|
|
Post by subdjoe on Sept 6, 2008 14:11:46 GMT -5
In case anyone cares to continue it.
JMO wrote in the previous thread:
"I don't know if open carry would work in CA anyway, too many gangs and the racial hate crimes would escalate for sure. "
"Racial hate crimes?" I would argue that ALL crimes are 'hate crimes.'
And, I would think that with honest citizens able to carry open or concealed (both have advantages and disadvantages) would be a deterent to crime. Works that way in the states where open carry is legal anyway. Same for the states with concealed carry. I will say that open carry may make one a target for thugs (even though there is no evidence that this happens in states that allow open carry). But, there are times when concealed just isn't practical. For instance, I'm a bit on the large side (fat) so concealed would be a bit difficult. But a high ride, on the belt holster works well. With a coat it is mostly hidden, but not within the legal requirement for concealed.
|
|
|
|
Post by surefire on Sept 6, 2008 15:43:28 GMT -5
I'm not against open carry, but I think it is a disadvantage. If a determined gang member sees that you have a weapon, that makes you the first target.
Also, I see no reason to scare the tar out of the everyday citizen that may be afraid of guns.
I would like to see CA make concealed carry "must issue" (I know it will never happen, with all the elitist extreme libs actually running the state).
I would support both concealed carry and open carry, but of the two I think concealed carry should be top priority.
I'm a VERY small person and can easily conceal a Glock 26(9mm), or Ruger SP 101 (.357 magnum) even with light clothing. If it is 100 degrees and concealing a subcompact doesn't work well due to light clothing, there are always mouse guns (.25 ACP pocket pistols) and rat guns (.32 ACP pocket pistols).
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Sept 6, 2008 16:00:47 GMT -5
Oh, I can CONCEAL one, no problem. The problem is ease of access. About the only real option for me would be small of the back carry. But that would mean having my shirt not tucked in, which looks sloppy. I guess I could have a waistcoat made with an inner pocket - since I usually wear one when I go out anyway.
I agree that open carry MAY make you a target. On the other hand, it may also act as a deterent. As I mentioned earlier, it doesn't seem to make people targets in the states where it is legal. It also has the advantage of ease of access.
Concealed takes you off the radar, but looses the deterent effect. And, there is the loss of easy access if TSHTF.
I do agree that we need to work towards making CA a must issue state. But it still galls me to no end to have to beg the state for a permit to exercise an enumerated right.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Sept 6, 2008 16:14:28 GMT -5
Unless and until...
** The gang issue is dealt with, and harshly at that,
** There is a profound shift in thinking toward the mere appearance of a firearm,
I do not see open carry in an urban setting as a viable alternative. So long as the defensive firearm is reasonably accessible... remembering that by resisting you have something of an advantage in that the bad guy typically isn't expecting it and quite often hasn't planned for it. If they plan for resistance, or no witnesses, then they just shoot first. Once it's past "first" you have options and with planning, awareness and execution, you can survive.
We have concealed carry in California already. We need to get it to "shall issue" under a single statewide standard that is not open to arbitrary or capricious dissembling by local CLEOs.
|
|
|
|
Post by surefire on Sept 6, 2008 16:25:45 GMT -5
Unless and until... ** The gang issue is dealt with, and harshly at that, ** There is a profound shift in thinking toward the mere appearance of a firearm, I do not see open carry in an urban setting as a viable alternative. So long as the defensive firearm is reasonably accessible... remembering that by resisting you have something of an advantage in that the bad guy typically isn't expecting it and quite often hasn't planned for it. If they plan for resistance, or no witnesses, then they just shoot first. Once it's past "first" you have options and with planning, awareness and execution, you can survive. We have concealed carry in California already. We need to get it to "shall issue" under a single statewide standard that is not open to arbitrary or capricious dissembling by local CLEOs. Good points, thebigdog One other thing to think about. Some nut can grab at an open carry pistol, and has a slight chance to use it against the carrier. Yes, I know one can get firearm retention training, but there is never a guarantee. When carried concealed, the bad guys are not going to know you're armed. |
|
Len
Apprentice Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by Len on Sept 6, 2008 17:16:12 GMT -5
A gun is an extension of one's hand. It is so easy to use one's hand to do anything. A LOT of training needs to be assured prior to allowing such.
Public & open carrying would bring out ALL the nuts for the first generation. After which Darwin's laws & courtesy would reign. But the mops would be continuously wet for years.
No, not in public, at least not in this state. Stupid is as stupid does.
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Sept 6, 2008 19:32:09 GMT -5
CA is technically a CCW state, but all the places that one would most likely need to carry are in de facto no issue counties, unless one is well connected or famous. I agree, we do need a uniform statewide must issue law. Even better would be to not have to beg permission from the state at all.
Len, I can't bring myself to agree with you that "Public & open carrying would bring out ALL the nuts..." yes, there would be a few. But I don't think it would be a huge problem. This is like the rants from Brady et al. about states becoming must issue states - blood running in the streets over parking spaces, etc. I think that the huge drop in crime that we would see would more than make up for any potential slight increase in accidental shootings by idiots who shouldn't be trusted with a fork, much less a gun.
|
|
|
|
Post by surefire on Sept 6, 2008 20:11:08 GMT -5
^I agree with subdjoe.
A shall-issue CCW law in CA will reduce violent crime (every victim may be armed from the perp's perspective), with only a slight increase in idiots abusing the priveledge.
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Sept 6, 2008 20:43:23 GMT -5
Surefire, that is "right" NOT "priveledge." In theory anyway. Since we have to beg the state for a permit to exercise it, I guess in a way it really is a priveledge.
Other states that have become shall issue in the past two decades seem to have had a decrease in both crime and firearm accidents. Familiarity helps prevent accidents.
|
|
|
|
Post by surefire on Sept 6, 2008 20:51:30 GMT -5
Surefire, that is "right" NOT "priveledge." In theory anyway. Since we have to beg the state for a permit to exercise it, I guess in a way it really is a priveledge. Other states that have become shall issue in the past two decades seem to have had a decrease in both crime and firearm accidents. Familiarity helps prevent accidents. Agreed. It should be "right". |
|
Len
Apprentice Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by Len on Sept 7, 2008 17:43:46 GMT -5
Well, Subjoe, technically I guess you are right! It would only be a few idiots for me as well. But their numbers would be large.
One game I like to play with "liberals" that mandate we are to be our brother's keeper and people are "basically nice": make a law that all cars carry shotguns. Repeal PC 187. Go for a drive.
Just a little hypothetical and fun to watch reactions.
As previously stated, there would be a period of adjustment with open carrying, and even CCW positioned appropriately even with mandated class at the level of basic PDs. It would pass but the media would excoriate the whole issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Sept 7, 2008 20:01:14 GMT -5
A gun is an extension of one's hand. It is so easy to use one's hand to do anything. A LOT of training needs to be assured prior to allowing such. Public & open carrying would bring out ALL the nuts for the first generation. After which Darwin's laws & courtesy would reign. But the mops would be continuously wet for years. No, not in public, at least not in this state. Stupid is as stupid does. Forty states with shall issue, no issue required and / or unlimited open carry all say you are utterly and completely wrong. Florida has had "shall issue" concealed carry since 1987. The hue and cry was that the streets would run red. They haven't. And the streets have not run red in any of the states where owning or using a firearm isn't looked upon by society as some type of social disease as it is here in California. Open carry is the norm in Arizona, among other places. Don't see anything in the news about dime store desperadoes shooting each other down in the streets there, do you? |
|
