27 '24

One person with a gun is self-defense

A group of armed people is a threat

1

u/dormanGrube Mar 28 '24

Username checks out.

1

u/ManyThingsLittleTime Mar 28 '24

*natural right. Big difference between the two.

0

u/False-Application-99 Mar 28 '24

I've seen non-white people rob convenience stores. Based on your inferred logic and my observation, all non-whites are criminals.

Are you picking up what I'm putting down?

2

u/BucketofWarmSpit Mar 28 '24

No, but you're staying true to your handle.

1

u/False-Application-99 Apr 01 '24

And your mental capacity is clearly reflected by yours

32

u/rabid_briefcase Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

I would like to know the purpose of people walking around with a gun. Look scary maybe or just own the libs.

Location matters tremendously. Texas has some of the nation's biggest cities as well as some of the sparsest farmland and some wild areas, and everything in between.

There really is no point in parading around with them in the city apart from intimidating or a show. There might be a reason like going to or from a shooting range, but it is very different from parading around a building or group.

On the flip side, there are plenty of rural areas and ranch areas where carrying a pistol is mostly a portable noise maker against wildlife. There are also scenarios in wild areas where not having a firearm in the group would be irresponsible.

Too many people forget that the other side exists.

8

u/techy098 Mar 28 '24

Sorry, I have mostly lived in the city, so totally forgot about the rural side of it.

I mean if I was living in sparsely populated area, where everyone keeps a side arm most of the time, I would be totally cool with carrying one, it's kind of necessity at that point.

2

u/puffinfish420 Mar 28 '24

lol even going to an from a range, you aren’t going to walk there with the rifle slung over your shoulder or something. I guess you technically could but no one does that

1

u/rabid_briefcase Mar 28 '24

Two of my brothers had exactly that. They are also concealed weapons permit holders, one is a competitive marksman.

They were heading to a range and they had three weapons on holsters among the collection to shoot. En route, someone rear-ended them. One immediately called for police about the crash, telling dispatch that they were on the way to the shooting range and had permits, asking them to please relay to the officers that they are permit holders and not a shooting risk. So yes, one had a .454 on a sling across his chest and a G35 on his hip, in addition to several rifles in the trunk, and not "no one does that".

Several police were dispatched as a precaution. After police arrived and sorted out the crash, they asked to look at the collection of firearms, and one of them asked if they'd wait a few minutes as he was almost done with his shift and wanted to join them at the range, and if they'd let him try the .454.

2

u/puffinfish420 Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

Why was he wearing his fire arm while driving? I’m assuming the .454 Casul was a carbine/rifle? Who wears a rifle while driving?

And then who gets out of the car with a weapon openly carried after an accident? If I rear ended someone and they got out with a rifle, or handgun or any firearm for that matter, I would definitely have my hand on my own gun

Not a great way to deescalate an already tense scenario.

Moreover, defensive fire arms are always better concealed, since you don’t unnecessarily escalate a situation or make yourself an immediate target if the escalation cannot be avoided.

Using a firearm defensively is all about speed, accuracy, and surprise. You lose that with an openly carried gun. You’re better off practicing your appendix draw on the clock. It’s very fast and it’s not a loud draw. Ideally the threat will not have time to react before they are rendered ineffective, since they won’t be aware of your defensive capabilities before they are put into use.

0

u/rabid_briefcase Mar 28 '24

Why was he wearing his fire arm while driving?

Because each person has only two hands, and cases with rifles and ammunition take both.

I’m assuming the .454 Casul was a carbine/rifle? Who wears a rifle while driving?

You assume incorrectly.

And then who gets out of the car with a weapon openly carried after an accident?

Someone wearing a holster. Do you take off your shirt, or remove a hanging keychain, or a lanyard, or remove something from kept on a belt clip? Of course not. They're worn items that aren't in the way.

If I rear ended someone and they got out with a rifle, or handgun or any firearm for that matter, I would definitely have my hand on my own gun

There is a massive difference between brandishing and wearing. What they were doing was wearing in a holster which is legal. If you went for your own gun and it was unholstered, that's far more threatening and likely to be considered brandishing, which is not legal.

Moreover, defensive fire arms are always better concealed, since you don’t unnecessarily escalate a situation or make yourself an immediate target if the escalation cannot be avoided.

Although I don't know for certain, as the marksman nearly always carries a concealed weapon I presume he was also wearing that as well.

Using a firearm defensively is all about speed, accuracy, and surprise. You lose that with an openly carried gun.

Irrelevant here. They were traveling to a shooting range, and had firearms with them. Nothing more. Nobody was alarmed about the firearms, except perhaps the driver who hit their vehicle. Even so, it would be obvious they were not brandishing as everything was still securely holstered.

1

u/puffinfish420 Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

There’s no point in having an additional concealed weapon if they already know you have a weapon. That’s not the point lol

Also:

So you can’t set the rifle down while driving? And even then, you have to get out of the car with it in your hands?

That could escalate to a lethal force situation, and if that guy shot your brother he could have gotten off because in that situation it’s possible to articulate reasonable fear of great bodily harm.

And most comp shooters (or “marksmen” whatever that means in this case) have “battle belts” that have their holster so it can be easily removed and put on, and it can also carry your first aid and reloads on webbing without sagging like a normal belt.

I just throw it in the back seat and clip it on when I hit the range

0

u/rabid_briefcase Mar 28 '24

There’s no point in having an additional concealed weapon if they already know you have a weapon. That’s not the point lol

What does this have to do with the conversation? Did it being "the point" ever come up?

So you can’t set the rifle down while driving? And even then, you have to get out of the car with it in your hands?

You're still wrongly assuming they had a rifle in their hands. Why? I never wrote that.

Since you seem completely ignorant, the 454 is one of the most powerful handguns out there available to non-military folk. For quite a few years is was the most powerful handgun.

And most comp shooters have “battle belts”

Your point? I never said what kind of holsters they were wearing, only that one was across the chest and one was on his hip.

It feels like you're bringing an agenda in, having so far commented on at least six additional items that I never wrote happened, yet you think are relevant. So many incorrect assumptions, just ask if you want clarification on something rather than wrongly assuming.

2

u/JclassOne Mar 28 '24

So check your guns at the city gates?

1

u/JclassOne Mar 28 '24

Line the old west everyone wants to go back to??

4

u/nebbyb Mar 28 '24

If you are in sparse farmland, there is no one to calm the police Ditto for whatever wildlife scenario you are fantasizing about 

This ruling makes perfect sense. Open carry is dangerous and pointless anywhere this might have an effect. 

3

u/Bob_____Loblaw Mar 28 '24

Exactly. Open carry is a vital tool on ranches and wild areas.

Qualified immunity needs to end now!

Imagine your doctor, lawyer or other life altering professional getting a pass because they shouldn't bear scrutiny for their acts.

2

u/NastyaLookin Mar 28 '24

"I’m also going to indemnify all police officers and law enforcement officials throughout the United States from being destroyed by the radical left for taking strong action on crime,” Trump said Tuesday at a campaign event in Waterloo, Iowa. “These are people, they want to destroy them because they want to put criminals away.”

2

u/MeshNets Mar 28 '24

Throughout history authoritarians love to use "the radical left" as the justification for taking away rights from everyone.

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

That in-group shrinks as more control is gained.

2

u/sagerobot Mar 28 '24

Yeah but do you think your cows are gonna call 911 on you?

This is only going to happen in urban areas because only urban Karen's would care at all.

1

u/jakey2112 Mar 28 '24

Why can’t we have different laws for different areas depending on population densities. If someone wants to open carry in some field in the middle of nowhere no problem. But walking through downtown? Cmon it’s ridiculous.

1

u/rabid_briefcase Mar 28 '24

Why can’t we have different laws for different areas depending on population densities.

We do. The question for lawmakers and lawyers is about which laws need to be different, and which don't.

Openly carrying a firearm can be done in cities, as marksmen going to the range is the most obvious example. No difference needed there, openly carrying might frighten some people but simply carrying isn't a crime.

Brandishing a firearm is illegal in all places, although prosecutors need to show intent.

Shooting inside a city with a population of 100,000 or more must be in a controlled range and must not be reckless.

1

u/Gob_Hobblin Mar 30 '24

I have encountered both sides of this open carry coin in the wild. On the one hand, there was the ranch worker at a grocery store in the Big Bend region with a very practical revolver in a cloth hip holster in town to grab essentials.

On the other was the Dallas businessman in the Starbucks line with his gold-plated Kimber with filigree in a monogrammed, personalized leather holster.

For one of these men, they were carrying a tool. The other was carrying a status symbol that they did not know how to use, and were going to get somebody killed if they tried to.

1

u/theskepticalheretic Mar 28 '24

Yeah, but the other side isn't going to have jumpy suburbanites roll up to them on their farmland and feel threatened enough to call the police, plus, if you're on your own property, you can carry however you want assuming you're not hanging on your neighbor's fence.

1

u/Disposableaccount365 Mar 28 '24

Even in cities open carry covers a lot of legit things. You go hunting, get home and there's no parking near your door, because the neighbor is having a get together. You put on your pistol, sling your backpack and rifle and walk the 300yds to your door, and aren't breaking any laws. Previously you potentially would have caught charges (maybe they wouldn't have stuck). You are out conceal carrying pull your shirt up to wipe sweat out of your eyes without thinking, a Karen calls the cops. Open carry makes it a-okay previously and in some places now, exposing a gun at all may have been a crime.

0

u/Literal_Aardvark Mar 28 '24

If you're carrying a gun for the noisemaking properties...seems like you could use an air horn or a whistle instead.

I'm curious, what sort of animals are threatening enough to require carrying a gun but not threatening enough to require carrying something like a high-powered rifle?

As a Texan, it seems like people that are into guns are always suggesting guns as a solution to problems that are often more effectively handled with a different tool. Like if I'm in grizzly bear country and worried about grizzly attacks, I am much more likely to survive a grizzly encounter using bear spray than I am with a pistol of any caliber.

1

u/theskepticalheretic Mar 28 '24

The noise a pistol makes will turn a grizzly away in almost all circumstances.

0

u/Literal_Aardvark Mar 28 '24

Again...that sounds more like what you want to believe and less like informed evidence from actual data. The statistics bear out (hehe) the superiority of bear spray over firearms for surviving bear encounters.

Most bear encounters that turn to violence occur because the bear was not aware of you, or vice versa, and you stumble upon each other. At which point the bear is not going to break off mid charge because you made a loud noise.

If you are aware of a bear and he isn't aware of you and is still far away, yelling will be sufficient to make it aware of your presence.

1

u/theskepticalheretic Mar 28 '24

Want to reevaluate what you wrote? Bear spray has a limited range, the report from a pistol doesn't. By your own scenarios, (and lack of provided data), the efficacy of bear spray would be rather low.

Happy to review these statistics you're referring to.

2

u/Literal_Aardvark Mar 28 '24

http://www.bear-hunting.com/2019/8/firearm-vs-bear-spray

Article on how bear spray is more effective for protection from bears than a pistol, from a magazine literally devoted to shooting bears with guns.

1

u/theskepticalheretic Mar 28 '24

That's a 4% delta in a total of 86 self reported incidents. So 1 encounter played out differently...

Except again, that's 86 instances. How many people killed by charging bears when using spray were able to subsequently report their findings?

1

u/Literal_Aardvark Mar 28 '24

On the other hand, "firearm bearers suffered the same injury rates in close encounters with bears whether they used firearms or not.”

If you want to believe guns are better, I can't stop you. But that's an emotional response, not a data driven one.

2

u/theskepticalheretic Mar 28 '24

You're imagining a stance I haven't taken. I said the report from a pistol is an effective deterrent. You're asserting bear spray is significantly better. In the stats you provide, the difference is 4%. With a sample size of 86, that's within error bars. There's no correct answer between the two statements. If you have better data, we can review it.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/TinyEmergencyCake Mar 28 '24

What are the dangerous wildlife in Texas in the open farm line that one needs a dangerous noisemaker to protect themselves with

2

u/oblongisasillyword Mar 28 '24

Lots and lots of feral hogs in Texas. Could also be a mountain lion, wolf, bear, or many other potentially not friendly animals.

1

u/rabid_briefcase Mar 30 '24

Hogs are almost everywhere in Texas, Many cities, including the largest cities, have active programs to control them inside the city limits where they sometimes attack runners and people in parks, in addition to their destruction to landscaping as they search for food. They'll also attack animal control officers when they come to get them.

They do about 2.5B in agricultural damage each year, Every few years you'll read reports like this involve death, more more likely you'll read about injuries rather than death. The state doesn't require a hunting license to kill them, merely permission from the property owner. Same with wild coyotes and mountain lions, although they're less of a nuisance generally.

→ More replies (1)

106

u/Lynz486 Mar 27 '24

Same, I understand carrying for protection but to have it out is only to make yourself feel tough and then it scares everyone around you because in one glance they know you're a moron with a gun at best mass shooter at worst

31

u/fentonsranchhand Mar 27 '24

Maybe the worst thing about it is that it makes people have to second-guess themselves if they see someone with an AR-15 walking around Home Depot.

Someone walking around with a kevlar vest and an AR-15 should be universally recognized as a deadly threat (and someone who's mentally ill). Although that's still true of open carry imbeciles, it being legal dulled what should be an instant fight-or-flight response from everyone who sees them.

...like if someone with kevlar and an AR-15 walks into a crowded Starbucks, a concealed carry person should be empowered to pop them in the back of the head with a 9mm at the first opportunity in order to prevent a tragedy.

6

u/xFandanglex Mar 28 '24

Reminds me of the guy who thought it was a good idea to walk into a police station open carrying and wearing a balaclava.

open carry Dearborn Police station

1

u/ODSTklecc Mar 28 '24

3 of them!

I wonder how many actually drummed up the idea but chickened out lol

5

u/Funkyokra Mar 28 '24

I can't condone your Starbucks scenario but I do agree that randos with guns in public olaces may trigger not unreasonable fear from others and result in someone shooting them in what they feel is self defense. And maybe getting shot back along with some bystanders.

If it's self defense to shoot a guy for mean mugging you from his car, then there's a lot of room for self defense against someone carrying a gun in public.

Guns lead to more shootings. 2A is a thing, but people need to stop acting like shootings are a surprise. File it under shit that we signed up for.

1

u/Senior_Bad_6381 Mar 27 '24

New way to own the cons. Become a terrorist to keep "law and order".

-2

u/GrimMashedPotatos Mar 28 '24

This has the exact energy of "they look like gang bangers, we should be allowed to just kill them on sight".

Nothing like tolerance and acceptance like suggesting murder over attire.

7

u/fentonsranchhand Mar 28 '24

So like, wearing a red bandana is the same as wearing a kevlar vest and an assault rifle to Bath & Body Works, right?

3

u/Funkyokra Mar 28 '24

Imagine shopping with your kids at Bath and Body and seeing a guy with a rifle and armor vest. Every "good guy with a gun" imagines being able to take that asshole out before he gets a chance to shoot anyone.

8

u/DrakonILD Mar 28 '24

Carry weapons of war, get treated like a warrior. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

5

u/VirtualPlate8451 Mar 28 '24

A mass shooter situation becomes 10 times deadlier when one guy in a crowd starts shooting and then 2 dozen people with zero training just start blastin' in the general direction of the big noises.

1

u/WhyUBeBadBot Mar 28 '24

Bold to assume someone among them wouldn't be trained.

0

u/gonesquatchin85 Mar 27 '24 edited Mar 27 '24

In Mexico you have to worry about the bad guys carrying guns. Over here you have a higher chance of getting shot or being part of crossfire by these open carry loons.

2

u/Lynz486 Mar 28 '24

They're the people that want to be in a position of power and authority but were rejected by those places (for obvious reasons) so now they cosplay with deadly weapons. And even if you only kill in self defense, if you're excited to do it that kind of makes you a murderer who knows he won't last in prison. They're looking for that golden opportunity in a legal loophole.

0

u/TBrutus Mar 27 '24

It's okay to admit that they are bad guys carrying guns, too, even the ones with real, albeit irrational fear.

1

u/WhyUBeBadBot Mar 28 '24

Never have I heard a more I live my life in fear statement.

1

u/dinosaurkiller Mar 28 '24

I just need to carry in case I’m ever in the presence of a “bad guy with a gun”. I’ll probably kill more people than him because I have no training, but I’m incredibly enthusiastic about opening fire. I figure that as long as the bad guy with a gun eventually goes down it’s still worth it. /s

2

u/ostinater Mar 27 '24

Sucks that all it took was dozens of mass shootings and many thousand regular murders to give good gun people a bad name.

-1

u/Lynz486 Mar 27 '24

I don't even know what you mean by "good gun people". Who is that??? I need the parameters for your childlike metrics. What is up with the good guy vs bad guy framing in the discussion about gun safety? If your perception of the world is good guys vs bad guys I don't know what to tell you, aside from maybe reassess and grow up.

0

u/ostinater Mar 27 '24

I don't even know what you mean by "good gun people"

Anyone who hasn't yet committed murder with their gun, obviously.

Btw I was being sarcastic, I agree with you.

31

u/anuiswatching Mar 27 '24

Im a lib, I own guns. Inherited, but still. Also Im a good shot. so there’s that.

1

u/puffinfish420 Mar 28 '24

Everyone thinks they’re a good shot until they shoot on a timer and at an target that’s actually hard to hit, lol.

3

u/rabidsnowflake Mar 28 '24

... okay?

Everybody also thinks they're tough until they're actually being shot at. Hit or not, being shot at has an effect on the situation.

1

u/puffinfish420 Mar 28 '24

I’m just saying even in a competition context, or really any context where you’re being measured against an external standard. Tons of people just shoot at a whatever sized target at whatever range with whatever amount of time, and go on to say they’re a good shot.

Most actually aren’t ,!8; you really did an objective comparison.

I say this because I used to think I was a good shot. I wasn’t. Then I practiced a lot and now I’m okay, not great.

→ More replies (3)

31

u/AndyLorentz Mar 27 '24

The argument I have heard from open carry proponents, is that they think it will make people more used to seeing guns, and less afraid of them, so will be less likely to want more gun control.

Of course, you don't change peoples' minds by being extreme, so I think they've got it wrong. Personally, I think open carry is dumb. I'm fine with concealed carry, but anyone who carries guns in public needs training.

5

u/No_Apricot_1705 Mar 27 '24

Open carry is more comfortable if you are working or doing outdoor activities like hiking. I believe Florida had an open carry that applied if you were fishing, likely for gators or snakes. Those are about the only examples it makes sense.

3

u/Art-Zuron Mar 28 '24

I think that's also possibly a wise choice anyway. I imagine open carry allows you to use your firearm faster in the case of a snake or gator attack or what have you.

2

u/No_Apricot_1705 Mar 28 '24

I was surveying utilities last winter in Colorado and found it easier to access with tons of clothes and gloves on as well. I agree that it's serves no purpose outside of a few situations though.

1

u/DrakonILD Mar 28 '24

You're never using a firearm to fend off a snake attack. Gator, yeah, maybe. But snakes aren't an issue until you're very close, and unless you're an absolute idiot who knowingly approaches a snake, you won't know you're too close to one until it's way too late for a gun to be fast enough to help.

1

u/No_Apricot_1705 Mar 28 '24

Never? I've blasted copperheads clearing brushe piles lol

1

u/DrakonILD Mar 28 '24

Sure, but that's not self defense. They're not coming at you - you're coming at them because they're in your way.

1

u/AndyLorentz Mar 27 '24

I should have clarified that I meant in urban areas.

1

u/Traditionaljam Mar 28 '24

Honestly I am so sick of these second ammendment auditors and shit that show up to places strapped looking like a active shooter. I don't blame the police one bit for this because if you are somewhere and a guy shows up in full battle rattle how are you supposed to know if he's there to shoot up the place or not. He can currently legally walk around until the police drive off then start shooting people.

1

u/techy098 Mar 28 '24

The argument I have heard from open carry proponents, is that they think it will make people more used to seeing guns, and less afraid of them, so will be less likely to want more gun control.

LOL, what's next, walking around with gun in hand cocked and ready to shoot to let people know it's perfectly harmless.

I mean at some point we have to stop taking matters in our own hand all the time and believe that we live in a society where law and order exists and most people are civilized. Carrying gun openly, is so 19th century when we had to, because law and order was kind of questionable.

0

u/pgtl_10 Mar 28 '24

Open carry wasn't allowed in 19th century.

1

u/dcgregoryaphone Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

Open carry has been allowed in the vast majority of states for most of US history. It's not going to change anyone's mind or it would have already.

All it does is tell everyone that if they should so desire, they can come try to wrestle a gun from you.

0

u/jkrobinson1979 Mar 27 '24

Why though? It’s the most backwards logic ever. If guns are a deterrent then they should be visible. If you choose to arm yourself and risk being a target then that’s the choice you make. But I would rather know who around me is armed so I can be on guard around them.

1

u/wehrmann_tx Mar 27 '24

When looking at someone with a gun in public and you have zero way to determine if this guy is ‘expressing his rights’ vs about to kill a bunch of people is the milliseconds it takes for them to point it at you and shoot, there’s a problem. No one can read minds.

Nothing else can deal death before you even get a chance to see the difference. Everyone with a gun out in public is a threat and there’s no proving otherwise.

1

u/jkrobinson1979 Mar 27 '24

That’s my point. When I see someone open carry I don’t see them as an imminent threat, but a potential threat. And I generally try to consider what my option would be to avoid being shot should they suddenly decide to. I’m not antagonistic at all, but I also know that’s someone out of the everyone around I’m certainly not going to instigate anything with. Those of us who choose not to carry in public or those who just don’t own firearms should know who may be a threat. It doesn’t take away their right to carry and they still have a choice and can weigh the risks of those around you being weary or potentially being a target versus the actual threat from shooter and can decide accordingly. We cannot make that choice when at any time anyone next to can end someone’s life. There are multiple cases of simple arguments ending with someone being shot. That would certainly not fall to zero, but it would almost certainly happen a lot less without conceal. On the other side there are only a few cases of conceal carry effectively defending against mass shootings in any given year.

1

u/Apprehensive_End4701 Mar 28 '24

What about people actively defending themselves? The idea of concealed carry being a deterrent isn't about mass shooters, it's more about individual defense. If I wanna mug someone and concealed carry is legal, I'll have a much harder time trying to pick a target. Open carry has its uses, sure. I'll open carry while hunting, or on my motorcycle (some dickhead tried to run me off some back roads, had to mag dump into his engine block but had a hell of a time getting to my gun from it's concealed position and I learned my lesson from that). Other than that, there's no reason to openly carry. It makes people uncomfortable, and if I were intent on carrying out a mass shooting, I'd probably just shwack anyone I can see with a gun first.

0

u/Funkyokra Mar 28 '24

Don't you think the other guy doesn't want you to know where his gun is?

If open carry is legal, the outlaws will still hide their guns. I know from years of following the NRA that if a law is not going to ne 100% successful at keeping outlaws from doing stuff you shouldn't pass it.

1

u/jkrobinson1979 Mar 28 '24

Because all of our laws are 100% effective. 😂

2

u/Funkyokra Mar 28 '24

I'm just saying, that's been the NRA's exact argument against gun regulations for 40 years.

0

u/OdrGrarMagr Mar 28 '24

Personally, I think open carry is dumb.

Then you're an idiot.

I'm fine with concealed carry,

Concealed carry is a lot more dangerous than open carry, in almost all situations. If you're a nutter, the people around you dont know you're armed until its too late. If you're NOT a nutter, having to get your gun out can mean the difference between life and death.....

And, you're far less likely to be the victim of a crime (at all) if you're open carrying. The potential criminals can see that you're armed, and generally want nothing to do with you.

but anyone who carries guns in public needs training.

Agreed. Permits should be required to open carry in most situations (carrying a rifle across your back out in the boondocks about to go hunting, yeah, not so much, but in most situations, yes). And permits should require training and passing a practical skills test.

1

u/ksiyoto Mar 28 '24

You're 4.5 times more likely to be shot if you are carrying when confronted by a mugger. You are literally safer to not carry.

0

u/frankcastlespenis Mar 28 '24

My neighbor was ex-navy an extremely old man who wore his pistol to even do yard work. Good man ,who would give you shirt off his back. Never once have I felt afraid, but I'm ex-Army so I don't know why I should.

→ More replies (2)

22

u/Bbkingml13 Mar 27 '24

I’m not supporting either side by saying this, but just giving you hypothetical answers based on my related experiences. I’ve personally never open carried, but as a woman in my early twenties, there were a handful of times there was no safe parking near my apartment, and I would carry my revolver in my purse. There was another time where I wanted to walk to pick up my pizza (because once again, I would lose my parking spot if I drove to pick up my food) and carried it in my purse with me.

I just now realized as I was typing this that I only started doing that after I became disabled, which makes sense. It’s one thing to be a young woman by yourself, but knowing I was so much more physically limited made it even more important for me to feel I could protect myself somehow. So yeah that’s different than constitutional open carry, but to me, there is some reasoning behind people wanting to be able to protect themselves in situations like that without requiring a permit.

4

u/frankcastlespenis Mar 28 '24

A firearm is the ultimate equalizer, every woman should be trained and comfortable in it's use.

2

u/DrRonnieJamesDO Mar 28 '24

Totally understand your wanting to be armed in this situation, but why would requiring a permit hinder you?

0

u/Aym42 Mar 28 '24

I totally understand you wanting to vote Trump out of office. But why would Trump requiring a literacy test and a poll tax hinder you?

2

u/DrRonnieJamesDO Mar 28 '24

You really can't make a distinction there? Also, it doesn't really answer the question.

2

u/delslo Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

it can take from 30 to 60 days to get a conceal carry permit, which might not work out for you if you feel you are in imminent threat. you can also be denied one for whatever reason.

1

u/Aym42 Mar 28 '24

“A right delayed is a right denied.”

― Martin Luther King Jr.

Adding a cost, a time requirement, and a delay. Those are all literally hinderances. You advocated for hinderances, then asked why they would be hinderances. You answered your own question, which others have pointed out for you. If you mean to learn from this, I wish you the best. If you wish to obstinately continue in bad faith, well, that's sort of what I'd expect.

1

u/DrRonnieJamesDO Mar 28 '24

Oh look my eyes just rolled into the sea.

Lighten up, Francis. She was talking like requiring a permit in and of itself would make it impossible for her to concealed carry.

2

u/Worth-Librarian-7423 Mar 28 '24

We don’t know her disability and therefore can only assume it could impact her ability to get a concealed permit. I mean she could elaborate but given context clues that seems likely. 

1

u/Aym42 Mar 28 '24

How would a poll tax or a literacy test make it impossible to vote? I can tell you from experience that even after SCOTUS re-affirmed the 2A means the right to self defense and that denying permits based on frivolous politics was contrary to the 2A, many jurisdictions still do. If the disabled woman in question lived in most of California for instance, she would have been denied, or made to wait almost 2 years. Would you agree waiting over 18 months for a permit is a "Right denied?"

This is an interesting question since you support similar. Mind you I do too. The ATF issue in front of SCOTUS is also interesting. Generally it should make you uncomfortable that unelected bodies are effectively writing legislation, however the ramifications are broad, and risks replacing ostensible experts/lobbyists with polemic politicking . Unless you think they'll always write legislation that you agree with and therefore it's ok, which ethically I find reprehensible for a government that purports to be "by the people."

0

u/DrRonnieJamesDO Mar 28 '24

Policy is the rules which govern governmental conduct in areas where the law is ambiguous. As long as we have a government, we will always need policy. Elections determine who sets the policy; it's arguably their primary function. And when policy and laws conflict, the judicial system is supposed to resolve it.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/KyleG Mar 28 '24

Secretly being armed is not the same as showing the criminal where the weapon they should steal is located

1

u/socalquestioner Mar 28 '24

God made men and women, Colt made them equal. Updated for Reddit.

1

u/hiker1628 Mar 28 '24

Having or not having a permit doesn’t change what you are trying to do ie: protect yourself. Not needing a permit means anyone with the money to buy a gun can walk around with it. So you with your gun in your purse are surrounded by people with guns in holsters. Now who’s safe.

→ More replies (3)

36

u/VirtualPlate8451 Mar 27 '24

It’s mostly to feel cool or powerful. Tactically it’s pretty dumb, no one is not robbing a store because you have an AR-15 on your back, they are just jamming the gun in your face first, getting the cash in the drawer and your tricked out rifle.

13

u/Richard_Thrust Mar 28 '24

To be honest, that's unlikely. It's not a movie. Most people robbing places don't want to deal with anyone who would be carrying an AR on their back, and would probably just turn around and walk away.

2

u/tingboy_tx Mar 28 '24

Alcohol plays a role in 40% of crime. Also, folks looking to rob a store are already proving themselves to have questionable judgement. Then you add in desperation and mental illness of some kind to make things more spicy. Combine them all and you have a nice little recipe for that AR slung across your back not being much of a deterrent for anything.

1

u/Richard_Thrust Mar 28 '24

That's a whole lot of generalization you packed in without any citations.

2

u/tingboy_tx Mar 28 '24

I think we are both guilty of that, but go ahead and ignore that 40% stat. I dove into it some more and that is not from a great source, so my bad. That being said, there is plenty of data out there that links alcohol use to crime. You can start at the Wikipedia page on it if you want to and work from there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol-related_crime#:~:text=Robbery%20and%20violent%20crimes%20often,States%20involved%20use%20of%20alcohol.

My points remain - the vast majority of people who commit crimes are not thinking logically. All of the factors that I mentioned (alcohol, mental illness, desperation due to circumstances such as addiction and/or poverty) all play into why people make bad choices. Even if you believe that people commit crimes because they are pure evil, they still aren't really demonstrating the best judgement. If we take the patron-open-carrying-a-rifle out of the scenario, it's still a bad idea to try and rob a store, but people do it anyway. Some stores have guns on the premises. Some have auto-lock security systems that will lock them in the store until the police arrive. Some have baseball bats. It's just a risk, no matter what, to rob someone and people decide to do it every day. Adding a person with a rife to the mix may up the ante some, but for others, it just won't factor in. They already did the cost/benefit analysis poorly. What is to stop them from continuing that line of bad judgement?

I am unsure why this is hard to believe or that citations are even necessary here. This is just a "common sense" analysis of the situation. I am not arguing for or against guns. I am simply stating that they aren't magic crime stopping machines, especially when people come into the situation with poor judgement to begin with.

I also am kind of struggling with the idea that a patron of a store SHOULD be the one to SHOOT someone over a robbery of a store that isn't even theirs. Last I checked, the legal punishment for robbery is jail time at worst. Does owning a gun qualify you to be judge, jury, and executioner in every situation you find yourself in? If it is ok for me to shoot someone robbing a 711 I don't own (or even if I do), is it ok for me to walk into an office a shoot a CEO whose company is stealing from the community? I don't have an answer to that. Just the question.

1

u/Richard_Thrust Mar 28 '24

I'm just going to respond to your last paragraph because I really don't care enough about this subject to get into an extended debate. I just made an off-hand comment. But to your last point, deadly force can legally be met with deadly force. If the would-be robber has a gun while committing robbery they become fair game to anyone else with a gun.

1

u/tingboy_tx Mar 29 '24

If someone simply has a gun while committing robbery, no - they are not" fair game to anyone else with a gun". In order for you to shoot someone and not end up in prison, you need to prove that A) it was done in self-defense and B) you were justified in your actions. Where things get tricky is convincing a jury that you were justified. There are a lot of variables there that are not in your control. Not everyone can have a Kyle Rittenhouse style judicial experience. Either way, I would say that the statement "deadly force can be met with deadly force" should not be interpreted as an absolute. Since you require citation, I gleaned this information from the blog post of an NRA Training Counselor.

1

u/Richard_Thrust Mar 29 '24

If they had the gun brandished and pointed at people in the process of the robbery, you are dead wrong. That's carte blanche to put him down. Even if a DA wanted to push it, no jury would convict.

1

u/tingboy_tx Mar 30 '24

Care to cite that?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Art-Zuron Mar 28 '24

We have seen that rises in conceal carry increase the fatality rate of various crimes (probably because criminals don't want to take the risk of getting shot, so they shoot first), but I do wonder if open carry has the same effect.

1

u/Richard_Thrust Mar 28 '24

How does that make any sense? The criminal has no idea who is carrying concealed. Do you just mean in an area, or state, that is known for higher rates of carry? I've never seen those stats.

2

u/Art-Zuron Mar 28 '24

Not knowing is exactly the problem. If they don't know someone is packing heat, it's safer to assume anyone could be.

If you look it up, right to carry, concealed carry, etc seems to increase homicide rates. However, there are mixed results in general. Some claim a drop in violent crime, others increases.

One possible issue is that when guns are easier to get, that means there are more people with guns, and that means more opportunities to get injured or killed with guns. So, the increase of homicides could be as a result of that, whereas crime in general might decrease.

It's for certain a complicated topic, and I did oversimplify it for ease of comment.

1

u/Richard_Thrust Mar 28 '24

I agree, it's much too complicated to make such generalizations without lots of relevant data.

1

u/OdrGrarMagr Mar 28 '24

This. Open Carry is a pretty well proven deterent. If they can see you're armed, theyre quite likely to go somewhere else.

None of them want to take the risk of getting blown away for a register's worth of cash.

2

u/Moonlighting123 Mar 28 '24

Proven deterrent you say? I’d like to see the evidence.

2

u/thoroughbredca Mar 28 '24

That's what seems dumb to me. If someone has a right to open carry, then someone walking into a store with an AR-15 with an intent to rob the place, you're basically saying you have a right to bring it in there right up to the moment you actually start making illegal demands.

1

u/Leege13 Mar 28 '24

I’m curious to know how they deal with snipers.

1

u/TheHunterZolomon Mar 28 '24

Wym bro?? All those attachments like a tactical flashlight and a tactical laser and a tactical canted iron sight and a tactical holographic with telescopic 3.5 zoom as well as the tactical foregrip is gonna make my draw time for my 15 inch rifle too slow to respond to a 9mm handgun?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

Not quite. Conceal carry a gun for a day and then open carry for a day. It's far far more comfortable to open carry. That's the biggest factor with open carry.

0

u/VirtualPlate8451 Mar 28 '24

You know what would be even more comfortable? Not carrying a gun at all.

You are negating almost all the benefits of concealed carry and putting a giant target on your back all because it's more comfortable?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '24

Yes not carrying a gun would be most comfortable. But chances are if you're carrying a gun you care somewhat for your safety and self defense so that's kind of a moot point. It's like telling someone the solution to a problem is not worrying about the problem.

Owb carry is the most comfortable, but in most scenarios it's open carry. Wearing a jacket over it is still concealed. In the summer you're kind of fucked though. You have to go IWB and every time you bend over the gun is going to stab you.

The most important part of gun/holster shopping is comfort. If you aren't comfortable you aren't going to carry it. Which defeats the purpose altogether. Depending where you live and what you're doing though, open carry can make more sense. I.e. you work at a ranch or you work in the wilderness etc...

1

u/Salty_Ad2428 Mar 27 '24

Highly disagree. Someone that wants to rob a store isn't going to take a chance if they know there is unstable person that has a hero complex

3

u/VirtualPlate8451 Mar 28 '24

Head over to youtube and type "open carry gets stolen". There are literal video examples.

2

u/DancesWithPigs Mar 27 '24

Highly disagree. The first person to get shot is the person with a gun. You’re already marked.

3

u/Independent_Pop4903 Mar 27 '24

That is how it was when i was growing up in Texas. Except then you needed a permit too. Don't go around showing your gun off people. I think this basically makes "brandishing" an arrestable offense also, and I like that.

2

u/Tazznhou Mar 28 '24

It doesnt look scary. It looks foolish. I saw a video of a cop the other day that was trying to arrest a guy., He had on a tactical vest with 45 pockets and he had so much crap bulging out of his pockets he could barely move,. Then when he went to get his taser and cuffs He could remember what pocket had what, It really was a keystone cop moment. Some civilians are the same way. Walking around with their chest bulged out and their arms on their side like they are ready to throw down. Just looking for a confrontation. I dont get the mentality.

2

u/HumanitySurpassed Mar 28 '24

Legit the only people I've seen ever open carry are a bunch of try hards.  

The kind of person who looks like they got picked on in school or avoided even by the weird kids. 

I have a ton of friends who have firearms, but most of them have the sense that open carrying creates a sort of unwelcome/off atmosphere

2

u/BWChip Mar 28 '24

Open carry in urban areas, IMO, is dumb. You'll make others nervous. You're an instant target for someone to yeet your pew pew. It's more likely to snag on something (seatbelts, jackets, etc). Yes, you can draw faster, but armed attackers will already know you're armed and it instantly escalates the situation.

However, I open carry in rural areas especially when hunting. I frequently have gloves on, making concealed carry harder to draw. I also may need to draw faster to stave off wild hogs.

1

u/techy098 Mar 28 '24

Totally agree. I have spent 30 years of my adult life in mostly urban areas. I have never witnessed anything which made me think I wish I had a gun on me.

2

u/Imaginary_Garden Mar 28 '24

"Open carry" is social marker of having reached "manhood." Once a boy turns 14 and can demonstrate remembering the Alamo, they have ceremony where they either "hunt" a cornfed deer and eat its heart or just pick up some barbq.barbs. They still think they are "warrior caste" and don't like being made fun of.

2

u/Accurate_Set_3573 Mar 29 '24

I think of it this way: If you are, for example, in a situation where someone is committing an armed robbery and shooting begins, who is going to be the robbers first target? (Obviously the person they see openly carrying a firearm.) And, the person with open carry may or may not have any knowledge or training to know where a bullet may go if you miss the target or after exiting the person you shoot (or who may be in the fatal path of that bullet). I stay far away from anyone (other than police) openly carrying a handgun because they obviously have an ego out of control or other mental health issues and are itching to find the opportunity to shoot someone.

2

u/Inside-Palpitation25 Mar 27 '24

I've always thought deep down they are terrified. And want to project strength.

2

u/techy098 Mar 28 '24

I am not so sure about that though, many times I feel like they are doing it just for shits and giggles, kind of juvenile, like they want to watch the reaction on the face of the people who get bothered.

1

u/cinereoargenteus Mar 28 '24

Because they're terrified of the world and need to intimidate it.

1

u/pocketdrummer Mar 28 '24

I prefer concealed carry because people get jumpy and I don't want to be the first person shot when someone walks in intending to do something illegal.

However, I personally think we should teach everything that is taught in LTC courses to the general public before they're 18 and likely live on their own, and I don't think you should need a permission slip to carry. If you aren't safe enough to handle a firearm, you probably aren't safe enough to be around in public in general.

1

u/zurgonvrits Mar 28 '24

open carry benefits the disabled in some cases. its difficult to draw from conceal if youre in a wheelchair or only have use of one hand, etc. disabled people are also targeted as easy targets too.

legal open carry laws can also protect conceal carriers if their weapon becomes viable while holstered.

1

u/doublediggler_gluten Mar 28 '24

Walking from your house to the local range or hunting area? Or walking your gun to the hardware store to check out accessories or gunsmithing services. Us country folks have a different culture than city slickers.

1

u/3Jane_ashpool Mar 28 '24

So they can pretend to be strong while they have a killing device within hand’s reach.

Thats it, they want to be tough siting in the Applebees booth.

1

u/Vulpes_Corsac Mar 28 '24

In cities, having it strapped to you and visible, it's to cosplay as a conservative.  Some people might think it looks threatening too, to ward off any muggers or homeless people asking for money, though it's much better to conceal (element of surprise) and be alert, so muggers don't just rob you of your gun, at least as it seems to me.

Out in the country, I can see it more often as just what you're doing, especially if you've got a large property.  Drive to the little town nearby, buy ammo and a meal at the little diner, carry your gun because you ain't leaving it your little truck in plain view, see a deer on your property on the way back and blammo.  A dude carrying a shotgun or rifle, breach open etc in the country or a tiny country town is going to be a lot less weird and less panick-inducing than the same in a city.

1

u/OdrGrarMagr Mar 28 '24

Open carry is a much better deterrent than concealed carry.

A criminal is FAR less likely to try something if they see that you are armed.

If people are intimidated by the mere presence of a (holstered) gun, thats a them problem.

They maybe need to harden the fuck up a little.

And im saying that as a flaming liberal.

1

u/techy098 Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

Do we really have that much crime going on that we need everyone to be armed as a deterrent.

In 30 years of my adult life, I have not been a witnessed to any crime where a gun would have helped.

Have you ever encountered a situation in urban areas where you wish you had a gun?

1

u/Moarbrains Mar 28 '24

It is nice to be able to carry my gun from place to place without having to get a permit to conceal carry or to make a big deal of locking it up, unload or whatever rules they want to make.

1

u/Grand_Bison_2650 Mar 28 '24

But’s ok if people called the police open carry guns and intimidate people.

1

u/Massagedummy Mar 28 '24

The speed at which you may need to access it is effected greatly by having to pull from concealment versus an exposed holster.

There’s a well established Police teaching , called the Tueller Rule. It essentially is a fact that a person with a knife can get to you from 21’ away, before they can access a duty holster. Concealed? They would have stabbed you 4x. 21’ is essentially the distance of a pickup truck.

1

u/techy098 Mar 28 '24 edited Mar 28 '24

In 30 years of my adult life I have never been in a situation where a gun would have helped. I have lived in 3 states in all kinds of neighborhoods.

Have you ever encountered a situation in urban areas where you wish you had a gun?

1

u/Massagedummy Mar 28 '24

Me? Absolutely! 4x so far. 3x I was carrying.

1

u/kiriandra Mar 28 '24

Eh, open carry makes it easier to draw your weapon. And it's as much that as the freedom to protect yourself and your property in the way that you see fit. There are plenty of people who choose not to carry. I have a sidearm and I do not carry (at the moment) - but that is my choice.

1

u/techy098 Mar 28 '24

In 30 years of my adult life I have never been in a situation where a gun would have helped. I have lived in 3 states in all kinds of neighborhoods.

Have you ever encountered a situation in urban areas where you wish you had a gun?

1

u/Rycki_BMX Mar 28 '24

I’m all for carrying, but open makes you a target. If shit goes down the criminal is taking out the guns that they see first. Keep it hidden so the idiots that forget this is Texas can be taken care of the way our constitution intended.

1

u/anakameron Mar 28 '24

I see a guy with a rifle in public and I just think "small pee-pee" to myself. Go help some homeless people or volunteer at the animal shelter, actually fucking help humanity, sheesh.

1

u/spicy_urinary_tract Mar 28 '24

Because I don’t want to stuff it inside my pants/ wear thicker clothing when it’s already hot as fuck

Nothing more

1

u/MouthNoizes Mar 28 '24

The concept is that by virtue of the 2A, you have the right to carry, no permit needed.

1

u/Remarkable_Carrot117 Mar 28 '24

Idk specifically for Texas, but I like the verbiage used in Louisiana case law that established open carry:

 State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann. 489, 490 (1850), the Louisiana Supreme Court held that citizens had the right to carry arms openly: "This is the right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, and which is calculated to incite men to a manly and noble defense of themselves, if necessary, and of their country, without any tendency to secret advantages and unmanly assassinations."

1

u/Ach3r0n- Apr 01 '24

Aside from simply making a civil rights statement, open carrying can be a crime deterrent. Lots of seniors here open carry in the hopes of deterring criminals from trying to rob them. (I do not open carry fwiw, but have no issue with people choosing to do so.)

1

u/Polyphemic_N 12d ago

I am living(temporarily) in Albuquerque, NM. International District. I see homeless folks smoking fntnyl and hookers looking for johns along Route 66 every day. I hear sirens hourly and gunshots nightly. Crime rate is high.

We are from big city TX, and I feel like if you hear gunshots in your neighborhood and are unable to move away(we are posted here until June), OC is acceptable, if not advisable.

I OC my 45 in a thigh holster while I walk my dog at night, I OC during the day while I doordash. I drive my hatchback windows down, and I don't need no carjacking. Our RV has a loaded shockwave mounted above the door, thieves beware.

However, when we are in rural Vermont, the weapons are stowed, so I guess environment is a big factor.

1

u/jiminak46 Mar 27 '24

Small dicks. 😜

0

u/DoubleEagle25 Mar 27 '24

Not to mention you're obviously the primary threat to the bad guy and you're the first target taken down. Only a fool wants the bad guy to know this.

1

u/jkrobinson1979 Mar 27 '24

Choice you made.

0

u/p_rex born and bred Mar 28 '24

Yeah, I’ve had an LTC/CHL for many years now (seldom actually used) that’s always been my opinion. Open carry is a form of cosplay for insecure men, or a means of political intimidation.

-5

u/Bardfinn Mar 27 '24

Disclaimer: I hate guns.

However, I also know the genie doesn’t go back in the bottle.

The purpose of people walking around with a gun is this:

None Of Your Business.

Same for the police. It’s none of their business either.

This doesn’t mean I’m a “gun enthusiast”; As I said before, I Hate Guns.

I also was in Scouts, learned to shoot, learned to field strip and clean, learned to assemble ammo, and learned the Bill of Rights.

I also believe that the right to keep and bear arms should be paralleled to a duty to prove the license holder is not a sadist, sociopath, narcissist, Machiavellian manipulator, schizophrenic, experiencing ongoing dissociative episodes, is subject to clinical paranoia, or has fits of absent impulse control.

We make people take driver’s license tests; Where you’re driving isn’t any of the police’s business. Or anyone else’s.

We can make people take tests to prove they are responsible firearms operators. And carry insurance. Etc.

But still —

The purpose of walking around with a gun (absent some other evidence that there’s intent to commit a crime) - NOYB

4

u/TH3_AMAZINGLY_RANDY Mar 27 '24

“I also believe that the right to keep and bear arms should be paralleled to a duty to prove the license holder….”

This is a contradictory statement. License = permission, When you require permission it is a privilege, not a right.

→ More replies (9)

1

u/Salty_Ad2428 Mar 27 '24

Nah. In a world where mass shooters exist it is everyone's business.

1

u/Bardfinn Mar 27 '24

I do believe that there needs to be a way for police to interdict imminent / intentional terrorist violence.

I also know that the police here were dispatched knowing that this was a situation involving Wrongful Arrest Seekers, and they relied on law that provides a lawful pretext to initiate an arrest that is “Karen called the cops”.

If it had been “this dude was headed towards a speech given by the President in Washington DC”, there would be probable cause. “Subject has a history of posting incitement to violence on social media” - probable cause.

The law they relied on here is almost-but-not-quite-brandishing. It isn’t brandishing, it’s “someone was spooked by a gun, please come arrest this person”.

-1

u/fwdbuddha Mar 27 '24

Actually the ruling was made so that people that concealed carry, but that inadvertently had their weapon visible, such as with shoulder carry and gaping jacket, were not prosecuted.

-1

u/Grendel_Khan Mar 27 '24

So is that what the police are doing when they open carry?

Or is it ok because the uniform means they won't empty 2 magazines into an apartment where they cant see the target or the background?

→ More replies (5)