Gun Rights

The 'Weird' and 'Scary' Open Carry Movement

The NRA's criticism reflects shifting attitudes toward publicly displayed guns.

|

Are people who assert their Second Amendment rights by bringing rifles and shotguns into stores and restaurants "weird" and "scary"? At least one staff member at the National Rifle Association (NRA) thought so, and he expressed that view in an online commentary that the organization felt compelled to retract last week after it caused an uproar among gun rights advocates.

To some extent, the episode reflects divisions among Second Amendment activists, many of whom view the NRA, despite its reputation for adamantly resisting gun control, as insufficiently zealous. But the brouhaha also highlights a shift in American attitudes regarding the public display of guns.

The controversial essay, which the NRA posted on May 30, argued that protesters associated with Open Carry Texas had "crossed the line from enthusiasm to downright foolishness" by openly carrying rifles into coffee shops and restaurants. Although such displays are legal in Texas, the unnamed author said, they "can be downright scary" to people who do not understand what's going on, and they risk alienating potential supporters, making "folks who might normally be perfectly open-minded about firearms feel uncomfortable and question the motives of pro-gun advocates."

That article, which was originally attributed to the NRA itself, has since disappeared from the organization's website, replaced by a video in which Chris Cox, the NRA's chief lobbyist, insists that "the National Rifle Association supports open carry…unequivocally." Apologizing for "a poor word choice," Cox says the NRA agrees with Open Carry Texas that people should be allowed to carry handguns as well as long guns without having to hide them.

"In Texas some people have decided to protest the absurdity of the ban on open carry of handguns by carrying their long guns openly and legally," Cox says. "Ultimately what this comes down to is a tactics discussion."

In other words, while there is nothing wrong with wearing a pistol on your hip, slinging a rifle across your chest is a bit too ostentatious for the NRA's taste. Many people, however, may be alarmed by the sidearm as well, which presumably is why Texas and several other states ban open display of handguns even by people with carry permits.

Then again, at least 18 states allow open carrying of handguns without a permit. That approach jibes with an older sensibility that viewed concealed weapons with suspicion.

As the Supreme Court noted in District of Columbia v. Heller, the 2008 decision recognizing a constitutional right to armed self-defense, "the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues." In 1850, for example, the Louisiana Supreme Court upheld a ban on concealed weapons, ruling that the right to bear arms protected by the Second Amendment applies only to openly displayed weapons: "This is the right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, and which is calculated to incite men to a manly and noble defence of themselves, if necessary, and of their country, without any tendency to secret advantages and unmanly assassinations."

Openly carrying a weapon was considered manly and honorable, while secretly carrying a weapon was considered sneaky and disreputable; someone who hid his weapon was probably up to no good. Today, by contrast, the prevailing view, at least among urbanites, seems to be that secretly carrying a weapon is less worrisome than carrying it openly. Out of sight, out of mind.

Although their constitutional position has a long pedigree, organizations such as Open Carry Texas, which seeks "to condition Texans to feel safe around law-abiding citizens that choose to [openly] carry [guns]," may be fighting a losing battle. In any case, concealed weapons are probably a more effective deterrent to crime: When guns are hidden, bad guys do not know which potential victim might be armed. Hence there is a practical advantage to keeping your gun out of sight, aside from avoiding a panic at Starbucks.

Advertisement

NEXT: Brickbat: A Little Appeasement Never Hurt

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Today, by contrast, the prevailing view, at least among urbanites, seems to be that secretly carrying a weapon is less worrisome than carrying it openly.

    That’s because everyone is all for individual rights up until they conflict with the sensibilities of the most delicate among us. Once the pearl clutchers know about such an appalling exercise of liberty, it’s time to calm their jitters with some state intervention.

    1. I suppose you’re one of *those* types who thinks it’s okay to just yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater too!

      1. Who goes to the movies anymore?

        1. Movies? I thought that analogy was all about the Lincoln assassination and not making tasteless jokes.

      2. So let’s compare these guys to the DEMOCRATS and their tactics… You know,,, those that take over college presidents offices, shutdown businesses and universities, block roads, riot and bomb places. What these guys are doing also a “Display” but in their case it hurts no one and is perfectly legal…

      3. As long as the crowed theater is on fire it is fine to yell fire. See no Abridgment to 1st amendment rights.

      4. Doing so when there is no fire violates the contract between you and the theatre proprietor. It also interferes with the contract between the proprietor and the other theatre goers.

        A firearm being safely carried does NOT interfere with a customer at Starbucks or Chipotle anymore than someone wearing a pro Obama or pro abortion shirt.

      5. Harm caused by yelling fire in a crowded theater should not be a rational for federal restriction of constitutionally enumerated and guaranteed rights. It should certainly merit charges for harming others if others are harmed as well as civil lawsuits, but it’s a terrible rational for diminishing a right that the federal government has a duty to protect. If the government can qualify when, who, how and where each citizen gets how much of a part of a right that essentially removes it from the rights realm and into the privileges realm.

        And do you actually know a single person who would yell Fire in a crowded theater but doesn’t because … I guess because it’s not constitutionally protected? You do understand that it’s not actually unconstitutional or necessarily illegal to do that? It was an example presented by Justice Holmes of why the federal government should have standing to exempt certain actions from a citizens rights, it’s considered total junk and ignored these days, though unfortunately both sides of the aisle still believe they should be able to qualify rights.

  2. The problem is thus – Prarading around handing longarms in an unsafe manner in large numbers in a location not normally associated with longarm use does the opposite of what the open carry people want. It turns the public against them instead of normalizing open carry. They see gun nuts parading around recklessly and it sours them to the thought of further resoration of our rights. The open carry texas people are being counterproductive. Acclimation is a subtle and slow process. Shoving something in someone’s face will make them recoil from it.

    1. THe best analogy I’ve read here was that it’s like a very overt gay pride parade. They aren’t going to change anyone’s mind anyway, so fuck ’em.

      1. A lot of gay people hate the crazy flamboyant parades. They do nothing but cement opposition.

        1. The historical record is that they undermined the opposition, but enjoy your solipsism.

          1. I tend to agree with Drake and the lot on this – just pissing people off who previously WEREN’T opposed to guns but now will be because you were an overzealous dick. Kind of like motorcyclists with OBNOXIOUSLY loud pipes….

        2. You mean like the republicans I see post places referring to niggers and sand jockeys but never being called out for it by other republicans? Makes you wonder why so many people think all republicans are racists. Cops who do incredibly terrible things and get defended by other cops? Democrats who defend the president no matter how poorly he acts?

          If you don’t police your group the entire group ends up carrying the association with the worst in the crowd.

      2. Isn’t that what they want in the 1st place?

        Pun Pun Pun Pun Pun Pun Pun

    2. Depends on whether your cause has social approval and state backing. For example, a lot of gay and feminist activists have made ostentatious public displays a huge part of their publicity campaigns (glitter bombings, parades/marches, public displays of nudity and sexuality, e.g. Folsom Street Fair, etc). Unlike in those campaigns, there’s not going to be a media-coordinated public backlash against the people who shit their pants when they see a gun calling them bigots and hate mongers and driving them out of polite society. With that in mind, you have to tailor your approach.

      1. I think what moved the ball on gay acceptance was not the in your face campaigns, it was more openly gay people in media being “normal” and “harmless” that helped people not care. It could be the over the top displays of gay pride made regular gays seem normal by contrast. I don’t really know.

        1. “Gays and Guns – The Intersection of FABULOUS and Flying Brass”

        2. The parades made them seem harmless.

          The parades often feature behavior that is bizarre and glorifies sexual promiscuity, but despite that (or perhaps, ultimately, because of it) the parades are comical and ridiculous.

          People don’t fear what they laugh at.

          Gay pride events in the major cities shifted quite quickly from being shocking to being tourist events. Straight people took the train into New York and Boston to watch them. Expecting those people to remain anti-gay would be like expecting people who go to Disney World to go home and want to ban Mickey Mouse.

          1. “That damn rat cost me two grand in tickets, food and souvenirs to keep the spawn quiet! Somebody should put a round between his beady dead eyes!”
            /Every dad that has been to Disney World

          2. Just ban all the fucking Disney princesses instead.

          3. Right. I’d say an important distinction between ostentatious pride parades and carrying rifles into a Starbucks is that the parades don’t cause people to fear for their safety whereas the latter makes people shit their pants.

  3. Yeah, I think carrying long guns into a restaurant is kind of stupid and pointless. However, I recall fondly traveling through MO a couple years ago and stopping for gas. Much to my surprise, a guy brought his new rifle in to the store and was proudly walking through all its features with the clerk, who paid rapt attention.

    I thought it was cool – I was just surprised how open it was, cause that would NEVER happen in metro Detroit without pants shitting and cop calling.

    So – it was apparantly a rather common site in that area, and I thought it was cool. The whole “tons o’ people walking around two-fisting AR’s and shotguns at a restaurant” just strikes me as fucking stupid and pointless, in contrast.

    YMMV

    1. *gets misty eyed*
      Remember when trucks had gun racks…with actual guns in them.

      Also, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGyJOX5wFFg

      1. Yes.

        *wipes a tear*

      2. Mine still does.

        It’s behind the rear seat instead of up against the rear window.

    2. Yeah, I think carrying long guns into a restaurant is kind of stupid and pointless. However, I recall fondly traveling through MO a couple years ago and stopping for gas. Much to my surprise, a guy brought his new rifle in to the store and was proudly walking through all its features with the clerk, who paid rapt attention.

      I think a guy in a small Missouri town showing off his rifle to some buddies at the gas station is different than 12 dudes with long guns showing up at a Starbucks with the express goal of making a political statement.

      I personally don’t like the open carry activists at all, even though I’m in favor of their right to bear arms. There are plenty of people who are frightened of firearms, and it seems to me you should respect such people and shouldn’t purposefully make them uncomfortable. It just seems like common courtesy.

      It’s not helping to make gun activists more popular.

      1. Yeah, I’m agreeing with you, as noted:

        The whole “tons o’ people walking around two-fisting AR’s and shotguns at a restaurant” just strikes me as fucking stupid and pointless, in contrast.

      2. One guy with a gun is exercising his rights.

        12 guys with guns is a show of force.

      3. There are plenty of people who are frightened of firearms, and it seems to me you should respect such people and shouldn’t purposefully make them uncomfortable.

        Right, but I’m sure the overwhelming majority of those people are people who have never seen a gun in a prosaic context.

        My wife is an eastern Massachusetts girl who grew up thinking guns are made of plutonium. The first time she saw a guy walking down the street with a rifle in Vermont in deer season, she was horrified. The first time. After she saw that 100 times, she was no longer horrified…because the human mind can’t maintain that sort of agitation over something that has become routine.

        The guy who calls 911 the first time he sees Open Carry people in a Starbucks won’t call the 100th time he sees them. He’ll yawn. Fear isn’t the mind killer; boredom is.

        1. This^. The fear of guns in society can be largely attributed to lack of familiarity. If you had a time machine and used it to bring an old west cowboy to the present time, do you think he would be more fearful of our cool rifles and handguns, or of riding in a 2 ton automobile at 80 mph surrounded by large trucks bumper-to-bumper down the expressway? It is amazing that most people are more afraid of guns than automobiles, but that just emphasizes Fluffy’s point.

      4. Their main problem is that they are carrying AT people.

      5. There was a day when anyone concealing a weapon was considered to be cowardly and/or with criminal intent. In either case he was not to be trusted.

        Carrying concealed was actually ruled unprotected under the second amendment in Louisiana (state supreme court).

    3. Question for those of you who carry concealed (for the record, I don’t):

      What is your reaction when you see a dude roll into Taco Bell with an AR-15 in a tactical sling carried in front of the body with his hand on the grip.

      Are you indifferent? Do you give him a thumbs up? Do you go to condition orange or even red? Does your hand instinctively go to your gun?

      1. ^ This.

        I open carry all the time, primarily in a drop holster because it’s accessible and more comfortable while on my motorcycle. But I don’t touch it, I don’t fuck with it, and I don’t get in people’s faces with it when I’m out and about.

        I saw a picture of one of these Open Carry guys with a rifle slung across his back and pointed downward. Didn’t bother me in the least; looked like he was perhaps grabbing a coffee on the way to a hunt. The very next picture I saw was some Open Carry jabroni posing and making a big scene waving his front-slung AR-15 all over the place. It was just a picture, I was thousands of miles away, and I’m perfectly OK with guns, and it STILL got my hackles up.

        While I agree that you should be able to walk down the street carrying whatever you please and not be hassled, when you start to do it in a manner that causes people to feel a genuine sense of danger or fear because you look crazy and unpredictable, then you’re an asshole and you’re doing everyone a disservice.

  4. Fun fact: Wyatt Earp was Jewish.

    1. So?

    2. Really? I did not know this. Interesting.

      “Jews of the Old West”. That seems like it’d be a small book, but maybe there’s a whole Zionist conspiracy that HASN’T been discussed! Inquiring minds want to know…

      1. “You’re a real meshy-goona.”
        “That’s meshugina!”

    3. No, his wife was. But he did get buried in a Jewish cemetary.

    4. In Tombstone he drew a line through the town.

      One side of the line was a gun free zone that he enforced. The other side was open carry ( or concealed I suppose). The gun free zone was for the citizens and merchants and the other was for saloons and whore houses where the Texas Cowboys came to play after the trail drives.

      Except for he, his brother, and Doc Holiday.

  5. Second Amendment activists … view the NRA … as insufficiently zealous.

    NRA has always been a bunch of ugly little girls afraid of upsetting the panty-wetters.
    And that’s me being polite about it.

    1. Or they’re an organization which chooses to be reasonable about the possibilities of practical politics and takes what victories they can, when they can.

      The National Firearms Act was passed in 34. The Assault Weapons Ban was passed in 94. The gun grabbers took six decades, essentially unopposed, to do what they did to our 2nd Amendment rights. It’s going to take a long time to roll all that back, barring an end run around them via the Supreme Court.

      1. The NFA was really only passed thanks to prohibition and should have died with it. And you missed 1969. Up until then we could purchase firearms through the mail and have them delivered to our doors. Kennedy was shot with a mail order rifle, that’s what put the kibosh to that one. The weapon ban was due to the school shootings. The allowance by SCOTUS for congress to permanently strip an American citizen of their second amendment rights in the 1990’s based on state level felony charges came about directly due to the war on drugs and all the gang wars.

        Note one similarity, all of our second amendment losses were due to crisis and half were due to government created crisis.

  6. i like turtles

    1. Any preference between terrestial turtles, sea turtles, or freshwater turtles?

      1. Yes, and what about tortoises? Do you like them, too?

  7. http://www.tampabay.com/news/c…..ge/2183723

    Guy plasters campaign stickers against a judge on stop signs. Police track him down using red light cameras and the rest of their survalience aparatus.

    1. I actually don’t have a huge problem with this because of this –

      “officers asked Mazzara more than once to stop. They even offered advice on where he could put stickers, but he ignored their warnings… detectives went to Mazzara’s Largo business, an insurance restoration contractor, to discuss the matter with him.”

      Having worked on many local campaigns, city workers get VERY agitated at stickers on traffic signs. I know there was no conspiracy against my city water and sewage candidate, but we got multiple calls warning us that some D-bag supporter was plastering stickers on traffic signs.

      This isn’t a free speech issue.

  8. Prarading around handing longarms in an unsafe manner in large numbers in a location not normally associated with longarm use does the opposite of what the open carry people want.

    It’s still OK to wear your “I’m the NRA and I vote” T-shirt, though, right?

    1. I’m not stopping you from doing anything.

      But if you do something stupid, I will say all sorts of horrible things.

      I expect you to take it as a condition of the first clause.

      1. Oh, I agree the long-gun tactic is counterproductive.

        Would it be stupid to wear your “This picture could be a real gun” T-shirt?

        1. No. Only the most irredemably stupid are going to flip over that.

          But even I have issue over these dipshits with unsafe handling pointing potentially loaded weapons in the direction of other patrons. That just isn’t proper handling.

          1. the most irredemably stupid

            Nice band name.

  9. Someone needs to pull the string on these guys. I bet the guns are stage props. We will find out when one of them gets arrested.

    This seems like a sleazy leftist plot, But probably not

  10. Here’s the thing, if they just made open carry legal, the Open Carry asshats would start leaving their guns at home. Its Fuck-you-dadism.

    1. Open Carry of longarms is legal in Texas.

      1. Right, but I thought the point of the matter was to make Open Carry of handguns without permitting similarly legal.

  11. How long till there’s an “accidental discharge” (I know, I know…)? Haven’t followed this closely, but at first blush these don’t seem the smartest of people. A problem is, they aren’t just open carrying; they seem to be almost WANTING a confrontation.

    1. I’m sure there have been a lot of those by the police already.

  12. What I don’t get is why they have to make a big.deal out.of it. I go to dinner every week with a group of guys and one of our.number open carries everywhere he goes. He never shows.it.off, or gets loud about.it or tries.to.make any.sort of a statement. It just is a matter.of fact with him. We have never been.asked to.leave a restaurant, and barely anyone even looks at.him funny, mainly because he.is a polite soft.spoken person who just happens to have a gun.on his.hip openly.

    We have established a reputation.of being a bit.obnoxious.but very good.toppers, and friendly with the.wait staff, so we have built up some good.will, but even when we.go.to.a.new.place, there is.never a.problem.

    The fact that I and.at least two others are.always carrying concealed at the same.time, is of.course.not.noticed.at all.

    1. I don’t think I would open carry even if legal. Seems like you are tipping your hand. I like having the element of surprise.

      1. Yeah, I prefer not to advertise: “hey! I have a gun! Shoot.me first/or steal it!”

      2. Really? Isn’t the idea that someone won’t mess with you to begin with if they believe you’re armed?

        1. While obviously/openly armed people in the vicinity.may discourage a casual robbery or.mugging, any sort of.even moderately planned operation would have.to.include “disarm and/or kill any obviously armed potential opposition.” I prefer to not advertise.

          Additionally, if you open.carry, you.need to be on.constant watch.for.someone.possibly snatching.your weapon, even.if you have a locking holster of.some kind.

  13. Had I been involved in organizing the “event” in question I would have done two big things different.

    First, I would have screened the attendees – made sure we only had well groomed, responsible-looking, and (reasonably) physicaly fit individuals. Preferably there would have been a significant number of recent veterans since few people would freely say much negative about them. I would defintely worked to get a lot more people who are not white males simply because that would really have made it look more “grass-roots” and less “racist militia”.

    Second, I would have asked that nobody bring anything which the media would call an assault rifle. It doesn’t necessarily have to be a hunting rifle, Garands and M-1A’s would be fine. Old military surplus bolt-action rifles would get the point acrss without being too scary.

    1. Agreed. One has to question the motive of the open carry folks showing up en masse to these public venues. If your objective is to normalize open carry among the populace, perhaps your tactics need refining. If your objective is to stick your tongue out at the anti-gun crowd while yelling ‘neener, neener, neener’, then proceed as you have.

      I get on my libertarian family members occasionally when they they are arguing with non-libertarian family members. It is easy to fall into the trap of arguing simply to prove you are right about something (which often devolves into rubbing your opponents nose in it), when you should be focused on swaying the position held by your opponent. The method of arguing must be different in each case.

    2. Well, the problem with that approach is that you’ll end up with a law that says it’s OK to carry old non-scary guns, but illegal to carry new, “scary-looking” guns. By “new” I mean anything manufactured after WWII.

  14. What is obnoxious is that texas is already on the path to legal open carry in the next year or two. Don’t fck it up.

  15. I think it is great these guys are making a “display” much like the DEMOCRATS do when they protest something. I mean you have heard of the LEFT taking over college presidents offices, shutting down businesses and universities, blocking roads, rioting and bombing places (generally screwing with peoples lives to make a point). What these guys are doing is perfectly legal and it hurts no one. Funny, the LEFT tells us that burning the American Flag is OK and not obnoxious but an individual displaying his right to bear arms is. I know the problem… Is it that the Democrats can’t stand individualism? I mean if you are not part of the “Group-Think” and Left Wing Orthodoxy you need to be controlled.

  16. The open carry movement deserves a thank you from anyone who supports the second amendment; at some point individuals need to EXERCISE their rights.

    I find it ironic that Slocum argues CONCEALED weapons are probably a more effective deterrent to crime. The left has argued for decades that if gun rights advocates were TRULY interested in reducing crime they would OPENLY wear weapons!

    1. The open carry movement deserves a thank you from anyone who supports the second amendment; at some point individuals need to EXERCISE their rights.

      I don’t think so. As others have pointed out, if they were more intelligent about it, then… maybe (AFAIK, open-carry *movements* and *organizations* have been far less politically successful than the NRA).

      But getting a bunch of guys together and open-carrying at Chipotle doesn’t send the right message. One guy sitting down to eat with some (apparently) unarmed friends, a group of women with a couple of rifles, open exchange of gun paraphernalia by unarmed individuals or between openly armed and unarmed individuals, or a large armed group outside political buildings and offices all send a much less broadly (or more targeted) aggressive as well as a broadly cooperative (or targeted uncooperative) message.

      Otherwise, you’re not exposing people to a common occurrence, you’re highlighting a show of force. It’d be like if 10 white guys in sheets walked into KFC. Even though sheets are completely legal and your intent is to promote togas, you’ve got to be aware that your message might be interpreted as a Klan meeting and that the alternative interpretation should be avoided, if possible, as it’s detrimental to your advocacy of togas.

    2. Exercising a right by doing something that is irresponsible, completely impractical and scary to pretty much everyone is not doing anyone a favor except for the anti-gun folks.

      People who use open carry laws in a normal manner are not carrying in urban areas. They are in rural areas or the wilderness where there are practical reasons to openly carry. When you do that in a city:

      1. You look like a complete doofus to anyone you are not scaring.

      2. You are going to scare a lot of people who have no idea what your intentions are (again people understand that there is no practical reason to walk around with a long gun in the middle of town).

      3. You hurt the gun rights cause resulting in the opposite of whatever you hoped your bs political statement might accomplish.

  17. I can see the argument both ways. Open carry will deter the criminals that dont want a fight(problably most of them), but will paint a huge target on the back of your head if someone is intent on or ok with killing.

    concealed is not a deterrent on the individual level, and people should not attempt to use it as one (see nv concealed carry guy).

  18. People who open carry rifles in Target are to the gun rights movement what the John Birch Society was to conservatism before Buckley and Goldwater purged them…an irrationally extreme albatross.

    I’m as pro-gun as you get generally, but people open carrying long guns unless they’re on their way to go hunting or to the range are idiots. Yes, they have a right to do it…but they’re idiots.

  19. As a proponent of legal open carry, I think these demonstrations are stupid.

    A group of people marching around with rifles at low ready is not a way to normalize open carry in society.

    I recent moved from Kentucky (Open carry) to Florida (Big no-no). I would love to see open carry here just for the convenience of transporting my guns.

    I used to work in a hardware store, and people would bring guns in there all the time, looking for replacement stock screws or what have you. No one ever raised an eyebrow.

  20. Sorry, but I agree with the original NRA article. Just because something is legal, doesn’t mean it’s a smart thing to do. Just because you shouldn’t do something, doesn’t mean it should be illegal.

    Groups of people open carrying rifles into restaurants will definitely scare some, and will likely give gun-control advocates some ammo, pun intended.

  21. Open carry is for wildlife. Concealed carry is for protection against people. Someone carrying a rifle around town at best comes off as a complete d-bag and at worst causes a real problem that ends with people getting hurt/killed. They are also going to frighten a lot of people who have no way of knowing what their intentions are because there is no sensible reason to be carrying around a long gun you don’t intend to use. Unless you are somewhere where you will actually be using your long gun, there is no reason to carry it around.

  22. Concealed carry is of no use to me, I don’t carry a purse.

    This article should have been about the NRA lying to you about its longstanding opposition to Open Carry and the mainstream press hiding the fact that for the past four years the NRA has been arguing in Federal court to uphold California’s 1967 ban on openly carrying loaded firearms in public, a ban which the NRA endorsed at the time. In the same lawsuit, Peruta v. San Diego, the NRA argued in support of California’s Gun Free School Zone Act of 1995.

    Charles Nichols ? President of California Right To Carry
    http://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

  23. A bunch of looney gun nuts. They probably go home and jerk off with their guns. Just what everyone wants to see at a restaurant, yahoo’s walking in with guns.The first thing that would come to mind is a shooter is here to kill people. I’m waiting for some guy with a concealed weapon to think they are bad guy’s and blow them away.

    1. Todd you have absolutely no idea what r talking about. Here in Kentucky we conceal carry I do myself but there are laws in place for the use of lethal force. Just because somebody has a gun on doesn’t mean they intend to do harm to anyone. You can take your gun out show it to your buddy or whatever in the restaurant its no different than carrying a buck knife on our side or in your pocket.

    2. Todd you have absolutely no idea what r talking about. Here in Kentucky we conceal carry I do myself but there are laws in place for the use of lethal force. Just because somebody has a gun on doesn’t mean they intend to do harm to anyone. You can take your gun out show it to your buddy or whatever in the restaurant its no different than carrying a buck knife on our side or in your pocket.

  24. Id suggest you spineless types start getting your fast draw down like the rest of us gun slingers……………..lol Roflmao!

    Open Carry is legal in many many states and has been for decades and we don’t see mass shoot outs on the streets or even people freaking out over it like the NRA is doing here or the weak knee’d Libtards.

    Even in states where open carry is legal and even encouraged its rare to find anyone openly just doing it.

    In New Mexico,Arizona,Texas everyone has a gun rig on and the restaraunts put long hat racks along the walls to hang your gun belt on while your eating and to hang you hat on!

    Really your whining about a non-issue to start with. Guns are a right and to bear them is also a right. Get use to it!

  25. Carry your weapon discreetly. This is humanity 101.

    I, as someone entirely uninterested in harming you, have zero desire to be blatantly reminded that you, an individual whose temperament I know absolutely nothing about, can kill me at range.

  26. Concealed carry is of no use to me, I don’t carry a purse.

    “[A] right to carry arms openly: “This is the right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, and which is calculated to incite men to a manly and noble defence of themselves, if necessary, and of their country, without any tendency to secret advantages and unmanly assassinations.”” District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 – Supreme Court (2008) at 2809.

    “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues.” District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 – Supreme Court (2008) at 2816.

    Charles Nichols ? President of California Right To Carry
    http://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.