# Right to Open carry? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 25, 2018, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535 "2018-07-25T02:17:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Isamu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/7c8e57/32.png) [@Isamu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isamu)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/61 "2018-07-26T15:30:46Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > How can I appear ready and trained for militia service if the government deprives me of the arms needed to be a good militiaman? You’re not going to like this answer but it’s true. A good militia is trained to follow orders and that takes some time. Anyone can learn to shoot a gun in a day, some will do it well, some wont. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/62 "2018-07-26T16:01:21Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > The funny thing about that is nobody is complaining about all those convicted felons whose right is infringed. You didn’t read my link in post #43, did you? ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/63 "2018-07-26T16:45:56Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > You didn’t read my link in post #43, did you? I did, but didn’t click the link, as I have now done. Thanks for the link, it’s interesting. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/64 "2018-07-26T18:28:29Z")
> [@Isamu](#): > > “In 2016, there were more than 38,000 gun-related deaths in the U.S. — 4,000 more than 2015, the new CDC report on preliminary mortality data shows. Most gun-related deaths — about two-thirds —in America are suicides, but an Associated Press analysis of FBI data shows there were about 11,000 gun-related homicides in 2016, up from 9,600 in 2015.” > > [Gun Deaths in America: CDC Data Shows Another Rise in 2016 | TIME](http://time.com/5011599/gun-deaths-rate-america-cdc-data/) Well, suicides are not part of murder or crime. But yes, in 2016 the violent rate took a tiny uptick. However, if you look at this Politifact article, violent crime & murder is way, way down. "\*“For 15 to 20 years both the violent and nonviolent crime rates as measured by the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report (UCR) have been dropping like a rock. It is now at the level of the early 1950s. It is very low,” said Alan Lizotte, a professor in the School of Criminal Justice at the University at Albany, in email correspondence with PolitiFact…The murder rate in 2014 was 4.4 murders per 100,000 people and in 2016 it was 5.3. Because the numbers are relatively small, a change in the rate is reflected as a seemingly larger percentage. “To be clear, you can have an uptick in crime from 2015 to 2016, and yet the numbers in 2016 are still lower than what they were a decade ago,” said Kenneth Leon, professor at the George Washington University. “Sessions has a structural incentive to emphasize law-and-order-related rhetoric and make statements that suggest there is a crime wave, or that the U.S. is ‘less safe.’ He is selectively curating the data to fit his needs.” \* > **[Violent crime is up some, but still well off historical high](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2017/dec/04/jeff-sessions/violent-crime-some-still-well-historical-highs/)** > > In Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ testimony to Congress about Russia in November, he brought up a recent increase in th ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/65 "2018-07-26T18:31:21Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Any Constitutional right comes with such a tradeoff. > > We would love to tell those KKK assholes to not march on the streets, but… > We would love to send those Westboro Baptists to jail, but… > We want to forbid people yelling “faggot” at gay couples, but… > > We are sympathetic to those family members who have to see the murderer of their loved one go free because the police violated the defendant’s privacy, but > > That jury made a dumbass decision by letting the defendant go, but… > We understand he was guilty and his slick lawyer got him off, but… > If he was forced to testify, he would have gotten tripped up in his lies, but… > > We think that serial killer should be drawn and quartered, but … > > All constitutional guarantees are infringements upon what transient majority opinions would like to impose. Yep. People forget the 2nd Ad is part of the Bill of Rights sometimes. Yes, we could cut the mass shooting rate way, way down by forbidding the media from publicizing the name of the shooter, but that would violate the 1st Ad. We could also cut the mass shooting rate down by banning semi-auto guns, but that would violate the 2nd. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/66 "2018-07-26T18:35:11Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > And there is no clearer example of judicial activism, interpreting the wording to mean what you want to, than that. The writers stated the purpose directly; Scalia found a way to ignore it and invent some other purpose instead. Umm, no. The intent of the authors was to allow men to own and carry weapons. Not only if they were in the military. Now, you also have to remember, that “the militia” in that period was\* all able bodied men\*. \* Thus, _if you say_ only the militia can carry guns, that means only able bodied men can carry guns. (They didnt include women back then, and in some states not “men of color” , indentured servants, natives and the like. ) - defined in Federal law. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/67 "2018-07-26T18:36:21Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > The funny thing about that is nobody is complaining about all those convicted felons whose right is infringed. A few cases have come up, with men who pled guilty to a non-jail, non violent crime. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/68 "2018-07-26T18:38:03Z")
> [@Isamu](#): > > You’re not going to like this answer but it’s true. A good militia is trained to follow orders and that takes some time. Anyone can learn to shoot a gun in a day, some will do it well, some wont. Back then, according to federal law, every able bodied (white) man was in the militia, trained or not. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/69 "2018-07-26T18:40:57Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > A few cases have come up, with men who pled guilty to a non-jail, non violent crime. Do you happen to know if they were listed in \*\*Bone’s \*\*“Gun cases to watch” thread? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/70 "2018-07-26T19:00:31Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Wrong. But then you knew that before you asked, so it was just an exercise in you attempting to score points, not a real question. I guess I was just wondering why you mentioned the concealed carry classes at all. They fact they are currently happening only when you sign up for concealed carry does NOT help the argument that wide(r)spread permission of open carry would be a good thing, because it ain’t like attendance of such classes would _increase_ when you tell people all they have to do is grab a gun, stuff it in their waistband, and stroll over to Walmart. So, was mention of these classes a non-sequitur, or what? Was there a point they were intended to support? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/71 "2018-07-26T19:11:35Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Do you happen to know if they were listed in \*\*Bone’s \*\*“Gun cases to watch” thread? Yes, at least one was. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/72 "2018-07-26T19:22:39Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > I guess I was just wondering why you mentioned the concealed carry classes at all. They fact they are currently happening only when you sign up for concealed carry does NOT help the argument that wide(r)spread permission of open carry would be a good thing, because it ain’t like attendance of such classes would _increase_ when you tell people all they have to do is grab a gun, stuff it in their waistband, and stroll over to Walmart. > > So, was mention of these classes a non-sequitur, or what? Was there a point they were intended to support? No, I was responding to a poster that brought it up saying that either open carry or carry concealed is a ‘right to murder’. I wasn’t attempting to make any sort of argument about what a right to open carry would or wouldn’t mean wrt increases or decreases in crime, merely that it wouldn’t be a ‘right to murder’. Shouldn’t have been a big mystery as I actually quoted the part I was responding too. I guess I didn’t actually respond to the OP, so perhaps that’s where the confusion is coming from. I don’t believe this is a next step. I think rights can have have been limited in the past, as long as the spirit of the right isn’t violated, and I think it’s prudent for a myriad of public safety issues if open carry is not nationalized. That said, as open carry is already legal in several states and it’s not exactly blood running constantly in the streets, I don’t think it would have a major impact on gun deaths, as I think (IMHO and all that) that most citizens wouldn’t avail themselves of the option. The laws would still apply…it would NOT be a ‘right to murder’ in any way, shape or form, and my WAG is that if some folks availed themselves of the option and got into altercations involving firearms that the examples of the bad shit that can legally happen to folks who use their guns in anger will have a stifling effect on people wanting to do this. As for criminals, they already have very limited rights to carry, and my guess is that the police would start to profile anyone openly carrying by essentially harassing them by asking for ID and the like (which happens today, even in open carry states). Finally, whether you open carry or carry concealed there are STILL restrictions…you can’t take one on school grounds, or federal parks, or federal office space (or state or local) or…well, it’s a rather long list. And ignorance of the law would most likely be no excuse for some clueless individual who decides to carry his rifle onto any of them. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/73 "2018-07-26T19:35:08Z")
For those opposed to this ruling, what do you think _bear_ means in the context of the 2nd? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/74 "2018-07-26T20:00:05Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > There are a large number of historians and constitutional scholars who believe that _Heller_ was an idiotic and wholly ideologically based ruling, and who have ample historical evidence for that view. That aside, in my personal and non-lawyerly opinion, this takes _Heller_ to a whole new level. Not even Scalia in his wildest dreams believed that the 2nd bestowed the right for random yokels to wander around in public festooned with guns. It’s literally as if the reaction to all the horrific gun violence of recent years is “this is great, now how can we get more of it?” I’m pretty sure scalia understood the 2nd amendment to include the right to bear arms and not simply own them. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/75 "2018-07-26T20:04:41Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > I can show you four Justices. Meh. I can show you 4 justices that think that the constitution doesn’t really give you a federal right to an abortion. Does that persuade you that abortion rights are not really rights? I can show you 4 justices that don’t think gay marriage is a right. Does that sway you in the slightest? Do conservatives sound like idiots when they say that 4 justices disagreed? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/76 "2018-07-26T20:14:19Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Meh. I can show you 4 justices that think that the constitution doesn’t really give you a federal right to an abortion. Does that persuade you that abortion rights are not really rights? > > I can show you 4 justices that don’t think gay marriage is a right. Does that sway you in the slightest? Do conservatives sound like idiots when they say that 4 justices disagreed? More importantly I think is that this doesn’t constitute the thinking of actual experts in the related fields. To use your example, because 4 justices think that abortion should be outlawed does that mean that most medical experts (or a ‘large number’) as well as those who are experts in other related fields think this way? No? It was a silly one liner to do a rather lame back up of the original assertion. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/77 "2018-07-26T20:23:58Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Finally, whether you open carry or carry concealed there are STILL restrictions…you can’t take one on school grounds, or federal parks, or federal office space (or state or local) or…well, it’s a rather long list. And ignorance of the law would most likely be no excuse for some clueless individual who decides to carry his rifle onto any of them. If you have a constitutional right to open carry, can such restrictions exist? In that scenario you’d have the federal government making rules/laws in direct defiance of the amendment. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/78 "2018-07-26T20:28:02Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > If you have a constitutional right to open carry, can such restrictions exist? In that scenario you’d have the federal government making rules/laws in direct defiance of the amendment. You have a right to freedom of speech (if you are an American), but you can’t produce, say, kiddie porn. There are limitations that can and have been put on rights, as long as you don’t violate the spirit of the right in question. And there is precedence for this…even during colonial times there were restrictions such as ordinances for carrying a weapon (firearm or even blade) into some cities or counties. Just my take on it though…I don’t claim to be an expert or even extraordinarily knowledgeable on this. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/79 "2018-07-26T20:42:59Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > If you have a constitutional right to open carry, can such restrictions exist? In that scenario you’d have the federal government making rules/laws in direct defiance of the amendment. In Heller, Scalia wrote this, quoted above: _Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment , nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms._ > **[Scalia leaves room for control of most violent weapons - UPI.com](https://www.upi.com/Under-the-US-Supreme-Court-Scalia-in-08-Right-to-bear-arms-is-not-unlimited/80201355648700/)** > > The U.S. Supreme Court, within the last five years, has twice affirmed the Second Amendment contains an individual right to bear arms, but in one of those majority rulings, the court's most conservative justice left room to control the types of... So yeah, it is pretty clear that schools, govt buildings and the like could be prohibited for carry. But I think that the Courts were right in the Ops (me) case, in that owning and carrying is a\* basic \*right, but a right which is in no way absolute. However, in Sates where CCW licenses are hard to get and Open carry is outlawed, that does (IMHO) impugn upon the basic right. If I had my way, carrying long guns (and handguns) would be OK in non-populated areas, and handguns would be Ok in cities, but restrictions like not in schools, etc would be a good idea. But NOT crazy restrictions like “not within 2000 yards of a school or park or playground” which (like for offenders or adult businesses) often bans the entire city. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535/80 "2018-07-26T20:43:55Z")
> [@XT](#): > > .you can’t take one on school grounds, or federal parks, or federal office space (or state or local) or…well, it’s a rather long list. And ignorance of the law would most likely be no excuse for some clueless individual who decides to carry his rifle onto any of them. [Not so much on national parks anymore.](https://www.nps.gov/grca/learn/management/upload/Firearms-in-IMRparks2-2010.pdf) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-to-open-carry/818535.md?page=5)