Ejected from Cabela's for open-carrying

[IN_Varmntr]

Scutter, I took this picture last time I was at the Cabelas in Dundee, Michigan. They seem to have their stuff straight. They obviously allow conceal or other carry permit holders to carry weapons in their store.

 

[tv1217]

Strategically placed forward slash. Nice. I don't remember if the one in Hammond has that.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I still think it was because Scutter was carrying an XD. No one should have to look at that thing.

Probably narry a word would have been said if it were a Glock.

They couldn't have said anything. Once it exploded, there would have been no one left to make comment.

Hadda be said.

 

[Nakatomi]

Your language (gang?) shows your bias.It's not about scaring people, as that would be a crime (literally.)

It's about education. The more they learn that good, decent people can go out and shop, see a movie, have supper, etc., all while armed and not being adorned with a little metal shield, and no harm comes of it; the more that "Susie Soccermom" sees that that man who just happened to be standing near the curb stops her little darling who is dashing for the street and who politely answered with a "no, I'm not, but you're welcome!" when she gratefully breathed, "Thank you, Officer!", the fewer problems like this we will find. We can touch the lives of one or many at a time. This is a way to touch many lives at once and to do so positively and with respect.

I tried to back out of this gracefully, but since I am still getting addressed in this thread, and since I am still getting kookmail, fine. I'll rejoin the discourse.

I am not sure you helping old ladies across the street while packing an exposed Desert Eagle .50 is going to compensate for all the news stories on every night now about some guy somewhere who just offed 10 people with an assault rifle. You are just adding to the public perception that there are too many people running around with weapons. CC is out of sight, out of mind. Protect your rights while not scaring the civilians.

I had a hoot watching the news footage archived on opencarry.com...not exactly even-handed coverage of OC events. Pretty much every one was the same. 1] Announce scary gun event at local zoo or whatever; 2] Interview OC guy explaining why he is not a kook; 3] Fast cut to public going, WTH are all these guys doing armed at the zoo? Is Bigfoot loose or something? and 4] Cut to reporter shaking their head in dismay. The End.

Not sure how this helps the cause.

 

[Nakatomi]

This on the front page of CNN tonight:

"Remembering Colombine - 10 Year Anniversary"
Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

Explain how an OC sit-in at Cabelas is going to counter public opinion of crap like that, and not actually make it worse....

 

[jsharmon7]

I am not sure you helping old ladies across the street while packing an exposed Desert Eagle .50 is going to compensate for all the news stories on every night now about some guy somewhere who just offed 10 people with an assault rifle. You are just adding to the public perception that there are too many people running around with weapons. CC is out of sight, out of mind. Protect your rights while not scaring the civilians.

I had a hoot watching the news footage archived on opencarry.com...not exactly even-handed coverage of OC events. Pretty much every one was the same. 1] Announce scary gun event at local zoo or whatever; 2] Interview OC guy explaining why he is not a kook; 3] Fast cut to public going, WTH are all these guys doing armed at the zoo? Is Bigfoot loose or something? and 4] Cut to reporter shaking their head in dismay. The End.

Not sure how this helps the cause.

You do have a very valid point about the issue of "perception." I understand the reasons some people choose to OC. It's your right to do so, you shouldn't have to hide a weapon because of someone else's opinion, it can be more comfortable, you believe it helps condition the public to the idea of guns, etc. I just hope those people also realize that how they act in public is a reflection on "all gun owners." Just as some people on this thread are railing against the Cabelas corporation for the disrespect and rudeness shown by a single employee, so too shall the public against gun owners. I don't mean this in anyway to insinuate that anyone is so childish as to go out of their way to cause a scene about OC, but keep in mind that OC is relatively rare in most places and you may be the only representative of gun ownership most people encounter.

 

[Roadie]

I tried to back out of this gracefully, but since I am still getting addressed in this thread, and since I am still getting kookmail, fine. I'll rejoin the discourse.

I am not sure you helping old ladies across the street while packing an exposed Desert Eagle .50 is going to compensate for all the news stories on every night now about some guy somewhere who just offed 10 people with an assault rifle. You are just adding to the public perception that there are too many people running around with weapons. CC is out of sight, out of mind. Protect your rights while not scaring the civilians.

I had a hoot watching the news footage archived on opencarry.com...not exactly even-handed coverage of OC events. Pretty much every one was the same. 1] Announce scary gun event at local zoo or whatever; 2] Interview OC guy explaining why he is not a kook; 3] Fast cut to public going, WTH are all these guys doing armed at the zoo? Is Bigfoot loose or something? and 4] Cut to reporter shaking their head in dismay. The End.

Not sure how this helps the cause.

So, you are going to go on, calling your fellow gun-owners "kooks" based solely on the WAY they carry?? Your way is right, and all OCers are wrong? Well, aren't we pompous.

What's next?
"Oh, I am pro -1st Amendment all the way, but only if you express your opinions in a certain way"

 

[Bill of Rights]

You might be a bit drowsy. Society, in general, EXPECTS an LEO to be armed. Do you not realize this? Really? It has nothing to do with what you think is right or wrong, or what is written down in some statute. People expect an LEO to have a gun, much the same as you would expect to see a stethoscope around a doctor's neck. It's not that the LEO has more of a right to carry....it's that his/her position in society requires that he/she carry.

This! Exactly! Society expects a LEO to be armed. Somehow, by choosing to ignore our rights and our responsibilities to protect ourselves, we, or more precisely, our ancestors, have gotten away from the expectation that we expect a man to be armed. We've somehow never developed the similar expectation that a woman will be armed in her own defense rather than only travel places with menfolk there to protect them. This is why the education aspect is so important-if it starts happening more and being seen more, then it will hopefully become unusual to see someone who is not visibly armed--however long that may take.

Besides, I know quite a few LEO's, and none of them would even think of open carrying off-duty, so this whole argument is moot anyway. The few rookies who might want to strap their badge and gun on and go strutting around town would be quickly smacked with a healthy dose of common sense about "staying under the radar" by the veteran officers.

And in that world I described, said officers (the not-visibly-armed ones) would be the ones "not staying under the radar".

I'm not saying that it's right or valid for Susie Soccer Mom to be scared or alarmed about someone carrying a firearm around in a public setting. I'm just saying that this is how things are in some places. Especially if open carry is rare in that area. That's why I always CC. 100% of the protection for me and my family...and none of the drama.

I don't OC. I'm clearly not opposed to it. The lack of education I mentioned above is the reason for the y treatment given a former customer of a store who was in compliance with their policy.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[IndyBeerman]

FAIL!!
The word "concealed" appears nowhere on my License To Carry Handguns.

Hehe Hey Joe that from people that's giddy from just getting their permit and failure to properly read it right. They just assume it means:

License To Conceal Handgun

It amazes me the amount of people who get the license but fail to know, or read up about it.

So not to thread jack this, here's a link for any related discussion so we may continue with Scutter's original post.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...s_really_a_little_light_on_it.html#post349756

 

[txgho1911]

What will help the cause. What will it take.

Maybe some form of instruction or educational info on who we are and that includes all of us.

How not to throw any part of us under the bus as we have been programed to do over the past 40-80 years.

Every part of this community who holds dear that piece of this culture we really care for and toss the rest of us to the wolves so you can be safe.

If you are supporting CC even as you help demonize OC then you are the hypocrite I am speaking of. I am sure Zumbo had a safe or vault full of guns of many types. Hypocrite he is was exposed and his knowledge has been expanded since then.

Militia service was compulsory not even 150 years ago.

 

[Roadie]

This! Exactly! Society expects a LEO to be armed. Somehow, by choosing to ignore our rights and our responsibilities to protect ourselves, we, or more precisely, our ancestors, have gotten away from the expectation that we expect a man to be armed. We've somehow never developed the similar expectation that a woman will be armed in her own defense rather than only travel places with menfolk there to protect them. This is why the education aspect is so important-if it starts happening more and being seen more, then it will hopefully become unusual to see someone who is not visibly armed--however long that may take.

And in that world I described, said officers (the not-visibly-armed ones) would be the ones "not staying under the radar".

I don't OC. I'm clearly not opposed to it. The lack of education I mentioned above is the reason for the y treatment given a former customer of a store who was in compliance with their policy.

Blessings,
Bill

You hit the nail on the head. Public perception has changed. The media brands OCers as "rebels" now instead of as citizens exercising their rights. I firmly believe if more people carried, and the thugs KNEW more people carried, crime would drop drastically, but as long as gun-owners are called kooks, even by our own kind, we will still be frowned upon. Instead people should feel safer to know an honest armed citizen is around.

(..and if you don't believe the media is biased, let me remind you of all the crude tea bagger comments in the media)

 

[chasekerion4]

I tried to back out of this gracefully, but since I am still getting addressed in this thread, and since I am still getting kookmail, fine. I'll rejoin the discourse.

I am not sure you helping old ladies across the street while packing an exposed Desert Eagle .50 is going to compensate for all the news stories on every night now about some guy somewhere who just offed 10 people with an assault rifle. You are just adding to the public perception that there are too many people running around with weapons. CC is out of sight, out of mind. Protect your rights while not scaring the civilians.

I had a hoot watching the news footage archived on opencarry.com...not exactly even-handed coverage of OC events. Pretty much every one was the same. 1] Announce scary gun event at local zoo or whatever; 2] Interview OC guy explaining why he is not a kook; 3] Fast cut to public going, WTH are all these guys doing armed at the zoo? Is Bigfoot loose or something? and 4] Cut to reporter shaking their head in dismay. The End.

Not sure how this helps the cause.

Search, man... search. Nothing's gonna be said here that you can't find on your own.

You're not gonna change any OC'ers minds. I like to OC and if you don't like it, run right along side Susie. If you're not running, then you don't have a problem with it, so don't worry about Susie! She's not your problem. You just focus on keeping yourself and your family safe from me, the show off, stupid kook. Or are you not afraid of me? If you're not afraid of me, there's hope for Susie Soccermom yet. Hey, we got you to not be afraid of guns and their licensed owners. Maybe we can convince Susie, too, that I won't kill her and her extended family! But we have no chance to talk to Miss Susie to educate her if we have our guns hidden, now can we?

The same people that issued your license issued mine. They say I can OC. They aren't worried about Susie or her opinions of guns. You don't need to worry about it either. In fact, MANY states are discussing the OC route. Maybe our lawmakers agree with the OC community. The word needs to get out.

We all know the reality here. These crimes are almost always committed by crooks with no LTCH or CCW. They're thugs. Yet every time, their gun is concealed until the time has come to commit the crime. No one even knows it's coming until it's too late. In that respect, if I wanted to be prick about it, I could say the CC'ers are the idiots giving gun owners a bad name.


But to put it another way; I've talked to at least a dozen people about the IN carry law over the past year while out in public. I dress nice, appropriate and act like an adult should. Not one person said anything negative, in fact, every one was very positive about the whole concept and EVERY SINGLE one noticed I wasn't a kook. Nor did I shoot any place up. I don't hardly think I'm advancing the cynics. Your local news is doing that. Anyone who sees me OC, I guarantee you, has a higher opinion of people with guns. It's all about the presentation; not the product.

 

[Nakatomi]

So, you are going to go on, calling your fellow gun-owners "kooks" based solely on the WAY they carry?? Your way is right, and all OCers are wrong? Well, aren't we pompous.

What's next?
"Oh, I am pro -1st Amendment all the way, but only if you express your opinions in a certain way"

I would respond to this, but as most of your posts to me are blah blah commie blah blah Feinstein Lover blah blah blah, I'll just let the fact that you are proud of owning a two-tone Bersa speak for itself. OH SNAP! lol

 

[turnandshoot4]

I would respond to this, but as most of your posts to me are blah blah commie blah blah Feinstein Lover blah blah blah, I'll just let the fact that you are proud of owning a two-tone Bersa speak for itself. OH SNAP! lol

How about responding to Bill of Right's post?

Try not to call names. Please.

 

[Nakatomi]

How about responding to Bill of Right's post?

Try not to call names. Please.

They've been calling me names for three days, I can't tease the lad back a bit? Not cricket, old chap!

What part of Bill's post would you like me to address?

 

[Nakatomi]

You're not gonna change any OC'ers minds. I like to OC and if you don't like it, run right along side Susie. If you're not running, then you don't have a problem with it, so don't worry about Susie! She's not your problem. You just focus on keeping yourself and your family safe from me, the show off, stupid kook. Or are you not afraid of me? If you're not afraid of me, there's hope for Susie Soccermom yet. Hey, we got you to not be afraid of guns and their licensed owners. Maybe we can convince Susie, too, that I won't kill her and her extended family! But we have no chance to talk to Miss Susie to educate her if we have our guns hidden, now can we?

So, are you actually saying that as you wander the earth like the guy in Kung Fu people stop you in the street and say, "Hello! You are obviously an ambassador of gun rights, can you please take a few minutes to educate me on why carrying a gun like Wyatt Earp is a good idea?"

Riiiiight.

 

[Bill of Rights]

...A pistol carried openly has only one purpose, and that is to kill....

While you are correct that a pistol has only one purpose, whether openly or concealed-carried, you are incorrect as to what that purpose is. The pistol's purpose is to propel a small projectile at high speed in a specific direction when it is made to do so by the action of a human operator. It is that person who determines why, how, when, where, and at what or whom it is to be fired. The sheeple like the clerk that was so rude to Scutter do not understand this fact because they choose not to understand it. Ignorance can be fixed, given the will and opportunity to do so. If there really was an "AP" who gave this order, (likely, since the general impression I've gotten is that this was a person without the initiative to stick her neck out for a decision like this) that person needs to answer for the order. Maybe s/he wasn't aware of Cabela's policy, though that's no excuse, considering how it's posted. Regardless, both of them need to be schooled by their manager in how to address customers as well as how to not **** them off. Tact and diplomacy can go a long way.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[chasekerion4]

So, are you actually saying that as you wander the earth like the guy in Kung Fu people stop you in the street and say, "Hello! You are obviously an ambassador of gun rights, can you please take a few minutes to educate me on why carrying a gun like Wyatt Earp is a good idea?"

Riiiiight.

No, they ask why I have a gun, AFTER asking if I'm a LEO.

You're fighting a losing battle with your argumentative posts. I don't "wander the earth" at all, especially like the guy in Kung Fu. Nor am I Wyatt Earp.

Are you 9 years old?

To educate you; I'll use this example. You took the "safety" course, right?

2 "thugs" come charging at you at full speed. But you had your back turned and notice them as they are about 10-15 yards away. You see them and adrenaline kicks in instantly. You have a split second to react.

Now, flip your shirt up, click your thumbbreak and unholster your weapon. Sorry sir, you're already dead.




You stand in line at the gas station ready to buy that oh so refreshing Mt. Dew. It's 3 a.m. Two guys stake out the place from the outside. They see you OC'ing. There's two options here.

• They come in and target you first
• Realize that they're complete idiots, as you may very well be LEO, and go to the next gas station to rob

Odds are that they choose option B. Criminals want easy targets, as you know from your "safety" course. You are NOT considered an easy target if OC'ing.




But let's just say you're CC'ing. Now you know 100% for certain that they will rob the joint, because you don't look like a threat at all; you look like a regular ol' guy. You have several scenarios now:

• Stay CC'ing and do nothing, just be one of the robbery "sheep" and let it happen.
• Draw your weapon and shoot. Let's assume you kill them. You now have a conscience for the rest of your life that you killed someone who was trying to rob a freaking store, not you.
• Draw your weapon, fire and miss. We all know the possible repurcussions here.
• Assuming you don't kill them, but do hurt someone else. Your wallet just got lighter and quite possibly, the rest of your life is financially ruined.

Ask any LEO if there's such a thing as a car accident. There isn't. Every car accident can be avoided. They are called incidents or crashes or wrecks. Never are they called accidents. There's a reason for it. Pay attention and they don't happen.


If you pay attention to your surroundings, you can be prepared for ANY criminal incident, regardless of whether or not you are OC'ing. So why not potentially deter a crime by openly carrying?

While I respect your right to CC, I don't understand the thought of CC'ing if you don't have to by law.

Studies show criminals don't look for the most challenging score. I'll play the odds of deterrant and if I get shot first, I probably deserve it for not paying attention. If I don't get shot, I'll play the odds that I can draw my weapon a lot faster than you because I don't have to flip my shirt; or suck in my gut to grab my gun; or pray that the cute little "clip" actually holds and the holster doesn't come out with the gun in my frantic attempt to draw it; or untucking my shirt first; or flipping my thumbbreak;

Damn, that's a lot of crap to have to deal with.

Reach, pull, shoot.

Seems like a no-brainer to me.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Yeah, I probably wouldn't go back either and give them any business. While I see many people posting that this is not a OC/CC debate but more of a coporate vs local store policy, I see it differently.

What if the store wasn't turning away law abiding gun owners, but instead they were asking gay couples to leave because "no one should have to look at that".

Gay people kissing or holding hands in an establishment may make some people uncomfortable, but you can't ask them to leave. But yet of course we are forced to accept that private establisments legally (it's legal) can strip you of your 2nd Ammendment right, but they can't ask a gay couple to leave (without a civil suit and the other hoopla that would surround it).

That is the core of this in my book. Is the laws need to recognize that no private business should be allow to negate consitionally granted rights, because imagine if ALL had strict hand gun rules, posted. We would not be able to carry any where. Any where.

Just another extreme example from me. I didn't even know what Cabelas was until this thread.

This is going to sound totally counter to my usual posts, but....the private business is not negating rights, Constitutionally protected or otherwise (is there even an "otherwise"?) As was recently pointed out to me, no one is handcuffing you and dragging you into the store. Scutter and Spasmo drove 260 miles round trip to go there-by choice! and therein lies the problem: After all that driving, they were treated badly because of someone's ignorance. You have a right to protect the life God gave you. You have, IMHO and apparently, those of our Founders, a responsibility to protect yourself and those dear to you. If to do that you must shop elsewhere, then so be it. It sounds like this was a case of flunkie-fication, however, and not store policy. I may be willing to reverse my statement upthread in re: shopping there.

Conversely, many times we are forced to go into gov't buildings, for there are things we must do such as serve on a jury or meet with some gov't official, and yet we are forced to do so unarmed...In those situations, yes, our rights are being denied us. This is one law that needs to change, IMHO, because there, our free choice is irrelevant.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[esrice]

This is what happens when ammo prices go through the roof and no one can afford ammo, and therefore no one is hitting the range anymore. . . .

7 pages x 40 posts/page of pent up frustration!