Open Carry vs. Racism
Posted by nsnelson 9 years, 4 months ago to Legislation
I've been contemplating a parallel between some new gun debates and Rand's essay on Racism. Texas passed new legislation to allow licensed open carry of handguns. For years now, I have been licensed to carry concealed wherever permitted. I do not intend to open carry, but I support the liberty to choose whether one carries concealed, openly, or not at all. But the ignorance surrounding this new legislation is astounding. The legislators who passed it displayed irrationality and fear-mongering (I watched them debate the bill). The opponents and local media are increasing the spread of ignorance and fear. But I'm particularly disappointed with average people who supported the legislation.
I have been a member of two Facebook groups: Open Carry Texas, and Texas Carry. Both made amazing strides in getting this legislation passed, even overcoming opposition by the NRA. But now roughly half of the group members are upset that so many local stores (e.g., grocery stores) are posting signs legally prohibiting open carry on their premises. Many open carry supporters are now saying this is a violation of their second amendment rights, and now they want to pursue legislation that requires these stores to allow open carry.
Never mind that the 2A is a limit on the Government, not on private businesses. Never mind that private property rights are the foundation of liberty, and even of our right of self-defense (and the tools of self-defense). Some of these people are making the comparison between the bakers (etc.) who have been sued for refusing certain products to certain homosexual events, saying that stores should not be allowed to discriminate against those who want to exercise their second amendment rights. That's right: they want to make open carriers a protected class.
The other half of the group members (myself included) seem to recognize the importance of private property rights. But it is Facebook, the land of misinformation, of not addressing arguments, of anonymous name-calling, and of never convincing anyone. It's just frustrating to watch, and I needed to share this with people who understand.
Anyway, it reminded me of Rand's treatment of racism. What she said very aptly applies to this debate: some on the pro-gun side started by appealing to individual rights in order to be allowed to open carry, now they want to violate the rights of private business owners.
“One of the worst contradictions, in this context, is the stand of many so-called ‘conservatives’ (not confined exclusively to the South) who claim to be defenders of freedom, of capitalism, of property rights, of the Constitution, yet who advocate racism at the same time. They do not seem to possess enough concern with principles to realize that they are cutting the ground from under their own feet. Men who deny individual rights cannot claim, defend or uphold any rights whatsoever.”
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...
I have been a member of two Facebook groups: Open Carry Texas, and Texas Carry. Both made amazing strides in getting this legislation passed, even overcoming opposition by the NRA. But now roughly half of the group members are upset that so many local stores (e.g., grocery stores) are posting signs legally prohibiting open carry on their premises. Many open carry supporters are now saying this is a violation of their second amendment rights, and now they want to pursue legislation that requires these stores to allow open carry.
Never mind that the 2A is a limit on the Government, not on private businesses. Never mind that private property rights are the foundation of liberty, and even of our right of self-defense (and the tools of self-defense). Some of these people are making the comparison between the bakers (etc.) who have been sued for refusing certain products to certain homosexual events, saying that stores should not be allowed to discriminate against those who want to exercise their second amendment rights. That's right: they want to make open carriers a protected class.
The other half of the group members (myself included) seem to recognize the importance of private property rights. But it is Facebook, the land of misinformation, of not addressing arguments, of anonymous name-calling, and of never convincing anyone. It's just frustrating to watch, and I needed to share this with people who understand.
Anyway, it reminded me of Rand's treatment of racism. What she said very aptly applies to this debate: some on the pro-gun side started by appealing to individual rights in order to be allowed to open carry, now they want to violate the rights of private business owners.
“One of the worst contradictions, in this context, is the stand of many so-called ‘conservatives’ (not confined exclusively to the South) who claim to be defenders of freedom, of capitalism, of property rights, of the Constitution, yet who advocate racism at the same time. They do not seem to possess enough concern with principles to realize that they are cutting the ground from under their own feet. Men who deny individual rights cannot claim, defend or uphold any rights whatsoever.”
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...
Previous comments... You are currently on page 3.
Good point about wondering if they will be responsible. Right now, those who seem to go through the effort of getting a license to carry seem to be responsible. As a class, they have few accidents and crimes than even law enforcement do. But I wonder if this will change when we legalize Constitutional carry. I hope and believe most people will be responsible. But even if they aren't, it's just all the more reason to make sure we are equipped to defend ourselves. Also, I don't think the question of their responsibility has anything to do with open versus concealed carry.
I have a somewhat schizophrenic emotional reaction to the issue: I first try to think what the effect is on people who haven't been brought up in a family where guns were part of routine life, like I have, and try to avoid scaring them; second, I don't trust our government, and prefer to keep them guessing as to what armaments I may have.
But these signs are only temporary:
"There was an initial surge in "No Handguns" signs on businesses that had been convinced the knuckle-dragging CHLs would invade in their camo clothing, tromping through stores in muddy boots spitting tobacco everywhere and running decent customers away. Instead, it was the decent customers who politely informed store owners that unless the signs came down their business would go elsewhere. Six months later "No Handguns" signs were an endangered species."
www.txchia.org/history.htm
Second, if open carrying does make you the first target, why do law enforcement officers open carry? If the argument against open carry is so strong, it also applies to law enforcement.
Third, law enforcement does open carry because it does act as a deterrent. Most criminals prefer weak (and unarmed) victims. Most thieves, for example, are not looking for a gun fight. There are documented cases where criminals intended to rob a store, walked in and saw people open carrying, so they left and went to rob another store instead. Open carry (with or without a uniform) is sometimes a deterrent.
Fourth, even when it is not enough of a deterrent, law enforcement officers open carry because that allows a faster draw than concealed carry. There are fewer layers of clothing to dig through or for it to get caught on.
I do and will prefer to conceal carry, mainly because I just don't want to deal with the social issues at this time. Tactics are not my primary concern; but I do see pros and cons of open carry.
Your "unselfish reason" actually should be selfish. Liberty for all means liberty for me.
Sometimes we engage in open carry walks in public. Our intent is not to disgust or offend, but to educate and bring the issue into the public eye as we lobby our political representatives. Here in Texas, long rifles have been (and still are) unregulated, and even without a permit it is legal to carry them openly. That is the reason long rifles have been the open carry tool of choice for us until yesterday. Even still, some people refuse to pay for a Big Government "license to carry" (or they just don't qualify), so they will continue this. But for most of these people, this is only a temporary tactic until we obtain the legal protections desired, and someday we will only carry our usual preferred handgun. Our goal is liberty, Constitutional carry, unlicensed carry.
And I don't share your experience about other states that do allow open carry. When I recently visited Alaska, Arizona, and Michigan, I did see some people open carrying (not just inadvertent concealed carry fail). They weren't being overt about it; I wouldn't have noticed if I wasn't looking for it. Most people didn't notice (or didn't care).
No one else the wiser, I was ready for anything that walked in. Ha! Ha!
That was back during semi-retired 2012. I became fully retired on my Bama Dept. of Corrections pension November, 2013. .
seriously what I carry in my pockets. . if I am a karate
master, I am ready to defend myself. . if I have a
pistol, I am as well. . what business is it of theirs? -- j
.
See for example: http://www.midwayusa.com/product/9664...
Product information says, "You never know when the impending zombie apocalypse will begin ... And remember, don't forget the double tap!!"
So how about some real paranoid behavior?!
In my home town in New Jersey, a paranoid guy lived on the main street and made his foil-hat status explicitly clear. He had placed huge signs on the front of his house that were so bizarrely memorable, I can still quote them exactly. "Eight forms of torture, they can read my mind." "Electronic transmitter in brain." "Heat from body powers the device." A foil hat would have prevented signal leakage out instead of the "normal" incoming mind control.
Less visible, but more audible, was an odd fellow who incessantly wandered around the local department store where I worked as a teen. One time, I rang up a package of underwear for him while he repeatedly muttered his standard screed against "alcoholic atheists and communists." I told him the price was $3.59. He handed me $5 proclaiming, "The men go down in ships!" I gave him his change (one each of penny, nickel, dime, quarter, and dollar.) He left with his merchandise, warning, "Don't touch that! They'll cut off your fingers. Alcoholic atheists and communists!"
Clearly, those guys had crossed the too non-conformist line.
If my sheep says "Bah" then that word probably translates to some version of "Food"; a very focused animal.
I hypothesize that you are part of a vast governmental program that is trying to force me to use "aluminum hat" instead of the traditional "tinfoil hat". I am not paranoid...these things exist...Wait! What is that?!
Jan
I don't trust any government agency not to misuse the background check information and build a database of gun buyers.
Wonder how many millions of "registered" gun owners are in that database?
I would not mind seeing a lot of open carries around me.
Never have. Just a rare one person,
I have a TV that is on more often than not, with hundreds of channels available, but I only watch/listen to a very limited subset. Very worthwhile content often appears that is not available via a computer or purchasable media, for example, on Turner Classic Movies. I also enjoy the nonce entertainments on (what purports to be) news channels. I need no computer searches to be presented with such unusual treats as Britain's Prince Charles delivering a weather forecast, or during recent alleged threats to school systems, a newscaster reporting with an unintended spoonerism, "the creats were not thredible."
Finally, the Romans worked with a lot of tin, so do you think they coined the "tinfoil" hat terminology? I doubt most modern folks have ever met tin in foil form, but since metallic aluminum became plentiful starting in 1886, I suggest that aluminum should be the default for the foil hat aphorism.
Your sheep probably comments to this whole thread with, "Bah!"
Jan
The most common response from strangers to my mentioning that I do not have a TV is, "Good for you!" Apparently your positive image of that medium is not shared by many people who themselves posses one. Insofar as a fear that someone will consider that I am on the short list for a tinfoil hat due to this 'idiosyncrasy' - they are welcome to that opinion. One of the reasons I am forthright about saying that I have no TV is to encourage non-conformity: One need not have a TV in order to have a reasonable status in modern society.
I would like to thank you for the extremely diverting image of the critters on my property exerting not just an influence, but one via "threats of violence". This has given me a vision of the hens hurling their eggs at me; the dogs march in front of the house, carrying placards that threaten a strike. I am finding this a delightful fantasy.
Jan, smiling
All alone with a gun on your hip will not prevent someone shooting you in the back.
Heck, someone may stab an open carry person in the back to steal the displayed and thus coveted pistol.
I used to be a corrections officer at a maximum security prison for 21 years. Prison guards working inside closely with inmates (in places that are legally described as a "criminal environment") are allowed to carry a baton, pepper spray and/or a taser but never a firearm.
Why? Because at any given time, several inmates can overwhelm an officer and take his gun, that a lethal weapon.
Carrying a concealed weapon does not mean I could be gunned down to be robbed while loading groceries in a car.
But odds strongly have it that a mugger will instead use a gun to intimidate a victim into handing over a wallet.
Such a face-to-face scenario shall provide me with the option of pulling a pocket pistol holstered in leather that kinda looks like a wallet or handing over my real wallet and then pulling my pistol.
Mugged from behind? I just may wind up deprived of my concealed gun, my wallet and the cell to call 911 with.
That's why I try to be always aware of my surroundings. Being a prison guard for two decades provided good training for that.
That still does not mean I can't be ambushed.
Old dino is only human and a senior citizen at that.
a ham handy-talkie (15 minutes) than from hours of
football, lately.
and, of course, the latter arrived on tv. -- j
.
be fine to carry concealed without a permit. . maybe
this is turning into that world. -- j
.
nearby wings the guy. . I wish. -- j
.
Load more comments...