OMG! Open Carry! In Big Cities! In Texas! OMG!

(courtesy gunnews.com)

Looking for gun control? Look in the large, Democrat-controlled urban areas of America. Gun rights have gone bye-bye in Boston, Chicago, Hartford, Los Angeles, New York City, San Francisco and Trenton. Politicians in these gun control havens have an answer for people who point to other states’ gun rights. What works in the wilds of Wyoming won’t work on the mean streets of Manhattan. Densely-populated cities have special needs. Hang on. What about Atlanta, Dallas, Miami, Phoenix, Nashville and Kansas City? Pay no attention to the firearms freedom behind that curtain! We’re on a mission here! Like this . . .

Texas lawmakers hoping to make it legal to openly carry handguns in the state often point to a surprising statistic: Texas is one of just six states that prohibit it. That may soon change, if a measure lifting some of the state’s handgun restrictions continues to advance in the Legislature.

But a Texas Tribune analysis of gun laws nationwide shows the “one-in-six” figure paints an incomplete picture — particularly when it comes to allowing open carry in highly populated urban areas. That’s because many of the nation’s biggest cities are congregated in the states that prohibit it.

If Texas passes Republican Sen. Craig Estes‘ bill, which would allow permit-holders to openly carry holstered handguns, Houston and Dallas would become the largest metropolitan areas in the nation to allow it. Among the top five metro areas by population, they would be the only two where handguns could be carried openly.

And? Surely that’s a good thing, not a bad thing. texastribune.org‘s three – count ’em three! – writers are quick to point out that the large cities that “allow” open carry (e.g. Philadelphia and Detroit) have plenty o’ regulations restricting who can openly pack heat on their hip. Their laws are “more restrictive” than the proposed Texas open carry laws.

As if that’s a good thing. The writers also neglect to mention the fact that Texas’ “less restrictive” law will create permitted open carry. To open carry in the Lone Star State, Texas residents will have to complete four hours of training, undergo a criminal background check, submit their fingerprints and pay a fee. Not that I agree with any of that, but there it is. Or should be. (In the article, I mean.)

The Trib offers a handy chart of cities that have open carry, and the laws regulating the practice. So … who cares? As our man Krafft points out on a regular basis, “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility.” No matter were you live.

comments

  1. avatar MattInPA says:

    Uhh what? One has to have a PA LTCF to open carry in Philly(unlike the rest of the state). There’s no training requirement to get a PA LTCF (I’m not complaining), but there is a training requirement for a Texas CHL. So how is open carry more regulated in Philly? (Again not complaining)

    1. avatar B Realio says:

      I thought your state has a preemptive clause for firearms or is that AG still dragging her feet?

      1. avatar MattInPA says:

        We do have preemption but open carry is de facto legal so I’m not sure if preemption covers it. Also, the state statute says that you have to have a LTCF to carry in Philly regardless of the manner in which you carry it. So there’s that

        1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

          As of 2013, Philly was the fifth largest city, so we already have a top five city with legal open carry (as others note, legal if you hold a PA LTCF). Legal pure and simple. Not long ago it was technically legal but de facto prohibited since you would probably end up face down on the lovely streets of Philly with some jackboot’s knee on the middle of your back before they would even bother to ask you for ID and license. One high-profile lawsuit later, Philly cops are supposedly trained to act lawfully in this respect. I haven’t tested it myself, and I have never personally seen anyone open carrying in Philly.

  2. avatar Anthony says:

    Indeed a LTCF is required for open carry in Philadelphia. Give it a try!!!! and you will wish to goodness you had not.

    PA ostensibly has pre-emption. However, the AG does not believe it’s her responsibility to enforce the laws of the State with which she unilaterally disagrees, especially those involving firearms. LOL She is of course up to her ears in her own legal difficulties.

    1. avatar Steve says:

      I’ve never understood the idea that lawyers have that they can pick and choose which laws they want to defend in court. That goes against the very nature of the checks-and-balances system. The legislature passed the law, you NEED to defend it as best as you can until the courts say otherwise, or else you need to lose your job because you’re not doing it in the first place.

      1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        “…or else you need to lose your job because you’re not doing it in the first place.”

        And there’s the problem, right there. It’s the fault of the voters ultimately, though the public schools and media have worked hard to get them to a state in which they will keep voting in lawless politicians.

    2. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      “Indeed a LTCF is required for open carry in Philadelphia. Give it a try!!!! and you will wish to goodness you had not.”

      Yeah, that covers it very succinctly and well.

      “She is of course up to her ears in her own legal difficulties”

      As Progressive politicians tend to be.

  3. avatar ThomasR says:

    Metro Albuquerque area, 500,000 people. I have OC’d without need of a permit for the last seven years, including across the street from the University of New Mexico. Grocery stores, Walmarts, coffee shops, around Hispanic. white, black, american indian, rich, poor, homeless and tourists from around the world.

    Blood in the streets?, nope.

    People screaming in fear as they crush through any exit when I enter in a public place? Nope.

    Being targeted by human predators because I’m carrying a very valuable piece of property? Nope.

    Cops harassing me because I’m OC’ING a gun? Nope.

    Dogs and cats living together? Nope.

    I don’t think people that hate and fear freedom and being responsible for ones self-defense and the defense of one’s community know of what they speak.

    1. avatar Vhyrus says:

      I’ll do you one better: Phoenix metro area. 4 million+ population. 14th largest metro area by population. Constitutional carry. No rivers of blood.

      1. avatar Bob108 says:

        With Phoenix seemingly unable to pull together money to hire more police and the violent Mexican drug trade funneled through Phoenix, the only thing preventing rivers of blood is our vast 2nd amendment rights – constitutional carry, open carry, stand your ground, right to brandish to deter an attack, etc. Life is good in Arizona, believe me.

        1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

          I can go along with that, given the experience of living in Houston. To the “blood flowing in the streets” fear mongers, I would counter that it is the Second Amendment and responsible Texans exercising their rights under it that serve as the dam holding back the rivers of blood that would otherwise deluge us. Open carry will be provide additional support holding back that force of violence.

    2. avatar Bob108 says:

      I disagree on one thing. Growing up, our cats and dogs lived together rather peacefully. I suspect that having our cats open carry sharp claws probably had a lot to do with the dogs being polite and courteous. 🙂

      1. avatar ThomasR says:

        I was being facetious. It might be to old now a days, but I was referencing the movie “Ghost Busters” when Bill Murray and crew is talking about the Apocalypse, fire and brimstone, boiling rivers, the dead rising from the grave, and Bill says “Dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria!”

      2. avatar Dave says:

        Actually, cat claws are normally concealed. However, just as in Florida, they can be briefly exposed to view without causing a major problem. 🙂

    3. avatar Dev says:

      Las Vegas, too.

      1. avatar Cliff H says:

        Yes, I have open carried in and around Las Vegas, but North Las Vegas has a different attitude.

        We were also strongly advised in our firearms class (for the unconstitutional concealed permit) that although it is perfectly legal you will spend a LOT of time in conversations with Metro officers if you decide to walk down the strip with an open firearm, pistol or long gun.

  4. avatar Mk10108 says:

    Do it for the children and the continue march toward lawful self defense at home & public.

  5. avatar John in Ohio says:

    I believe that in the long run, it is much more difficult to go from the privileged exercise of open carry and no state level preemption to the true right to bear arms than it is to just pass legislation that prevents government from infringing. Opponents of the right to bear arms sandbag in hopes that the push to restore the exercise of the right will fade away as the generation ages and passes on. Also, each concession that appears to move towards free exercise of the right potentially saps the pro-carry support base as personal “good enough” benchmarks are achieved and personal biases/bigotries are triggered. When there is no realistic way to openly bear a handgun, the support for OC is potentially the largest. Government allows OC with a license and some supporters believe that is good enough and they don’t work for or support more progress. Some supporters don’t believe that someone ought to bear arms openly or concealed without training and background checks so they likewise stop there. Government allows OC except in certain large cities and some supporter believe that this is good enough and don’t work or support more progress. Some supporters don’t believe that someone ought to bear arms openly in those large cities so they likewise stop there. Et cetera. By successfully sandbagging restoration of the exercise of the right to bear arms through piecemealing, these antis and Fudds make it more difficult than I believe it might appear on the surface to some.

    1. avatar ThomasR says:

      Except for one thing. The anti-freedom crowd will never stop. Like the horror movies where the hero/heroine, after epic battle and they defeat the monster, as they are riding off into the sunset, out of the pit of darkness, a taloned hand comes reaching out into the light.

      In the same way, the reason we have reached the level of freedom that we have, is because of the efforts of those trying to take even more of our freedoms. That truly has been the fire, the boost for the extra efforts that we have made to push back the forces of tyranny. I know that has been the case for me.

      Since the forces of tyranny won’t ever stop, I won’t ever stop. I believe that is the case for many on this site. And this shows in the shifting of the American general population to where we are now have more than fifty percent in believing the Second Amendment actually does protect an individual right and that having a gun to protect oneself actually is beneficial and not harmful.

      So as the anti-freedom crowd continually keeps pushing to repeal laws liberalizing the carrying of weapons in public, we’ll just keep pushing back to unchain even more of our liberties. We’ll not have the luxury of resting on our laurels, or on the victories that we have achieved up to this point.

      And more freedom will be the result.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        Of course it will never stop. But, the thing is that the natural trend for government, any governing body really, is to grow in power. Since the anti-Liberty message is justified and conveyed in emotional terms, it takes more effort and reason to see beyond that mistaken message. Over time, the push by government will be towards less individual freedom. The trend with people will be to believe the easier emotional message and not the more difficult to grasp rational one. Those two things coupled with compulsory public education will result in a net loss of individual Liberty over time unless relatively much more heavy lifting from the pro-Liberty side is steadfastly carried out. From a net freedom perspective, we’re losing. I contend that we will continue to lose as our base dies off, there is a delay (it took some time for you, no?) for individuals to figure it all out, government intrusion levels become normalized, and we lose people from our base as the efforts reach their “stop” (where they believe we ought to be).

        Yes, we cannot rest. I hope I didn’t leave the impression that we should.

        1. avatar ThomasR says:

          I understand. Civilizations rise and fall. The ones that started out as beacons for freedom, that guided us in our own beginning, the Greek Republics, the Roman Republic all fell into corruption. Instead of a mature responsible citizen fulfilling their duty with their lives as a sacrifice, “With your shield or on it”, they turn into a self-indulgent, immediate satisfaction “what can my country do for me” hands out and mouths open, like our current crop of Statists and their worshipers.

          Will we, as Americans, overcome this natural cycle and not fall into our own dark age? We will find out, I believe, in our life times. But we were the first, after a long dark age, to start a fresh, a new birth, a new experiment not seen for over a thousand years. A representative Republic based not on royal birth, but on free armed citizens voting for who would represent them in their halls of government.

          At this point, I don’t see any viable candidates to replace our promise of individual freedom if we should fall. Switzerland perhaps. But is there anyone else that can pick up that mantle?

          I’ll be honest. As a once agnostic west coast liberal/liberterian, I saw Christians as the bane upon this country. I see now why we have fallen into the straights of the burgeoning tyranny that grows before us. It is the Liberal/progressives/RINO’s and the death cult of cultural suicide and statist worship that they promote.

          For me, it is now obvious what is needed to bring us back to the beacon of freedom that was the guiding light for this country, imperfectly as it was expressed for a major part of our history. Imperfectly, but still with greater reality of real personal freedom and real opportunity for all people than 95% of the rest of the planet.

          Now,as a baptized Libertarian/Christian, I know what freed me from the lies and the propaganda that is the milk and butter of the cult of liberal/progressivism. Others will need to find their own guiding light that will give them strength in the coming challenge. Because I believe, for those that truly desire personal freedom, what we have seen up till now is only the precursor of much worse to come.

          May G-d have mercy on us all.

        2. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Excellent post, ThomasR, and I don’t disagree.

  6. avatar Twistedwacko says:

    We’ve always had open carry here in AZ…. and nobody but the tourists care.

    1. avatar Vhyrus says:

      The tourists seem fascinated by it, especially the Canadian ones.

    2. avatar Bob108 says:

      You are telling me. Some tourists have fits, which is kind of fun to see. Arizonians will notice, perhaps mentally assess risks, and then go about their business. But then again, where I live there are the Arizonians who want to have friendly talks about guns. They want to talk about their last trip to the range, where is the best place to buy ammo, and what do you think of the Sig, Glock, XD, 1911, or whatever you happen to be wearing at the time. I prefer conceal carry in Arizona just so I can go about my business. It is so good to live in Arizona. 🙂

      1. avatar Gatha58 says:

        I love it. You carry concealed in AZ because you don’t have time to talk to all the tourists who want to ask you questions ? Makes sense to me.

  7. avatar Ralph says:

    There’s nothing as rewarding to my ears as the wailing and gnashing of teeth and the rending of skinny jeans and neck scarves by newspaper sob-sisters and high-estrogen male “reporters.”

    The more they cry, the more I smile.

  8. avatar Anon in CT says:

    Even if it were permitted, I would not OC on a NY Subway. I’m not saying it should be banned, but common sense certainly says it should not be done.

    1. avatar ThomasR says:

      Ahh, “Common Sense”. Those two words have become so overused and abused by the anti-freedom crowd, I get hives when I see it being used in a situation which is debatable. In my view, the anti-freedom crowd use this particular two words to attempt to close down debate about a debatable situation. I mean, if it’s “Common sense” then obviously, if you disagree with me, then you must be without “common sense”.

      So, I’ll use the same tactic. For me, it makes complete “common sense” to Open Carry in many if not most situations. Just in a crowded scenario like a subway, I would use a triple retention holster, probably as a shoulder holster to keep the gun more in front and up high. It really is not debatable.

    2. avatar Mike in NC says:

      My “common sense” tells me that riding the NY subway is the activity which should be avoided.

      1. avatar ThomasR says:

        LoL. Some time the “obviousness of the truth’ is obvious. That is common sense.

      2. avatar Anon in CT says:

        Well then have fun in traffic. While it could be cleaner, the Subway is cheap and efficient. It’s also pretty safe, though I’d still be happier with a G30S tucked into my waistband.

    3. avatar Cliff H says:

      Not that I can think of very many incentives that would convince me to go to New York City in the first place, much less ride the subways, but you would have a point only if you were the ONLY person open carrying on the train.

      If New York had reasonable allowance for exercise of 2A rights, including both open and concealed carry, the chances are there would be more than one good guy carrying on the same train as you, in which case the bad guys would have to factor in the possibility of being flanked if the messed with you about your pistol. Additionally, if they had to be concerned not only about one or more other OC people on the train they would have to consider that there could also be one or more concealed carriers as well. I think it would not take long before predation on New York subways would diminish to the point they could re-assign those transit cops to more productive work.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        @Cliff H: +1. I was going to post a similar comment.

        @Thread: IIRC, the case that sparked the early calls for concealed handgun licensing in Ohio was the court case of a private investigator who relocated from another state to Ohio. Once he held a license to ply his trade in Ohio, he would have had to open carry. This didn’t fit well with undercover work. Do armed private security and police officers open carry on the subway in NYC? One lone OCer might, or might not, be at greater risk but the mass effect coupled with the “who else is carrying concealed” question would lend to herd immunity.

    4. avatar Cicero Smith says:

      I live in NYC and would without question open carry on the subway if I could.

      What you define as common sense, someone else could just as easily define as nonsense.

  9. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    Gee….Texas is sure a gun friendly state. More myth, legends, and folklore.

  10. avatar stateisevil says:

    Atlanta, Detroit, and Seattle are little hamlets off the beaten path I guess.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      Lived in Seattle area before coming to Las Vegas last year (see post above). Seattle does not approve of Open Carry, law or no g-damn law, and will screw with you at every opportunity if you open carry in their city, up to and including official SPD policy of taking your weapon into “protective custody” while they try to find some reason to arrest you.

  11. avatar John in Ohio says:

    The Texas Tribune‘s table is incorrect about Ohio. It states that “License required from city police department to carry concealed handguns” and “License required from city police department to have loaded weapon in vehicle.” Ohio has preemption at the state level which means that cities cannot require such a thing. Granted, since we got saddled with CHL licensing in 2005 (many of us carried concealed without license just fine before the law), carrying a loaded handgun in or on (motorcycles and scooters but not bicycles or mopeds) a motorized vehicle requires a CHL. This is a state level law and cannot be made by cities.

  12. avatar Mike in NC says:

    I lived in Texas for 25 years and never heard of a “Texas Tribune.” At the time there were only four or five papers of importance: Houston Post (closed mid-90’s), Houston Chronicle, Dallas Morning News, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, and Austin American Statesman.

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      I’ve lived in Texas for 59 years, and hadn’t heard of the Texas Tribune until last year. I _had_ heard of The Texas Observer, a hopelessly left-wing rag that IIRC the hoplessly left-wing Jim Hightower ran. I’m wondering if The Texas Tribune is a successor.

    2. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      I’m in my fourth decade here and only first heard of the Texas Tribune this week. Someone at the Ted Cruz rally on Tuesday mentioned the Senator had just a few days prior done a really great sit down interview with a reporter of theirs. It’s posted on their website and it actually was an overall fair piece of journalism. Other than that, I have zero experience or awareness of the Texas Tribune. I don’t know where exactly it’s based or if it even has a print edition.

  13. avatar Jomotopia says:

    The list of restrictions in Atlanta, GA in the source article is incorrect. Technically school and college carry is legal according to the legislature but the Governor, AG, and Code Commission disagree. Also bars no longer require owner’s permission to carry and there is no law against consuming alcohol while carrying.

  14. Umm Detroit isn’t heavily regulated in OC, it’s legal without a permit for Anyone 18+ to carry any firearm they wish in town.

    Coincidentally, Detroit is the self defense capital of the country, averaging more than forty deaths resulting from self defense per year, that’s just the deaths not the total number of shootings and incidents.

  15. avatar Dennis says:

    Arnt the paddle on the paddle holsters suppose to be worn inside the pants?

  16. avatar JoeVK says:

    Yesterday at work (yes, I was stuck at work on Easter Sunday. I think atheists own the company I work for.), a guy came in and started BS-ing with a customer that I was talking to. They had apparently known each other for a long time and the BS started flowing so freely I thought I’d need hip waders. They eventually got on the subject of car dealerships trying to screw people over. The guy started complaining about how one screwed him over and claimed it made him so mad he wanted to shoot someone. As he said “shoot someone”, he pulled a Glock from the BACK POCKET OF HIS JEANS and pointed it at the customer’s side before turning it and pressing the side of the slide into the customers arm, muzzle pointed away from the counter. And yes, his finger was on the trigger the whole time. He then stuffed it into the other back pocket of his jeans and went back to talking as if nothing had happened. The customer seemed a little shocked by what he did, but smiled and said nothing as it happened. After the guy left, the customer and I resumed our conversation, and he still said nothing. I can’t believe the guy was so blatantly stupid.

    1. avatar Irish1776 says:

      A guy walked into your place of business and drew a firearm and pointed at your customer (with his finger on the trigger)… AND YOU DIDN’T SAY SOMETHING? Was there a point to this story?

  17. avatar James R says:

    I lived in Phoenix where lots of folks open carry. My GF was a 911 operator for Phoenix PD. She would receive almost daily (and daily in the winter) calls from out of state snowbirds about ” a man is walking down the street with a gun” Conversation usually went like this:

    Caller: “there is man walking down the sidewalk with a gun on his hip”
    GF: “is he waving it around or threatening anyone?”
    Caller: “no, its in a holster but I can SEE it”
    GF: “Ma’am (almost always women calling” that’s not illegal”
    Caller: “well it should be!”

  18. avatar John says:

    Is that a paddle holster being worn outside? Come on people!

  19. avatar Jared says:

    Philadelphia and Detroit do not have “restrictive laws”.

    Please do you research, you almost always drop the ball when you compare states Rob!

    Pennsylvania has preemption and their gun laws are much more liberal than those of Texas.

    Detroit has the same gun laws as the rest of Michigan.

    Texas is more gun friendly than Michigan, but not when it comes to open carry.

  20. avatar Highvoltage says:

    All of Michigan, including Detroit is shall issue concerning CPLs, and open carry is legal. Detroit is still mostly a hell hole, but at least the police chief advocated for the public to arm themselves, and aknowledged that the police cannot be everywhere they’re needed, when they’re needed. Most of the violence in that city and other like Flint, Pontiac, and Saginaw isn’t committed by the legal gun owner, but by the criminal scum that make those areas nearly uninhabitable.

  21. avatar DaveR says:

    Wearing a paddle holster incorrectly give me zero confidence in this guy’s knowledge of how to handle his firearms. An idiot with a gun is a part of the problem, not the solution.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Perhaps that’s what he had at the time. Idiots not minding their own business are more of a problem than anything else. Hope you don’t get a nosebleed up on that lofty equine.

      1. avatar Ted Unlis says:

        Does that include idiots like the Nutty Buckeye?

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Ah, my favorite stalker, Officer Teddy! Am I being detained? Am I free to go?

          Bless your little anti-liberty heart, Officer Ted. Goodnight. 🙂

        2. avatar Ted Unlis says:

          First John cried troll, now it’s stalker for opposition to the alternate reality of the open carry obsessed fringe, yet no mention of “shall not be infringed” or threats of armed insurrection. Too funny!

  22. avatar int19h says:

    >> Houston and Dallas would become the largest metropolitan areas in the nation to allow it. Among the top five metro areas by population, they would be the only two where handguns could be carried openly.

    You know what’s really funny? Houston and Dallas aren’t even in the top five metro areas by population.

    1. avatar Ted Unlis says:

      I’m afraid you mistaken int19h, perhaps you’re not familiar with the difference between a city population and city metro area population. Here’s the U.S. Census data for 2014 on U.S. Metropolitan Areas by Population:
      1. New York 20,092,883
      2. Los Angeles 13,262,220
      3. Chicago 9,554,598
      4. Dallas-Fort Worth 6,954,330
      5. Houston 6,490,180

  23. avatar Ted Unlis says:

    Once open carry becomes law in Texas this September, little will change. I suspect Texas will be much the same as Oklahoma where I’ve spent a great deal of time after their OC law passed in 2012, never seen anyone open carrying in OK City yet and less than half a dozen in rural areas, mostly during hunting season.
    I believe most folks in Texas will exercise common sense and opt for concealed carry even after open carry of handguns becomes legal.

    The big positive for those of us who actually carry concealed for defensive purposes is that armed dumbasses will be easy to spot when we encounter them in a public setting, even though they’ve always been out there, come September they will have the lawful ability to draw the attention they desire.

    The big negative is the possibility of more locations posting 30.06 signs banning firearms on their premises which effects lawful CHL holders who were quite content with the out of sight out of mind status quo.

    1. avatar Jeremy says:

      Well aren’t you just a biased, prejudicial, arrogant a$$hole. If one were inclined to believe that you know what you’re talking about (don’t worry, I doubt anyone here would make that mistake), then anyone who OC’s is stupid, and doing it solely for the purpose of attracting attention. How I love talking to people who wear their ignorance and prejudices on their sleeve! Ohio is an OC state, and I choose to carry openly, daily. I have two main reasons for my decisions, and despite the fact that you probably won’t grasp them, I’ll cast my pearls before the swine anyway on the hopes that you may have an “ah-ha” moment.
      1. Deterrence. Most criminals are cowards. If you look at where mass shootings have happened, a big common thread is these are places where they could reasonably assume no one else would be armed. They don’t want to get shot while shooting others. Knowing this, there is a fair assumption that a visibly armed citizen could act as a deterrent to a would be killer, in much the same way that a police officer present would. The argument that they would simply be the first one shot assumes the killer could calmly walk up to the armed citizen without looking fidgety, panicky or just plain “off”, draw, and shoot them from point blank range without any sort of reaction from the armed citizen. It would have to be done point blank, because the adrenaline dump that comes with real shooting makes accuracy, especially for someone untrained, rather difficult. The odds of the OC being killed, therefore, are pretty low, and the shooting would, once again, be mitigated by an openly armed citizen.
      2. Re-familiarizing citizens with peaceful guns. Many people only see guns one way. On the screen, being used to kill people. Usually lots of people. They are programmed to fear the presence of a gun, to assume that killing is about to happen. I carry so people can see someone going to the movies with his children, going out to eat, buying groceries, and that individual just happens to have a firearm on his side. It helps to foster a higher level of comfort around firearms if they see people with them regularly, and nothing bad happens because of their presence. Like the AZ citizens, I most frequently get stopped by people who are curious about OC’ing and my particular choice of firearm, and I’m happy to indulge them in Q & A, educating them on the law, requirements, etc, or even just a general firearm discussion. Positive interactions leads to more support for our side. I HAVE had a couple negative interactions with businesses, but both were based on fear, and lead to apologies from the businesses once things were straightened out. By keeping my cool, I improved their view of those who carry.

      So teddy, if you can hear me up there on your pedestal of ignorance and self-righteousness, I’d just like you to consider that everyone has their own reason for their personal choice of carry style, just as everyone has a preference on what firearm works best for them. Try to not be so judgmental and arrogant in the future.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email