Common OC/CC threadjack

[dburkhead]

Learning to us the advance reply method, excuse me if I don't do it right..



I agree with you in-regards to the deterrent factor in many cases. Our hypothetical scenarios are really without limits as to the what-if's. I was hoping for a news account of someone that OC'ed and how the "event" played out, similar to the Florida hold up that involved the Subway and the Marine of page 5 of this post.

The point was that on the one hand OC'ing is currently uncommon enough that not having news stories to hand is not surprising and on the other when it "works" (as a deterrent) by definition there is no news story to report. "Today, the 7-11 at I70 and Post Road was not robbed. Film at 11."

I actually like your idea of the unmarked officers and cars. I think that is how things should be. I will have to think on that and see what good and bad scenarios play out in my mind. One that comes to mind right now is. I believe that the thought of, who is a civilian that is CC and who is the LEO incognito would be a pretty good physiological deterrent.

Actually, uniforms for law enforcement officers are historically a recent innovation. And they came about for several reasons, one of which is that having someone visibly patrolling has a deterent effect on crime. So while one might speculate that having all the police undercover might be a more effective deterrent "in the "you never know" sense, historically that hasn't been the case. The combination of uniformed officers providing a visual reminder of police presence along with some being plainclothes so that even when you don't see an officer you can't be sure one isn't present, has generally worked best.

I'm not saying that I am giving up, I am stating that I think there is not enough momentum among others that would provoke a change of minds for the pubic. I think the example of the gay rights movement, we are now talking about apple to oranges examples. But I get your point that my percentage might be too high. I'm not against OC, in fact I wouldn't care if everyone OC. I guess I just playing the "devils advocate" or trying to be a realist.

Momentum doesn't just magially appear. To quote Samuel Adams, "It does not require a majority to prevail, but a tireless, irate minority eager to set brush-fires of freedom in the minds of men." (You'll find I use historical quotes and allusions a lot. Very little in the political arena has not been gone over quite thoroughly by some really smart people in the past.)

Momentum happens because we make it happen.

Thanks for your thoughtful replies.

Likewise.

 

[USMC_0311]

. It is only after people started "coming out" that laws and attitudes began to change.

I wish all you CC'ers would just come out of the closet.
Quit Hiding!!

See I told you so.

 

[Bubba]

I see your point how the LEO and common citizen are different but I still stand by the fact that their profession is in our area of discussion and they have a more intimate take on it, IMHO. I do like your comparison of the formula one driver vs truck driver.

The police defend themselves and those around them by actively pursuing and apprehending criminals. The armed citizen defends himself and those around him by GTFO. A citizen should reserve force for situations where retreat from the BG is unsafe or impossible (no duty, but why shoot the guy if you can avoid it), whereas a LEO does not have the option to retreat from the BG in the long run (by which I mean, the LEO may withdraw from an encounter for tactical or safety reasons, but police power must eventually be used to apprehend a threat to society).

I actually like your idea of the unmarked officers and cars. I think that is how things should be. I will have to think on that and see what good and bad scenarios play out in my mind. One that comes to mind right now is. I believe that the thought of, who is a civilian that is CC and who is the LEO incognito would be a pretty good physiological deterrent.

Not to be a jerk, but are you serious? Secret police, lurking around, not subject to public scrutiny. I don't want to bash LEOs as a whole, but they are only human, and the scene from V with the fingermen accosting Natalie Portman comes to mind. Besides which, anyone who's ever driven a car on an interstate knows that one cop eating lunch or doing his paperwork in the median does more for upholding traffic laws than any 10 officers writing tickets.

Anyway, to . Glad to have someone else in the debate.

 

[Markedup]

GTFO ??
I am ignorant.

M.

 

[dburkhead]

GTFO ??
I am ignorant.

M.

Get The . . . Out

 

[Joe Williams]

Because a person does not like guns or does not feel it is proper for people to walk around with exposed weapons does not make them sheep. snip

Yes. It does. Actually worse. Their decision to behave as though being armed is a shameful aberration of some sort is an outright damaging attack on all of us.

 

[Michiana]

Don't think so

Yes. It does. Actually worse. Their decision to behave as though being armed is a shameful aberration of some sort is an outright damaging attack on all of us.

Joe, you and a few others that think it is socially acceptible to be walking around a Wal-Mart in Indianapolis with a exposed gun on your hip are probably less than one percent of the population in this country. This "look at me, I have a gun on my hip" does nothing to further the gun owners cause in this country. People expect to see LEO's with a firearm and it gives a sense of security to them; not the same with when Joe Public displays a firearm in public.

 

[Joe Williams]

Joe, you and a few others that think it is socially acceptible to be walking around a Wal-Mart in Indianapolis with a exposed gun on your hip are probably less than one percent of the population in this country. This "look at me, I have a gun on my hip" does nothing to further the gun owners cause in this country. People expect to see LEO's with a firearm and it gives a sense of security to them; not the same with when Joe Public displays a firearm in public.

So, because you and some others don't like public display of our rights, we should be prohibited from exercising them? What else do you hate about our Constitution? What other rights should we surrender to Fudds who think they have the right to control others?

 

[dburkhead]

Joe, you and a few others that think it is socially acceptible to be walking around a Wal-Mart in Indianapolis with a exposed gun on your hip are probably less than one percent of the population in this country. This "look at me, I have a gun on my hip" does nothing to further the gun owners cause in this country. People expect to see LEO's with a firearm and it gives a sense of security to them; not the same with when Joe Public displays a firearm in public.

Can you please tell me if history has ever shown a case of a right being preserved by hiding it?

People expect to see either LEOs or criminals with a firearm because that's all they see. So long as that's all they see, then they'll tend to think that only LEOs and criminals have and/or want guns.

 

[Michiana]

What don't you understand?

So, because you and some others don't like public display of our rights, we should be prohibited from exercising them? What else do you hate about our Constitution? What other rights should we surrender to Fudds who think they have the right to control others?

I have never said you or any other citizen should be prohibited from the right to carry a gun, exposed or conceiled, I am saying use good judgement where you do either by being considerate of those around you. What don’t you get about that statement? You are the last person to lecture me on the Constitution of this country. :bigballs:

 

[turnandshoot4]

By saying "be considerate of those around you" you are saying don't do it because they might not like it. Which infringes on my rights. Because of their feelings.

Just sayin.

 

[dburkhead]

By saying "be considerate of those around you" you are saying don't do it because they might not like it. Which infringes on my rights. Because of their feelings.

Just sayin.

There is no right not to be offended in the Constitution.

And what about them being considerate of me? Why doesn't it work both ways?

 

[turnandshoot4]

There is no right not to be offended in the Constitution.

And what about them being considerate of me? Why doesn't it work both ways?

Right. That is what I was sayin. I thought.

 

[Michiana]

Response

By saying "be considerate of those around you" you are saying don't do it because they might not like it. Which infringes on my rights. Because of their feelings.

Just sayin.

What I am saying is there is a time and place for everything and if I have to explain to people where is the proper place to OC I am beating a dead horse. Like I have said many times just because you can doesn't mean you should. Because you are in a smoking allowed restaurant that does not give you the right to blow smoke in the face of the person at the table next to you.

 

[turnandshoot4]

What I am saying is there is a time and place for everything and if I have to explain to people where is the proper place to OC I am beating a dead horse. Like I have said many times just because you can doesn't mean you should. Because you are in a smoking allowed restaurant that does not give you the right to blow smoke in the face of the person at the table next to you.

You're right. I shouldn't to get up, go to the next table and blow smoke in their face. But I can go about my business, eat my meal, and have a smoke afterwards. Now I don't even smoke but this example is perfect.

Same as I can go to walmart, do my shopping with my family, and go about my business with a firearm on my hip. I'm not bothering anyone. I'm not tapping people on the shoulder and pointing to my hip. As a matter of fact the most hassle I EVER got was at Cabela's. A store that sells guns. Not walmart or anywhere else.

Heck 20 of us didn't get hassled at IHOP or Northwoods while OC'ing.

 

[Michiana]

You have an option

There is no right not to be offended in the Constitution.

And what about them being considerate of me? Why doesn't it work both ways?

You have an option of carrying a gun for your protection without makings others uncomfortable; their only option is to leave the store if your gun makes them uncomfortable. You can have your cake and eat it too, they can't.

 

[Michiana]

Do you think these people are helping our cause?

It is in the news about the people walking around with AR-15's hanging on them close to where the president is speaking. Because it is their right to do so do you honestly believe this in the long run will help the gun lobby that is trying to get more freedom to carry? It just fuel's the fire for the anti gun lobby to put more restrictions on where guns can be carried. It will be interesting to see how this plays out over time.

 

[turnandshoot4]

It is in the news about the people walking around with AR-15's hanging on them close to where the president is speaking. Because it is their right to do so do you honestly believe this in the long run will help the gun lobby that is trying to get more freedom to carry? It just fuel's the fire for the anti gun lobby to put more restrictions on where guns can be carried. It will be interesting to see how this plays out over time.

It will be intresting. But look at what happened recently.

Paul Hemke released a letter saying it was dangerous blah blah blah. The white house basically said they support the rights of the states.

Gun rights: 1
Anti-constitution, communist, socialist, freedom hating pigs: 0

 

[Michiana]

I wonder

It will be intresting. But look at what happened recently.

Paul Hemke released a letter saying it was dangerous blah blah blah. The white house basically said they support the rights of the states.

Gun rights: 1
Anti-constitution, communist, socialist, freedom hating pigs: 0

Lets be real, what they say in public and what they do behind closed doors are two different things. Remember 95% of the people will be getting tax cuts? This president is a very sensitive subject when it comes to protctions for obviously reasons so I anticipate an attempt to make sure no one can have a gun within X distance of a president. I might be wrong but time will tell.

 

[dburkhead]

You have an option of carrying a gun for your protection without makings others uncomfortable; their only option is to leave the store if your gun makes them uncomfortable. You can have your cake and eat it too, they can't.

Or maybe they can grow a pair and learn to deal.

Would you say the same thing if it were my skin color that made them uncomfortable? Or how about my hair style? Or maybe my weight? Or maybe if I were a big, muscular ox of a man.