Open Carry?

[C-dub]

There will certainly be people that would OC just because, but most everyone one else who would actually OC are probably only going to do so because of comfort. It will either be too hot to wear a cover garment or inappropriate for the occasion. Although, I'm wondering what occasion would it be inappropriate to wear a cover garment, but acceptable to wear a sidearm.

I've been through a couple of OC states, but have yet to try OC myself.

[57Coastie]

While digging up the skinny on gun carry in Alabama, I came across this. It echos a consistent thread among the few cops I talk to that open carry in public is undesirable for tactical reasons. I thought this guy said it pretty well:

My take on it is if you are a law abiding citizen and interested in protecting yourself, your family, or whomever you feel the need to protect, why not carry concealed? Why do you feel the need to carry open? Is it just because you can?
Like has been stated, in this day and age, if you open carry without a law enforcement badge or ID on your hip next to your firearm, you are going to get a hard look and alot of scrutiny from just about everyone, including me. Rest assured you will get stopped, likely at gunpoint, by some LEO's who don't want to take a chance when conducting a field interview with you on why you have a weapon displayed on your hip. I don't know you from Adam, and you might be a great and law abiding person, but I am not about to approach you with a weapon displayed without taking every precaution I can take. I feel safe to say most, if not all cops will agree with me on that.
The ONLY time I carry open is while I am on duty and that is because I am a Detective and have to. When I am off duty, the last thing I want to do is wear a firearm open on my hip and draw unwanted attention. Plus, your chances of surprising a bad guy in the event you need to draw your weapon are much greater if you carry concealed.
Trust me on this, it may be legal for you to do so, but carrying open and not being a LEO is going to be MUCH greater trouble than you will want to deal with.

http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93368" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Absolutely right, casingpoint.

Occasionally I try to inject a little humor on the forum, but this one is not funny.

On another thread somewhere I observed that I was a federal LEO for more than 20 years, authorized by federal statute to carry in or out of uniform, and I never carried openly while out of uniform during all those years.

Through my experience I am convinced that your Alabama source was quite correct when he suggests that those civilians wanting to open carry want to do it "just because they can," a macho thing -- "look at me!!" -- and in the process this would counterproductively increase the risk of a bad event.

I cannot close without observing that if anyone out there thinks I am one of those "antigun types" they can think again. If anyone should question this statement, you can ask either Seamus or El Gato, the only forum members that, to my knowledge, I know personally.

Irresponsible suggestions by gun owners and users are a major reason we have those "antigun types" out there.

Respectfully,

Jim

[Dragonfighter]

I can think of a few occasions and situations where OC would be appropriate if not preferable. If they pass OC however, I want the option to carry concealed left intact. I am one that does not care for the BG knowing my carry status.

[57Coastie]

I can think of a few occasions and situations where OC would be appropriate if not preferable. If they pass OC however, I want the option to carry concealed left intact. I am one that does not care for the BG knowing my carry status.

That is true, Dragonfighter, and your sensible comment makes me recall such circumstances, and I am compelled to admit that, to use a Washington expression, I "misspoke" in my earlier post. A classic example of my overstating a case.

I did indeed open carry on occasion when out of uniform -- while hiking in Alaska in rough heavily-treed brownie country, as did anyone having good sense. One never could be sure just what might be around the corner.

Jim

[lil red]

There are times it would be nice not being in the closet. If people can openly support Obama, why can't we open carry?

[Oldgringo]

Here we go again...

I have no interest whatsoever in displaying my weapon; except, on the range, in private, etc. OR when needed.

I think it's best for the populace to wonder if the steely-eyed old blond guy (across the room, restaurant, store, parking lot, plaza, etc.), with the rugged Sam Elliot good looks, who is eyeballin' me and everybody else is armed?

[srothstein]

Casingpoint,

I have to disagree with the officer in your post for two reasons. First and foremost, is that I strongly support the right of the people to carry, openly or concealed. It really does not make any difference to me. If we had a law allowing open carry, I would not be stopping people to check them out just because they had a gun. That poster was correct that in today's society, carrying openly would get a person a lot of comments, calls to the police, and stops - possibly at gunpoint. But that is not right if the state allows open carry. That is what we should be working to change.

Secondly, and much more importantly, this attitude reveals a significant problem in today's police. They WANT to be the nanny and decide what is right or wrong, who can defend themselves, etc. They think they know better than you. If the law allows open carry, there is absolutely no reason a police officer should be stopping the person to check if he is a criminal. As a matter of fact, the conclusion the officer should draw is that he is a law-abiding citizen since he is not breaking the law. I will freely admit that I am in the minority on the theory of cops defending people's rights and not stopping people who are not clearly breaking the law, but that IS what we should be working for. And we should all be supporting those who want to open carry, just because they can. If it is within the law, we should all get upset when they get stopped and harassed. The only way I can protect my rights is to yell and scream when their rights are violated, regardless of whether or not I agree with what they happened to be doing at the time.

[Sangiovese]

Casingpoint,

I have to disagree with the officer in your post for two reasons. First and foremost, is that I strongly support the right of the people to carry, openly or concealed. It really does not make any difference to me. If we had a law allowing open carry, I would not be stopping people to check them out just because they had a gun. That poster was correct that in today's society, carrying openly would get a person a lot of comments, calls to the police, and stops - possibly at gunpoint. But that is not right if the state allows open carry. That is what we should be working to change.

Secondly, and much more importantly, this attitude reveals a significant problem in today's police. They WANT to be the nanny and decide what is right or wrong, who can defend themselves, etc. They think they know better than you. If the law allows open carry, there is absolutely no reason a police officer should be stopping the person to check if he is a criminal. As a matter of fact, the conclusion the officer should draw is that he is a law-abiding citizen since he is not breaking the law. I will freely admit that I am in the minority on the theory of cops defending people's rights and not stopping people who are not clearly breaking the law, but that IS what we should be working for. And we should all be supporting those who want to open carry, just because they can. If it is within the law, we should all get upset when they get stopped and harassed. The only way I can protect my rights is to yell and scream when their rights are violated, regardless of whether or not I agree with what they happened to be doing at the time.

I completely agree with this.

If open carry was legal, then what reason would the officer have to "check you out?" In my book, probable cause still applies. You could play the "safety" card because an armed person obviously has the capability to seriously injure someone... but so does a guy with a 2" lockblade on his belt. Or a plumber carrying a wrench. Or a lady with a baseball bat. Or a <insert one of a thousand other people here>. Is the cop who made that post going to "check out" each of them... at gunpoint?

I think that a cop who is only on guard when he can see a weapon is a cop who is going to find himself way behind the curve if he ever comes across someone who is willing to use deadly force against him.

Personally, I have no desire to open carry. I would not do it even if it were legal. But that doesn't mean that people who choose to exercise that right where it is available deserve to be hassled for exercising that right.

[flintknapper]

Casingpoint,

I have to disagree with the officer in your post for two reasons. First and foremost, is that I strongly support the right of the people to carry, openly or concealed. It really does not make any difference to me. If we had a law allowing open carry, I would not be stopping people to check them out just because they had a gun. That poster was correct that in today's society, carrying openly would get a person a lot of comments, calls to the police, and stops - possibly at gunpoint. But that is not right if the state allows open carry. That is what we should be working to change.

Secondly, and much more importantly, this attitude reveals a significant problem in today's police. They WANT to be the nanny and decide what is right or wrong, who can defend themselves, etc. They think they know better than you. If the law allows open carry, there is absolutely no reason a police officer should be stopping the person to check if he is a criminal. As a matter of fact, the conclusion the officer should draw is that he is a law-abiding citizen since he is not breaking the law. I will freely admit that I am in the minority on the theory of cops defending people's rights and not stopping people who are not clearly breaking the law, but that IS what we should be working for. And we should all be supporting those who want to open carry, just because they can. If it is within the law, we should all get upset when they get stopped and harassed. The only way I can protect my rights is to yell and scream when their rights are violated, regardless of whether or not I agree with what they happened to be doing at the time.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

EXCELLENT!

[blue]

x2 EXCELLENT! Srothstein is REALLY ON TARGET!

Blue

[lil red]

Freedom is scary for some people.

[Conagher]

Thank you srothstein for taking a stance against this authoritative elitism. I am saddened at the obvious reality, even on this forum that the liberalization of our great national has neutered our American independence. But to realize the pacification is so extensive that one could agree, much less support such irrational behaviour from one who is sworn to “protect and serve” is almost incomprehensible.

"Trust me on this, it may be legal for you to do so, but carrying open and not being a LEO is going to be MUCH greater trouble than you will want to deal with."

IMHO, any one who is not totally outraged at such an oppressive sentiment has either a complete disregard, or a perverted misunderstanding of the principles of our founding fathers and the premise on which this country was founded.

[Purplehood]

Current generations of Americans have been brought up to consider the existing restrictions the norm and with the vast majority being ignorant of our past, have no problem with it.

[joe817]

Current generations of Americans have been brought up to consider the existing restrictions the norm and with the vast majority being ignorant of our past, have no problem with it.

Very well put Purplehood! I totally agree.

[frazzled]

There are times it would be nice not being in the closet. If people can openly support Obama, why can't we open carry?

Because its not 1878 on the open range any more?