Gotta love the support for the right to carry!

[NavyLCDR]

Link Removed#

For Pam Reis, the issue seems silly.

Reis and her husband founded Pistols Plus nearly 20 years ago in Osage Beach, just outside the city limits of Lake Ozark. Their 15,000-square-foot gun shop is the largest in the area.

"I don't know why anyone would want to open carry in the first place," Reis said. "The only reason to openly carry is that you're too lazy to get a concealed carry permit or you want to look like a big shot."

Once again - in my years of openly carrying, about 99% of the reactions I receive are positive and supportive. 95% of the few negative reactions I have gotten have been from concealed carry only snobs who can't resist the urge to tell me they carry their gun concealed and so should I.

Please join me in letting them know how you feel:
Link Removed

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Reis,

"The only reason to openly carry is that you're too lazy to get a concealed carry permit or you want to look like a big shot."
Thank you so much for telling me why I open carry. Since I posses a WA Concealed Pistol License (where I live), I never would have guessed that I was too lazy to get one.

As for looking like a big shot being the reason for carrying openly... If a criminal is presented with two potential targets - one who looks like everyone else except that they have a firearm which can be used to kill them with clearly visible in a holster on the belt - and the other target just looks like everyone else period, which target do you honestly think the criminal is going to pick?

I carry my gun openly to protect my family and the absolute best protection I can provide is to deter the criminal from ever choosing us as a target to begin with. I have no desire to be a concealed carry type of person with a hero complex hoping for the opportunity to save the world from the future actions of a criminal by being able to be judge, jury and executioner.

I hope that the hero complex comment offends you as much as your big shot comment offended me.

With all due respect,
John H....

 

[Firefighterchen]

Open carry doesn't make 99% of tourists nervous....it makes a lot of concealed carriers wet their panties often though

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

 

[Drzzit]

Sent them My email. Hope they think about what they are saying. Can't believe that they derive their income by owning and operating a GUN STORE. They should know better. The 2A is not up for interpretation.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

 

[BluesStringer]

It would seem to me that added to the need to let Pistols Plus know what gun owners and/or OC'ers think of the owner's quote, that Missourians need to fix that gaping hole in their gun laws by demanding a state preemption law that protects them throughout the state, instead of allowing a bunch of country club Aldermen to make a patchwork quilt of carry laws and who knows what other gun-related laws (mag-capacity etc.) they're fartin' around with.

Looking at the website, I noticed that there's no mention of mail-order purchasing or of FFL transfer services offered, so it kinda seems to me like the owner(s) aren't going to give a mosquito-fart in the wind what out-of-staters think about that quote. Point being, they appear from their website to be a locals-only business. As such, the number of OC'ers coming from out of state who might refrain from buying ammo or accessories while visiting there, is probably going to be in the low single-digits, if that. I think emails are more likely to just get it off our chests than influence the quoted owner to re-think and/or retract or clarify his quote to be more "palatable" to folks like us.

That said, as anyone who's read more than 10 or 15 of my posts on this site already knows, I freakin' love having the ability to get stuff off my chest, so thanks for linking the email page, Navy, that rant felt great! LOL

Blues

 

[Nightmare45]

I open carry in AZ all the time not even noticed except by some visitors, CC in Texas and AZ familiar with both states and do not open carry to feel like a big shot, a license is just a tax revenue for the state nothing more or less, the 2nd is the ultimate authority provided by the founding fathers. I carry for protection of self, family and have visited Pistols Plus, the store is quiet nice sounds like they are just like Hollywood, wish to make money off guns but don't want to honor the constitution, no problem will be more than happy not to visit again.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Here's a lame attempt by Pistols Plus to retract their statement:

Link Removed

Although they have apparently retracted their retraction by closing their facebook page. Apparently not enough people believed their excuse.

 

[BluesStringer]

Their "excuse:"

This Sunday’s edition of the Kansas City Star ran an article about the recent ban of open carry in the city of Lake Ozark. In this article, the owner of Pistols Plus is quoted with several anti open carry remarks. Here at Pistols Plus, we are active supporters of all gun rights, including open and concealed carry. We have always maintained a positive stance in support of all gun rights. The author of the article, Jason Hancock, visited our store in preparation of this article. He received our input and was given a direct quote by Pistols Plus employee Jim Harrsion. Mr. Harrison’s quote was printed with his permission. Mr. Hancock was not given permission to directly quote any other Pistols Plus employees. The quote of Pam Reis, printed in Mr. Hancock’s article is a misinterpretation of what may have been said, and does not follow Mrs. Reis’ beliefs on open carry. We expect more out of those reporting current events and feel this article has been slanted to represent the ideals of those involved in its publication.

He directly accuses the author or his editors of lying about what was said. How is that simply an "excuse?" How many more pounds of flesh do you want from them for the lies of a media outlet pushing a regularly-seen anti-OC meme from media outlets in every part of the country? Being forced to close their FB Page isn't enough "consequences" for you for the lies of their local media?

Good grief Navy, you got as much as you're ever going to get with an explanation that their words were misrepresented by media. I mean, gee, as gun owners/carriers, we never see that happen, right? Pffft. They aren't going to put a "retraction" up for something they contend was never said! Their explanation says they fully support all gun rights. What more do you want from 'em?

 

[NavyLCDR]

Their "excuse:"



He directly accuses the author or his editors of lying about what was said. How is that simply an "excuse?" How many more pounds of flesh do you want from them for the lies of a media outlet pushing a regularly-seen anti-OC meme from media outlets in every part of the country? Being forced to close their FB Page isn't enough "consequences" for you for the lies of their local media?

Good grief Navy, you got as much as you're ever going to get with an explanation that their words were misrepresented by media. I mean, gee, as gun owners/carriers, we never see that happen, right? Pffft. They aren't going to put a "retraction" up for something they contend was never said! Their explanation says they fully support all gun rights. What more do you want from 'em?

Why didn't they leave their facebook page up? Why didn't they publish an explanation as a letter to the editor in the newspaper? Why is their same excuse not posted on their store website? Why didn't they respond directly to my email, even with a canned response? What are they hiding from?

 

[BluesStringer]

Why didn't they leave their facebook page up? Why didn't they publish an explanation as a letter to the editor in the newspaper? Why is their same excuse not posted on their store website? Why didn't they respond directly to my email, even with a canned response? What are they hiding from?

Answer my questions first:

1) He directly accuses the author or his editors of lying about what was said. How is that simply an "excuse?"
2) How many more pounds of flesh do you want from them for the lies of a media outlet pushing a regularly-seen anti-OC meme from media outlets in every part of the country?
3) Being forced to close their FB Page isn't enough "consequences" for you for the lies of their local media?
4) Their explanation says they fully support all gun rights. What more do you want from 'em?

I don't do FB, so I'm not positive that they have taken their FB page "down." I won't speculate on why they did anything with their FB Page, if they indeed did do anything.

As to why they didn't answer you directly, who the heck are you to them? You said you live in WA. Isn't it enough that your (and my) email contributed to a public response? You gotta have your ego stroked directly or it doesn't count?

I'd really like an answer to #4 above.

Blues

 

[NavyLCDR]

Answer my questions first:

1) He directly accuses the author or his editors of lying about what was said. How is that simply an "excuse?"

You are right. It's not an excuse. It's an accusation.

2) How many more pounds of flesh do you want from them for the lies of a media outlet pushing a regularly-seen anti-OC meme from media outlets in every part of the country?

If they are asserting that the newspaper lied then I would like to see them make a public claim as such instead of a post on Facebook that they later delete.

3) Being forced to close their FB Page isn't enough "consequences" for you for the lies of their local media?

We have no evidence to suggest they were forced to close their FB page. They could have very well done it voluntarily. Or, perhaps, the newspaper responded to them privately and mentioned to them something like, "Would you like to hear the audio recording we have of the interview that we conducted and the evidence of who said what?" We don't know what happened to the FB page - only that it currently no longer exists.

4) Their explanation says they fully support all gun rights. What more do you want from 'em?

I would like to see them make their statements and accusations in a way more public than on a Facebook page that was discontinued shortly after they posted their accusations on it.

I don't do FB, so I'm not positive that they have taken their FB page "down." I won't speculate on why they did anything with their FB Page, if they indeed did do anything.

I didn't know they had a FB page until someone else posted it on another forum. Google has evidence that it existed, and anyone can verify that it no longer does. Only Pistols Plus can tell us what happened to their FB page and why.

As to why they didn't answer you directly, who the heck are you to them? You said you live in WA. Isn't it enough that your (and my) email contributed to a public response? You gotta have your ego stroked directly or it doesn't count?

You are correct, they don't owe me any explanation or reply at all. But, I am pretty sure I am not the only one to make a comment to them. I don't need my ego stroked in any way.

I just find it extremely hard to believe that, " Here at Pistols Plus, we are active supporters of all gun rights, including open and concealed carry." was turned into,
"I don't know why anyone would want to open carry in the first place," Reis said. "The only reason to openly carry is that you're too lazy to get a concealed carry permit or you want to look like a big shot." by the newspaper. And if it was, I find it very hard to believe that the business would remain virtually silent about it.

Or, it could be that Pistols Plus is planning a lawsuit against the newspaper and their lawyers have advised them to shut the heck up. Time will tell.

As you pointed out - I am in WA and will probably never have the opportunity to visit their store. I am sure there are people in Missouri who would know which statement is more accurate regarding the opinions of the owners of the store regarding open carry.

 

[Jarhead6541]

Open carry doesn't make 99% of tourists nervous....it makes a lot of concealed carriers wet their panties often though

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

Um, what did I miss here? One gun store co-owner makes a statement dissing oc’ers, or is misquoted, or their statement is blatantly misstated or even completely made up [what!? No!?] by a city newspaper reporter/editor, so now the target is cc’ers?
Exactly why anyone, much less cc’ers [gun supporters], would tend to fear oc’ers [gun supporters], is beyond me. Is this how, in the end, we lose our 2A rights; by splitting supporters into separate factions? The oc’ers, the cc’ers, the non-carrying supporters, the revolver fans, the pistol fans, the Rugers, the S&W’s, etc.
Here I assumed this was as close to a non-issue beef between carriers as you could get. What’s the real difference? Either way we carry for the same reasons, with only differing applications on personal grounds. Both should be 100% legal in all 50 [or is it 57] states. Isn’t that the goal here?
One thing not needed right now is infighting between like-minded defenders of what’s important. We’re on dangerous enough ground as it is.

 

[BluesStringer]

Um, what did I miss here? One gun store co-owner makes a statement dissing oc’ers, or is misquoted, or their statement is blatantly misstated or even completely made up [what!? No!?] by a city newspaper reporter/editor, so now the target is cc’ers?
Exactly why anyone, much less cc’ers [gun supporters], would tend to fear oc’ers [gun supporters], is beyond me. Is this how, in the end, we lose our 2A rights; by splitting supporters into separate factions? The oc’ers, the cc’ers, the non-carrying supporters, the revolver fans, the pistol fans, the Rugers, the S&W’s, etc.
Here I assumed this was as close to a non-issue beef between carriers as you could get. What’s the real difference? Either way we carry for the same reasons, with only differing applications on personal grounds. Both should be 100% legal in all 50 [or is it 57] states. Isn’t that the goal here?
One thing not needed right now is infighting between like-minded defenders of what’s important. We’re on dangerous enough ground as it is.

If all, or even most, posts by CC'ers directed to OC'ers were like yours, there would be no problems between the two "factions." Yes, you state the goal as all of the regular OC'ers on this site would want it, 100% legal for both in all 57 (HA!) states, and I feel comfortable saying that that includes Firefighterchen.

But Chen has a point that you must've missed as you've surfed around here. It is typical for CC'ers to call OC'ers any number of pejoratives, ranging from rather innocuous characterizations like "show-offs" and "attention whores" to "idiots" and "intellectually inferior" and blaming us (OC'ers) for hurting their cause, only of course, as they try to stifle our rights, they will refer to it as "our" cause.

They say the best defense is a good offense, and if Chen seems a bit abrasive or impatient with criticisms about his OC'ing, it's because their offense has been directed at us as previously-described for a long damn time now, and he (and I, and others too) are sick of it. Our days of being defensive and being the red-headed step-children of the wider gun owning "community" are gone. When *the* cause is to restore the full rights of all gun owners and carriers, no matter how or what they choose to carry, then we will revert to calling it "our" cause as being all-inclusive. But though it may not be evident just from the one post you picked to make your comment on, if you looked through the many OC vs. CC types of threads, you'd find a clear hostility from many CC'ers directed towards some or all OC'ers on an all-to-regular basis. And until very recently, OC'ers have refrained from reciprocating.

I get your post, and don't even disagree with it in an idealistic sort of way, but in practice, it has been the board's OC'ers always defending against scurrilous accusations, outright lies and promulgation of mindless and uninformed myths about how we're hurting "our" cause.

Blues

 

[Firefighterchen]

If all, or even most, posts by CC'ers directed to OC'ers were like yours, there would be no problems between the two "factions." Yes, you state the goal as all of the regular OC'ers on this site would want it, 100% legal for both in all 57 (HA!) states, and I feel comfortable saying that that includes Firefighterchen.

But Chen has a point that you must've missed as you've surfed around here. It is typical for CC'ers to call OC'ers any number of pejoratives, ranging from rather innocuous characterizations like "show-offs" and "attention whores" to "idiots" and "intellectually inferior" and blaming us (OC'ers) for hurting their cause, only of course, as they try to stifle our rights, they will refer to it as "our" cause.

They say the best defense is a good offense, and if Chen seems a bit abrasive or impatient with criticisms about his OC'ing, it's because their offense has been directed at us as previously-described for a long damn time now, and he (and I, and others too) are sick of it. Our days of being defensive and being the red-headed step-children of the wider gun owning "community" are gone. When *the* cause is to restore the full rights of all gun owners and carriers, no matter how or what they choose to carry, then we will revert to calling it "our" cause as being all-inclusive. But though it may not be evident just from the one post you picked to make your comment on, if you looked through the many OC vs. CC types of threads, you'd find a clear hostility from many CC'ers directed towards some or all OC'ers on an all-to-regular basis. And until very recently, OC'ers have refrained from reciprocating.

I get your post, and don't even disagree with it in an idealistic sort of way, but in practice, it has been the board's OC'ers always defending against scurrilous accusations, outright lies and promulgation of mindless and uninformed myths about how we're hurting "our" cause.

Blues

Just because Rambo fits this dialogue so well.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

 

[Jarhead6541]

Don't get to nearly as many posts as I'd like to, so yeah, I did miss the previous arguments. Not being sure of the context of those discussions, I'll withhold any statement until further notice. As to this particular 'jab', it just appeared to be unprovoked with the exception of one individuals alleged statement. I suppose the chip on the shoulder remains an irritant.
I guess we've all got a dog or two in this fight [ if only it wasn't with each other], so I'll leave you guys to yours, and stay the hell out of it; for now.
Thanks for helping to clear that up.