I support our second amendment, but I am against people feeling empowered to carry their legally permitted weapons openly and here is why: many aren't trained to retain total control of their own weapons and there may come a time when somebody is able to grab it away from them and use it against innocent bystanders.
Americans are used to seeing police openly carrying firearms. But because they are uniformed and easily identifiable and their position in society still commands some level of respect from most of society, most would never dream of overpowering or subduing a police officer in an attempt to grab their weapon away from them and then use it against innocents.
Not so for some schlub picking his nose in a Def Leppard t-shirt, who may or may not have had the proper training in order to maintain control of their own weapon. Some crazy asshole may get it in his head that Mr. Nose Picker doesn't look all that tough and that he could probably wrest Mr. N. P.'s crappy little 9mm away from him and then use it to cause some righteous anarchy.
And that is it in a nutshell. Gun control in this case means maintaining control of who is in possession of ones own weapon. I am not convinced that the majority of Americans are wholly prepared to do exactly that, which is why I'd prefer that those who choose to carry a legally registered firearm keep it concealed.
-Laz
LA - Skateboarding, Googie, Bernie's, And More
19 hours ago
AWESOME.
ReplyDeleteLaz, I totally agree. Nice post.
ReplyDeleteI disagree 100% with this post. Here is a copy of mainsails "open carry" argument. He also makes some very good points.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.usacarry.com/forums/open-carry-discussion/7230-open-carry-argument.html
1. Regardless of how skilled you are at drawing your weapon, you are going to lose.
2. My probability of being a victim of a crime, violent or otherwise, is completely unchanged by the fact that I have hidden beneath my shirt the means to defend myself. The goal is not to be a victim in the first place, remember? I don't want to be a victim that fought back successfully and triumphed; I prefer to not be victimized at all. By making it clear and obvious that I am armed, that I have teeth, I tip the risk scale to the point that the criminal’s gains are far outweighed by the risk.
3. Like the first one shot in a robbery, argument, there is no credible evidence it happens. It also blindly ignores the more obvious fact that anything you possess can make you the target of a crime, be it a car, a watch, or even a female companion (girlfriend, wife, or daughter).
I say no, read mainsail's entire dissertation and then post a logical argument rather than an emotional one.
I was shocked to hear of the people who believe they not only have the right to an open carry of a firearm but the need to do so. They want to be able to carry them into bars, restaurants, hospitals, schools, etc. I thought I was losing my mind when I heard people talking about "losing their freedom and 2nd amendment rights" when they wanted to carry firearms into Town Hall meetings, presidential debates and the like. What is going on in this world where people feel the need to arm themselves openly? There are far too many hotheads at meetings and debates to even think about allowing any type of weapons. Why allow people to carry an open weapon into a bar? Alcohol and firearms don't mix. Is this considered normal in Alaska?
ReplyDelete@Anon -- so you agree. I didn't say anything about NOT being able to carry. I pretty much said it offends me that people feel the need to open carry. It's the 21st century for chritsakes. Not Dodge City. People used to wear codpieces, too. Which isn't fashionable any longer either, though it is doubtful that other people could get injured if one improperly wielded a codpiece.
ReplyDeleteThe other 'logical' position taken was that most (let's say 99.9%) don't have the training to be able to safely carry firearms so that innocent people do not get hurt if they decide to use them to defend themselves. I stand by that point of argument.
And I say next time sign in as yourself, Darcie Salmon. I can tell who you are by the way you've written to me on facebook. Attempting to add commentary of any significance to a discourse while anonymous on the internet is 'illogical'.
-Laz
(and yes I am self aware enough to understand the irony of posting this under a pseudonym, but people who know me know that this is just a long time internet nickname, not an attempt to obfuscate identity)
Look Randy, I understand completely what you are saying about open carry. This is not the wild west of years gone by, however, open carry Keeps situations from starting. That is why cops openly wear weapons. It works. Open carry is legal in some states and is rarely ever used. It is not prudent to carry an open weapon in most situations and people know this. It is rarely done in the state of Arizona, but you so see it from time to time. I understand your point of "nose picker" getting his weapon taken from him, it is a very real concern, I was a cop in the military and was astounded to hear the figures on how many cops are killed each year with their own weapons. The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. These are strong words and made strong for a reason. I don't believe they wanted people walking around town brandishing the weapons of the time in 1776 Boston or Philly either, but understood that freedom to bear was better than the alternative. Incremental gun banning is a reality. Giving it legs will seal the fate of all gun owners and those who believe in the right. I don't wish to give an inch more on any gun issue. leave it where it is. it has been infringed enough.
ReplyDeleteNO. 18,19,20 year olds cant have concealed carry, but they can have open carry, they can even have open carry oy a handgun. They can have a hand gun with parentol concent. I'v met people in the age range of 18-20 who are more mature than some people 21+. So hears my thought.....If a 18 yearold can go to war, why cant he/she have a concealed carry? So if they can buy a hand gun with parental concent and can pass a backround check like everyone else then why cant the GOV. change the law and inable a 18-20 yearold to buy a hand gun. It doesent help the lawabiding to pass more gun laws. If a criminal wants a gun they will git a gun, thats thy they are called CRIMINALS. Passing more gun laws hinders the lawabiding and gives moer freedom to the lawless.
ReplyDelete