Open Carry Incident - Vincennes

[stephen87]

Suppose we all decide to start carrying long guns into public restaurants. What do you all think will ultimately happen? How long will it take? Will it be a net gain or loss of rights?

Can't be a gain, of course, because we already have the right to do so. Do we want to keep it? Or should we run the risk of trying to normalize the behavior by in hopes of desensitizing the public? I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to know how that would turn out.

So because you think my rights will be taken away, I shouldn't exercise them? Does this include voting? After all, that's more dangerous than me carrying my long gun. Otherwise, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[stephen87]

If for whatever reason you don't exercise your rights, two things happen: 1) you make it easier for people to legislate them away because, hey... nobody exercises them anyway, and 2) you won't miss them when they're gone.

I wish I could rep you again. WILL YOU QUIT TALKING SENSE?!

 

[88GT]

So there will be no open carry events organized and advertised on INGO anymore?????

 

[stephen87]

We'll have to change it to an "I would open carry, but I don't wanna step on anyone's toes" event.

 

[tbhausen]

So because you think my rights will be taken away, I shouldn't exercise them? Does this include voting? After all, that's more dangerous than me carrying my long gun. Otherwise, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

No, I believe my rights may be taken away because people do things like carry AR-15's into McDonald's.

 

[stephen87]

It's my right to carry an AR into McDonald's. Do you disagree?

 

[Kutnupe14]

However is comfortable for me and is still safe. Obviously it won't be at the low ready.

Or is there a socially acceptable response I should be looking for here? IWB? Under my jacket? Taped to my forehead?

You have a round in the chamber, so are we talking safe for you, or safe for everybody else? H
ere, I'll simply get to the point. I always assume a firearm is loaded, and certainly don't enjoy being "lasered" by people. So, IMO, the safe way to carry a rifle, in public, is either slung muzzle straight up, or muzzle straight down. The problem with that, is you will have difficulty deploying your weapon with any type of speed should an immediate threat presents itself... so basically, short of the Russian falling out of the sky during history class, it's impractical. You'd be better off with a sharp set of chopsticks and cinder block.

Again, in absence of an articulable threat, it makes absolutely no sense to carry a rifle in public. There are better options, and better ways that won't alienate the public. I disagree with OC, but I saw a guy the other day, and didn't think he was dumb, and gun "activist" or anything... that was just his tactical consideration which he felt most comfortable with. Now if this same guy was OC'ing a long gun, I'd sigh and think "this idiots' looking for trouble."

 

[tbhausen]

So there will be no open carry events organized and advertised on INGO anymore?????

These are organized in cooperation with law enforcement agencies.

 

[tbhausen]

It's my right to carry an AR into McDonald's. Do you disagree?

Of course not (edit: until the manager asks you to leave their private property), but I don't think it's a good idea.

 

[88GT]

Suppose we all decide to start carrying long guns into public restaurants. What do you all think will ultimately happen? How long will it take? Will it be a net gain or loss of rights?Can't be a gain, of course, because we already have the right to do so. Do we want to keep it? Or should we run the risk of trying to normalize the behavior in hopes of desensitizing the public? I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to know how that would turn out.

No, we do not.

 

[88GT]

These are organized in cooperation with law enforcement agencies.

 

[Kutnupe14]

If for whatever reason you don't exercise your rights, two things happen: 1) you make it easier for people to legislate them away because, hey... nobody exercises them anyway, and 2) you won't miss them when they're gone.

I'm curious, does anyone have an example of a right that was done away with because nobody used it? I can't think of single instance where legislators got together and said "Hey, lets make a law prohibiting something that people don't do."
Conversely, there are numerous instance of legislators enacting laws that restrict rights because "people are doing it wrong." Speech, Arms, Search & Seizure, have numerous examples exhibiting such.

 

[Kutnupe14]

It's my right to carry an AR into McDonald's. Do you disagree?

No, it is your right. I simply question the logic behind it, as I believe it is more detrimental to our overall rights than helpful.

 

[stephen87]

You have a round in the chamber, so are we talking safe for you, or safe for everybody else? H
ere, I'll simply get to the point. I always assume a firearm is loaded, and certainly don't enjoy being "lasered" by people. So, IMO, the safe way to carry a rifle, in public, is either slung muzzle straight up, or muzzle straight down. The problem with that, is you will have difficulty deploying your weapon with any type of speed should an immediate threat presents itself... so basically, short of the Russian falling out of the sky during history class, it's impractical. You'd be better off with a sharp set of chopsticks and cinder block.

Again, in absence of an articulable threat, it makes absolutely no sense to carry a rifle in public. There are better options, and better ways that won't alienate the public. I disagree with OC, but I saw a guy the other day, and didn't think he was dumb, and gun "activist" or anything... that was just his tactical consideration which he felt most comfortable with. Now if this same guy was OC'ing a long gun, I'd sigh and think "this idiots' looking for trouble."

Is there ever a true "safe" way to carry a gun? When I carry my handgun, I carry indexed forward. It points at people's feet. Safe? Absolutely. I don't carry a rifle, nor do I own one, therefore I don't know the "proper" way to carry a rifle. However, I have slung a few over my shoulder. Depending on what type of sling it is, I can grab it almost as quick as my handgun.

These are organized in cooperation with law enforcement agencies.

Not all of them are. We organize open carry meets every now and then. LEAs have no say in what we do. Why do they need to be notified in the first place?

Of course not, but I don't think it's a good idea.

Just because you don't think it's a good idea, doesn't mean you should restrict other people's ability to do so. We go back to voting. I don't believe it's a good idea for some people to vote, but I can't restrict them from doing so. I don't believe it's a good idea for WBC to protest a military funeral, I can't restrict them from doing so. Just because we don't agree, doesn't mean we can restrict it. We definitely shouldn't be calling other people idiots and degrading them if they're doing something that we wouldn't do, but don't wanna lose.

 

[cbhausen]

I've read this whole thread and is time for me to pipe up again so here's my .02 worth:

African carry is my favorite way of carrying a rifle and sidearm at the same time.

That's all. Carry on.

 

[stephen87]

I'm curious, does anyone have an example of a right that was done away with because nobody used it? I can't think of single instance where legislators got together and said "Hey, lets make a law prohibiting something that people don't do."
Conversely, there are numerous instance of legislators enacting laws that restrict rights because "people are doing it wrong." Speech, Arms, Search & Seizure, have numerous examples exhibiting such.

Can you think of any rights that were taken away BECAUSE they were used? I can't.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Can you think of any rights that were taken away BECAUSE they were used? I can't.

History is littered with them... as are fairly current events.

 

[stephen87]

Taken because we used them, as they were meant, not restricted because some ******* went around and shot people for no good reason.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Taken because we used them, as they were meant, not restricted because some ******* went around and shot people for no good reason.

I hope the irony of this statement, in relation to this discussion, isn't lost on your part.

 

[stephen87]

What's the irony? Because I said used as they were meant, and someone's carrying a long gun in a restaurant as a means of self defense? No irony in that statement, from my eyes. I'll check back in the morning, I have to work later.