Because this is not the Wild West. To me, people who carry openly are sending a clear signal. To me, they are saying that they are afraid. They strap on a gun like a rattlesnake shaking its tail. In many cases, I believe they are looking for an excuse to draw, so as to righteously point out that their guns saved the day. Fearful, violent people should disturb people who manage to live in society without being attacked.
If you need to carry a gun, or feel you need to carry a gun, then go ahead. But keep it out of sight.
And for the record, it’s a safe bet I have more guns than most posters here; so it’s not like I’m anti-gun. I’m pro-polite.
For both cars and smoking, a combination of legislation and more importantly, social pressure, has resulted in safer cars and huge drops in smoking.
Not in all countries at the same time, but the trends are clearly showing that cars are becoming safer and tobacco is no longer as ‘cool’ as it once was.
Guns are heading in the same direction, just not at the same speed in all countries. In this country, it will be primarily social pressure that reduces the prevalence and danger of guns.
How do you know their intentions? I agree that most of the time you can reasonably assume their intentions are not bad. There is no constitutional right to carry an assault rifle in Walmart and it is almost universally illegal to do so. Walmart certainly has the right to prohibit it.
Yup, which is why driving is not a right, but a privilege. And who isn’t disturbed when they see people engaging in dangerous behaviors like excessive speeding in residential neighborhoods or not wearing their seatbelts?
That said, a car is primarily intended to transport people. In contrast, the purpose of a gun is inflict harm or to signal the ability to inflict harm. So why should we be encouraging people to be *less *afraid of guns? If guns ceased to scare people, then there will be little point in opening carrying a firearm.
Yup, which is why smoking is not a right, but an activity that increasingly becoming harder to do because of public health concerns. Of all the things that you could have picked to make your point, you picked the one activity that disturbs pretty much everyone who enjoys breathing clean air. Good one.
I’m not generally a fan of open carry but if that was my only option I would probably do it. I’m in CA so of course I have no options.
But I don’t think your characterization is very good. Think of it like tattoos or piercings. When I see someone with the giant rivet ear piercings or the eye bars or neck tattoos, that’s not appealing in any way. But my personal discomfort shouldn’t be the measure by which a person’s ability to express themselves in legal ways is constrained. Other people getting visible tattoos isn’t rude because I don’t like it for some reason.
It’s not just those that are afraid, or looking for an excuse to use their weapon. Enough posters on this board have stated the OC without those motivations. Before unloaded open carry was banned in CA a few years ago, a few activist groups organized open carry protests, or open carry community service cleaning up beaches and parks, in an effort to publicize the effort. They would alert police ahead of time, and have pamphlets and flyers to distribute. These aren’t people that are afraid - they were pushing a cause.
Going back in time 30-40 years, concealed carry was not nearly as prevalent. It’s now common and shall issue is the law of the land in more than 4/5 states. Things take time to normalize. Would your opinion change if the general feeling was not discomfort or fear at OC? If people regarded a normal person OCing the same way the did the police OCing, would you still think it was rude?
I’d start with having the gun unholstered or unslung, in hand, in shooting position as provacative if there is no lawful reason. I beleive it’s referred to as “brandishing.” A person with a gun still holstered but pointing to the gun and indicating they may use it would also be crossing the line.
While you can carry in Florida you better be careful. Being “rude” with a firearm is a big assed no no.
While I understand laws can be complex, that link showed the law as being so damn vague and open to interpretation as to be useless. And or dangerous depending your point of view I suppose.
So if I see someone in a public place in an open carry state with an assault rifle slung over their back, muzzle pointed downward, should I report them to law enforcement, or ignore them? What if they look Middle Eastern, with a beard?
Don’t call the police but keep a wary eye on them? That’s up to your own conscience, Personally, unless their were other suspicious actions on their part I’d maintain vigilance but not call the cops. This would definitely be the case if it was common practice to open carry in that locale.
Intentionally calling attention to your gun or your intent to use it, in any circumstance other than an imminent threat would be crossing the line in my book. Vague is not always bad in the sense that it allows police, prosecutors, judges and (worse case scenario) juries a little latitude in determining if you were behaving reasonably or unreasonably.