The Open Carry Argument

[NavyLCDR]

I don't know where this "civil suit" stuff came from, when there are no criminal charges against someone, or they have been found "not guilty" in criminal court. The Constitution never said it's OK to be tried twice, if it's one criminal, and one civil case. It said double jeopardy is ILLEGAL.

There should be ample proof there are GROUNDS for ANY suit before it is brought before a court and taxpayer money is wasted. Not to mention the money the innocent party has to pony up just to defend a case that should never have been permitted to occur.

We need SERIOUS TORT REFORM in this country!!

I do agree with you on ideal and principle. Unfortunately, though, no charges for an assault conducted in self defense or a verdict of not guilty by reason of self defense does not negate the fact that an assault did occur. It simply means the assault was justified. Then some scumbag lawyer will use the fact that an assault did actually occur to try to gain financial advantage. Unfortunately, in this case, double jeopardy only applies to being tried twice for the same offense within the same legal jurisdiction. The civil case would be in a different jurisdiction because it would be tried in the civil court and not the criminal court.

This is also why military members can be tried in the military as well as out in town for offenses committed out in town. There are two separate jurisdictions involved.

It ain't necessarily right, but that's the way it is (or at least the way I understand it to be!)

 

[miestrojerry]

Read this and tell me what it says: the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Open carry is a form of bearing arms. Which the government can not restrict, but private property owners, like stores can.

The government does not trust the people, so we are restricted on open carry in many places.

If some one says that you are not a part of a well regulated militia, then tell them you are an army of one.

Jerry

 

[hopnpop]

I am just writing down what I read in the various gun magazines I get. There have been a number of court cases, that they tell about in the magazines, where the state finds the accused not guilty of charges from the state, but end up getting sued by the family of the bad guy in a civil trial for money or whatever. I would list the magazines here for you to look up the stories for yourself, but I don't know if I am allowed to do that on this forum or not.

Here's another example of the benefits of some Castle Doctrine Laws. Legislation has been written to compliment the "no duty to retreat" law, by providing immunity to those who have injured or killed a party in SELF DEFENSE, from law suits by the agressor or his family, or whomever. Castle Doctrine laws do vary by state. Some states don't have them at all, some provide the "no duty to retreat" clause, and others offer the "no duty to retreat" WITH protection from these secondary law suits.

 

[Islander]

Here's another example of the benefits of some Castle Doctrine Laws. Legislation has been written to compliment the "no duty to retreat" law, by providing immunity to those who have injured or killed a party in SELF DEFENSE, from law suits by the agressor or his family, or whomever. Castle Doctrine laws do vary by state. Some states don't have them at all, some provide the "no duty to retreat" clause, and others offer the "no duty to retreat" WITH protection from these secondary law suits.

Yep, that's how it is in SC. CANNOT be sued in civil court for this. Thanks South Carolina. Read 16-11-420 B, below. Get on your state representatives to pass this sort of legislation.

SECTION 16-11-410. Citation of article.
This article may be cited as the "Protection of Persons and Property Act".

SECTION 16-11-420. Intent and findings of General Assembly.
(A) It is the intent of the General Assembly to codify the common law Castle Doctrine which recognizes that a person's home is his castle and to extend the doctrine to include an occupied vehicle and the person's place of business.

(B) The General Assembly finds that it is proper for law-abiding citizens to protect themselves, their families, and others from intruders and attackers without fear of prosecution or civil action for acting in defense of themselves and others.
(C) The General Assembly finds that Section 20, Article I of the South Carolina Constitution guarantees the right of the people to bear arms, and this right shall not be infringed.

(D) The General Assembly finds that persons residing in or visiting this State have a right to expect to remain unmolested and safe within their homes, businesses, and vehicles.

(E) The General Assembly finds that no person or victim of crime should be required to surrender his personal safety to a criminal, nor should a person or victim be required to needlessly retreat in the face of intrusion or attack.

 

[GOV5]

read this and tell me what it says: The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Open carry is a form of bearing arms. Which the government can not restrict, but private property owners, like stores can.

The government does not trust the people, so we are restricted on open carry in many places.

If some one says that you are not a part of a well regulated militia, then tell them you are an army of one.

Jerry

rofl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I like that!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[bralko85]

It's pretty lame when a person has to resort to comparing a pre-meditated hit on four uniformed police officers to an open carrier getting shot standing in line waiting for coffee. The Brady Bunch and the Violence Policy Center also have to make such far fetched comparisons to support their position. But if that works for you, go for it. I don't buy it.

Seriously... the cops were shot because they were wearing blue uniforms and badges, not because they were wearing guns.

Lame? No, I don't think so. Obviously my point sailed right over your head...:blink:. While I was talking about criminal intent, you zeroed in on the uniforms like a deer caught in the headlights.

All I'm saying is that OC in most situations is not a prudent option for a variety of reasons, far more than the "lone" reason given in the original article. Does that mean I disagree with an individual's right to carry openly? Absolutely not. Does that mean I think concealed carry is the best option, 100% of the time? Again, :no:

I don't begrudge anyone from exercising their right to do so, I nod knowingly to those individuals I come across in public who are carrying openly, and occasionally I exercise the right myself.

Be safe out there guys.

 

[miestrojerry]

Compare what to who??????? Where I live, we effectively have no LEOs. The sheriff's department take reports over the phone, There is no community policing, the LEOs don't or can't come out and help us develop our own crime watch.

I talked to a local security company about alarm systems, they told me that I can not count on the county sheriff for assistance, even if it is an open gun battle. They may show up to take reports at best. If I need to have some government agency to protect me, I was instructed to call the VFD. They all have guns.

Right now, this second, I have a 357 on my hip. There is a 12 guage within reach in my bedroom. My dog is the best warning and defense system I can have where I am at.

I forgot to mention this, the sheriff's department has a M113 APC, so they could come to a pitch gun battle, but it would be a long trip to get my place.

Jerry

I am an Army of ONE and extremely well organized.

 

[NavyLCDR]

mjmcg,

Thank you for your opinion. Very typical New York. I would not expect anything less from your state, and you have delivered!

 

[NavyLCDR]

"Very typical New York"

That's a tough one to follow up on since that can be taken so many ways. What do you think of when you hear the words "New York?"

Hoplophobia and gun control.

The plain and simple truth of the matter is, were it to be allowed and a person so chose to exercise that option, they end up with more trouble on their hands they bargained for. If not by the public in general, but by those members of our society who would specifically target them due to the fact they see an easy opportunity to obtain a handgun through commission of a crime itself.

If it is such a plain and simple truth, then why does it not happen in real life where people do open carry guns? The only place these crimes of open carriers getting shot, or their guns getting taken from them are on the internet forums, in the imaginations of those afraid at the sight of an armed American because they have been listening to the claims of the anti-gun crowd for too long and have begun to believe their propaganda.

I doubt that you are interested in the facts. But here is what happens in real life:

Link Removed

Gun Owner Saves Lives In The Richmond VA Golden Market Shooting

Open carry was an advantage in this case because in the video I saw just how fast the GO managed to draw his gun and begin to return fire. You always hear about how open carry is so bad tactically – you’ll be the first one shot, etc. Oh, yeah? The GO had a HUGE gun in plain sight and he was NOT shot. Who got shot first? An unarmed store owner.

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/5.1/gun-facts-5.1-screen.pdf

Paper page 31 (file page 38):

Fact: 60% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they
knew the victim was armed. 40% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided
committing crimes when they thought the victim might be armed.

Fact: Felons report that they avoid entering houses where people are at home because
they fear being shot.

Fact: 59% of the burglaries in Britain, which has tough gun control laws, are “hot
burglaries”174 which are burglaries committed while the home is occupied by the
owner/renter. By contrast, the U.S., with more lenient gun control laws, has a “hot
burglary” rate of only 13%.

Fact: A survey of felons revealed the following:

• 74% of felons agreed that "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at
home is that they fear being shot during the crime."

• 57% of felons polled agreed, "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed
victim than they are about running into the police."

The FACTS are that a criminal has a much easier method of obtaining a gun than to take one from an armed citizen. The FACTS are that the majority don't want to get shot and don't want to get caught. Messing with a person they KNOW is armed does not meet either one of those goals. The FACTS are that a criminal when he sees an armed person will simply will wait 2 minutes for that armed person to leave or go down the street one block (or go to New York) where they will find an abundance of targets that don't appear to be armed.

If you would like to support your claim from factual data I would love to see it because in the multitude of open carry arguments I have read your opinion is expressed quite often, and yet we fail to see any factual data to back it up. Unless you want to count the 4 Lakewood police officers shot in a coffee shop which was a hit against uniformed police officers, or you want to point to crimes where armed security guards at Wal Mart were shot in the face because they were wearing a uniform and were shot because it was a planned attack on an armored car. But those instances are vastly different than Joe Schmoe civilian getting popped on the street or in a convenience store which you claim will happen if Joe Schmoe carries his gun openly.

I don't care if you carry your gun concealed, openly, or duct taped to your forehead. But I won't make such childish blanket statements about a segment of fellow gun owner's and carriers such as, "Having one ying-yang walking around like Bronco Billy" and "some putz is walking around with a John Wayne complex." and "because he's got the Dirty Hairy / John Wayne thing going on" and "Hey look at me I'm a badass with a gun!". Those phrases sound like they came straight from the Brady Bunch and belong on the Brady Bunch's website. They do absolutely NOTHING to help our cause.

no profession of fact intended or inferred

No truer words ever spoken. You obviously aren't interested in facts. It seems your major goal is to belittle your fellow gun owners/carriers. We get enough that from the Brady Bunch.

 

[Islander]

I didn't read each and every post in this thread. I instead opted to risk repetition in simply stating the following opinions:
What people don't know won't hurt them. I don't mean physically hurt, I mean it won't bother them not to know. I believe that openly advertising the fact that you have a handgun by carrying exposed in public opens the door for a whole host of unwanted problems, not the least of which is stupid people who will inevitably stare, or worse yet, comment about it, doing little more than drawing more attention to the fact that some putz is walking around with a John Wayne complex.
The next thing it does is targets you as someone who has a gun that could potentially be stolen, thereby making it the object of a criminals scheming. The idea that criminals avoid known armed individuals is a misconception. If a criminal doesn't know you have a weapon or not, he's left with a 50/50 gamble and that's what criminals don't like. They like when they know the odds are in their favor, like when you advertise the fact you have a gun and they follow you just waiting for the opportunity to strike and take it.
I firmly believe, and not to tread on anyone's sense of offense, but the only real reason behind anyone walking about in public openly wearing a handgun is because of the false pretense that EVERYONE around them, criminals included will all of a sudden reel in awe and respect for them and leave them alone because he's got the Dirty Hairy / John Wayne thing going on. Never mind the percentage of people who they possibly terrify with it in the process.
The only way to own and carry a handgun responsibly is so that nobody has a clue, and be aware of your surroundings. There is always a method for carrying concealed that will allow for a quick presentation to diffuse a situation should the situation call for it. There is no justification in my book other than a heavy case of hero syndrome for carrying openly in public. None.
I live in NYS where it is mandatory and I'll tell you a little story about what happens when you don't. While hunting one winter with a stainless S&W 629 .44, my buddies and I stopped in at a Mickey D's on our way home to grab a quick sandwich. It was at a location where every skier from NJ to ME happened to be all at the same time. Well, the one time I don't ensure that my coat was over the revolver on my side was the one time it took for the 16 year old girl at the register to happen to see it and asked if I was a police officer. I replied no and wondered what would have given her that idea. She pointed straight at me and loudly said "well I saw that huge gun on your side and just figured you were!" You could have heard a pin drop in that place as every person in there suddenly stopped and all eyes were fixed dead on me for what seemed an eternity as I turned about 9 shades of red with embarrassment as I pulled my coattail over it. I stepped out of the line and said to my buddies, lets get out of here and I left. If you need to ask why, or have some contradicting stance as to why I should have stood my ground then words like privacy, modesty, subtlety, inconspicuous are words you are not familiar with and are the core of the values any gun carrier should abide by, not "Hey look at me I'm a badass with a gun!"

Just one man's opinion, no profession of fact intended or inferred.

We disagree. It is perfectly responsible for a person to legally carry a gun unconcealed whenever and wherever it is legal. It is an expression of freedom. It can be a political statement. It can be simply a matter of convenience, done by people who don't shy away from responsible people going about their business responsibly.

Criminals are probably going to be MORE afraid of a person carrying a gun, not skulking in the shadows thinking "Wow, a victim open carrying, think I'll get the drop and steal that weapon!" Admittedly, this is a supposition on my part, but search the net,; you won't find many (if any) mention of people being attacked by perps to steal their open carry weapon. I think you are more likely to become a victim if not openly "armed and dangerous".

Regarding the event at MDs, you missed the perfect opportunity to TEACH not only that young girl, but "every person in there" that it is LEGAL to carry your gun. You could have proudly promoted one of our most treasured freedoms, but instead you furtively slinked away without a word. I realize you possibly had to leave to avoid getting arrested (since you can't carry openly under any circumstance in NY), but you could have said something positive and left a positive impression with all those people.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Regarding the event at MDs, you missed the perfect opportunity to TEACH not only that young girl, but "every person in there" that it is LEGAL to carry your gun. You could have proudly promoted one of our most treasured freedoms, but instead you furtively slinked away without a word. I realize you possibly had to leave to avoid getting arrested (since you can't carry openly under any circumstance in NY), but you could have said something positive and left a positive impression with all those people.

I turned about 9 shades of red with embarrassment as I pulled my coattail over it. I stepped out of the line and said to my buddies, lets get out of here and I left. If you need to ask why, or have some contradicting stance as to why I should have stood my ground then words like privacy, modesty, subtlety, inconspicuous are words you are not familiar with and are the core of the values any gun carrier should abide by

Islander... I think he has his weapon and his gun confused in his head.... "This is my weapon, this is my gun, this is for fighting, this if for..."

 

[hopnpop]

I don't care if you carry your gun concealed, openly, or duct taped to your forehead. But I won't make such childish blanket statements about a segment of fellow gun owner's and carriers such as, "Having one ying-yang walking around like Bronco Billy" and "some putz is walking around with a John Wayne complex." and "because he's got the Dirty Hairy / John Wayne thing going on" and "Hey look at me I'm a badass with a gun!". Those phrases sound like they came straight from the Brady Bunch and belong on the Brady Bunch's website. They do absolutely NOTHING to help our cause.

The bold type denotes where your ass is showing, MJMGC. You certainly covered your bases - you stated that there's only one real reason why people OC as if your opinion were factually indisputable. You don't know many people who OC, that's obvious. If you do know many people who OC, you certainly wouldn't be so prejudice, as you'd recognize immediately that most do NOT have "John Wayne" or "I'm a bad-ass" complexes. Of course you're entitled to your opinion and I can tell by your post that you're not about to be swayed... or even accept any arguments to the contrary. Unfortunately I'm still compelled to bring a couple points to the table... even though, to you, they're only coming from a John Wayne/bad-ass/Dirty Harry/yin-yang/putz/hero-wanna-be...

1) You stated: "Never mind the percentage of people who they possibly terrify with it in the process". If anyone's 'terrified' by an average Joe walking around with a holstered pistol, maybe they should seek psychiatric help. I believe that falls under "hoplophobia". It's a phobia, like any other. And I have yet to see anyone's 'terrified' reaction to OC. I see skepticism and curiosity, and of course, the occasional "stink eye" from those who are opposed to firearms carry. I've not even seen a negative reaction to OC in banks, of all places.

2) Location, location, location! Maybe OC isn't as welcome even in "upstate" NY as it is here in Milichigan. Consider that OC may be more commonplace in other parts of the country. That does seem to be a case. Here, it's a rarity for anyone to even bat an eye at it.

3) You also said "The only way to own and carry a handgun responsibly is so that nobody has a clue...". So by that logic, anyone who OC's is an irresponsible handgun owner. That'll piss off a lot of LEOs since they, too, OC. Now is when you chime in and say "they have to", or "but they're trained". Whether they have to or not, they DO carry openly, and they do so while their uniforms and badges make them bigger targets than their guns do. And I'm sure you can't possibly wrap your head around the notion that many civilians recieve training beyond what's required by law. But again, you're not about to be swayed by logic and experience that's not your own, so with that, I'll leave you to your closed-mindedness. Good luck with that.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Also a lot of hunters OC. I suppose that we should just subscribe to the PETA garbage that says all hunters are irresponsable idiots, because they OC.

Hey now! I am a member of PETA! I believe there is room on this earth for all of God's creatures.... usually next to the mashed potatoes unless the gravy is going to get in the way.

PETA - People who Eat Tasty Animals...

Oh, that's probably not politically correct. Sorry if I offended you again, mjmcg. :cray:

 

[mappow]

Gotta Lov those tasty animals...........Medium rare, charred with fire and possibly some Bearnaise.

If you see a clean cut, well groomed individual OC'ing. Would not most people assume it probably was a LEO? Not trying to impersonate, but most wouldn't be bother by it.

I do like the Forehead option, LT.

 

[Itstjs]

Openly carrying a firearm we all know has its plus's and minus's, I choose not to most of the time, I think Ive only done it once or twice, I just dont like seeing people eyeball me like Ive got some contagious disease. I dont understand how people can be uncomfortable with it though either...Ive yet to see a BG openly carry a firearm.
Id like to see more people do it, however until then I think Ill let it be some unwelcome suprise for some would be BGleasantry::cray:

 

[mappow]

ItsTjs, you ever figure they're looking at you in admiration not disgust? Just asking.

 

[AzBanks]

I open carried for about five years AIWB and only had 3 or 4 people notice. A couple of them asked me about it. One older gentleman noticed as he was pumping gas at the next pump over from mine. He looked a little startled and then looked me in the eye and asked politely if it was legal. I told him that it is legal in Arizona. He replied that it would get me thrown in jail in New york. I told him that is one of the reasons I don't live in New York. He smiled and we each went on about our business. I kept my shirt tucked but a little loose so it would drape just a tiny bit over the top edge of my firearm. I believe most people thought it was a cell phone or pager if they saw it at all.

 

[preventec47]

Recently retired Glen Coffee arrested for having concealed weapon

By Chris Chase

When former San Francisco 49ers running back Glen Coffee(notes) retired from the NFL this summer at the age of 23, he said it was because God told him to leave football and enter the ministry. He didn't mention whether or not he was supposed to accept his higher calling while carrying an automatic pistol.

Coffee was arrested in Florida on Friday morning for carrying a concealed firearm, according to TMZ. Police found the weapon cocked in his center console during a traffic stop.

The former NFL player had been pulled over for speeding in his 2008 Cadillac and was soon discovered to be driving a car without insurance or registration. When police searched the car before it was to be towed, they found the loaded weapon.

Police arrested Coffee and charged him with a third-degree felony, which is punishable in Florida by up to five years in jail. The arrest came in Coffee's hometown of Ft. Walton Beach.

------------------
My Comment, I used to carry concealed in my car in Louisiana and Georgia just like he did
without a permit. Now I have a permit. Those Florida folks see it as a serious crime dont they !

 

[hollie1]

We can carry either way. Lots in our state do both! I prefer to carry consealed! But if its imprinting some oh well! I'm to small to hide it any better & I don't like it in my purse unless I real real have no choice! Hubby just trys to keep it somewhat covered while were out! If he chooses to carry open I've not a problem with that at all!
To each their own,we do whats best & comfortable given where you live. It is a personal choice to make,,,

 

[GOV5]

Hollie, why is against the law to carry it in a console? I thought that was where it was supposed to be placed when traveling.