The only real reason anyone carries concealed.

[XD40scinNC]

"Dude, you are so lucky. I was going to roll you for your wallet, but not with that gun there!"

Hey dude, that wallet gets me some cash, and credit cards that will be usable for a couple of hours, then are worthless.

But your gun, that is a guaranteed income stream, as I now have a weapon to rob someone every few hours for their cash and credit cards which will be likely be cancelled in a couple of hours, then I take the gun and rob someone else of their cash and credits.... rinse and repeat.....

 

[NavyLCDR]

Hey dude, that wallet gets me some cash, and credit cards that will be usable for a couple of hours, then are worthless.

But your gun, that is a guaranteed income stream, as I now have a weapon to rob someone every few hours for their cash and credit cards which will be likely be cancelled in a couple of hours, then I take the gun and rob someone else of their cash and credits.... rinse and repeat.....

Yep, it happens ALL THE TIME! Like once or twice a year.....nationwide.

 

[Reba]

Hey dude, that wallet gets me some cash, and credit cards that will be usable for a couple of hours, then are worthless.

But your gun, that is a guaranteed income stream, as I now have a weapon to rob someone every few hours for their cash and credit cards which will be likely be cancelled in a couple of hours, then I take the gun and rob someone else of their cash and credits.... rinse and repeat.....

The contemporary version of "teach a man to fish"....

 

[BluesStringer]

Hey dude, that wallet gets me some cash, and credit cards that will be usable for a couple of hours, then are worthless.

But your gun, that is a guaranteed income stream, as I now have a weapon to rob someone every few hours for their cash and credit cards which will be likely be cancelled in a couple of hours, then I take the gun and rob someone else of their cash and credits.... rinse and repeat.....

The contemporary version of "teach a man to fish"....

Yeah, not really. The number of verifiable instances of it happening anywhere close to how XD describes it is statistically so minuscule as to be immeasurable for inclusion in any crime statistics, meaning that if it really was the "contemporary version of 'teach a man to fish'," all the criminals would be dropping like flies all around us as they die of starvation.

I hold no bias against those who conceal carry. I did it for over 30 years for many of the same reasons that people state they continue to do it now. I only have a bias for my own chosen method of carry, which is open, and for debunking myths when they're stated so plainly around here. Navy typically only responds to myths too on this subject, which is all he did again in this thread. XD's posts are, and have been for years now, simply awash in myths on a wide range of subjects.

Blues

 

[XD40scinNC]

Yeah, not really. The number of verifiable instances of it happening anywhere close to how XD describes it is statistically so minuscule as to be immeasurable for inclusion in any crime statistics, meaning that if it really was the "contemporary version of 'teach a man to fish'," all the criminals would be dropping like flies all around us as they die of starvation.

I hold no bias against those who conceal carry. I did it for over 30 years for many of the same reasons that people state they continue to do it now. I only have a bias for my own chosen method of carry, which is open, and for debunking myths when they're stated so plainly around here. Navy typically only responds to myths too on this subject, which is all he did again in this thread. XD's posts are, and have been for years now, simply awash in myths on a wide range of subjects.

Blues

Well that was personal, but can't help but notice the only thing you injected was opinion devoid of any facts.

So I inject some verifiable instances: https://www.google.com/#q=open+carry+robbed+at+gunpoint

 

[NavyLCDR]

Multiple links to the same incident hardly defines a trend. Thank you for proving my point - one or two reported instances per year, nationwide. As you notice, the media loves to jump all over it when it does happen.

Might want to think about concealing your flower pots. Open display of flower pots is equally as dangerous:

Man Assaulted With Flower Pot, Bat on Ashby Place | Patch

Ignored 911 Call Turns Fatal In Berkeley; Police Busy With Occupy Protest « CBS San Francisco

 

[Bikenut]

So is the original poster (Blueshell) saying the only reason for folks to conceal carry is to ..........SNEAK......... their gun into places as they disrespect the property owner's right to control who is NOT allowed to be on/in their property all the while demanding their right to bear arms be respected by the same property owner's who's rights they are disrespecting?

 

[mikestone967]

So is the original poster (Blueshell) saying the only reason for folks to conceal carry is to ..........SNEAK......... their gun into places as they disrespect the property owner's right to control who is NOT allowed to be on/in their property all the while demanding their right to bear arms be respected by the same property owner's who's rights they are disrespecting?

I believe that is exactly what he has stated... Several times.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[scottdls]

So is the original poster (Blueshell) saying the only reason for folks to conceal carry is to ..........SNEAK......... their gun into places as they disrespect the property owner's right to control who is NOT allowed to be on/in their property all the while demanding their right to bear arms be respected by the same property owner's who's rights they are disrespecting?

Maybe they just want to exercise their right to force a baker to bake a cake for their gay wedding, while they carry too. It's OK to be OUT, but not with your "gun" out...while we're respectin' private business property and stuff.

 

[Blueshell]

So is the original poster (Blueshell) saying the only reason for folks to conceal carry is to ..........SNEAK......... their gun into places as they disrespect the property owner's right to control who is NOT allowed to be on/in their property all the while demanding their right to bear arms be respected by the same property owner's who's rights they are disrespecting?

We agree that carrying concealed is for sneaking.

I make no demands on the property owner. They are free to respect or disrespect my rights as they see fit. And I am free to do the same of them.

Sure, I would like employers and places open to the general public to be prevented from discriminating against the armed citizen, but if that's ever going to happen, it's not anytime soon.

I do understand why many see this act as disrespect, and I admit that it is disrespectful to a degree. I just value my life more than I value your stuff.

 

[XD40scinNC]

Short story:

I carry concealed because I want to. Don't like it, well suck it up butter cup, I could effing care less.

Clear enough?

 

[BluesStringer]

Short story:

I carry concealed because I want to. Don't like it, well suck it up butter cup, I could effing care less.

Clear enough?

If you meant to say that you care as least as is possible, the proper way to say that is that you couldn't care less, so I don't think you're being clear at all. Saying you could care less means you still care some. Saying you couldn't care less means there's no more caring left to rid yourself of.

Me, I choose to open carry, but as long as one is not spreading myths as they state their preference for concealed carry, I actually couldn't care any less.

Maybe English isn't your first language?

Blues

 

[XD40scinNC]

If you meant to say that you care as least as is possible, the proper way to say that is that you couldn't care less, so I don't think you're being clear at all. Saying you could care less means you still care some. Saying you couldn't care less means there's no more caring left to rid yourself of.

Me, I choose to open carry, but as long as one is not spreading myths as they state their preference for concealed carry, I actually couldn't care any less.

Maybe English isn't your first language?

Blues

The OC grammar Nazi, your place in history will be noted by no one. But to clear the air, I don't give a damn what the **** you think.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Short story:

I carry concealed because I want to. Don't like it, well suck it up butter cup, I could effing care less.

Clear enough?

Me, I choose to open carry, but as long as one is not spreading myths as they state their preference for concealed carry, I actually couldn't care any less.

The OC grammar Nazi, your place in history will be noted by no one. But to clear the air, I don't give a damn what the **** you think.

Link Removed

 

[Bikenut]

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
So is the original poster (Blueshell) saying the only reason for folks to conceal carry is to ..........SNEAK......... their gun into places as they disrespect the property owner's right to control who is NOT allowed to be on/in their property all the while demanding their right to bear arms be respected by the same property owner's who's rights they are disrespecting?

We agree that carrying concealed is for sneaking.

I make no demands on the property owner. They are free to respect or disrespect my rights as they see fit. And I am free to do the same of them.

Sure, I would like employers and places open to the general public to be prevented from discriminating against the armed citizen, but if that's ever going to happen, it's not anytime soon.

I do understand why many see this act as disrespect, and I admit that it is disrespectful to a degree. I just value my life more than I value your stuff.

Interesting. And yet when you .... sneak... your gun into/onto private property you are demanding the property owner allow you on/in his property against his wishes.

But then, you could respect the property owner's rights to the same degree you demand your rights be respected and protect your life simply by shopping somewhere else since neither you, I, nor anyone have any right to be on/in someone elses private property for the purpose of buying "stuff".

Respect is a two way street.

 

[Blueshell]

Interesting. And yet when you .... sneak... your gun into/onto private property you are demanding the property owner allow you on/in his property against his wishes.

But then, you could respect the property owner's rights to the same degree you demand your rights be respected and protect your life simply by shopping somewhere else since neither you, I, nor anyone have any right to be on/in someone elses private property for the purpose of buying "stuff".

Respect is a two way street.

I could go elsewhere, you're right. And the property owner could just change their policy, too.

Sent from my A462C using Tapatalk

 

[Bikenut]

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
Interesting. And yet when you .... sneak... your gun into/onto private property you are demanding the property owner allow you on/in his property against his wishes.

But then, you could respect the property owner's rights to the same degree you demand your rights be respected and protect your life simply by shopping somewhere else since neither you, I, nor anyone have any right to be on/in someone elses private property for the purpose of buying "stuff".

Respect is a two way street.

I could go elsewhere, you're right. And the property owner could just change their policy, too.

Sent from my A462C using Tapatalk

And why should the property owner change his policy? To please you? Again, neither you, nor I, or anyone, has any right to be on/in the property of another. And that "open to the public" does not mean everyone is allowed to be on/in that property but means only those members of the public who abide by the rules of the property owner have the owner's permission to be there.

Sometimes I think this whole issue isn't one of the right to bear arms but is one of ego where some folks think they are so important the private property rights of others take a back seat to their favorite right to bear arms.

Want respect for your favorite rights? Respect the favorite rights of others. To do otherwise is to have the same attitude, and engage in the same kind of behavior, as the anti gunners who think their feelings trump your right to bear arms.

Or are you letting your feelings trump the private property owner's rights?

 

[Blueshell]

And why should the property owner change his policy?

I don't think it's wise to make a gun free zone because that's where nearly ALL mass shootings occur. It's bad policy regardless of one's position of property rights.

Again, neither you, nor I, or anyone, has any right to be on/in the property of another. And that "open to the public" does not mean everyone is allowed to be on/in that property but means only those members of the public who abide by the rules of the property owner have the owner's permission to be there.

I don't claim to have a right to be there. I have the ability. The property being 'open to the public' is my ability to just walk right in.

Sometimes I think this whole issue isn't one of the right to bear arms but is one of ego where some folks think they are so important the private property rights of others take a back seat to their favorite right to bear arms.

Operating a business is about making money, not ego. Carrying a firearm is about personal safety, not ego.

Want respect for your favorite rights?

I don't care if the owner respects my rights or not. I make no demands of the property owner. The very fact that I'm carrying concealed so as to avoid the whole topic with the owner should be enough to tell you that.

I know you like beating the drum on private property but this is about all property open to the public, including government buildings. Your local public school is not private property. Your local post office is not private property. Your local DMV is not private property.


Sent from my A462C using Tapatalk

 

[Bikenut]

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
And why should the property owner change his policy?

I don't think it's wise to make a gun free zone because that's where nearly ALL mass shootings occur. It's bad policy regardless of one's position of property rights.

And if the property owner doesn't think the way you do why should he change his policy to please you? Whether it is wise to have a no guns policy or not isn't the issue. The issue is the property owner has the right to be unwise and have a no guns policy regardless of what you, or I, think about it.

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
Again, neither you, nor I, or anyone, has any right to be on/in the property of another. And that "open to the public" does not mean everyone is allowed to be on/in that property but means only those members of the public who abide by the rules of the property owner have the owner's permission to be there.

I don't claim to have a right to be there. I have the ability. The property being 'open to the public' is my ability to just walk right in.

I get it. You don't have a right to be there but you have the ability to ... sneak... your gun in because you are willing to disrespect the property owner's right to refuse entry to those who carry guns because you think "open to the public" means everyone is invited. I get that too. But the truth is "open to the public" really means "Open only to those who abide by the property's rules of use." Sadly I also get that the reason you .... sneak... your gun in is because you know if you got caught the owner would throw you out.

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
Sometimes I think this whole issue isn't one of the right to bear arms but is one of ego where some folks think they are so important the private property rights of others take a back seat to their favorite right to bear arms.

Operating a business is about making money, not ego. Carrying a firearm is about personal safety, not ego.

I wasn't talking about the business owner's ego. I was referring to the ego of those who think they are so special their rights are more important than the rights of others.

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
Want respect for your favorite rights?

I don't care if the owner respects my rights or not. I make no demands of the property owner. The very fact that I'm carrying concealed so as to avoid the whole topic with the owner should be enough to tell you that.

It is painfully obvious it is you who does not respect the property owner's rights. And you are demanding the property owner allow you on/in his property even though you are disrespecting his rights as you exercise yours. And the reason you carry concealed is to ... sneak...your gun in hoping the property owner doesn't catch you and throw you out. Got it.

I know you like beating the drum on private property but this is about all property open to the public, including government buildings. Your local public school is not private property. Your local post office is not private property. Your local DMV is not private property.


Sent from my A462C using Tapatalk

Yes I like to beat the drum of respecting private property because it becomes painful to watch otherwise honorable folks demand their right to bear arms be respected while disrespecting the property owner's right to deny entry to those who bear arms. That kind of disrespect for the rights of others is exactly the kind of thing the anti gunners do. And I personally find that kind of attitude coming from folks who stand up for rights disgusting.

And getting politically involved while standing up for rights is what is needed when talking about public property. But it is nothing less than hypocritical for someone to demand their right to bear arms be respected while they disrespect the property owner's right to control who uses his property.

 

[Blueshell]

And if the property owner doesn't think the way you do why should he change his policy to please you?

It's pleasing not be involved in a mass shooting.

Whether it is wise to have a no guns policy or not isn't the issue.

Just answering your question.

The issue is the property owner has the right to be unwise and have a no guns policy regardless of what you, or I, think about it.

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

I get it. You don't have a right to be there but you have the ability to ... sneak... your gun in because you are willing to disrespect the property owner's right to refuse entry to those who carry guns because you think "open to the public" means everyone is invited.

Nope.

I get that too. But the truth is "open to the public" really means "Open only to those who abide by the property's rules of use." Sadly I also get that the reason you .... sneak... your gun in is because you know if you got caught the owner would throw you out.

Been there, tossed out. I came back a couple days later sporting an empty OWB holster on my hip. When he asked, I lied and said I left it in the car, showing him the empty OWB holster. He didn't see the snubie at my ankle. I bought what I was there originally for and the world kept on turning.

I was referring to the ego of those who think they are so special their rights are more important than the rights of others.

Not all rights are equal. The right to life comes before all others, because without it, you have no others.

It is painfully obvious it is you who does not respect the property owner's rights.

This is only about the carrying of arms, not property rights per-se.

And you are demanding...

I demand nothing.

But it is nothing less than hypocritical for someone to demand ...

I demand nothing.

***
I do understand how this behavior is disrespectful. Just like gays joined the military during the ban, I am knowingly disobeying one of the rules. Sometimes repeatedly.

My goal is to just go about my day.