I don't get it

[joespahr]

To keep this response simple. Do you think anyone who can purchase a handgun or any gun for that matter should be able to walk around in the public with it?

Jason

Does it matter? "Shall not be infringed.", remember? Keep and bear are not separate rights. They exist together, so if you have the right to keep (purchase), ie you are not a felon or other prohibited person, you should automatically have the right to bear. And even if they were separated in the language of the Second Amendment (ie "The right to keep arms, and the right to bear arms"), both rights are covered by the blanket "Shall not be infringed."

 

[.45acp]

To keep this response simple. Do you think anyone who can purchase a handgun or any gun for that matter should be able to walk around in the public with it?

Jason

Yes, just to keep it simple. If you are legal to purchase and own a firearm, what restriction should be placed upon carry of said firearm?
Unfortunately, I see many CC’ers, viewing a CCW permit as a club, you seem to feed off of each other every time this issue comes up in a thread such as “I don’t get it”. In my opinion, the CC’ers that take issue with OC have fallen into the PC trap of “Keep the firearms out of sight out of mind” and the anti’s will leave us alone. Not true, the anti’s goal is the outlawing and restrictions of all firearms. The discussions of OC are just a sideline to split the gun community, and it is obviously working.
I am particularly disappointed with the mentality of “What if a OC’er shoots the wrong person, or just goes berserk”. If you are really concerned, research this and you will find that it is the CC’er that gets into trouble much more than the OC’er.

Either you fully support the 2nd Amendment rights or you don't...there is no but...


What else?

 

[.45acp]

Does it matter? "Shall not be infringed.", remember? Keep and bear are not separate rights. They exist together, so if you have the right to keep (purchase), ie you are not a felon or other prohibited person, you should automatically have the right to bear. And even if they were separated in the language of the Second Amendment (ie "The right to keep arms, and the right to bear arms"), both rights are covered by the blanket "Shall not be infringed."

+1, Well said.

Thank you,


Steve

 

[Boomboy007]

Just to keep it simple....

To keep this response simple. Do you think anyone who can purchase a handgun or any gun for that matter should be able to walk around in the public with it?

Jason

Yes. And that INCLUDES an AK or shotgun, although politeness would dictate they be carried slung. :sarcastic:

 

[.45acp]

Exactly what he says

There's no need for open carry for anyone except for law officials. You want to excercise your right to carry? Do it concealed.

So only LEO's should carry openly??? Do you really believe that and in the same breath claim that you are a ardent supporter of the 2nd Amendment?


Say it aint so

Steve

 

[Cocked _and_Locked]

F*ck The Republic of Kalifornia...

OMG, I gotta mark my calendar, 2nd time in a week I agreed w/Bo. Kommifornia sucks. They are dragging down the whole country.

JMHO.

 

[emt232004]

back on topic

Back to the original post, The only reason this event blew up and got so much media was that Witz and the city of royal oak signed a contract against what the laws in MI state. Making the contract going against the state law. Witz thought he would detour those few he thought would carry with the simple contract rather than someone noticing the wording and speaking about to have it changed to follow state law.
Witz wanted free media and he got it. The debate is not about cc or oc but about the right to carry at all in an event where it is legal to carry Witz tried to take that right away illegally

 

[Cocked _and_Locked]

Denver tried to do similar things a few years back. Local politico power grab. More common than should be. CO amended statue was updated to specifically restrict local municipalities from writing any ordinance contrary to state law WRT CCW and OC.

 

[handgonnetoter]

Does it matter? "Shall not be infringed.", remember? Keep and bear are not separate rights. They exist together, so if you have the right to keep (purchase), ie you are not a felon or other prohibited person, you should automatically have the right to bear. And even if they were separated in the language of the Second Amendment (ie "The right to keep arms, and the right to bear arms"), both rights are covered by the blanket "Shall not be infringed."

Well, one can't deny the logic of the wording of the 2nd Amendment.

 

[handgonnetoter]

OMG, I gotta mark my calendar, 2nd time in a week I agreed w/Bo. Kommifornia sucks. They are dragging down the whole country.

JMHO.

Oh, not to worry. In 2012 they are going to fall into the ocean anyways!:sarcastic:

 

[380hp]

Nicely posited, Bohemian! :yes2:



I was an officer for three years. In the state where I worked, open carry was legal. I saw people open carry all the time, and to be truthful, it did not bother me at all. However, I did have colleagues who resented the fact that "civilians" (they mistakenly believed that they were not) should not be allowed to carry weapons at all.

While I believed that I derived my authority from the badge on my chest, and chose to exercise that authority with great care, there are many who rather believe that their authority is derived from the tools of coercion on their belt (pistol, tazer, cuffs).

Trust me: Bad guys DO NOT wear their guns openly. Also, 99.9% of bad guys DO NOT have permits.

We never got a MWG (man with gun) call that did not also have some concurrent criminal activity involved. I am sure that, were we to receive a MWG call with no other information, the dispatcher would have notified the reporter that open carry of a firearm was not illegal.

I wished alot of others felt that way about law abiding citizens.

 

[HoustonRaven]

I hate one of my first posts here to be cannibalistic to my fellow 2a'ers, but I am having a hard time squaring those that question open carry with them being 2A supporters.

Ok, so some feel it is a tactical advantage. I get that. But isn't the greater argument here the right to CHOOSE? While some may not "get it", the ability to choose which carry option you prefer means a hell of a lot more than simply having one or another.

Not to mention, living in TX can be downright brutal this time of year. Open carry would be a great relief during the summer months.

 

[Ringo]

to keep this response simple. Do you think anyone who can purchase a handgun or any gun for that matter should be able to walk around in the public with it?

Jason

yes! If it's a legal purchase.

 

[Ringo]

Either you fully support the 2nd Amendment rights or you don't...there is no but...

You got that right!

 

[jason]

GO BLUE!!!!:big_boss: Mr.Glock

 

[IWLAFART]

I think that a person needs instruction in current state laws and safety. That being for the carriers and public.
I have taken numerous NRA classes and I feel that has helped me in many ways IMHO.:thank_you2:

 

[hammy22166]

hi im art from newyork does anyone really understand the handgun laws here? because it sais you can do some things like hunting and stuff . just be real careful cause you could have your permit taken awayif you get caught with it in your car.hard to understand.

 

[Bohemian]

hi im art from newyork does anyone really understand the handgun laws here? because it sais you can do some things like hunting and stuff . just be real careful cause you could have your permit taken awayif you get caught with it in your car.hard to understand.

Federal and State Firearms Laws
Link Removed