Kory Watkins, head of Open Carry Tarrant County. Associated Press photo
Back in the 80’s I was a big fan of the comic strip Bloom County. In one of the comic’s subplots the main character Opus the penguin, on a quest to find his mother, finally tracks her down at a Mary Kay Makeup animal testing facility. Just as he’s about to rescue her, the “Mary Kay Commandos”, old ladies with caked-on makeup and pink Uzis, arrive and order the animals back into their cages. Seconds later, the eco-terrorist Animal Liberation Guerilla Front bursts in to free the animals. Caught in the crossfire, Opus makes an observation.
“Saved from sadists by terrorists. Sort of a dream come true, you know?”
Yes, Opus, I know the feeling. Because I and my fellow reasonable gun owners are being saved from “tyrants” by open-carry douchebags.
On Tuesday, January 12th, Kory Watkins and his group Open Carry Tarrant County (OCTC) held a rally at the Texas Capital and won yet another victory for gun rights. By “won another victory”, I mean they acted like the complete fanatic morons they truly are and gave the anti-gun side yet more reason to attack gun rights and gun owners.
During the rally, OCTC members visited the office of state representative Poncho Nevarez (D – Eagle Pass). One of them videotaped the visit. The video shows an OCTC member asking Nevarez to support open carry of pistols in Texas. Nevarez politely says he’s not going to vote for it. The man shakes Nevarez’s hand and curtly but politely thanks him for his time. So far so good.
But then Watkins and his fellow traveling clowns decided to let their inner douchebag show.
OCTC members began calling Nevarez a “tyrant”, exhorted him to “read the Constitution” and told him “you won’t be here long.” Nevarez played along with it for a while – nodding and saying “I’m a tyrant, I won’t be here long” – then got fed up and ordered the open carriers to leave his office. The open carriers took this as a Batman symbol in the clouds ordering them to be the biggest flaming a**holes they could be.
One of them responded to the order to leave the office with “This is the people’s office!” Another told Nevarez “Don’t touch me” when Nevarez apparently tried to lead him to the door. After Nevarez said “I’m asking you to leave my office,” the man responded “I’m asking you to leave my state because you don’t take your oath seriously.” As they were leaving one even stuck his foot in the doorway, then asked “What are you gonna do?” when Nevarez told him to move his foot. He then challenged someone in the hallway.
Open carrier: “What are you gonna do, touch me or something? You creeping up behind me?”
The man says he’s not.
Open carrier: “That’d be one wrong move, bro.”
Courageous Open Carry warriors at the Austin rally
The end result of OCTC’s brave demonstration was a new form of gun FREEEEEDOMMMMMM!!!, in the form of “panic buttons” about to be installed in state representatives’ offices.
But that’s not all our brave open carriers nationwide have done.
Since that victory in my beloved Great State of Texas, open carriers in Washington State decided to spread some FREEEDOMMM!!! up there as well. On Thursday January 15th a band of brave open carriers went into the Capitol building’s public gallery during a protest. One of them was carrying his AR-15 pistol in this totally non-threatening way:
Washington State Open Carrier. AP Photo by Ted S. Warren
A police officer unreasonably told the open carrier he was carrying his weapon in a “tactical manner”, which is against state law. The OCer was in fact carrying in a tactical manner. But the police officer was being unreasonable by pointing out something that was obviously true. OCers don’t like people who unreasonably point out obvious truths (i.e., “If you carry an SKS into Chipotle to buy a burrito you’re a f**king idiot”).
The police officer threatened to eject and/or arrest the OCer, who eventually concealed his pistol and left. Open Carry extremists had won yet another victory. This victory consisted of guns being banned from the Capitol’s public gallery.
These are just two more great victories for gun rights, won by intrepid Open Carry extremists who bravely carry weapons in places where there is exactly zero threat to their safety and who convince businesses and local governments to ban guns from their premises. After previous Open Carry Mass Stupidity/”gun rights demonstrations”, Target, Sonic, Chipotle, Chili’s, Starbucks and other companies either banned weapons or asked people not to carry in their stores.
Every one of those bans was a victory. Right?
Now, I know what you’re thinking: “Of course the best way to win political support is to harass, intimidate, threaten, bully and throw a tantrum like a spoiled brat when you don’t get your way! Way to go, open carriers!” And who could argue with that?
Actually, I can.
I’m a staunch 2nd Amendment advocate. I’ve been shooting and collecting guns for over thirty years. I’ve carried a weapon as a Marine and Soldier for a quarter century, including in combat. I’ve carried a weapon as a cop for two decades. I’ve taught friends and family to shoot. I’ve written about the foundations of the 2nd Amendment, and its modern relevance. I’ve passionately advocated for keeping private citizens armed. I own many weapons and have fired tens of thousands of rounds in military and civilian life, from .22 pistols to an M1 Abrams’ 120mm main gun. I love the 2nd Amendment.
And I think Open Carry extremists are doing nothing but damage to the 2nd Amendment cause.
To any OCers reading this: this ain’t no tyranny. You can own tons of guns, including military weapons suitable for resisting government forces. You can criticize anything you want in public or online. You can travel as you wish. You can spout ridiculous, nonsensical accusations (“The Sandy Hook Massacre was faked by the government! The Boston Bombing was a false flag operation!”). And until you idiots f**ked it up, you could have carried a weapon into Washington’s state capitol.
That’s not tyranny. That’s life in free-as-hell America. You think this is tyranny, try walking into a restaurant with an AK in some of the places I’ve served. Around two seconds after walking in, right around the time you’d get shot, you’d probably realize America isn’t such a dictatorship after all.
I’ve asked this before, and I’ll ask again: please, open carriers, stop “defending my rights”. You’re making things worse. People look at regular-guy gun owners like me, and they see you. You’re convincing the undecided that gun owners are heavily armed, crazed bullies. Even CJ Grisham, the not-so-moderate head of Open Carry Texas, calls you OCTC members “A malignant cancer for the gun rights movement”.
I personally would put you OCTC members above Moms Demand Action and Bloomberg as enemies of the 2nd Amendment. Why? Because MDA and Bloomberg are pathetically ineffective at getting guns banned. You open carry clowns are effective. You’re succeeding where the professional anti-gun agitators fail.
It should be kind of a clue that much of the pro-2A movement thinks you guys are being paid by the anti-gun side to make us look bad. I don’t believe that. But I do believe something worse.
You guys actually believe so strongly in your holy cause, you don’t care how much damage you’re doing to your own side. You’re the suicide bombers of the gun rights movement, happy to indiscriminately destroy anyone, on either side, who doesn’t live up to your standards of what a true 2A believer should be. Like all zealots everywhere, you’ll do whatever makes you the hero of your own little drama, without regard for the negative effects on others.
If you ever did rise up and overthrow “tyranny”, I’m sure whatever you put in its place would be worse. Passionate zealots tend to have little regard for the lives of those less passionate than them. You already view everyone who doesn’t agree with you as enemies or “sheeple”. Based on the veiled threats and petty intimidation you regularly practice, I’d expect you guys to be the real tyrants.
You don’t represent me. You don’t speak for me. I don’t want your help.
At least one other gun rights advocate partly agrees. Alan Gottlieb, head of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, based in Washington State, said this of Thursday’s confrontation.
“This is the result of a few stupid extremists on our side who not only handled their firearms unsafely, but made the hundreds of Second Amendment supporters at the rally look foolish. Irresponsible actions get us bad results. Unfortunately, some of the fools in town are on our side. This kind of childish theater hurts our cause. The gun ban crowd is having a field day over this.”
The gun ban crowd is having a field day because every time they think they’re losing, Kory Watkins and his circus sideshow give them a neverending belt of anti-gun ammo to use against us.
If Kory and his lackeys read this, I have no doubt they’ll dismiss it with “This guy’s not a real 2nd Amendment supporter! He’s hurting gun rights, not us! We should carry rifles into even more places, and create even more enemies, and get guns banned from even more places! That’s what real gun rights supporters do!” And they’ll do it. They’ll do more damage, cause more harm, and pat themselves on the back for it. That’s what mindless zealots do.
But what should OCTC do instead? Shut up, put the guns away, and disappear forever. That’s the best thing they could possibly do to support gun rights.
Because there’s no tyranny here. And even if there was, I wouldn’t want OCTC douchebags “saving” me from it.
Chris Hernandez is a 20 year police officer, former Marine and currently serving National Guard soldier with over 25 years of military service. He is a combat veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan and also served 18 months as a United Nations police officer in Kosovo. He writes for BreachBangClear.com and Iron Mike magazine and has published two military fiction novels, Proof of Our Resolve and Line in the Valley, through Tactical16 Publishing. He can be reached at [email protected] or on his Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/ProofofOurResolve).
]]>But then open carriers go and screw things up.
Photo credit thetruthaboutguns.com
At last count several large corporations including Starbucks, Sonic, Chipotle and now Target have at least asked OCers to stop open carrying at their businesses. I’d guess they did this because OCers were driving customers away. The businesses’ request, of course, drove some pro-2A people nuts. These businesses have all been accused of being “anti-gun”. In reality, they just want to sell stuff. On their private property. You know, in accordance with their right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. They aren’t required to take sides in a fight they never wanted to be involved in. They should be left out of this.
But instead of leaving the uninterested out of the debate, open carriers have apparently adopted a policy of forcing people to take sides. They do this by flaunting their right to open carry, carrying specifically to provoke a reaction, carrying for no logical reason in really stupid places, and basically making asses of themselves. Then they take pictures of themselves proudly “defending our gun rights”.
Really, who wouldn’t feel comfortable walking into Chipotle’s with this gaggle of freedom-lovers hanging around outside? It’s not like any of them are CARRYING THEIR F’KIN’ WEAPON AT PORT ARMS, which has been taught as a combat-ready position for decades. And just look! None of them, NONE, have their weapon slung in front, which is where we soldiers carry our carbines on patrol so WE CAN QUICKLY RAISE THEM TO SHOOT PEOPLE IN THE FACE.
This has been explained by other writers already, but it’s worth repeating: if someone is carrying a weapon at port arms or low ready, it’s no different than walking around with a pistol out of the holster in a combat grip. Professionals carry their long guns in front when they’re prepared for imminent contact. When I was overseas and outside the wire, my weapon was either in my hands or hanging on my chest. You know, the way OCers carry their weapons inside coffee shops.
Statesman.com
Now, I’m going to do a little compare and contrast. Take another look at the totally non-threatening latte buyer above. Note how his weapon hangs by the sling on his chest. If I ever have a chance to ask him, I’m sure he’ll say nothing in the manner of his open carry suggests he’s a threat.
Now, check out this guy:
US Army photo
Notice that he’s carrying his weapon in pretty much the same manner as the latte buyer. But he is, in fact, one hell of a threat. Because the soldier, probably unlike the coffee shop customer, has been trained how to quickly raise his weapon and engage. The soldier carries his weapon up front specifically so he can shoot people with it. The fact that the open carrier apparently doesn’t know that he’s carrying his weapon in a combat-ready manner kinda suggests he shouldn’t be carrying it in a coffee shop.
And then there are guys like these flaming morons, wandering the streets with AR-15s that they can probably barely operate. And intentionally walking past a police station. While talking like rappers. And bragging about their right to open carry. Just to get attention.
But you know what’s even sadder than that? When you realize that those ridiculous open carry bozos were actually safer and less threatening than the coffee shop guy.
Now, let’s say I’m in Home Depot. I carry a concealed pistol every day. I’m with my wife and kids looking at appliances. We turn the corner to another aisle. And I see this guy, carrying an AK with his hand on the grip and finger just outside the trigger guard.
Photo credit nationalmemo.com
I now have a decision to make. Is this an open carrier demonstrating in support of a right, that we already have, by walking around Home Depot completely oblivious to the fact that he’s carrying his weapon ready for action? Or is it an aspiring active shooter who just ditched his trenchcoat to expose his weapon? Might I be forgiven for not realizing that he (supposedly) doesn’t intend to appear threatening, and that he’s just clueless?
Many of us pro-2A people carry a gun just in case we run into some murderous nutcase wandering around a business with an AK ready to open fire. Then we encounter “gun rights activists” wandering around businesses carrying AKs ready to open fire. But the gun rights activists are supposedly on our side. And we’re supposed to be able to quickly tell the difference between the two. At least one open carrier in Georgia couldn’t tell the difference, and drew on another open carrier recently (http://www.valdostadailytimes.com/todays-top-stories/x1736693358/First-day-of-new-gun-law-leads-to-arrest).
Here’s another example. How do these guys, especially the woman carrying with both hands on her weapon, not know they’re carrying in a threatening manner?
——–
EDIT: I had to remove this image because I inadvertently attributed it to the wrong source. The picture is originally from the Detroit News (who charges for its use), and can be seen here: http://www.colorsmagazine.com/stories/magazine/88/story/us-gun-owners-want-the-right-to-order-caramel-frappuccinos-while-fully-arme
——
Could it be… gosh… maybe they’re not the highly trained master gunfighters some of them imagine themselves to be?
Call me crazy, but I feel one of my responsibilities as a gun rights advocate is to show people that gun owners are reasonable, responsible people who aren’t a threat to the innocent. If I were to, say, walk into Chipotle carrying an AK at the combat ready, I’m pretty sure I’d accomplish the exact opposite. And I really couldn’t blame regular Joe for being afraid of me. Think about it, guys. If a cop walks into Chipotle with a rifle, people will get scared. If a soldier walks into Chipotle with a rifle, people will get scared. If some unknown guy walks into Chipotle with a rifle, especially if he’s carrying it at the combat ready, people are going to get scared. In America, carrying a rifle into a restaurant isn’t a normal act. Right or wrong, it scares people. And you won’t make people less scared of guns by intentionally scaring them with guns.
At this point, I’m sure open carriers will call me “Hoplophobe! Anti-gunner!” or whatever else helps their “You’re either one of us or one of the enemy” mindset. My response is, “Sure, whatever.” I’m 100% pro-2nd Amendment. In fact, I actually support the legal right to open carry in private businesses. I support it the same way I support the Westboro Baptist Church’s right to protest at soldiers’ funerals. I consider both acts to be the height of stupidity. I think the WBC and open carriers are only harming their own cause. Both acts are moronic. But this is America, and people have a right to be morons.
Peaceful open carry rallies where gun owners safely carry long guns slung across their backs on public land? I’m down with that. Blatantly ridiculous, orchestrated confrontations where open carriers walk into private businesses with rifles at the combat ready, just to piss people off, knowing that all they’ll do is create more enemies? No thanks.
So please, open carriers, stop “defending my rights”. Just stop. You’re not helping. You’re not creating friends. You’re not “proving how important it is to exercise our rights.” You also have a right to wander the streets dressed in drag; do you exercise that right? And you’re not “getting people used to open carry.” For years, the Westboro Baptist Church has angered people by protesting at funerals. America hasn’t gotten used to it. We grudgingly tolerate it because it’s legal, but pretty much everybody hopes the WBC picks the wrong funeral and gets beaten senseless. America will never say, “The Westboro Baptist Church? What a great group of guys!” And you open carriers will never NOT provoke a reaction by carrying an AR-15 inside Chipotle.
But maybe, if you keep doing this stupid crap, you’ll turn more gun-neutral people into anti-gun people. Once you create enough enemies, you’ll finally hit the critical mass that gets new gun control laws passed. When that happens, I won’t just blame those anti-gun people. I’ll blame YOU.
ADDED 7/9/2014: I just ran across this video. I don’t know anything about this guy’s background, but he makes a lot of good points.
Chris Hernandez is a 20 year police officer, former Marine and currently serving National Guard soldier with over 25 years of military service. He is a combat veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan and also served 18 months as a United Nations police officer in Kosovo. He writes for BreachBangClear.com, Iron Mike magazine and has published two military fiction novels, Proof of Our Resolve and Line in the Valley, through Tactical16 Publishing. He can be reached at [email protected] or on his Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/ProofofOurResolve).
]]>
Photo credit news.yahoo.com
I’m not a fan of openly carrying a pistol.
Before you accuse me of being an “anti-gunner” or liberal activist, you should know I’m about as pro-2nd Amendment as they come. I’m a 20 year cop, 25 year Marine and Soldier who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, and am 100% supportive of armed citizens. I’ve written extensively on the importance and need for the 2nd Amendment, and effectiveness of armed citizens against a variety of threats.
Having said that, I think open carry is a bad idea.
No, I’m not saying everyone who open carries is a bad guy. Nor am I saying there’s never a good time and place for open carry. Several people have told me success stories about open carry, and I believe them. But hear me out on this. As a cop I’ve carried a gun on and off duty for decades, and have a pretty good grasp on the factors involved with being armed in public. So I’m going to lay out my reasons why people shouldn’t, generally speaking, open carry a pistol.
1) OPEN CARRY MAKES WEAPON RETENTION HARDER
I started as a cop in 1994, not long after police went through a collective “holy cow” realization about how many officers were killed with either their own or their partner’s gun. For decades cops were more concerned with a fast draw than a secure holster, and as a consequence lots of cops were disarmed and killed. Around the early 90’s equipment companies started pushing security holsters, and police academies started training harder on weapon retention techniques. The number of officers killed with their own weapons fell sharply. In my first years on the street, I was in a couple of chaotic fights where the suspect apparently unsnapped my holster without me realizing it, but couldn’t get my weapon.
Fast forward a few years to 2001. I was a UN police officer in Kosovo, working with officers from 54 countries plus the local cops. In my unit we had officers from America, the UK, Greece, Germany and a few other places. I bought my own security holster, but our Greek cop carried his pistol in a really slick, not very secure quick-draw holster. He sold those holsters to several local officers, over my objections.
One afternoon we were in the office before shift. One of the locals had his Glock in the Greek speed holster. As the local officer conversed with coworkers, I walked up behind him, slapped the holster snap with my left hand and yanked his pistol out with my right. He spun around in shock. I handed his pistol back and told him, “that’s why you shouldn’t use those piece-of-crap holsters.”
Then I felt a tug on my weapon. I turned around. The Greek officer had seen me disarm his customer, got angry, and tried to do the same thing to me. But he didn’t know the sequence of movements necessary to remove my weapon. My gun was still secure in the holster.
So what does this have to do with open carry?
The average non-LE belt holster has, at best, a single snap. Many holsters rely on only friction and a tight fit to keep the weapon in place. For a concealed weapon, that’s generally regarded as an acceptable risk; it’s hard for someone to go for my gun when they have no idea it’s there. But if you’re walking around with an exposed weapon in a typical holster, especially in a crowd, you’re at risk of being quickly disarmed.
Photo credit breitbart.com
If you’re willing to spend the extra money on a security holster (they’re not cheap), and willing to put up with the extra bulk (they’re not small), then I’m a little more with you on open carry. But if you think, “I’m going to be so alert all the time, nobody could possibly disarm me,” you’re wrong. Nobody is switched on 24/7. We all get tired sometimes, we all get lazy, we all get complacent. We can all be overpowered by someone bigger and stronger. If you’re open carrying with a regular holster, you can be disarmed, period.
EDITED TO ADD: A reader shared this video in the comments.
This wasn’t a holster issue, but it illustrates an important fact. Not every criminal is afraid of a gun. If you open carry, you may just make yourself a target.
2) IT’S BETTER TO BE THE AMBUSHER THAN THE AMBUSHED
When I’m in public, I don’t advertise that I’m armed. I don’t wear anything that says police, I rarely wear anything related to the military. One of my goals is to be the “grey man”, the guy nobody notices. Cops or military guys may pick up on clues and ping me as one of their own, but almost nobody else will. And that’s a good thing.
If I’m ever unfortunate enough to find myself in the middle of a crime in progress, I doubt the criminal will immediately ID me as the guy who needs to be shot first. I won’t wear tactical pants (anymore), or t-shirts with huge Glock or Colt symbols, or anything else that screams “I’m probably armed”. Instead, I’ll be just another face in the gas station, bank, mall or theater. In most cases, this gives me a distinct advantage.
Criminals get tunnel vision just like everyone else. Watch videos of convenience store robberies; you rarely see a robber watching his back, or securing customers. Most robbers quickly scan their surroundings for cops or other immediate threats, go to the counter, produce the gun, get what they want and run. If I’m regular Joe in the background, I can draw and make my move when I have the element of surprise.
If I don’t think the robber is going to hurt anyone and I don’t want to risk opening fire around innocent bystanders, my “move” may be to be a good witness. But if the robber is threatening enough or starts shooting at the clerk, I can engage him from an advantageous position, like right behind him. There’s nothing immoral about shooting a bad guy in the back.
If the worst ever happens, and I wind up in the middle of a robbery while my wife and kids are with me and I have no choice but to fire, I’d much rather be involved in a “shooting” than a “shootout”. Ideally, the robber will figure out I’m armed right after he yells “Ow, something bit me!” like Forrest Gump and falls to the floor with multiple gunshot wounds. That’s a much better outcome than having the robber walk in, see me openly carrying, and shoot at me first.
EDITED TO ADD: These two videos give examples of what I mean.
If you’re in a place targeted by a criminal, carrying concealed could give you an extremely important advantage.
3) OPEN CARRY ATTRACTS A LOT OF ATTENTION
This is one of the more contentious points about open carry. The anti-gun side thinks anyone who open carries wants to scare and intimidate people. Even if the open carrier is doing nothing threatening, doesn’t say anything and behaves in a totally benign manner, people around might still freak out. Earlier this week I wrote about the recent incident in Forsyth County, Georgia, where a man was legally open carrying at a park. This generated twenty-two 911 calls, sparked hysterical reactions from local media, and was the subject of really stupid reporting from the Daily Kos (http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2014/04/28/open-carry-the-daily-kos-and-mass-hysteria-in-georgia/).
Photo credit 11alive.com
People at the park got so scared of this man, they herded their children into a baseball dugout and stood guard in front of it. One woman broke down crying for the camera, saying her son asked, “Did that man want to kill me?” This incident has received national attention, been blown way out of proportion, and is being used by the anti-gun side as yet more proof that pro-gun people are insanely violent (“That crazy man was carrying a gun in a park! Around children!”).
So what did the open carrier accomplish?
If his goal was self-defense, I guess it worked. No criminals attacked him while he walked through the park, probably because they were too distracted by the stampede of terrified parents rushing their children to the dugout. And criminals definitely weren’t going to try to rob the guy as police screeched into the park in response to the twenty-two 911 calls. So he achieved safety, at the cost of being the center of tons of unwanted attention from the local public, police, and eventually much of the country. Keep in mind, this was in gun-friendly Georgia, not some liberal paradise like California.
And some open carriers deliberately try to inflame the public and provoke a police response. This goes back to what I wrote earlier this week: I support open carry as a political statement. I don’t support it as a tactic. If your goal is to rile everyone up and force them to accept your right to carry, fine. Walk around with an AR-15 across your back and a Colt 1911 on your hip, and have your friends follow with cameras. You will get the public’s attention. You will provoke a police response. In an open carry state you should be simply questioned (not detained) and allowed to go about your business, which apparently is to make as big a scene as possible. And maybe to put a video on YouTube, showing how you were hassled by freedom-hating cops for no reason.
Is that why we want to be armed? To force people to react to us?
Carrying to provoke a reaction and then complaining about that reaction is pretty dumb. It’s right on par with a woman walking around topless in New York City because it’s legal there, then complaining “people were staring at my boobs”. Many gun-rights advocates loudly claim they want the government to leave them alone, then some of them take actions calculated to get police officers all up in their grill. Human nature is human nature. Guys will stare at any exposed boobs that happen by, and people uncomfortable with guns will freak when someone openly carries a gun around them. Open carriers and topless women can be as legal as the day is long, but they’ll still have to deal with the unreasonable and unwanted attention their actions bring.
Some of you will undoubtedly say, “I don’t have to change my behavior because of other people’s stupid reactions.” I agree, in principle. But we should also be free to walk in the woods without being eaten by bears. Unfortunately, bears attack and eat people because, well, they’re bears. Liberals and the media overreact, distort, inflame and try to spread panic about armed citizens because, well, they’re liberals and the media. My reason for carrying a weapon isn’t to prove anything, it’s to defend myself, my family and innocent people around me. I can do that better if I don’t have a crowd of panicked liberals calling 911 on me, police questioning me and TV cameras following me to report the Manufactured Outrage of the Week.
Again, as a political statement, I get it. This is America, please speak out about what you believe. But if you’re trying to provoke a response, don’t act like your goal is to be just a regular guy, no different from everyone else except that you happen to be armed. You can exercise your 2nd Amendment rights without making a scene, which in my opinion works out better for all of us on the pro-gun side.
4) WE GET BETTER RESULTS BY ENGAGING ANTI-GUN PEOPLE IN CONVERSATION THAN BY BEING CONFRONTATIONAL
This is going to be another contentious point, because not all open carriers are trying to be confrontational. I’d guess most of them aren’t. But many have been, and I think that confrontational stance works against us.
As a writer, I travel in some pretty liberal circles. The modern writing culture is basically overrun with extremely left-leaning people. As a conservative soldier and cop, I’m the fringe element. And because of this, I’ve had quite a few conversations about guns and gun control with liberal friends.
We on the pro-gun side often justifiably feel that debating the other side is pointless. We want to tell people preaching “reasonable” gun control to shut up, slap them with a copy of the Bill of Rights, show them our openly carried pistols and walk away. Unfortunately, while slapping them and walking away might be satisfying, it doesn’t help. And actually does more harm to our side.
I had a conversation recently with a very intelligent, very reasonable liberal friend. This guy is knowledgeable as hell on many subjects, and discusses everything rationally. Except guns. On that subject, he checks every irrational, emotion-driven box there is.
When we had the gun control conversation, he broke out the usual arguments (“the kind of people who want to carry guns are the ones I’m afraid of”, “if someone drops their gun it’ll go off”, “guys with guns will get mad and shoot it out over minor arguments”, “if everyone’s carrying guns how can the cops tell who the bad guys are”, etc). We had this conversation at a coffee shop, and he thought I wasn’t armed. When I told him, “You’ve never seen me without a gun”, he was taken aback. He seemed to think guys who carry guns can’t be trusted, have no self-control, and will spray and pray at the drop of a hat. When he found out I’m always armed, he had to reconsider.
My friend and I have been attending writers’ group meetings for over a year, we’ve hung out at bars and restaurants, and he’s never seen me do anything stupid. Being armed doesn’t make me cocky and impulsive like he thought it would; on the contrary, because I’m armed I’m much more likely to avoid confrontations. After the conversation, my friend had a new perspective. Chances are, next time he’s around his liberal friends and the topic of gun control comes up, he’ll totally screw up their mojo by saying, “I was convinced that only wackos carry guns. But then I found out this totally normal friend of mine always carries a gun. He calmly explained why he thinks I’m wrong about gun control, and he made a lot of sense.”
Photo credit whitewolftactical.com
Call me crazy, but I think that kind of interaction is worth a lot more than the shock tactic of, say, walking into Starbucks with an AR-15. Had I been openly carrying, our very productive conversation would probably have never happened because my friend would have been scared to talk to me (since, you know, I might have gotten angry and opened fire). Even if my friend doesn’t change his stance on gun control, he still learned that armed citizens aren’t the racist, redneck, Tea Party insurrectionists and child-eating NRA members some liberals think we are.
I know the anti-gun side’s tricks. I know many of them engage in irrational, overtly emotional attacks on us. I get sick of it too. But there are intelligent, reasonable people on their side who will listen to us if we make the effort, and some of them do change their views. We gain a lot more traction when self-described “New England liberal” author Justin Cronin writes an essay titled “Confessions of a liberal gun owner” (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/28/opinion/confessions-of-a-liberal-gun-owner.html?_r=0) or Anthony Bourdain tries to convince his liberal friends to stop demonizing us (http://anthonybourdain.tumblr.com/post/62424540749/guns-and-green-chile) than we do by telling everyone who disagrees with us to fornicate themselves. Or by openly carrying a pistol, just to piss off the people we know are scared of guns.
Again, guys, I’m not saying open carry is flat-out wrong and nobody should ever do it. If you’re in a place where open carry is normal and accepted, and you think it’s worth the risk of being disarmed or spotted by criminals, do what you think is best. There undoubtedly are places where open carry doesn’t raise an eyebrow and criminals know better than to cause problems, just like there are places women can walk around topless without being ogled (or so I hear, but my wife won’t let me confirm that).
But in a whole lot of America, legal or not, open carry is going to cause problems, and it’s going to put you at more risk. Which is why I think it’s a bad call. Not that it’s evil, not that it’s immoral, not that it should be illegal. In most cases, it’s just a bad call.
]]>
This guy is carrying a gun. At a park. Please display the appropriate amount of hysterical terror.
Just days after the State of Georgia passed a landmark “guns everywhere” bill that dramatically expanded gun rights, the law has already caused a major criminal incident.
This past week, a man with a gun permit walked through a park with his weapon visible. That’s right, a park. Where children were playing.
http://www.11alive.com/story/news/local/cumming/2014/04/24/armed-man-fowler-park/8121285/
This reckless man, no doubt bent on threatening innocent lives as he strolled through the park, prompted 22 parents to call 911. The police arrived quickly, and took immediate action to save lives. And by “took immediate action”, I mean they talked to him, determined he wasn’t committing a crime, and let him go.
“’The gentleman did nothing illegal,’ [Forsyth County Sheriff Duane] Piper said.”
“The sheriff, as well as the GeorgiaCarry.org group, said they talked to the man, who they say has a permit, and urged him not to flaunt the gun even though he has a legal right to. He has allegedly agreed to do so.”
The accompanying TV report notes that even before the recent Georgia gun bill, the man wouldn’t have been breaking the law. Applying the Kojak-like investigative superpowers gained in 20 years of police work, I’ve determined the following:
A man legally carried a visible pistol through a park. Parents got scared and called police. Police talked to man. He wasn’t committing a crime. They let him go. Nobody was hurt, or threatened, or in any danger whatsoever.
Obviously, reasonable people would say, “Nothing to see here, move along”, right? Nope. The Daily Kos, in one of the best displays of yellow journalism I’ve seen in the last decade, reported the incident this way:
“Man Legally Stalks Children’s Baseball Game: ‘I’ve Got A Gun & There’s Nothing You Can Do About It’”
In this article, writer Leslie Salzillo makes totally unbiased, non-inflammatory statements such as, “A man carrying a gun began stalking a children’s baseball game in Forsyth County, Ga, this past Tuesday night.” “Is this country so fearful of the NRA, that they do not dare arrest, detain, or at minimum question this man for disturbing the peace, stalking children, and/or intentionally putting the public in fear for their lives?”
And my favorite, “He’s just walking around [saying] ‘See my gun? Look, I got a gun and there’s nothing you can do about it.’ ‘He knew he was frightening people. He knew exactly what he was doing,’ said parent Karen Rabb.”
As near as I can tell, the man didn’t actually say anything like that. The parent was giving her interpretation of the man’s intent, which the Kos reported (probably intentionally) as fact. And despite the death grip the NRA has on America, police did in fact question the man. The Kos’ reporting is just stupid, but unfortunately not surprising. Hysterical, ridiculous, knee-jerk reporting is what we can expect from most journalists when they talk about armed citizens, especially citizens openly carrying. Even when the armed citizen did absolutely nothing wrong.
I’m going to make a statement about open carry, and some of you may not like it. I support open carry, but only as a statement. Tactically, it’s a bad idea. When I’m in public, I don’t want anyone to know I’m carrying. I don’t want aspiring robbers to pick me as their first target. If I ever have to draw my weapon on a criminal, I want to have the element of surprise. Granted, open carry is a hell of a deterrent to crime. But I’m going to carry concealed.
If you decide to open carry, hey man, good for you. I got your back. Power, brother. But understand something. Open carry, at least right now, is going to accomplish little more than causing panic among people who have been brainwashed into believing only wackjobs would even want to carry a gun. As a liberal friend of mine told me, “The kind of people who’d want to carry a gun are exactly the ones I don’t want carrying guns.”
Yes, my friend is wrong. As usual, the Daily Kos is pathetically wrong. But we’re not going to change their opinions by metaphorically waving guns in their faces. We on the pro-2A side understand the reality better than the other side does. Let’s show them the reasonableness of our argument. Let’s show them they have nothing to fear from honest, decent armed citizens. Let’s not make our own goals harder to achieve, by scaring people who have been conditioned by the Daily Kos to fear us.
]]>