Open carry at Home Depot (courtesy change.org)

DrVino doesn’t miss a trick (in the non-sexual sense of the expression). He recently caught wind of an email pimping a petition at change.org calling for a ban on firearms inside Home Depot (full text after the jump). Clearly, private enterprise is the new locus of gun control activism, now that the mid-terms approacheth and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America has declared victory for “forcing” Starbucks to issue a polite, non-legally-binding request for customers to leave their guns at home. The petition has 5k signatories so far and plenty of pro-gun comments below. [Note to open carrier on left: get your GD strong hand off the gun!]  . . .

We urge Home Depot to follow the lead of other companies who have been catapulted into the target of gun extremeists, like Chipotle and Sonic, to exercise their right as a corporation and ban all civilians from carrying weapons into Home Depot.

Home Depot is conspicuously failing in regards to protecting the safety and comfort of their patrons by allowing firearms on their premises.

Groups such as Open Carry Texas and Open Carry Tarrant County (who is known for publicizing the names and phone numbers of persons who express concerns over their rallies to the police) are using Home Depot as a platform for political demonstrations, regardless of the danger it may cause to patrons of Home Depot.

Despite many public arguments to the contrary, there is no data proving that the presence of weaponry in a place of business prevents robbery. However, the use of businesses such as Home Depot as a political platform for debates on the second amendment presents a clear and present threat to the safety and comfort of business patrons; a fact made very clear by the fact that a recent demonstration by Open Carry Tarrant County in a Forth Worth Texas Jack In The Box compelled employees to hide in the restaurant’s freezer in belief that the restaurant was being robbed and their lives were in danger.

We urge Home Depot to take efforts to prevent situations like these from re-occurring by taking into account the safety and comfort of all of their patrons and exercising their right to ban the possession of firearms in their business.

182 Responses to Change.org Petition to Ban Firearms At Home Depot

  1. I cringe when I see these attention whores feeling the need to take an OC pic in a store. When is the last time you took a selfie in a home improvement store? NEVER…

      • So true! The OC crowd seems to think it is a requirement to OC, not just a right that can be enjoyed.

      • Hey butt hurt hipster where did I say they took a selfie?
        I was agreeing with Dano for saying “I cringe when I see these attention whores feeling the need to take an OC pic in a store” and agreeing with Paul for saying “Of course, the OC fanatics are, to be frank, simply too daft to realize the truth of your point.”

        • Geez, you anti OC guys are just like the Fudds, turning against other 2A supporters in the vain hope the antis may not come for your guns.

        • Im not anti OC, Im anti “lets scare the crap out of everyone who was on the fence.” Its not like we don’t support their right to do so. Its just that its not a tactic thats winning any pro gun votes.

        • I’m seeing a couple of normal looking guys, standing comfortably, smiling for the camera picture being taken by a third presumably at ease fellow. Just another normal, casual day at the DIY big box store. All of the most infamous spree shooters have looked wild eyed and maniacal and show up shooting right from the start. These guys look about as threatening as Bob Vila on a lazy Sunday afternoon.

          What, exactly, is so crap scary about this example of OC, and what form of OC would you support, since you claim not to be anti-OC?

        • If you can afford an AR15 or AKM, you can sure afford an Uberti, Pietta or Traditions black powder revolver replica, which just might make more people interested in what you have to say about OC laws and it has that old Texas history. Hell, you can even get one of these for more versatility: http://www.buffaloarms.com/Products.aspx?CAT=3787

        • That is what I thought, fudds. ARs and other modern black guns are bad but old style guns are okay, for now.

        • There is nothing “normal” about carrying a long gun in a Home Depot. If it was “normal” we wouldn’t be talking about it, and the obvious reaction from the public is that the public feel threatened. Not good.

        • Personally, I would find a long gun slung over my shoulder while actually shopping (as opposed to attention whoring) at Home Depot to be an unnecessary inconvenience. Isn’t that why pistols and holsters were invented? Yes, I do realize that OC of handguns isn’t legal in TX. But this isn’t moving you forward.

        • “There is nothing “normal” about carrying a long gun in a Home Depot. “

          Ah, but is SHOULD be. The ‘gun’ should not be part of the discussion at all.

        • “Ah, but is SHOULD be.”

          Yes it should, we can all agree on that. But for the time being it is not accepted as normal, so for now oc is doing more harm than good for the cause.

        • “so for now oc is doing more harm than good for the cause.”

          Data source, please?

          Quite a few folks around here, myself included, believe the current momentum is in our corner overall. Dean Weingarten’s article,

          http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/06/dean-weingarten/moscow-restaurant-encourages-open-carry/

          nicely shows the big picture pattern over the last couple of decades. His discussion credits part of that move with OC activism.

          At the very least, it is far from clear that it is “hurting,” aside from the fact that it does bother some on the gun rights side (as post here).

          I’ve asked numerous times in the past few weeks for definitive, objective evidence that OC activism is hurting, and none has as yet been forthcoming.

          I don’t mean feelings about OC activism or those that practice it; I mean data. Is there a decline in pro-gun-rights legislation? Are there politicians admitting that they voted against a good law because of the OC activists?

        • The fact that restaurants like Chipotle and Jack in the box are awkwardly being forced to ask their customers to leave there guns at home is a negative affect of oc.

        • How so? Do this “request” have any teeth at all?

          Asked last week if Chipotle was putting up legal signs and the answer from someone in the AO that they had not seen any. If they wanted to DO something about carrying on the premises, they’d put of the legal signage.

          The point is that their press releases do often say “we obey local and state laws.” That means they understand that if they want to keep guns out of their stores, all they have to do is put up a sign. In the absence of the sign…no REAL objection.

          These “requests” are fluff and don’t hurt gun rights at all.

        • “Data source, please?”

          See California and what happened after those OC stunts
          Starbucks
          Chipotle
          Texas OC bills now shelved
          FL lawmakers are not moving forward with OC bill there

          Others will add in the recent setbacks caused by OCT’s attention whoring antics.

        • “See California and what happened after those OC stunts”

          California is California; Texas, and the rest of the country is not.

          “Starbucks
          Chipotle”

          Neither has implemented “official” policy nor exercised their legal recourse of placing 30.06 signs in stores in Texas…so far as has been posted by Texas residents who post here.

          “Texas OC bills now shelved”

          Since when and point to a specific cause. Has there been an interview with a lawmaker who has said something to the effect of “we are tabling this because the OC-ers are too much trouble,” or are you pulling this out of your backside?

          “FL lawmakers are not moving forward with OC bill there”

          Again, since when and show proof of cause.

          Of course, “not moving forward” can mean anything you want to make it mean, i suppose, since that’s a nice, vague, pointless “assertion” you are passing as “evidence.”

          You can make up what ever fuels your confirmation bias that you want, but it does not mean that is what is happening.

          If someone presents me with factual, verifiable DATA that these the OC rallies and demonstrations in Texas are hurting the cause of OC of Handguns in Texas, I will accept it at face value. That’s all I’m asking for.

          But I refuse to jump on an emotionally fueled bandwagon. Just because some guys are doing things some of us find questionable so that we THINK they are “hurting our cause” does not mean it is true.

  2. “…the use of businesses such as Home Depot as a political platform for debates on the second amendment presents a clear and present threat to the safety and comfort of business patrons…”

    What about the use of dead children as a political platform? That one’s kosher, eh, Shannon?

    • You are going to have trouble convincing the public that you have the moral high ground with that argument.

    • So you are saying that businesses should be sacred, but not children? I can’t tell where you are going with this argument.

      • After Sandy Hook, Aurora, Isla Vista, Trayvon Martin, etc… Before the bodies were even cold, or anyone knew what actually happened Shannon and her ilk were waving the bloody shirts and blaming all gun owners and gun organizations. My point is the antis unscrupulously use victims as political platforms to take our rights, yet pretend to be sitting on the high horse by calling these guys out.
        These guys might freak you all out, but they’re within their rights. The antis aren’t trying to get OC banned in Home Depot, they’re trying to get guns banned everywhere, period. I think the OCers should keep it outside, have a friendly BBQ instead of going into business who didn’t ask to be brought into the middle of all this.

        • Actually that idea of having a cook out in the parking lot, with permission of the business owner, isn’t a bad idea.

        • Mecha, I think we are on the same page when it comes to businesses. Home Depot is not a government organization.

          When someone loses their child, I don’t think they have any responsibility to wait before speaking out. The First Amendment gives them the right to blame America’s gun culture, even if that is not how they really feel.

          Responsible gun owners should respond with proposed solutions, rather than attacking the behavior of grieving parents.

          America has a desperately underfunded mental health system, and we have resisted funding it because it might lead to tax increases.

          We have also resisted universal background checks, and even electronic trigger locks, based on the perception of a “slippery slope”.

          The NRA even opposes anti-trafficking legislation, based on principle.

          That leaves nothing.

          Responsible gun owners have refused to come up with any alternatives to protect the unarmed besides “they should have been armed”. This response is applied equally to children, elderly, and even mentally disabled. The only group that gets shot on a regualar basis that seems to have some support within the NRA is hunting dogs.

          So if a grieving parent complains that their child did not need to die, they are accused of “waving the bloody shirt”. Well, what else are they supposed to do? According to this website, and many others, they are supposed to just shut up and deal with it.

          There is more to being a free country than just carrying around a boatload of rifles. One of the other responsibilities of freedom is to put up with the free speech of those who disagree with you. You don’t have to vote for them, but it would be a more polite society if you stopped calling them names and let them mourn their losses as they see fit. Your guns will never be taken away, their children were.

          If they really do try to take your precious guns away, you will have millions of voters on your side. You will have an army of lobbyists, manufacturers, lawyers, collectors, dealers, and billionaires.

          Your guns will have more support and protection than their children ever had.

        • Boy, there’s a lot of hogwash in there, but I’ll pick only one.

          “So if a grieving parent complains that their child did not need to die, they are accused of “waving the bloody shirt”.”

          Nice try, but it’s not the grieving parent earns the ire of those on this site for “waving the bloody shirt,” it’s those that seek to use such tragedies for political gain.

          Trying to draw some sort of moral equivalence with a grieving parent and a Shannon Watts (in her capacity as PR shill) is pretty reprehensible.

        • JR,

          So then you are agreeing with the parents, but disagreeing with others who suppor their cause? I am not sure how you can separate the two.

          If you disagree with someone’s motives, that does not invalidate their arguments. It is also a particularly weak form of debate, since you don’t really know their motives.

          It goes both ways, of course. They don’t understand your motives either. They have no right to assign motives to you. If they claim you have a “gun fetish”, for example, that argument would be unfair. They don’t know your reasoning or your motives.

          But you don’t know theirs. For all you know, a lobbyist who is working to enact universal background checks is morning a recent loss. You can disagree with their politics, but not their motives.

        • “I am not sure how you can separate the two.”

          That’s your problem. Shannon, et al, do most assuredly NOT support the cause of the parents, or they would not be so ridiculously opposed to things that work reduce violence in schools.

          The political hacks are USING the parents in a time of grief to further a repulsive political agenda that leads to continued victimization, whether those victims are women, the poor in bad neighborhoods, children or anyone else.

      • @ LBD I always question motives or intentions, because it tends to lead to a messy aftermath that we have to deal with. There’s an old saying about the road to hell I believe you heard before.

        Universal background is not within the Federal government’s responsibility, nor is universal reciprocity. The 14th Amendment has been abused entirely too much already.

    • If they issue a nonbinding suggestion not to carry like the other guys, meant more to shut the anti-gun agitators up and shoo them away to go bother someone else, then I can stick with HD. If they go all in with the pearl clutching crowd and start posting legitimate no-guns signs, then I’m out too.

      As a real estate investor and landlord, my annual HD spend is in the low five figures, directly, not counting what contractors might spend. Granted, that’s a mere rounding error for a company with $80 billion in annual sales, or even for the one or two specific stores I tend to frequent. Still, words spreads pretty easily among firearms owners, and when there are numerous supplier options all equally competitive and convenient, it can have some noticeable aggregate effect.

  3. Well, here we go again; panty-wetting leftards can’t respect the decisions and boundaries of businesses, so they have to pout, stomp around in a tantrum, and threaten to strangle the family cat.

    That’s how they operate. They use the same strong arm tactics of all those socialist-democratic-communist leaning dictators who managed to murder millions of their own countrymen ………… but why argue with details, they do it because, well, it just feels like the right thing to do, even if their “opinion” on the issue happens to be contrary to the Constitution.

    • “…That’s how they operate. They use the same strong arm tactics of all those socialist-democratic-communist leaning dictators”

      No.

      You had it right in your first paragraph. They stomp around and threaten to hold their breath like small children. To compare them to adults, no matter how evil those adults might be, is to give them too much credit.

      • Chip,
        I was merely alluding to the fact that both their leaders and their mindless minions will do anything and everything to get everyone to see things THEIR WAY because they lack the ability to compromise or take other people’s opinions into consideration. The leaders probably act out less because, if they tried that crap in the public forum, the majority of American voters would finally come to realize they’d bet on the wrong horse. The minions, however, just go for broke and act out every one of their dysfunctional childhood issues until they get their way.

    • These antis have no more moral authority than if they were to proffer petitions demanding that Home Depot eject people of certain races or religions from their stores.

    • You characters are really going out of your way to win the hearts and minds of folks on the other side, aren’t you? So when the anti’s do manage to get your open carry “rights” revoked you will have no one except yourselves to blame because of your extremist attitudes.

      • Well, John, if they do happen to migrate here to TTAG and wish to have a meaningful discussion, that can be done. But that still doesn’t change the sociodynamics of the situation.

        Granted that carrying an AK and an SKS in Home Depot (that’s what they appear to have) is a bit over the top, open-carrying a pistol, I think, is a much more subtle statement. Someone here also brought up the term “normal” and that was perfect. If and when we ever get dragged down to the level of the Ukraine conflict, then carrying long guns in Home Depot would be considered “normal”, if Home Depot was even still open, but I think you get my point.

        The bottom line here, John, is that there is no compromising the Constitution because when people begin to do that, they either unknowingly sabotage their own rights or they set the stage to sabotage the long term viability of the whole Republic. Granted that the current interlopers in our three branches of government are all complicit in keeping the American population from discovering how the bankers are slowly stealing our country out from under us, there is that point, as the founding fathers had discussed, where tyrants need to be reminded exactly who works for whom.

        The other day, I discussed a news item about the Black Bear hunt, locally. It turns out that 48% of the lefties openly admitted that they voted against the hunt without knowing any of the details; it just felt like the right thing to do, but 67% of those in favor of it (and I’m including the biologists, as well) had a good grasp of the biological and economic impacts if the anti’s bill went through, not to mention the increase in maulings and attacks. My point is that what is the point in arguing with socially immature people? All you can do is try to reason with them if they ever do grow up enough to come to the table and respect them for having done so.

        Short of that, if the liberals would have their way, there’s a strong argument for giving car keys to any child who suddenly decides he has what it takes to operate a motor vehicle. Just because a child can reach the the pedals doesn’t mean they’re ready to drive, and just because someone reaches the age of 18 doesn’t mean they are ready to vote. Up to age 18, we would have hoped that they had been taught enough about US and World history to make more informed decisions, but over the last 100 years, the globalists have been quite successful in downgrading our educational system so that these undereducated dolts will now be ready to shoot themselves in the foot at the voting booth, no pun intended.

        If these people were somehow psychically gifted individuals and their “feelings” turned out to have a good track record, I’d certainly be willing to consider that, but these people are uninformed and running on emotions and fear being dictated by cleverly orchestrated media opportunities. All we can do is try to educate them before they kill the rest of us with their ignorance.

        I’d like to live in a gun free world too, but we ain’t there yet. Guns will no longer be needed when guns are no longer needed.

  4. Gotta agree with the “[Note to open carrier on left: get your GD strong hand off the gun!]” comment. Open carry? Not my cup of tea but I support everyone’s right to do it if legal in your jurisdiction. That means a handgun is holstered. A rifle? Slung. But not posing at low ready or taking a selfie with your hand on the grip and an indexed finger. That’s no different from unholstering a handgun and posing in a Sul position for your Facebook 15 seconds of fame. Someone came around the corner gripping a rifle like this in Cleaning Supplies? They might need a “Cleanup, Aisle 4.”

    • Then you’d probably end up in jail, if you weren’t shot. After all, for all you know, it could be an off duty cop or one wearing a not immediately obvious uniform who’s responding to some event. Your attention would be on the rifle, wouldn’t it, not the badge? Or even if it really were a spree killer, you’re not going to out draw a rifle in low ready with a committed killer on the trigger. Sheesh.

      Nevertheless, if you’re the type to go around shooting first and asking questions later, then perhaps you’re the problem, not the open carriers.

      • Jeez people slow down where did I say I would shoot him? Confronted by these kids I’d boogie around the corner and assess the situation.

        Coming around the corner gripping a long rifle in what could be considered a menacing or “brandished” fashion could get them shot by an off-duty LEO, or by a CPL holder, or could just scare the crap out of someone shopping.

        I didn’t say I would draw down on anyone.

        • You’re just backpedalling. You said if they came around the corner with rifle in low ready, which you described as threatening, that they’d need a cleanup in the aisle. Clean up of what, exactly? You’re already in this deep, let’s see you keep digging.

          It’s funny, though, you imagine a scenario of “low ready”, but that doesn’t comport with the picture above. Where do you get off fabricating a scenario, linking it to the reality above, then dismissing your own fabrication and the reality you artificially paired with it? Pure straw man. Now, back to your regularly scheduled backpedalling. Clean up of what, exactly? Blood because you shoot them? Human waste because you draw and scare them? What exactly?

  5. Maybe the OC folks don’t get it. I wonder if the lawmakers in Texas allowed open carry of “smart” guns these guys would jump through hoops to get them in spite of the effect it have on many others.

    Personally I don’t see how giving the antis ammunition like those pics does anybody any good. Am I wrong?

    • OC Texas and OC Tarrant Country are both functioning as false flag operations. It doesn’t matter if they’re actually in the pay of Bloomberg and/or Shannon and the Moms, effect is the same. The gun controllers couldn’t create better anti-gun propaganda than they’re getting for free with the OCers in Texas.

      • And yet, both major party candidates for Texas governor this year have come out in favor of open carry legislation. Curious, that.

        • He’s not arguing causation, dumbass. He’s saying while the anti’s are getting all worked up about this, it has had no effect on the political positions of either the R or D running for governor. They were for OC before OC Texas, they still are. Try reading next time.

        • the legislation has to make it to the governors desk first… if enough of the reps and senators are scared of supporting due to feedback from constituents, then it doesn’t really matter what the guy at the top supports or does not support.

          “Well fuck them! I know my rights!” you say. Well that’s great, but this OC rifle crap is about the same level as a bunch of gay guys wandering around Home Depot squeezing ass and french kissing to show how normal they are. Legal? Sure it is. Likely to make someone support them? Not really. You ever stop for a minute to notice that once the gays stopped the confrontational, in your face tactics and started presenting themselves as the guy next door they actually made real headway? Lessons to be learned…

          you guys that see this as a black and white constitutional issue and not the PR issue it really is just crack me up. The people you are opposing don’t really give two shits for the constitution where it does not fit in with their flavor of the month politics. If average guy on the street has to make a choice of supporting an old document and “feeling creeped out by those gun guys at home depot”, Which one do you think he’s going to make a call to Joe Congressman about?

          You may feel that the Constitution gives you the moral high ground here, keep pinning all your hopes to that and watch your rights continue to erode.

          and on a final note… How the hell does carrying what is currently the most demonized weapon in the country around in public do ANYTHING to advance the cause of OC of HANDGUNS? Anyone?

        • Your point about flamboyant gayness not being as acceptable to undecided folks as the neighborly gay couple next door is 100% accurate.

          I am pro-gun and pro- open carry, but the extremists with their hate-everyone stances will kill and serious movement towards legitimate responsible gun ownership and will ultimately be to the disadvantage of gun owners.

        • John G? What serious movement has there even been to kill? It’s hard to argue that OC demonstrations are slowing or stopping progress, when progress is standing still already. Oh, or are you concerned about going backward? Well.

          Name me ANY advance in our freedom and civil rights, that did NOT entail upsetting the status quo. Just ONE.

          People can debate tactics all day, and that’s fine, but if you’re just sitting around waiting for the government to wake up and grant you more freedom out of the blue, all on their own, without any push for freedom by the People, then you’re going to be waiting and sitting on your butt for a long, long time. Which, actually, strikes me as a realistic characterization of your involvement.

      • Yeah, they should only be allowed to have muskets and they must locked in a gun safe at home at all times.

  6. If I see some jack wagon in Home Depot with his hand on his AK like that, I’m getting the hell out of there. If you’re trying to win people over to the side of open carry, be responsible and try not to act like you’re in Fallujah.

    • I’m in Texas and would like to see more people won over to the open carry point of view. How would you recommend people go about winning people over to open carry then, if not as above?

      As for Fallujah, I’ve never been, but I do know several men who have. They don’t talk too much about it, of course, but in the conversations we have had over the years that have touched on that subject, I don’t recall anyone ever mentioning standing around comfortably, casually and nonthreateningly right out in the open, and smiling for pictures like the gentlemen depicted above.

      • There were whole F’ing posts giving OC’ers ideas of how to do a public campaign in a MORE EFFECTIVE manner. How about a pre-planned event with police awareness where many OC folks gather in a public space like a park and get some talent to make some speeches and sheet. Make it welcoming for non-POTG walking by to enter the park space and ask questions about your hardware. Jesus.

        • First off, calm down. You seem a little stressed, are you feeling ok? You might consider transferring your firearms to a safe authority, such as the local police, until such time as you’re better able to withstand the withering, soul-stripping fury that is a casual conversation. You know, for your safety and that of those around you.

          As for there having been “whole posts” on the question, so what? There was one big whole post, well, actually a short 27 word post, on the topic of firearms back in 1791, and yet, here we and the entire nation are still discussing the topic……. So shut down the phony indignation, will ya?

          You say you want a pre-planned event. Well, this is at least three people with rifles and a camera and an open carry activist t-shirt. It’s not the March on Washington, to be sure; but it looks like more than a mere coincidence or impulse action that these three all ended up in the aisle like this. You might even call it, *gasp*, pre-planned. As for the police being notified in advance, you don’t know that they weren’t, so there. Beyond that, what if they had been? So what? The three coffee-sipping open carry lads at Starbucks in San Antonio notified the police in advance. Yet, the coppers showed up and ticketed them for disorderly conduct, and they weren’t even slinging rifles at the time, but leaning them against the table. Curious, that.

          Let’s see, what else is there to your lashing out? Ahhh, yes, they should do it in a public space like a park. Great idea! Except that the antis would use that backdrop of kids on swings and burgers on the grill to suggest how insane the open carriers are. Try again. Ahhh…..it should be “many” all at one event. It’s more difficult to organize large protests like that and they’re apt to go without much attention anyway, as they’d likely have to take place on the weekend. As with a park, that would be spun as an “armed mob” running rampant, poised to turn bloody red the peaceful greenery. You see, pal, anything can be spun one way or another. It’s all about your preconceived notions.

          Finally, who says it must start big? How many “many” was Rosa Parks?

      • In my mind having a hand on the grip of your slung rifle is akin to having your hand on the grip of a holstered handgun. It suggests an intent to use the weapon and does the exact opposite of putting people at ease. I don’t doubt that the person in that picture had anything but good intentions but since so much of human communication is non-verbal little things like having a hand on the grip of your rifle matter a whole lot.

        • “In my mind…”

          Okay, fair enough. That’s you.

          And you are correct…it suggests he may have an intent to do harm. But it does not prove it.

          A+ for good situational awareness, now does ‘threat assessment’ stop there? You’ve noticed he’s got his hand on the grip, what is the REST of his body language? Where’s the trigger finger? Where’s the muzzle? How is he acting overall?

          Did he have the hand on the grip prior to taking the picture, or just for the snap? What about the seconds after the picture?

          We are seeing a tiny slice of the ‘event’ here. I’m not sure it is rational to draw too many ‘clues’ from a snapshot of time taken in about 1/60th or so of a second.

          I wasn’t there, though…so I can’t say that he was NOT acting like a threat. Maybe before the picture he was running up and down the aisles yelling and brandishing and calling verbal threats to other customers. I kind of doubt it, though; that’s the sort of thing that is against the law and can get one arrested.

          In this case, in the absence of news of an arrest, I’ll be happy to assume that he was not otherwise creating a threat and was, therefore, a law abiding citizen who happened to pose for a picture in a manner in which you disapprove.

        • I cannot understand how some defend the way the guy on the left has his hand on the grip and his finger in the ready position. If I was in there i would ask him why he thinks that’s a good idea.

        • Bob, good question.

          And, it’d be AWESOME if you DID ask him that in the store while he was doing it.

          For my part, I’m not defending his action in doing that. I’m simply trying to emphasize that as shown, he’s not presenting an immediate, deadly threat and therefore calls to clear leather and shoot him are a bit alarmist.

          That kind of reaction to this particular pose helps fuel the anti-gunner claim that we all walk around in fear ready to shoot anyone that looks at us cross-eyed…or happens to be OC-ing a rifle in a way in which we don’t personally approve.

  7. The 2 open carry nuts in the picture are in a good position to shoot each other, and perhaps do us all a favor.

    • How so? Rifles slung over their shoulders, fingers off triggers, muzzles pointed at the ground? What’s particularly mutually dangerous about that? Now, I prefer rifles pointed toward the sky, rather than the ground, but both are permitted by accepted safety standards.

      If there’s no real safety violation here, then your objection has more to do with that they’re open carrying, as opposed to how they’re carrying. It’s pretty sick to go around wishing death upon people for exercising Constitutional rights, so perhaps you should speak for yourself and not “us all.”

  8. Open carry selfies= own goal.
    I’m not going to have kids. The world they would inherit is going to be a scary place, and even scarier since they’d have to do it unarmed, especially if, God forbid, they needed to go to a department store or a wannabe Mexican food joint.

    Seriously, why do I spend money on memberships and donations and make phone calls and all that other good 2nd amendment avocate-y kind of stuff when the Open Carry crowd gives the opposition freebies?

    Yer on yer own, future generations.

  9. The guy on the left will be the one to appear in the materials for the anti 2A groups. These are the ones that most have problems with. If you went in to get a box of screws & get met in the aisle by him what’s going to be the 1st thought in most peoples heads. My wife carries 24/7 her reaction on seeing the pic was robbery getting ready to go down.
    Lately had several robberies w/long guns. in the area.

    • When have three robbers ever sauntered into a retail store and casually, smilingly posed for pictures with a couple of rifles slung over their shoulders, before proceeding to rob the place?

      If I saw these guys in the aisle, I’d ask them how it’s going and whether they knew where they keep the batteries in this place. (Seems they’re always moving the little display case and I can never find it when I need them.) Then again, I’m a man. I don’t freak out over nothing.

      • As opposed to those emasculated lisping metrosexual leftards who gladly hold up a poster if told to do so by their boyfriend or their FemiNazi excuse for a wife.

        • I am curious. Have you taken a bath in the last 6 months or do you consider that emasculating you?

          You come off like one of those gay-hating preachers that turns out to bea child molester.

          Either that, or your old lady ran off with a liberal and now you are compensating.

          Anyway, you are trying wayyyyyyyyy too hard. Laughably so.

        • I’ve noticed this pattern of commentary you have; you saunter in, make some rather benign statement, and then leave, without ever getting to the crux of any of the salient points of the argument; ANY argument, really. Why is that?

          All your attempts at comedy aside, how exactly has my description of these followers of the anti-gun movement been off vase? And just to keep things balanced, we could also discuss the gun nuts who have 50 or 60 guns, who might be lacking a little something in their psychological makeup to compensate for small body parts, but I digress.

          The point here, is that I would state emphatically that an ill-informed, uneducated leftie is far more dangerous to maintaining this Republic than any gun toting miscreant(s).

  10. I’m an associate of Home Depot. Policy is as stated, no one is allowed to carry openly unless you are a member of law enforecrment. We have patrons come into our stores who are welcome to open carry as long as they have the appropriate credentials. Customers may conceal carry as long it’s just that and they have a conceal carry permit. No associate is allowed to conceal carry in the store while on the clock and/or representing Home Depot. The company does allow associates to carry their firearms on the premises as long as they are properly concealed and locked in their personal vehicle.

    • What state do you work in? I see open carry almost every day here in the Pahrump, NV Home Depot. No one says anything. Home Depot’s official policy has been, for a very long time now to not prohibit anyone who carries as long as they follow existing local and state laws.

    • I’m calling b.s. on that one. Home Depot’s policy, like most major chains, is simply to follow state and local laws, but to allow store managers some discretion on a case by case basis. I’d expect they’d boot anyone open carrying if there’s any controversy, such as an anti getting the vapors and making a scene, but otherwise to leave everyone alone and let them shop in peace.

      As for employees, Home Depot, like most major companies of any type, forbids firearms on the premises. However, in Texas, an employer (with few exceptions) may not ban lawfully possessed firearms locked in employees’ personal vehicles parked on company property. Presumably Home Depot would abide by that law in Texas and in states with a similar law.

  11. Is the left still trying to use the debunked Burger King employees in the freezer BS?
    I think the open carry guys are doing more damage to our rights than helping our rights. I understand what they are trying to accomplish but when a national business bans guns, it is not just where the open carry protest is happening. It happens in every location. These boneheads do not even realize that they are causing gun owners in other states to be effected by the ban their protest caused. Way to go, Bonehead Open Carriers. If the open carry people want open carry of modern handguns that badly, then they need to find another, less destructive way to protest. People in other states don’t appreciate having their rights effected by these protests.

  12. Sigh. Buy stock in the company. Go to the annual meeting. Make a proposal to the board. And …

    Oh wait. That would require something like effort and dedication. Never mind.

  13. The Hysterical Mothers have to do something, anything to keep their financial support from Saint Bill Paying Billionaire. Apparently, they only need to provide the appearance of results, the propaganda they generate is their real product. An added bonus would be any discord they manage to foster among the ranks of supporters of the 2nd amendment. Der kluge Herr Farago hat recht. One of Little Miss Hysteria’s minions is keeping an eye on comments posted on TTAG. Every time we slam one of our own a delusional, hysterical, cat loving useful idiot, gleefully makes note of their effectiveness.

    • I agree with you Bob. Somebody has to push the boundaries. Somebody has to be the tip of the spear. Almost all I read here are 2A’s eating their own. Driving supporters away.

    • Not just keeping an eye, but actively posting I’d wager.

      Ever notice how a lot (not all, but a lot) of the more “militant” anti-OC posts are from folks whose names are not familiar and never post again?

      Interesting, that.

      The ones calling for the violent demise of the OC-ers strike a familiar pattern to the kinds of comments we see on some other sites.

  14. Is this not the same group who marched across the Brooklyn bridge with ARMED GUARDS? They do not want guns unless they are being carried to protect them? idiots!! Leave my 2nd amendment rights alone!!! Also I may add that we do not need new gun laws we need to just enforce the ones we already have! ….oh wait that would mean Eric Holder would actually have a JOB to do!

  15. “Home Depot is conspicuously failing in regards to protecting the safety and comfort of their patrons by allowing firearms on their premises.”

    no .. Home Depot allowing guns on the premises by law abiding citizens are allowing the patrons to be in a safe environment.

  16. I received an email solicitation to sign their petition. Instead, I contacted their site and emailed them there that they had come along too late for me to believe their lies and restraint upon my Second Amendment rights.

    My bride and I then communicated with Home Depot, from which my wife and I have purchased supplies to rebuild and remodel three homes and the latest of which is 4000ft2 and we needed all new appliances, as well as a huge amount of other things.

    We told them if they restrict my right to bring in my open carry or concealed carry weapon, lawful in my state, then I would not spend any more of my money there either, and to help insure that I would cancel my Home Depot card.

  17. Remember the Luby’s Cafeteria shooting? The woman who watched both her parents being murdered had obeyed the no firearms sign and left her gun in the car. If she hadn’t maybe things could have been different. I carry concealed for a reason, nobody knows I’m armed and unless I’m entering a secured goverent building I ignore any no guns sign I see if I choose to go there.

    • Suzannah Gratia Hupp.

      Another name to remember is a lady with a similar story: Nikki Goeser. Like Ms. Hupp, she left her gun in her car in compliance with the ‘no guns’ policy the restaurant had the night her husband was shot and killed by a man that was stalking her.

      Every school shooting victim in the country is also a victim, at least in part, of the immorality of “gun free zones.”

  18. Haven’t seen but a couple of open carriers at Home Depot (sorry Paul, nobody seemed to really notice). I don’t think too many of the big brick and mortar stores are financially stable enough to turn away the very kind of people who make the most use of their products.

  19. If you respect property rights, you respect those property owners right to ban those who insist on openly carrying guns, obviously making many of their customers uncomfortable….why is that such a difficult concept to grasp? If your neighbor invited you to a BBQ, but did not want you to smoke at his house, even though legal in public areas, would you bitch and cry that you are being denied important personal rights? – I think not. it’s not a war zone, and’ unless you are on-duty LEO, keep you weapons to yourself.

    • My brother was like that with his damn smoking; he just couldn’t understand why so many people were denying him his God-given right to smoke wherever and whenever the urge hit him.

    • Except for the fact that Home Depot DOES NOT restrict people’s rights to carry if they are following the state laws where the Home Depot is located.

    • Jjmmyjonga,

      Your example is not equivalent. Smoking damages the homeowner’s health and home. Someone who has a firearm openly visible on their hip does not damage a store.

      And what about patrons’ rights? What right does the store have demanding that patrons be vulnerable to violent criminals?

      • It is also important to mention that just because a business says you can’t carry a loaded hunting rifle around does not mean they are disarming you.

        They are only disarming you against well-organized gangs, small armies, and zombies. For any other threat, you can fit pretty good self-defense into a holster.

        I am surein the next few weeks (if not already), there will be some sort of OC attention addict who manages to stop a robbery because he was carrying around an AK-47, but odds are that he could have done just as well with with a revolver in his back pocket.

    • As a matter of law, not all private property rights are created equal. Home Depot is private property, true, but it’s open to the general public. Your home, while also private property, is not open to the public. The law has long recognized different treatment for different types of private property owners.

      For example, it’s perfectly legal for someone to refuse to marry or invite into their home a person of a gender, race, religion, nationality, you name it, which they find undesirable. However, that same person could not legally refuse to hire or serve such a person for any of those reasons.

      Whether that open-to-the-public distinction should exist, however, is another matter for another time.

  20. “…to exercise their right as a corporation and ban all civilians from carrying weapons into Home Depot”

    So, I guess the mouth breathers over at Change.org don’t want cops carrying in the store either. Fantastic. Great policy. Hope they have some non-civillians (aka members of the military) around to lend a hand should things get hot.

  21. Please someone tell me what the problem is with guns in the right hands. I’ve owned guns for over 30yrs and raised 2 kids. My guns never harmed anyone. So tell me what is wrong with guns? All mine are legal and I carry everyday.

    • It comes down to the definition of “right hands.” The anti’s think that means military, police, celebrities, politicians, and politically connected elites, exclusively.

      You seem to think that includes responsible, law abiding, upright men like yourself. How dare you?

  22. You silly chicks just stick to Lowes and leave Home Depot to the guys. Real Men will however go to a REAL lumberyard/hardware store.

  23. Note to open carrier on left: get your GD strong hand off the gun!

    That open carrier is none other than Texas’ own Kory Watkins – a high-school educated, part-time bar-tender and failed political candidate who is determined to ensure that Texas never legalizes the the open carry of pistols.

    Read more about him here:
    http://texansforkorywatkins.com/

  24. Although the context is different, perhaps this kind of description also fits the Texas OCers in the photo..

    *Squid: A young motorcyclist who overestimates his abilities, boasts of his riding skills when in reality he has none. Squid bikes are usually decorated with chrome and various anodized bits. Rear tires are too wide for their own good, swingarm extended. Really slow in the corners, and sudden bursts of acceleration when a straight appears. Squids wear no protection, deeming themselves invincible. This fact compounds itself with the fact that they engage in ‘extreme riding’ – performing wheelies in public areas. Squids wreck a lot. Derived from ‘squirly kid’. Via Urban Dictionary

  25. Again, what does trying to get a private business to ask patrons to peacefully leave if the have a visible firearm going to reduce gang shootings, suicides, mass killers, etc?

  26. My personal opinion on the open carry “attention whores” is the same I have about people who expose their naughty bits in public to promote a cause. Put it away. The attention you attract is not the kind you want.

    “I do not think that means what you think it means.”

    BTAIM, I carry concealed in Home Depot (Oregon) and at my “gun free” workplace. What they don’t know they don’t know. Discretion is good.

  27. I think these HD OC’ers are on to something. After all, open soliciting for work in Home Depot’s parking lots has done quite a bit, I’m sure, to personalize and normalize illegal aliens. It’s a mad, mad, mad, mad world when crime is normalized and the Constitution is stigmatized.

  28. Businesses are private organizations and can allow in anyone they want. Similarly, they are allowed to ban OC if they think it makes their customers feel safer. It is their right, either way. This is a business decision, and governments should not be able to regulate it unless it becomes a matter of public safety.

    I personally choose not to carry, except concealed, and even then in only a limited situation. Even if I were carrying, I would not feel comfortable shopping in any store that allowed OC. I can’t tell by looking if someone is exercising his 2A rights, or preparing to kill me and my family.

    Anyone who is openly carrying superior firepower is a potential threat, particularly when they are carrying with their right hand on the gun. By allowing him to carry so close to a ready position, I am literally putting my life, and my family’s lives, in his hands. In the time it takes me to aim, he will have already gotten off a few shots. (He would have to shoot from “low ready”, judging from the picture, but he still has obvious advantages in speed, accuracy, magazine size, and distance.)

    I can’t tell from the picture whether these two men are honoring the freedoms built into our Constitution, or mocking people they are about to kill. The easiest course of action for me would be to simply avoid any store where they openly carry firearms.

    I have no such qualms about concealed weapons. Responsible gun owners, by concealing their status, are giving me at least one signal of their intent: They are keeping their hands off their guns.

    • Dave wrote, “This is a business decision, and governments should not be able to regulate it unless it becomes a matter of public safety.”

      Please explain how businesses which guarantee that violent criminals can harm patrons with impunity (banning patrons from carrying firearms) is not a public safety problem.

      Dave also wrote, “I can’t tell by looking if someone is exercising his 2A rights, or preparing to kill me and my family.”

      Everyone around you could be preparing to kill you or your family with a concealed firearm, short sword, pipe, or bomb and you have absolutely no way of knowing it until they act. Does this mean we should mandate that everyone wear straightjackets in public? Because that is the only way you can guarantee that another person will not harm you.

      And yes, a person can kill you with a handgun, short sword, or pipe just as easily as a rifle.

      • Uncommon:

        Just because anyone “could” be preparing to kill me actually does not bother me much. It only bothers me when they take the extra step of arming themselves with rifles.

        Even then, if I were similarly armed, I would be fine. The fact of the matter is that I am rarely similarly armed in the hardware store. And even when I am armed, I don’t walk around with my hand on the gun.

        As far as the store choosing to disarm their patrons, they have done no such thing. I am perfectly welcome to walk into any of my local hardware stores carrying anything I can conceal. As long as I keep it concealed, they are happy to do business with me.

        The local gun store has the same philosophy.

        • “It only bothers me when they take the extra step of arming themselves with rifles.”

          You COULD turn that around, though, and say just because someone is armed and may even have a hand on the gun that, based on what he’s otherwise doing, he’s not a threat.

          Arming yourself is not the ‘extra step.’ It is the first step. Acting like a thread is the extra step.

          I thought it was part of our strategy to get away from the “gun is the talisman” meme…that it is neither a good talisman nor an evil one.

          The presence of a gun is not itself a threat, lest we believe the tone and implication of every anti-gun hysterical piece ever written.

        • JR,

          I agree that the rifle itself is not the threat. The person carrying the rifle is the potential threat.

          When I first see such a person, all I know about him is that he cares about gun rights more than he cares about what other people think. This is perfectly legal, but it gives me some small insight into what he might be thinking.

          Generally speaking, I assume he is harmless, but keep an eye on him. I would do the same if he were carrying around an axe or a baseball bat. It is not the gun I am worried about, it is the judgment of the person carrying it.

          If he then puts his hand on the gun, I pay much closer attention. Not only does he not care what I think, but he seems to be inexperienced, or maybe nervous. Either one is a warning that he might be irresponsible, and therefore dangerous.

          In any case, I would usually leave the store. There are plenty of other businesses in town, and plenty of other times that I might go without running the risk that he might (negligently or intentionally) shoot up the garden shop.

        • “I know about him is that he cares about gun rights more than he cares about what other people think.”

          Sorry, man, but you know no such thing.

          That is projection of what YOU think of a person OC-ing a rifle (or whatever is his infraction).

          We agree that the rifle is not the threat. I continue to contend that it is ACTION, not what he thinks or how he prioritizes his “gun rights” or cares about what I think, that make him “threat” or “non threat.”

          Is he moving in an aggressive manner? His he looking around furtively, or zeroing in on one person? Where’s the muzzle of the rifle? What is is overall demeanor? Etc.

          What he thinks about gun rights is immaterial in this equation. Thoughts cannot directly hurt me and therefore pose no imminent danger.

      • Theoretically, of course, someone could kill me with a pipe from the plumbing aisle. But they would have to be close. And he will to do it with one hit, because otherwise, my brother will shoot him.

        Someone who is an average shot with a rifle could hit me from 20 yards, and still have plenty of time to take down my brother.

        If your theoretical “open pipe” ninja sees my brother and I in Home Depot, he never knows which of us is armed. I never promised I was unarmed, I just said I usually don’t fear for my life when shopping for air filters.

    • Dave,
      I used to have a London Fog trench coat where the inner and outer pockets were open to each other at the bottom of the pocket. It would be so easy for anyone to walk into a restaurant with their hands in their pockets, all the while having their hand on the trigger of an AK with the safety off and no one would know.

      I hope I’m not hearing you say that you’d feel safer just because you did not know that someone had a gun. I mean, we can’t all be so paranoid that we have to assume that EVERYONE is a threat, but somewhere in the argument I would like to think that people might come to view Open Carrying as being done by good, honest, well-meaning fellow citizens.

      • BR: Come to think of it, I actually do feel safer when people keep their weapons concealed.

        It lets me know that they care about my perception. The two guys with rifles apparently do not.

        Also, when someone is carrying concealed, it is less likely that a crazy person could take their gun off them and start firing. (For one thing, the crazy person would not usually know that there even is a gun.)

        There are also tactical reasons for carrying concealed, but you knew that.

        • “It lets me know that they care about my perception.”

          I’m sorry. What makes you think I (or anyone else) cares about your perception?

          My carrying a firearm is not about you or anything about you, unless and until you become an active threat.

          There are also tactical reasons for carrying concealed, but you knew that.

          And, there are tactical reasons for OC-ing, too. There has never been any study or body of evidence that shows that one is definitively “better” in the general, unpredictable scenario.

          First rule: Have a gun.

          I CC far, far more often than I OC, by the way…so I’m not making this point from a position of defensiveness about OC. It’s just that for every x, there is a counter-x.

          So, I can’t see how other people carry is my concern.

    • So it really just comes down to your feelings? Your feelings don’t trump my rights.

      Whether a firearm is concealed or carried openly, it’s still there. You just happen to draw the line at open carrying, because that marks the boundary of your comfort zone; but what’s the philosophical or even practical difference with drawing the line at carrying (or even owning) at all, whether concealed or openly carried?

    • So what if it’s winter time and he carries this same rifle concealed under a long coat. Are you less safe, more vulnerable, than if he was open carrying it? Good grief.

      And superiority in a fight does not depend solely on the superiority of the firearm. There are innumerable men and women out there in the military, in police departments, even at the local tactical gun range, who would destroy either of us with a mere .22, regardless what firearm we wielded. Ultimately it comes down to effectiveness and training, of which the firearms is but a single component. Hell, the Aurora, CO killer had an AR, but could not wield that apparently superior piece of firepower effectively. So he jettisoned it for a shotgun and pistol. If he’d only been armed with the rifle, which he dropped in the parking lot, there wouldn’t have even been a spree shooting that night. So much for your “superior firepower automatically means greater threat” theory.

      Sheesh. The open vs. concealed carry debate brings out the pearl clutchers in the POTG just as the 2A vs. civilian disarmament crowd debate does.

  29. If I open carry in my home and Home Depot bans open carry, does that mean I can’t visit their website?

    Looks like two sides have formed over this article. Those who feel the two guys in the picture are hurting 2A efforts in general and those who believe they aren’t doing anything wrong. Vermont has some pretty liberal (definition two) gun laws and — despite years of experience with firearms — I would be a little taken aback if I turned the corner of the isle in a HD and saw these two blokes standing as they are (letting their SBR’s just hang out there like that), blocking the isle.

    Je’es, I thought those folding gates were annoying….

    There’s a difference between blatant open carry (for shock purposes) and sensible open carry.

    • “Those who feel the two guys in the picture are hurting 2A efforts in general and those who believe they aren’t doing anything wrong. “

      You are right about how in these OC discussions, a lot of ‘feelings’ come out.

    • Whole lot of fail in that post. First, what SBR’s? I see two rifles of routine length. I see no one else in the aisle at all, so what blocking is there? The store’s own boxes to the right are blocking, if anything. Shall we ban boxes?

      The purpose of these actions is to normalize firearms and help achieve open carry of handguns. You may not agree with their approach, but that is their reasoning for carrying these rifles in public. Despite popular media perception, going on a spree killing is not the one and only reason in the universe that someone would own or carry a rifle in public.

      Vermont already has open carry for handguns, so of course it would be unusual to see someone carrying a rifle in protest of no open carry of handguns. They’re only doing it here to obtain what you already have there. Legalize open carry of handguns in Texas, too, and these open carrying rifle demonstrations will cease.

  30. I live In Tarrant county and these douchebags are driving me nuts! You’re not helping anyone but the other side!

    I’d be difficult not to confront them or call the cops on them myself if I come across some.

  31. Do all these “attention whores” use either an SKS or a WASR-10?

    Nothing wrong with either. They are probly first guns for these guys, and they think they are helping, but haven’t matured enough to know they are hurting the cause.

    I OC a G17 in Home Depot all the time, and now expect to see a no guns sign go up thanks to these blockheads. How did that help me?

    Please don’t ever carry a long gun into a business, especially ones that I go to!

  32. It seemed like the anti gun crowd couldn’t get traction or publicity on much of anything. Until these tactless activists started getting attention. Nothing helps the enemy more than your own strategical ignorance. Anti gun groups love that you do this oc activists!

  33. To me if they want to try to normalize guns they need to stop taking and posting pictures of them posing like want to be bada$$es and just act like normal gun carrying people. Walk in and do your business and leave. No posing. If someone walked into a restaurant with their hand on their pistol how nervous would you be. I likely wouldnt hang around. Normalize starts with being normal. Normal people dont walk around with rifles at low ready with their hands on the grips and what looks like loaded magazines. Bunch of attention whores. They are our version of Moms Demand Action.

    • This casual picture looks, well, completely casual, to me. I don’t see any prone positioning, aiming an nonexistent enemies, nor anyone growling at the camera, flexing muscles. I don’t see camo or tacticool buffoonery (of the sort that many here own and wear, don’t lie). It’s two guys; one in cargo shorts and polo style shirt, and the other in jeans and a t-shirt. Where’s the alleged badassedness on the part of these gentlemen? Or are you doing that projection thing, again?

  34. im all for oc and cc as long as its done tactfully and in good taste,But carrying to get attention to show you can do it makes all of us gun owner’s look bad.

  35. WTF does change.org have to do with corporate policies, and, oh crap, the open carriers are going to go t Home Depot burning yet another establishment for the rest of us.

  36. I’m all for open carry. The premise for what OCT is doing is spot on, why can we open carry rifles and not pistols, and rally’s like the march at SXSW were appropriate. I don’t OC personally but believe firmly in presenting a unified front to those who have placed themselves against us.

    That being said, a bunch of dickweeds like the guy on the left stronghand on the gun, finger indexed, or carrying low ready with a combative stance… completely way out of line and hurting the cause. Like that guy we all knew in college (especially for those who were in fraternities), who always had way too much to drink and always had to be babysat at parties etc… you dont attack him publicly and thus air your dirty laundry to anyone who might be opposed to you can see it, but you do make the message clear to him that he needs to get in line.

    I dont see why we the POTG are putting up with people like that, or the Chipotle commando’s, or the guy at that Georgia ballpark if he indeed was not paid and planted by MDA…. seriously, like a bunch of alcoholic uncles at thanksgiving, they show up and do damage to an otherwise worthy cause. They need to be taken out to the woodhsed and beaten with a hose and told to step back in line. That Jerry Miculek video posted a week or so ago was spot on. Placing your hand on the weapon and posturing agressively completely change your appearance.

    I also dont like all this “oh well starbucks’ gun policy isnt legally binding so these guys arent harming the cause blah blah blah…” thats nonsense. To the uneducated and uninformed these are huge victories that we are just handing to Shannon and Co. Lie big and lie often… thats what these people play by. Tell people that Starbucks, Chilis, Chipotle, and lets be honest Target and Home Depot soon enough have “banned” guns from their stores, and the only people who will realize that isn’t a true victory are people who are already on our side. The people on the fence and the people who hate us? They see us losing every time Shannon opens her mouth or posts on twitter.

    So yes I echo Farago’s sentiment above… keep your GD hand off of the gun if you are going to open carry, remember what you are fighting for. OC isnt about showing off how tough you are with all your tacticool hardware, its about fighting for something bigger than you, behave accordingly!

    • “the guy at that Georgia ballpark”

      We need “The Truth” about that story.

      I read (here perhaps, but I don’t recall) that the story as reported was WAY WAY overblown…that there was one woman who was making a stink and basically got things stirred up. And, it was she who was interviewed on the news.

      Now, I don’t know myself. But I do remember reading right after it happened that it was not as reported.

      Sure would welcome correct info on this one. I did find this “update” from two days after the initial story:

      http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/cops-defend-georgia-man-gun-caused-scare-children-baseball-game-article-1.1770008

      An excerpt:

      “Forsyth Sheriff Duane Pipe said the man was acting inappropriately, but did nothing illegal.

      “A park is one of those places where you can openly carry a weapon if you do have a permit,” Rainwater told North Fulton. “A lot of parents with their kids at Fowler Park don’t understand that in Georgia you do have that right.” “

      So, some good came of it. Like it or not, those parents got educated on Georgia Law.

  37. Bottom line is that carrying a rifle on your person while you shop or go about town is solipsistic. Common sense and respect for others have gone out the window by the time you can rationalize this sort of behavior. The tone deaf OCer needs the shrill anti-gunner and the inverse is also true. They require an “other” to “defy” by acting stupid in public (and photographing it!) as an assertion of the self.

    I can OC a handgun where I live, but I need a permit to conceal it. That is the only reason I would OC, I wish I had the right to carry concealed without LEO sign off, but I don’t. What the hell are you going to do with a rifle in a crowded shopping center? I see many people OC handguns where I live and most of the time nobody even notices, occasionally someone will chat them up about their pistol. If the same guy walked in with a rifle, many customers would walk out… best case scenario.

    Ultimately these people are a product of their environment. Our society has lost touch with reality and our new normal is that people in general don’t know how to conduct themselves in public. This social decay only plays into the hands of those who would expand government control over our lives. People carrying rifles around like fools is a distraction from what the real goal should be: The end of LEO sign off, constitutional concealed carry of handguns nationwide. From there, challenge the NFA. At no point will it ever be normal to carry a rifle around with you just because you feel like doing so.

    • I do want to correct one simple misunderstanding you seem to have. Otherwise you are mostly right. The OC Texas guys are protesting the fact that open carry of rifles IS legal and that OC of handguns is NOT legal in our great state.

      Thats the point of the demonstrations… to pressure the legislature to make handgun OC legal (although to be honest getting a CHL here is remarkably easy, but that’s a different discussion, because our no printing laws are also pretty draconian unless something has recently changed, so OC coul dinsulate yuo from that). The method they have chosen is carrying rifles to show people how absurd it is that a rifle is legal to OC and handgun not. For the most part, their demonstrations and rallies are good and information and the people are approachable, a good example being the rally at SXSW this year. The bad examples of being this skinny hipster tool show above (I think he leads one of the OC chapters in Texas, if so double shame on him) with his strong hand on the rifle or those people who were aggressively posturing outside of various restaurants or posing for pictures at low ready. In regards to those people I wholeheartedly agree with you.

    • “Bottom line is that carrying a rifle on your person while you shop or go about town is solipsistic.

      How do you figure that?

      How is OC solipsist but CC or nightstand carry isn’t?

      This sounds like the kind argument the anti crowd makes with their “they are so scared they see danger on every street corner, in every child” nonsense.

      Just because you happen to disagree with something does not make it solipsist.

    • I have toagree with Fug. This is solipsist behavior. They are expressing their own rights to the detriment of other people’s perceptions.

      Imagine if these two were Islamic men wearing ceremonial coverings on their hair. Would the 2A supporters here be just as ready to defend them, or would we lean toward calling the police?

      • The implied premise of your question is repugnant.

        Why would I care if two people in any kind of attire were carrying … so long as they were not acting in a threatening manner?

        Questions like this one keep revealing a fixation on THINGS like guns and clothing and the way people LOOK like their race.

        Threat assessment is made based on actions. Is someone presenting an acute danger that satisfies ability, opportunity and jeopardy? Yes/No.

        What they are wearing is immaterial.

        I like the way you constructed that question, by the way. It communicates a LOT.

  38. Carrying an AK47 into a Home Depot is not going to win anyone over to the 2A or Open Carry. I think the OC people create more opponents to the 2A than they create. Strutting around the cleaning supply of aisle of Home Depot with an AK47 is going to scare more people than anything. There is no reason to carry a rifle into a store. I’m a big supporter of 2A and all constitutional rights but there is a time and place for everything.

  39. I shall quote many of the other posters here: Attention whores.
    Our aim is to make open carry normal, and taking pics with your hand on the grip in a home depot IS NOT NORMAL. These people need to get a grip and stop being so bloody overt. These pics are just ammunition for the antis. 7.62 by the look of the picture.

    • At one time, a black man holding the hand of a white woman was considered not normal. Today, you see that every day. You see it everywhere from professional sports arenas to the Supreme Court.

      If you’re always going to defer to whatever is considered normal at the time, how do you ever expect to make progress and establish a new normal?

  40. Look I have no problem with OC, and actually hope it makes it through the next session. However, I have a CHL. I carry everywhere the law allows me to. If I see people walk, uninvited, into a place of business with long arms on the FRONT of their bodies with HANDS ON GRIPS they run the risk of getting shot, by ME. On top of that, do you think I would be prosecuted for shooting you? The only requirement for the use of deadly force is the feeling that one’s life or other’s lives are in danger. Do you think this standard would be met by two guys with long arms with hands on pistol grips and fingers anywhere near triggers? Um yes, any day of the week and twice on Friday.

    I used to carry a tiny .380 daily, but after the Aurora theater shooting I stepped up to a .40 just to have the firepower for a fighting chance against an MSR, the weapon used in that shooting. Seeing guys walk uninvited and unannounced into places of business that have nothing to do with shooting puts me on alert and puts my hand on my weapon. If a finger nears a trigger there will be no warning shots as I have NO IDEA what your INTENT is, nor will I wait to find out.

    So quit being infants after attention. Want to open carry? Please do so, at rallies decrying your purpose and intent. And, FYI, an antique plack-powder piece gets the message across without being nearly the threat an AR or AK can be perceived as.

    Finally, If businesses invite you in, then by all means accept, but DO NOT put people and corporations in the uncomfortable position of not knowing your reasons for entering their establishment. You are the reason Chipotle and JIB and now potentially Home Depot will be forced to take a side, and as history shows it rarely goes well for OC.

    For once do the SMART thing, and not something just because it’s legal to do so.

    • “On top of that, do you think I would be prosecuted for shooting you? “

      In the absence of an imminent threat? Yes. The mere presence of a rifle is not an “imminent threat.” But hey, I get it…”guns scary.”

      “The only requirement for the use of deadly force is the feeling that one’s life or other’s lives are in danger.”

      Yeah, good luck proving your “feelings” to a prosecutor. People have been prosecuted in self defense cases with a LOT more going for their self defense claim than the circumstances you’ve described….Zimmerman, for example.

      ” Do you think this standard would be met by two guys with long arms with hands on pistol grips and fingers anywhere near triggers? “

      Maybe, maybe not. I’ve been in court on a few murder trials, and, well, I don’t think this stuff is a “bright line” as you seem to believe it is. Too many unknowns to make the call up front.

      “Um yes, any day of the week and twice on Friday. “

      Not even close. There could be a witness that says they never saw him unsling the rifle, or that the dude was not even looking at you when you shot him. Or any of a thousand other circumstances that could be that “one little thing” that trips you up.

      Overzealous prosecutors with political ambitions are another MAJOR concern…perhaps someone just needs a feather in their cap in the form of a high profile CCW related SD case?

      Stranger things have happened.

      Look at this way. Every “expert” on the topic recommends that you arrange legal counsel BEFORE you find yourself in a self defense shooting. If it was as “straight forward” as you are asserting, I’m guessing they would not believe there is a need to make that recommendation. The advice could be “just say you felt your life was in danger and all’s good.”

    • The MSR in Aurora never saw action inside the theater. It jammed and was dropped outside. The shooter there used a shotgun and .40 cal Glock.

      Even so, the relevant face off wasn’t between an his pistol, shotgun or even his MSR versus your .380 or even your .40 cal. handgun. The relevant face off was between his firearm of any kind and the theater attendees’ lack of firearms of any kind.

      These killers don’t want to face resistance of any kind, especially from a firearm. Specific caliber you’re carrying isn’t all that important, really, as they’re apt to surrender or run and kill themselves upon its presentation. In fact, the vast majority of DGU’s do not involve discharging a firearm at all. We also know that the majority of armed criminals aren’t all that gun savvy themselves. They’re not going to visually and instantly recognize that your gun is smaller than their gun, so the gun fight is on, baby! No. They’re going to see the flash and hear the report, wet themselves, then end it their aggression, one way or another.

      Quick nod to those who will bring up the North Hollywood and Tyler, Texas courthouse shootouts: yes, more firepower would have helped in those cases. Those are exceptions that prove the rule and, if anything, argue in favor of open carrying of rifles.

  41. From the standpoint of activism these folks think they are all Rosa Parks but they are really Claudette Colvin. The Rosa Parks arrest in 1955 was smartly designed, media savvy, and fully coordinated with the national organizations. These protests are not.

    The Panther’s 1967 open carry marches CA worked so “well” that the national prototype for gun control was invented and passed as a direct response.

    These activists have passion but are wholly ignorant of effective activism techniques and of history. Fighting stupidly loses more battles than “being right” wins.

    • “The Rosa Parks arrest in 1955 was smartly designed, media savvy, and fully coordinated with the national organizations.” Really? But for her mug shot, which the police took, can you show us even ONE picture from the event? So much for the smartly designed, media savvy, fully coordinated myth.

      Rosa Parks actually sat in the “colored” section of the bus, as it was called at the time, and identified with a moveable sign separating it from the white section. When the white section of the bus filled up on that day, the bus driver came back and moved the sign further toward the back of the bus into the black section, where there were still open seats, thus expanding the white section. Ms. Parks and others, seated in what was now the expanded white section, were instructed to move. The several others did, but she did not. That’s not some pre-packaged media event. That’s just one woman who’d worked all day and was dead on her feet. (Ms. Parks also had a personal grudge against this exact bus driver, going back to the 1940’s, which you can go look up for yourself.) The media savviness and play up you cite all took place AFTER the arrest of Ms. Parks, not before as part of some plan.

      What you fail to mention, Don, is that Colvin’s protest, nearly a year before that of Ms. Parks, was the case that actually went to the Supreme Court and won; forcing Montgomery to desegregate the bus. Ms. Parks was later touted as the big civil rights success story because the educated, married, activist Ms. Parks was more telegenic and acceptable than the unwed, teenage mother that was Ms. Colvin. If you want to pick a poster girl in the 1950’s, these things matter. Plus, Ms. Colvin had already won her case in federal court at the time of Ms. Parks’ arrest for this same act.

      You also fail to mention others who’d defied Montgomery’s bus segregation before Ms. Parks (or even along with Ms. Colvin). Irene Morgan did it back in the 1940’s. Sarah Keys did it earlier in the 1950’s. Along with Ms. Colvin were several other ladies: MacDonald, Browder and Smith.

      All of the real work, the defiance, the arrests, the court cases won in federal district court, appellate court and the Supreme Court, all took place without Rosa Parks and her after-the-fact celebrity status. All the initial heavy lifting was done by unsophisticated individuals, “fighting stupidly”, as you describe it, and acting without the hifalutin organization you clamor for and insist is necessary.

      As for the Panthers, well, they were already a very dangerous group of men, openly rejecting peaceful means and embracing violence, as part of a separate movement. The guns for them were a means to an end, not an end in themselves. That’s exactly the opposite of these three gentlemen in the picture above. By the way, except for some 12 ga. shotguns, they all carried handguns in their infamous 1967 march in California. That’s basically what you and the others are calling for these guys to do, and abandon the AK’s. Yet, the scary black panthers didn’t have any scary black rifles, and look what happened.

      • So you agree that Rosa Parks was a good champion for the movement (genteel, middle class, well dressed, well spoken, professional, non-threatening) and that’s why HER story was circulated nationally and generated support for the civil rights movement instead of all the other people arrested/kicked off of buses before.

        And you agree that a group of really passionate anti-government men protesting with weapons will be perceived as dangerous.

        A rifle is not a picket sign. Stop putting companies in the position of having to take sides on political issues that they have no interest in. Stop providing marketing material for the antis, And keep your hands off your guns in public unless you need to shoot someone.

        -D

        • I agree that Rosa Parks was a longtime NAACP member prior to that bus ride and had the insider’s advantage of becoming a celebrity after the fact through their publicity seeking, after the real work had already been done and the victories already been won by others.

          I agree that Ms. Parks was a nice poster child for seeking contributions.

          I agree that her action had no effect on anything, but her own celebrity status, as others for many years prior had taken the brave first step to violate the unjust law and the many grueling steps of defeating said law in court.

          That Ms. Parks was able to snatch for herself some star status, after the work had been done and the success earned by others, hardly advances the cause. That the NAACP was able to exploit her nonevent for their own financial gain, likewise was hardly noteworthy.

          As for “really passionate” and “anti-government”, I’m not even sure what you’re talking about. I cannot discern any of that from a picture of a couple of normal looking guys casually standing and smiling and posing for pictures while doing something entirely legal.

      • You’re wrong on all accounts.

        The violent and radicalized behavior of the black panthers was cause and effect. rampant police abuse during the civil liberties protests and a system that is (as in currently) rigged against them tends to piss off people enough to compel them to use arms.

        Maybe you missed the photographs of the M1 carbines and pump shottys. I mean, fvck, malcom x has his signature picture of his modified m1 carbine with the magazines taped “jungle style”.

        So dont try to distort history. I actually support the black panthers for what they did then. after all, they are the reason why terms such as “assault weapons” and laws against brandishing firearms were created to begin with (and such laws are the reason for ronnie st reagans anti-gun stance)

    • “The Panther’s 1967 open carry marches CA worked so “well” that the national prototype for gun control was invented and passed as a direct response.”

      This is exactly the public image the ninja element of OCers is creating. I suspect that they are so ignorant of history that they have no idea that the symbolism they’ve stumbled onto is connected to an organization as repugnant to most Americans as the Black Panthers. Looks like these baaad boyz don’t read to much.

  42. I agree, Guy on left needs to get his hand off the gun.
    More pointedly the open carry crowd needs to pack more commonly carried Pistols instead of long guns.

    • Ugh.

      How many times does it have be pointed out that they are protesting NO LEGAL OPEN CARRY OF HANDGUNS in their state?

      This is why my head hurts in these OC discussions…context is EVERYTHING, yet somehow it is the one key piece of the puzzle that is always missed.

      • And how man times do we have to point out to people like you that IT DOES NOT MATTER.

        Doing stupid open carry stunts does nobody any good but Bloomberg.

        Get a clue.

        • First of all, you are continuing the meme of the unsubstantiated claim that it’s helping Bloomberg right on cue.

          But setting that aside for a moment…in what universe do you live in where context of an action does not matter?

          Come on. You are not that daft; I’ve seen you write cogent pieces and make sense before.

          I am speaking very specifically to the “OC a handgun if you want to OC” comments that get repeated, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over…every single time this issue comes up.

          Just because you disagree with what they are doing does not mean the context of why they are doing does not matter. You can disagree with them all you want…it’s no skin off my nose. Really. No, I mean REALLY, Paul, I don’t give a rat’s backside what you think about this issue, one way or another.

          But to have folks telling them “OC a handgun, it’s better than a rifle” is … well, at this point, there are no words for it.

          They are protesting to get the fact that OC of Handguns is illegal CHANGED. Agree with their methods or not, but at least get what they are doing and why they are doing it correct.

          In fact, getting a bad law changed, you know, the CONTEXT of these protests, is incredibly important …. or should be, for ANYONE that believes in the Right To Keep and Bear Arms.

          YOU don’t ever have to OC. You’d have that choice. But having it against the law for handguns part of a much larger problem.

        • JR_in_NC says:
          June 25, 2014 at 18:21

          They are protesting to get the fact that OC of Handguns is illegal CHANGED.

          Agree with their methods or not, but at least get what they are doing and why they are doing it correct.

          In fact, getting a bad law changed, you know, the CONTEXT of these protests, is incredibly important …. or should be, for ANYONE that believes in the Right To Keep and Bear Arms.

          YOU don’t ever have to OC. You’d have that choice. But having it against the law for handguns part of a much larger problem.
          (end)

          There are ways to positively make a point and ways to negatively make the same point.
          It’s easier to have a dialog if you don’t look menacing.
          I choose attempting to positively persuade opponents or those more on the fence, that simply have a casual bias toward opposition, rather than those entrenched in opposition.

          A cool drink is much more inviting to someone, rather than being splashed with hot oil.

          The guy on the left gives an aggressive posture, especially since the sling is over on far shoulder. He’s not concerned with retention.

        • I choose attempting to positively persuade opponents or those more on the fence, that simply have a casual bias toward opposition, rather than those entrenched in opposition.

          A cool drink is much more inviting to someone, rather than being splashed with hot oil. “

          +1

          And that’s why each of us have our own slice of the fight to continued RKBA…we have different strengths.

          One thing cannot be argued: they are drawing attention to the law they are trying to get changed.

          What was it some famous guy said about “no bad publicity?”

          Food for thought…

      • If you are saying that the state these guys are in “DOES NOT Allow open carry”, It’s still a stupid show of defiance!

        • The state they are in allows open carry of rifles but not handguns. It’s a dumb law, and they are trying to get it changed, along with a lot of other groups doing different things in the same fight.

          The rifle OC-ers are just the most “visible.”

  43. Jon in Houston

    Sorry, but Chipotle Ninja has already happened.

    And their defenders are even bigger idiots than they are.

    You guys are the best friends Bloomberg has in his efforts.

      • Sorry, Johnny Houston, it’s already been used by a number of others on TTAG in the comments. Your OC fanaticism and defense of the stupid behaviors and choices of fellow OC fanatics is doing a great service to Bloomberg. I hope you are proud of yourself.

      • Wrong. “Chipotle Ninja” is both descriptive and accurate. It was invented here and will soon enter the common vernacular.

  44. There should be a petition prohibiting groups of people from bullying private businesses into making political statements.

    It’s usually lose lose for any business to take a stance. If the business sides with antigunners they lose progunners business, side with the pros they lose the antis.

    Actually I’m seeing it go a step further when the antis say make a statement in our favor or you’ll lose our business.

    I think this is the point when they go too far. Is that not terroristic in nature?

  45. 150+ comments and nobody’s mentioned that the part of the petition about the Jack in the Box employees hiding in the freezer is complete bullshit? That was debunked within about two days of the JitB open carry incident.

    • That may well be because we can’t stop tripping over our own feet on whether OC of a rifle is teh badz 3v1L.

      • JR_in_NC says:
        June 25, 2014 at 18:21
        They are protesting to get the fact that OC of Handguns is illegal CHANGED. Agree with their methods or not, but at least get what they are doing and why they are doing it correct.
        (end)

        Also if OC of any type is illegal then HD or anyone else has the right to call the cops. If the point that the guys are making is Handguns are illegal and Rifles are o.k, . they could still do a better job of it, instead of being poster “children” for Bloomberg’s minions.
        I read this as the point of change.org’s noise, is to persuade Home Depot to make a statement against people, carrying open or concealed.

        • “If the point that the guys are making is Handguns are illegal and Rifles are o.k,”

          Yes; that’s it. OC of rifles is legal so they are doing it (carrying their rifles) to show how dumb the law is that rifles = OK but handguns (which ‘upset’ fewer people) = Not Ok.

          “they could still do a better job of it, instead of being poster “children” for Bloomberg’s minions.”

          That certainly is an arguable point a lot of folks have made.

          Either way, we have to remember that this is political activism – to raise awareness for getting the law changed. Whether or not they will accomplish that goal (or hinder it) remains to be seen.

  46. Can some please tell the Clown Militia member with the douchebag hat that his hat went out of style 80 years ago. All he needs is the douche-tool soul patch on his chin and he’s set.

    So you need an AK to walk into Home Cheapo and get some Chlorox to clean up your shit stained toilet? Ooooooookays. Its kind of tough to load up a patio’s worth of pavers into the bed of your truck with an AK dangling from your chicken wing. Lemme guess, he’s not there for actual man work.

    These open carry tools are making the rest of us look bad. We are judged based on the actions of these gimps! Carrying around an AR or AK on a Chipotle run or Starbucks run or a Home Cheapo stop is over the top ridiculous. Put the rifles away Nancy boys.

  47. I try to be a responsible gun owner but how am I supposed to be able to tell the level of competence some one else has with their weapon? How do I know if the clown with the AK knows how to carry it safely? Is there a round in the chamber? Is the safety on? Why does he have his finger hovering over the trigger guard? Is he some nut that has decided that Home Depot is the place for the next mass shooting? People open carrying guns in public places make me nervous. I know what level of competence I have with my weapon but I don’t know about their’s. I know that many people will not agree with me but I do not want to sit in a restaurant with a bunch of people that have their weapons stacked on the table.

    • The pro-carry forces must be really proud when someone like Jeff logs in to agree with you. I am not sure if it is the bad spelling or the inappropriate caps-lock, but he would make a great spokesman. It must make you feel like I do when Corrine Brown talks.

      It would actually be funny if Jeff was really a progressive liberal, and was trolling you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *