Joining the Majority – Amanda S. Green

Joining the Majority – Amanda S. Green


The coming of a new year always brings with it new laws. Most of the time, those laws go into effect with little to no fanfare. Many received even less coverage in the press when they were proposed, debated and eventually signed into law. This year is different. All you have to do is turn on the national news or pick up a nationally circulated newspaper or go onto social media sites like Facebook to know that Texas has completely lost its collective mind and should be shunned or removed from the union or some such idiocy. Curious as to what sort of horrible, terrible and really bad law goes into effect the first day of the New Year? Open Carry.

That’s right, folks. Texas finally joins the vast majority of states in this glorious union of ours by allowing people to legally open carry their guns.

Yes, you read that right. It joins the vast majority of states. As in it becomes the 45th state to allow open carry.

Read that again. The 45th state to allow open carry in public places.

Funny, you don’t see that when reading all the stories condemning Texas for passing the law. Frankly, it surprised me when I started researching this post to discover that so many states already allowed open carry. Yet Texas is being painted as a horrible state and asking for so much trouble by allowing its citizens to do what 44 other states already allow. Funny how that is never talked about in the anti-gun propaganda.

A quick search on the internet this morning revealed the following stats:

  • Four states and one other area do not allow open carry in public places: California, New York, Illinois, Florida and Washington D. C.
  • 31 states allow open carry in public places without any sort of license or permit. In some of these states, the weapon must be unloaded.
  • 15 states allow open carry in public places with some sort of permit or license.

Texas falls into the latter category. To be able to legally open carry a handgun, a person will have to 1) legally own the gun and 2) undergo the permit process which includes the CCW training class, fingerprinting and background check.

Something else you don’t hear much about in the media, and certainly not in the social media condemnations of open carry, is that businesses can choose whether or not to allow open carry on their premises. The Wall Street Journal has a pretty good article on how some businesses and other corporate entities are approaching the issue. It also notes that the same exceptions to the concealed carry permit currently in effect will also apply to open carry.

Unfortunately, the WSJ also promulgates the same argument so many opponents to open carry put forth: open carry will put police officers at more risk.

On the face of it, there might be some merit in that concern. However, there is one thing those spouting that “concern” seem to overlook. Open carried weapons are visible. The police will be able to see the weapon and act accordingly. If anything, I am more concerned about officers – or concerned citizens – overreacting when coming across someone open carrying.

That same article does point out one concern I have as a citizen, that of complacency by the police to calls from citizens worried because they have seen someone with a gun. In this case, the Colorado Springs 911 operator told a woman reporting a man walking down the street with a rifle that open carry was allowed and did not prioritize the call. The person with the rifle wound up killing three before being killed by police. Did the dispatcher follow policy? Probably but a simple call to the local patrol unit to check on the person might have helped prevent the deaths.

As I’ve written this post, I’ve debated whether or not to touch the real elephant in the room – private ownership of guns of any sort. There are those in this country who would take away our guns. Others would take away only some of our guns. The arguments for such strict gun control range from “no one needs an assault weapon” to “only our police and military should be armed” to “if there were no guns, there would be no mass murders”.

For me, it’s simple. A person who follows the law concerning gun ownership, no matter what the law is in that state, should be allowed to own as many guns as she wants. Outlawing guns or increasing the difficulty of doing so won’t stop gun crimes. If someone wants to shoot another person and they don’t own a gun, they will get one by stealing it or buying it from the black market. And yes, there is a black market for guns now and there most definitely will be one if we start outlawing guns.

That is the biggest fallacy in the anti-gun movement’s argument. Whether they actually believe violent crime will fall with the removal of legally owned guns from the equation or they just think the rest of us will fall for their line, I don’t know. But I would recommend they spend time in a country where there is a shortage of some non-essential commodity. Watch the black market in that country in action. Look around and see how many items not “legal” are not only owned by the citizenry but used, whether for good or ill means.

As for those who will feel “uncomfortable” because someone might walk into the same room with them carrying a gun, grow up. If a person means ill, not letting them open carry isn’t going to stop them. They will secrete the weapon upon their persons or will already have it stashed in the location. They will find a way to carry out their plan, law in place or not.

However, if that same person walks into a room or building, looks around and sees others open carrying, it very well might give them pause. Yes, there are those folks out there looking to commit suicide by cop and that could turn into suicide by open carry. But most are cowards who believe that brandishing a weapon is all they need to do to get what they want. When faced with people who have trained for open carry, self-preservation will kick in and – bingo – plans change.

Ask yourself something else as well. If you or your loved one is in a situation where an armed perp is threatening to kill them, would you prefer your loved one to be unarmed or able to defend himself? Oh, I know the argument that more people would be wounded or injured by those open carrying or concealed carrying but where are the stats to back that up? I don’t know about you but I am tired of our heroes being killed protecting innocents. Isn’t it time to even the playing field for them?

As long as it is legal to own guns, it should be legal to open and conceal carry. The fact that 45 of our 50 states plus the District of Columbia agree with me ought to say something. For all those crying “foul” about Texas joining the majority, grow up and get a life. Open carry isn’t a return to the Old West, at least not in Texas. The weapon has to be legal and the carrier has to be licensed and that means having taken the class and passed all the other requirements. Don’t like it? Move to one of the four states or the District of Columbia where it is not allowed. Just think about why several of those locations have such high crime rates when you do.

Most of all, remember that Open Carry is not universal, at least not in Texas. There are exceptions to where you can Open Carry just as there have been exceptions with Concealed Carry. You can’t take your gun into the courthouse. You can’t take it to sporting events. You can’t take it into businesses that make 51% or more of their profit from the sale of alcohol. You can’t take it into businesses and other locations that have said you can’t. That includes churches and privately owned businesses. They have to post the prohibition and it is up to the gun owner to secure their weapon off-premises.

All I can say is “Thank you, Texas, for finally joining the majority of our country when it comes to Open Carry.”


154 responses to “Joining the Majority – Amanda S. Green

  1. It is not actually true that the response to the shooter in Colorado Springs was delayed by the dispatcher.

  2. A quick [searchengine] search of “China mass killings stabbing” pretty much punctures (sorry) the theory that removing firearms eliminates mass killings and lowers crime rates. People will find a way to threaten/hurt/kill if they are determined or sick enough.

    My thought on open carry is “OK, printing is less of a problem.” I suspect that’s one of the biggest advantages to open carry – you don’t have to spend as much time worrying about keeping your concealed piece concealed. And the Bad Guys are going to conceal anyway, I suspect, just as they usually do. There will probably be as many “massacres in the street” as there were when concealed carry passed, that being 0.

    • I pretty much agree with you. If someone wants to kill another person or persons, they will find a way. Taking away guns won’t make that disappear.

    • This exactly. And I fully expect the “Moms Demand Action” crowd to carry out their threats to SWAT people… right up until the time that people start filing countercharges and suing the reporters under RICO.

    • If anyone is naive enough to think that this is a new phenomenon, ask them to explain why it is that the Malay felt the need to coin a word to specifically describe someone going nuts and killing others?

      The phrase “to run amok” is from that word, occasionally spelled “amuk”.

      It’s actually not that uncommon for people to have done this. The reason it’s not in the historical record is that it was so damn common that people didn’t feel the need to comment on it. Somewhere in my family’s papers, there are accounts of stuff like this happening in logging camps and coal mines, and on a routine basis. Usually, in conjunction with alcohol…

      • One notes that when the British declared “amok” would no longer be accepted as a defense in murder, the number of such murders crashed.

  3. wanderingmuses

    I live in North Central Texas and I don’t care about open carry at all. Folks always ask, “Well, how can we tell if they’re licensed or not by just looking?” They are right. You can’t tell. But I know who’s armed already and if the do something stupid, I (and probably at least 30% percent of other patrons) know who to aim at. The only new law we’re getting on the 1st that I don’t like is a total smoking ban. What ever happened to leaving it up to the individual business owners to decide?

    • I live in the DFW area and that is how most people I’ve spoken with feel. As for knowing if someone is licensed or not, for police it gives them one more reason to be able to stop and ask for ID/permit. For the business owner, I assume they can ask for proof of permit as well. Me, I just figure the bad guys are less likely to open carry for fear of being stopped and asked to provide their permit. Shrug.

  4. As for those who will feel “uncomfortable” because someone might walk into the same room with them carrying a gun,

    I know of women who “feel uncomfortable” because a man has walked into the same room, just as I know men who “feel uncomfortable” because a woman has walked into the same room. There was a time in this country when a person felt free to say they felt uncomfortable because an Indian, or a Mexican, or a Negro or a Catholic or a Jew had entered the room they were in. Screw ’em. You do not have a Right To Feel Comfortable.

    Hoplophobia merits even less indulgence than the oikophobia afflicting our elites, and far less than Islamophobia or homophobia or any of the other pseudo-medical phrases deployed to derogate an opponent’s arguments. The MSM and its political patrons have no fear of guns — they are surrounded by armed security — they simply have fear of ordinary citizens not being dependent upon the government.

    • Amen. I am so tired of our “my feelz hurt” attitude that it isn’t funny. I was raised to stand up for myself and for those who can’t stand up for themselves. It doesn’t matter that I’m female. I have a voice and I know how to use it — just as I know how to use my hands and feet as weapons if there isn’t a more “tangible” weapon at hand.

  5. The important thing to remember is not that the MSM is knotting its knickers over Texas — it is that there is an underlying reason it is knotting its knickers over Texas. When they so aggressive deploy a narrative, always peek behind the curtain for what that narrative is intended to conceal.

    In this instance, I notice that three of the localities forbidding “open carry” are central to the Media-Political Complex, that center of conventional wisdom inhabited largely by those who fled the other states.

  6. My daughter and I each took the concealed carry classes this fall, but she preferred to wait until open carry is permitted – I went ahead and applied for the Concealed Carry permit – it was only $25 for a veteran, and another $10 for the fingerprinting. I very much preferred to not be obvious about carrying. I’d rather catch the b*stards by surprise.

    • I do like the way you think, Celia. 😉

    • That’s sort of my thought. I wrote an essay about it some time ago entitled “Sheep—With a Switchblade.” The more difficulty the Bad Guys have selecting their target because of fears of possible-carry, the better off all of us are. (Is it the confident dude? Or the gal hugging her large purse? Or the grandmother in a jacket? Could it be the computer guy with all the odd-shaped cases on his belt?)

      • That’s my thought on concealed carry. If you don’t know whose carrying, it can be anybody. Thus more effective than open carry. A arms lotto.

        The problem is that most of the places that are banning any carry are opening themselves up to predators.

        • And I fully expect some law firms to specialize in suing said businesses after an incident basically on the grounds that by posting that sign they assumed all responsibility for preventing anyone else from getting in with a weapon.

          And frankly, the only way they could ever do that is by 100% metal detector to enter backed up by armed security. Most of them won’t pay the expense.

      • I am a dumpy, 60ish female, who — if she looks like anything at all — appears as the principal of some Catholic or Anglican girl’s high school; kindly, somewhat absent-minded, soft-spoken, erudite and harmless.

        It’s a useful camouflage. I really ought to carry something with a better accommodation for the automatic than the vintage Doney & Burke bucket bag, though.

        • I recommend the type of bag traditionally used to hold a lady’s knitting. The spare skeins of yarn will hold the pistol in such a way as to reveal no outline, the generally open “weave” of the bag lets the bullet pass with minimal irreparable damage, and the surrounding yarn helps muffle the sound of the shot, facilitating getting off a second shot while the goblin(s) wonder(s) whence came the first.

          • But … I don’t knit! One darned more thing to carry!
            The Doney & Burke bag doesn’t show any outline at all. But there’s just barely enough room in the inside pocket for the ziplock baggie of extra 9mm ammunition, let alone the magazine and the pistol itself.

            • scott2harrison

              Unless you are going to the range, why carry a ziploc of ammunition? Also, being a paranoid person and a true believer in Murphy, if I am carrying, I prefer to have the weapon strapped to my body where I cannot pull a Secret Service and leave it somewhere.

              • Reality Observer

                Tain’t no such thing as too much ammo. At least until you start listing to one side or the other…

                • Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard

                  That’s not “too much ammo”. That’s having the ammo poorly balanced. [Very Very Big Evil Grin]

            • You’re an ideal candidate for a waistpack. Just don’t pick one of the ones that will flag you as a carrier, and go to town with it. Make a show of keeping your wallet in the front compartment, and practice looking a bit dotty… Nobody has to know you’ve got a Glock, a magazine or two, and a flashlight in the back one.

              I’m a big advocate of tritium night sights and a good, bright combat light. You never know when these things will happen, and having the light with you could be a lifesaver. Also, if you don’t have anything else, a few thousand lumens in the eye suddenly tends to screw up their visual acuity and accuracy…

              Also, wouldn’t hurt to throw in a few Israeli combat dressings, and maybe a couple of Prusik cuffs. At least, the 550 cord to make them out of–You never know when you’ll have to restrain someone. Granted, all that could make it look like you were out looking for trouble, but a bit of careful ground preparation can make you look simply well-prepared: “Oh? The handcuffs? I made those out of my spare shoelaces I always keep… Terrible, how the new ones they have these days are always breaking, isn’t it?”.

          • No, no, no. Even if you carry it in your knitting bag, you do NOT put your (probably expensive) yarn stash at risk by firing through the bag unless there is no other choice!!! 😉
            Other potential problem is the gun getting snarled up in the yarn. Or, worse, snarled up in your current project…

            What am I saying, though, I just stuff my knitting into my purse along with everything else.

        • When making a bank visit (in 1980) with my elderly distantly related aunt in small town, Texas, we didn’t realize she was carrying until she pulled the weapon out of her carpetbag and laid it on the counter. An 1845 Navy revolver. If a carpetbag can conceal that, it can conceal anything you might want to carry.

          Times were different then. All the ID I needed to cash a personal check was her telling the teller- “He’s my cousin.”

          • An 1840s Colt Navy? (ball and black-powder-era Walker Dragoon?) Good lord, you should have confiscated that from her as a valuable antique!

            • The Colt Navy is a petite 36 cal. cap and ball revolver and easily fits in a medium sized purse. It is much smaller than the Dragoons or the 1860 Army.
              Fully functional reproductions are available through the mail even in CA and no registration is required, though the legality of carrying one concealed and loaded I knoweth not.

          • It’s been a while. Pretty sure it looked like this: Since her late husband had been a Texas Ranger (born in 1898) I’m sure it had once been his and she knew how to use it.

    • William O. B'Livion

      Let me ask you this;

      For some REALLY good reason you are entering in a room to do violence to all it’s inhabitants. You have four people to shoot.

      One has a pistol on his hip, one has a rifle in his hands, and the other two are not visibly armed.

      In what order are you going to shoot them?

      Second question, why do you think the “bad guys” are so dumb they can’t do the same sort of analysis?

      • Exactly – I support having the right to open carry, but consider it tactically unwise; Why make yourself a high-probability first target?

  7. While I don’t have a problem with private establishments banning firearms on their property, I think that any that do so should be held strictly liable for the safety of their patrons.

    • I do. From the civil rights point of view, there’s no difference between refusing a serve a customer who is taking advantage of his second amendment rights, from any other right.

      “Civil rights are great, as long as we can pick and choose which ones we’re paying lip service to today.”

      • The question here is whether you hold civil right or property right superior. My only concern would be being able to secure firearm in pov for businesses. Otherwise it’s the argument of conflicting property rights. (Said by someone who is screwed by fed of said ability to secure in pov)

        • I prioritize property rights. If you want to discriminate based on weapons, race, or gender, have at it. Just don’t expect my business.

          • The fact that we transgress against property rights in one dimension (public accommodation) does not require we trample those rights in every dimension. The cure for an error is not more errors.

            It is also useful to acknowledge that the public accommodation principle is not a violation of property right, it is a requirement of being licensed to conduct business.

            • Hey, I’ve got an idea! Let’s call it a regulation under the Commerce Clause!
              Wickard is outstunk only by Griggs. I’m not the least bit interested in the shenanigans that legalize tyranny.

          • Good. Same place my morals are.

      • I agree. Turning your environment into a maze of Gun-Free Zones makes carrying a gun so inconvenient (for the law -abiding) that it effectively disarms or criminalizes you (if you’re not a criminal already).

        I wonder if anyone has tested that on the grounds of “You must let me exercise my 2nd Amendment rights while you bake me that same-sex wedding cake!”

        If anyone has, I don’t wonder at all why I haven’t heard about it,

        • That’s where the strict liability comes in. By exposing the business to a low-probability but large cost, it should change the corporate calculus to favor carriers.

          • I very much hope that’s how it ends up. The tort biz being what it is, I’d be amazed if there aren’t billions of dollars worth of lawsuits already in the works from the Gun Free Theater shooting in Aurora. I hope the plaintiffs win astronomic amounts, but — IANAL — I’m pessimistic, for exactly the reason you mention: the expected cost of declaring your business to be a Gun Free Zone would soar and the number of Gun Free Zones would plummet, and I think The Powers That Be really really really don’t want that.

            I’d expect the defense to drag it out (at $200/hr/lawyer, bankrolled thru the backdoor by us, the taxpayers) until the last plaintiff went broke. That, and/or there’d be some sort of indemnification snuck into page 4,839 of a “must pass” “bipartisan” bill.

      • William O. B'Livion

        Last I checked public establishments were not required to allow you to speak, pass out pamphlets, hold church services etc. on their grounds.

        They are allowed to require you wear (or do not wear) certain clothing, to remove hats and etc.

        So saying “Hey, this is my property and you can’t have a gun here” is within their rights.

        I just ignore it.

    • William O. B'Livion

      I don’t have any problem treating their signs the same way the criminals do.

      If they want to enforce it with armed guards and metal detectors, have at it.

  8. I don’t see a problem with open carry. At lease t I know that they are armed.

    I do have a question,
    ◾Four states and one other area do not allow open carry in public places: California, New York, Illinois, Florida and Washington D. C.
    ◾31 states allow open carry in public places without any sort of license or permit. In some of these states, the weapon must be unloaded.
    ◾15 states allow open carry in public places with some sort of permit or license.
    That adds 31+15= 46, so was Texas number 46 or did some state slip by without comment. If it was the latter than that shows the hypocrisy of the wailers,

  9. BobtheRegisterredFool

    1919, Elaine Arkansas.

    All the fear mongering about spree killing is more than offset by the casual massacres prevented by an armed population. Mass murder requires a number of people functional enough to be responsive to risk. Lowering the risk makes mass murder easier, endangering minorities.

    • Spree killers almost invariably target gun free zones to do their evil worst. It’s been shown that the Colorado theater shooter passed several other venues in order to pick one that banned concealed weapons.
      It is true that you seldom see a case where a mass shooting is stopped by an armed civilian. The media and anti gun crowd (but I repeat myself) would have us believe that it never happens when in actual point of fact when an armed civilian counters a shooter with lethal force the body count is such that it doesn’t qualify as a mass shooting.

      • The media and anti gun crowd (but I repeat myself) would have us believe …

        Used to, new-born reporters spent their time on the police beat and in the obit department — areas where you quickly see the nature of people and learn to get the details right.

        Nowadays they come fresh from the J-School womb and get put on the Steven Glass beat, where their standards aren’t accuracy and objectivity but honing the narrative.

      • BobtheRegisterredFool

        Hence fear mongering.

        It may be correct to say that there is an aspect that we can solve if we just pay attention, and discuss it until we come to understanding. That aspect isn’t what they want to talk about.

        The #BlackLivesMatter protests have mostly used people who died as a result of choices made while impaired by drug use. If a permanently impaired kid had gotten them-self killed at home or at a facility, the parents or staff might have some culpability. Cops don’t have the power to intervene on the streets to that degree, and are supposed to have the same level of responsibility for the deaths of people who are sometimes impaired, and sometimes considered to be competent adults? Bullshit.

        Either the public has responsibility to stop individuals from being a danger to them-self and others, or the public does not. There are costs either way, and being indecisive to avoid paying just means that nothing gets fixed. There is no intelligent principled reason for the left to support their basket of policies.

  10. BTW, I have found Andrew Branca over at Legal Insurrection blog to be a good resource on self-defense law. Here’s the link to his online course for Texas.

  11. I’m glad you pointed out the one thing most are ignoring – you have to already possess a CWP in order to open carry. Most of the people I’ve seen talking it up have missed that very crucial point.

    • That’s true for most places. Wisconsin is a bit different. The state constitution says carry is permitted. When concealed was forbidden, it was logically ruled that that meant that open was therefore the de facto standard.

  12. I wonder why some anti-gunners worry about how many guns I own. It doesn’t matter if I have 3 or 53, I only have two hands, so at best I can dual-wield….

    • Because feelings trump reality. They also get the most excited about firearms least often used in crime.

      • Of course, because if they got excited about something REAL, they’d have to do something substantive, and that would end the problem and deprive them of the power to bitch about things.

      • To be fair, the antis were initially against handguns, which ARE more often used in crime. However, when they ended up having to remove the handgun ban from GCA ’68 just to get it passed, they realized that banning handguns wasn’t going to be possible even back then when anti-gun sentiment was at all time high. So they changed to “Assault Weapons” in the hopes that enough low-information Americans could be tricked into thinking they were machine-guns. It kinda/sorta worked for a little while with the Assault Weapons Ban from 1994 to 2004, but it they failed to generate even enough support to renew that pile of excrement, let alone use it as a springboard to get more restrictions passed and signed into law.

        Although I suspect you are right at this point. The antis have been crying “Assault Weapon” so long that the current crop have probably forgotten, or never knew in the first place, why they are doing so and are just running on emotion.

    • Imagine for a moment. You are in your home, along with a few close friends and their children (or you in theirs, go with it). Suddenly a Largely Peaceful Protest* appears! They have Largely Peaceful tent stakes, baseball bats, rocks, and possibly molotovs inn their Largely Peacefully Protesting hands.

      You, in your home (or a friends’) have:

      Several various small caliber rifles ( .22s, everyone should have a few around) to arm random young guests, slighter framed persons, passing dogs…

      A couple of shotguns, purely for sentimental value, 12 gauge for a couple of adults to whom recoil is a pleasant nudge.

      Perhaps a few scary black rifles with respectably sized magazines. Perhaps. Maybe just sensible hunting rifles, for control of vermin… such as wild hogs, which require a respectably sized cartridge that starts with a “3” (and we will leave aside such silly European rifle calibers in millimeters for the moment).

      Assorted handguns. Everyone should have a few, for plinking, and arming such partygoers who didn’t bring their own, too.

      The Largely Peaceful Protesters’ Partisans worry over the number of guns you have because now you can shoot back! Terrifying, I know.

      * :Largely Peaceful Protesters can be often confused for members of the criminal class bent on nothing more than violence, plunder, rapine, and mayhem. Though of course, as any Largely Peaceful Protesters’ Partisan will tell you, they look nothing alike…

      • Very much that scenario was encountered in the Fifties in the American South by a number of Civil Rights activists — after the NRA had paid their respects to those activists.

        In fact, the knowledge that the NRA had already welcomed such activists had a surprisingly depressing effect on parties of peaceful protesters (and certainly helped ensure they remained peaceful.)

    • I wonder why some anti-gunners worry about how many guns I own.

      Because they already burned through the other made-up scare terms, most recently “assault weapon”, and now they are trying to gin up the easily ginned up crowds against anyone who owns “too many” firearms with the new and improved scare term “arsenal.”

      Interestingly enough, and at the bottom line this is the most encouraging thing I see across the current US political landscape, it’s just not working anymore.

      • Sadly, my own “Arsenal” does not yet include a scary black rifle. Cabela’s had a fairly highly regarded starter black rifle on sale at a very good price and they sold out the morning of the first day, so I had to do without.

  13. In a bit of Irony, Virginia just canceled their concealed carry reciprocity agreement with 25 States But Open Carry is Legal in Virginia OOPS

    • Also ironically, Texas is one of the few states VA kept reciprocity with because its’ standards were “high enough”.

    • Governor of Virginia pulled that bit of excess by executive order.
      I understand that the Virginia legislature reconvenes in a couple of weeks and it’s a tossup whether the first item on the agenda is to rescind the order or to initiate impeachment proceedings against the governor.

  14. You’ve got to wonder if the Mexican Cartels are behind the push to ban guns. It’s not like anybody in DC is actually going to do anything to seal the border and firearms would be another very lucrative revenue stream.

    The only place I go that I can’t carry is work. (If I find a job that will allow me to carry at work I’ll totally take it!) I stay away from anyplace that bans ccw because I won’t support a business that wants to curtail my rights.

    • What about hospitals? They ban both guns and cigarettes..

      • Hospitals tend to have police on site on a fairly regular basis. Otherwise I would have more concern for them setting themselves up as victim disarmament zones for a mass shooter wannabe.
        Then again, no metal detectors at the entrances, so if someone carries concealed what’s there to stop them other than a cute little sign?
        Of course based on liberal progressive logic we could solve all the gun problems simply by making it illegal to shoot anyone. There. Fixed. Done.

        • Funny, the last time I was in a Hospital there WAS a metal detector at the entrance. Of course, (most?) Hospitals should probably be considered prohibited places here in Florida via the back-door of having mental-health facilities on-site (mental-health facilities are prohibited places by law). So I wasn’t about to try to carry there anyway.

        • Ah, yes, metal detectors. $20,000 worth (probably $50,000 with inflation) of steel rods in one leg guarantee a blood pressure spike every time I encounter one.

          Every now and then I walk through the door of a private business that has decided to put some up. Often, there are flashing lights and buzzers. I feel like the Booby Prize contestant in a Japanese game show, but I usually keep on walking. Except on the occasions when I’m particularly annoyed, when I stand there waving my leg through the sensor area. After a while, they will usally ask me (very nicely) to leave.

          Interestingly, one courthouse had its metal detector cranked up so high that I had to take off my glasses, watch, and finally my tie tac, and it was still fretting about something. The guard waved his wand over my upper torso, shrugged, and told me to go through anyway. I asked if he was going to do my lower body. He said no, they only did the top. So I walked through, musing that I could have worn a pair of flappy homeboy hip-hop pants, stuck one of my underfolder AKs down each leg, and he would probably have passed me through…

          • Ran into the same thing at the Richmond airport right after I had my first neck surgery…. on one particular metal detector at one particular checkpoint.

    • William O. B'Livion

      Mexican Cartels realize that the people you *really* have to worry about don’t pay attention to bans, and even if they did, well, they have other tools.

      Rifles and pistols are like a hammer. They merely multiply the force a user wishes to apply.

      Lots of things can be used to apply force. A tire iron, a baseball bat, a truck filled with fertilizer and other accelerants.

  15. The truth is that the “Wild West” was actually LESS violent than the sidewalks of Old New York or Boston or Nawleans or San Francisco…

    As for open carry; I’m going for my CWP but I don’t think I would carry openly as a norm:

    a. it picks you out as a priority target. Goblins can see where the guns are and choose accordingly. Take out the threat first works both ways.

    b. I don’t think I could guarantee security of an exposed firearm. A cop doesn’t usually have his hands tied up carrying things; if I’m at WalMart juggling boxes or pushing a shopping cart I’d be at a handicap if a goblin made a grab for my sidearm while I was encumbered.

    • The truth is that the “Wild West” was actually LESS violent than the sidewalks of Old New York or Boston or Nawleans or San Francisco…

      “An armed society is a polite society.” -RAH

      • What we have in our cities today is gang violence; what they had in the “Wild West” (and in points east in earlier eras) was dueling. Never heard of any innocent bystanders, crossfires, or “collateral damage” from a duel.

        • BobtheRegisterredFool

          Point of Order; Don’t forget range wars, robberies, and attempts at insurrection.

          • Good point! All are still with us, however, and in IMO in greater frequency now that dueling is gone…

            • BobtheRegisterredFool

              My theory is that the range wars quieted down when automobiles, telephones, and television shortened the lines of communication. With less isolation, it is harder for someone choosing whether to take the risk of a range war to be sure they influence the balance of force within the distance force can be projected.

              There was a distinct number of confederate veterans who robbed banks and trains in order to fund future attempts at insurrection.

        • Pretty sure John Wesley Hardin =/= duelist.

    • I use a holster that locks the pistol in place until the button on the side is pushed-in by the trigger-finger on the draw. For example:

      • That’s not a good holster, sad to say. There’s a reason many gun schools and trainers ban the Blackhawk:
        -the button is very prone to jamming due to dirt
        -your finger position isn’t in the best place, especially for striker guns- it is possible to shoot yourself under stress if you’re not paying attention
        -it’s not an especially strong holster, and it doesn’t take much to rip it off the belt- the same problem with the Fobus holsters

        A Safariland ALS would be a better pick

        • I’m going to go out on a limb, and say that if you’re wearing a retention holster as a civilian, you’re doing it wrong. Open carry is just such a terrible, terrible idea for dealing with these situations. You’re basically laying your cards on the table, and saying “Hey, I’m here, I’m armed… Kill me first.”.

          I get the entire “Let’s take back the commons, and make this normal, again…” thing, but the open carry philosophy is more about making a political statement than being actually tactically effective. Think about it–If you’re seen to be armed, what is the next step? Put yourself in their shoes, and think about how you’d deal with the situation, if you were the bad guy.

          And, now realize that you’re going to be the first thing they try to neutralize. They’re also going to do it with an eye towards taking you by surprise, and will focus all their firepower on you, first. I’ve heard of taking one for the team, but that’s a ridiculous way to plan.

          • I’m personally in favor of keeping the gat concealed.
            However, if one is going to OC, best that they carry in something that actually works as a retention holster.
            Serpas, Fobus, and nylon sausage sacks should never ever be used for OC.

            • One point not often realized in these discussions is that the Open Carry Reform movement covers the case when a concealed firearm inadvertently become unconcealed. Many jurisdictions would arrest and prosecute CCL holders for this, and the Open Carry laws basically make that go away – you have to be brandishing before they can throw you in the cooler.

          • I will admit I carry in a paddle retention in winter. Works well since have to secure in car at work and can have cover garment in a coat.

    • Yup. A few years ago, one of the networks did a show that was advertised as a test of whether armed civilians could stop a shooter in an indoor setting. However, they biased the test (yeah, I know you’re shocked) by having them open carry, so the simulated bad guys just took them out first. Duh. Anyway, it did prove your point (a).

    • William O. B'Livion

      > I don’t think I could guarantee security of an exposed firearm.
      > A cop doesn’t usually have his hands tied up carrying things;

      Most (all?) uniformed police use “retention holsters” that require multiple discrete actions to release the pistol. there are videos of “Goblins” pulling a police officer by the handgun in the holster because they didn’t know how to release it and were just using MOAR 4CE.

      Of course, then you wind up with a rather thick, heavy holster.

      Number (a) would be my biggest “fear”.

      IMO a gun is like a first aid kit or a fire extinguisher–you have them around, but they aren’t the center piece on the table.

  16. People who want to protect themselves without raising a fuss carry concealed. Jerks who want to needlessly scare the horses carry openly.

    I predict an increase in the latter type of incident, and of gun bans by businesses in response. And I expect this law to have no other effects.

    • scott2harrison

      If I recall, in Texas, if your CCW printed, it could cause revocation of your permit. It would seem that this law would end that silliness.

  17. Fair bit of useful discussion has been going on elsewhere on how to respond to one of these “sudden jihad syndrome” events, and avoid getting shot by the first responders. Allow me to recap, for the audience here…

    First thing to remember? You are not superman. Nor are you a trained and fully prepared/equipped first responder, someone who has trained for this scenario and who is current on things like marksmanship and tied into the local authorities comms networks and so forth. Even former SF guys who are thinking clearly tell us that they would not deliberately try to engage with the bad guys, unless there was no other choice. Clearing buildings and fighting in built-up areas is a team sport, and if you’re not a part of the team doing it? You’re likely dead meat, and an impediment to the guys who are. In other words, don’t be a hero.

    That said, what should you do? First, get the hell out of the line of fire, and do what you can to protect as many innocents as possible. Withdraw, and cover their withdrawal. If you can’t unass the area completely, withdraw to a defensible position and take up an improvised ambush position to await intervention by first responders. Attempt to get into communications with those first responders, either by cell phone or perhaps a police radio you grab off a first responder who was a casualty of the initial attack. Let authorities know where you are, and try to get them intelligence on what is going on. When they show up, make sure they are who they say they are, and then do as you are instructed to. It would purely suck to be mistaken for a shooter and put down by the responding officers by mistake–Which will happen. You’re likely to be proned out, and treated like a criminal there at the first. Try to avoid giving the good guys a reason to mistake you for a bad guy, and deal with it. You’re at least alive, and perhaps have managed to save others.

    In general terms, open carry is a bad idea. Just like the usual “shoot me first” outfits, the weapon marks you as one of the first people they’re going to shoot. Avoid that, at all costs. Discretion is the better part of valor, here. Let them figure out the hard way who is armed, and who isn’t.

    And, if you have the misfortune to be unarmed, don’t give up. For the life of me, I’m completely unable to understand why people think the guys with the guns are magically invulnerable–Give me five minutes in the average public building here in the US, and I can guarantee you that I’d be able to find some very nasty things with which to defend myself. Imagine Seung-Hui Cho getting a faceful of toilet bowl cleaner, or other heavy-duty cleaning material from the janitor’s closet as he comes through the door. Think he’s going to be doing much shooting, while he’s screaming on the floor and going blind? Yeah. Also, gives you the opportunity to grab his weapons and turn them against him. All kinds of delightful possibilities for the aggressive types, out there. Break off a table leg, wait for him behind the door; slam the door into him and beat him to death with the leg. Look around you: Weapons everywhere… God forbid you should be in a chemistry classroom, either.

    Ideally, you want the poor bastard to find out what Rorschach meant with his line in Watchmen: “None of you seem to understand… I’m not locked in here with you: You’re locked in here with ME…”.

    Failing that? Mob the bastard. He can’t kill all of you, and some are going to manage to get close enough to grab an arm or other limb. Bite, scream, scratch, go for his eyes. Enough people in a mob are going to overwhelm these assclowns, no matter what. Mobs should terrify anyone with a gun, and if they’re coming into classrooms after you, they’re close enough to seriously damage. Even the kids at Sandy Hook could have used this tactic to good effect–Sure, some would have died, but imagine that dumbass buried under thirty or so six-year olds, biting and screaming in panic?

    Teach the kids to attack these assholes when they show up, and I guarantee you that the romance of going after unarmed schoolkids close up is going to evaporate about five minutes after the bloody chunks first show up in the news. Put me in charge of running school security programs, and one of my tactics is going to be having some poor fool show up in one of those bite suits we use for training dogs, and then have the kids mob his ass on command. Give the kids paintball masks, and him a paintball gun. Do that a couple of times to get the idea across, and make it the reflexive response to those kids seeing someone with a gun, and see what happens when some idiot tries it for real. The asshole may get a few of them, but what happens to him after he’s underneath the mass of them? Yeah… Thing of nightmares, my friends. Nightmares.

    I’m probably going to have to pay extra money to whoever is in that suit, though… Mass amounts of small children should outright terrify you, especially when they’re in full-out panic mode. Same as any other mob–Worst thing I can imagine as a former soldier is having to deal with one of those Mogadishu scenarios, where my guys and I are outnumbered by a mob that would likely literally tear us apart. Guns are not magic talismans, folks: The guys behind them should be terrified of you, if there are enough of you around. There are only thirty rounds in a magazine, and that means that he’s likely only going to be able to immediately kill five to ten of you, given the dynamics. If he’s close enough to reach, like across the classroom? You should be able to take him down. If you’ve got the balls, that is…

    • What of the simplest scenario: one or more shooters in a room you’re in? Seems to me that if immediate exit isn’t available, then if shooting back isn’t a good answer there’s not a lot of point in carrying a gun.

      • Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard

        I didn’t “hear” Kirk saying that “shooting back” wasn’t a good answer.

        I heard Kirk saying “be smart” when taking action.

      • That’s not the scenario we’re talking about. The one I’m speaking towards is you finding yourself in the midst of that mall takeover in Kenya, or the San Bernardino situation.

        You’re by yourself, and armed? Go to town. Worst thing that can happen already has, so just hope your training and reaction is enough.

        Friend of mine had a mindset I hope to emulate, if I’m ever in one of these nightmare situations. Immediate transition from “situation normal” to complete bugf**k insane aggression in about a split second. Do it right, and you’re going to at least disrupt things. With luck, you’re going to be the guy standing there with a tent pole and a couple of bloody heaps, afterwards.

        I watched it happen, and it scared the hell out of me as an innocent bystander/non-participant. Worked, though–The aggressors didn’t take the command post, and although he got his ass chewed for beating the crap out of the two poor fools that came in after him, they really didn’t do anything to him after the fact. Frankly, I think he scared the shit out of the guy who would have been reading him his Article 15. Army training events used to be a lot rougher than they are, right before I retired in 2007.

        Good model to use for these things, though, that’s for sure: Not only did he take down the two guys with guns who’d entered the command post, but the rest of the aggressor team heard the screams and commotion from outside the tent, and decided that it would be smarter to run than join in. There should have been eight guys with guns and MILES gear, and they were essentially defeated by one guy with a tent pole and an attitude problem. Perhaps the most disturbing thing was the beatific and, dare I say, sated look on this guy’s face, in the immediate aftermath. It’s probably not a really good idea to give a frustrated staff officer an excuse to beat your ass, late at night when he’s really, really tired of the BS.

        • I rather think that in the event of me being caught up in something like Westgate or San Bernardino – which I have thought about, ever since my daughter and I decided this summer that things had just gotten too damned crazy — likely I would try and be a sheepdog; herding people out of the way, and setting up behind something solid to cover their withdrawal. One of the long-time regular commenters at the political blog I contribute to (as well as some significant others, like Belmont Club) is Subotai Bahadur. Retired Army, I think – also long-time law enforcement and Tea Partier. He advised the strategy of -run-hide-fight back in a recent comment at Chicagoboyz.
          He also pointed out that most mall shops have a back entrance/loading dock area, which most people don’t know about, or consider in that kind of emergency.
          I take having the weapon and the CC license a very serious responsibility. I don’t think I could go completely berserk as your friend with the tent-pole did, but I would hope that I could react as swiftly and effectively as Subotai suggested.

          • I think he might have been one of the contributors where this was discussed… Certainly, his position is consonant with it.

            The idea of running, hiding and fighting is not palatable to me. At all. Yet, that is the path of wisdom, and I hope I have the presence of mind to follow it. Protect others, defend, strike back only if possible from ambush, and otherwise in extremis.

            The rest of it, I’m afraid I may be a bit past. Flicking into rage mode would probably result in a stress-induced heart-attack, these days, and I really don’t like admitting that to myself. Probably at that point in life where I ought to emulate the old bull in all those jokes about walking down the hill to the cows vs. running…

            Still, the berserkerganger approach does have its value, in certain circumstances. There is a time and place for utter madness, and why not give it a try, when all other options are gone?

            Cop friend/acquaintance was telling me about dealing with the aftermath of a rape. The girl who was the putative victim in this case, completely “lost her shit” during the rape, as he so delightfully phrased it, and the upshot was that the rape was never fully carried out. She literally tore off, bit, and/or otherwise destroyed the rapist’s genitals, and he bled out in her bedroom before the ambulance arrived. She was missing a couple of teeth, had a couple of broken bones, but he was dead, dead, dead–Despite the gun and knife he’d threatened her with.

            Girl weighed maybe 90 lbs, he was easily over 200, and a former football player. When they got there, she was still going to town on the guy’s head with some improvised club she’d created from broken furniture. The bedroom looked like it had been hit by a tornado, and blood was spattered everywhere, mostly his.

            Apparently, it can be a really foolish thing to try to force someone into committing fellatio, and having things “down there” bitten off can result in some really spectacular bleeding. The words “fire hose” were used. Every male cop that went into that scene winced, mostly because the evidence technicians who processed it found the parts that made the rapist male in about three different places in the room. With more-than-obvious bite marks, I might add. Precisely how she did this, nobody ever quite figured out, but the rapist only had about half an intact (empty) scrotum left, so far as external genitalia go.

            Bugf**k crazy doesn’t always win out, with odds like that, but occasionally it does. I always wondered what happened with that young lady, after the whole ordeal was over–My friend didn’t know, because she left the area, but did seem to be coping with the whole horror show about as well as you could expect, when the department last had contact with her.

          • William O. B'Livion

            > He also pointed out that most mall shops have a back
            > entrance/loading dock area

            Training materials have been captured which indicate that terrorist are being trained to cover entrances and shoot people when they come out. We haven’t *seen* this yet, but if you’ve got the manpower to start something inside, then shoot the first responders as they show up/stack up to enter they’re going to be looking at the entrances.

            If there are side doors they are unlikely to be covered, but keep a mental map of where the main entrances are, and avoid the SHIT out of them.

            > likely I would try and be a sheepdog; herding people out of the
            > way, and setting up behind something solid to cover their withdrawal.

            Consider moving to the bathrooms and setting up on a corner. At most of the malls I’ve seen there is a long hallway to the bathrooms and you can get people to cover in the bathrooms, then cover the hallway.

            > I take having the weapon and the CC license a very serious responsibility.

            Then you need to get as much training as you can afford.

            • “Consider moving to the bathrooms and setting up on a corner. At most of the malls I’ve seen there is a long hallway to the bathrooms and you can get people to cover in the bathrooms, then cover the hallway. “

              Bad, bad idea. Do not ever back yourself up into a cul-de-sac with one entrance, which is the way a lot of malls have their bathrooms set up. I’ll grant that access to water and toilets is a good idea, if you’re going to be there for awhile, but the better idea is not to set yourself up to be bottled in and trapped. Bathroom area has access you can use to get into service areas? Great idea, because those always have outside access. However, if you’re dealing with an insider attack, guess what? You’re now hosed, because you’re walking your sheep right into the wolf’s mouth.

              There’s no perfect solution, but I would very much advocate taking some time to think about where you are, and where you want to be. Getting yourself into a situation where the bad guys can lock you down? Well, you may not be vulnerable to immediately being killed, but you’re effectively hostages just as much as if they put guns to your head.

              If you’re going to run, don’t pick a dead end to run towards. You want to get as close as you can to the outside, so that you can disperse. Concentrate your charges into a corner or small room? You’re doing the Devil’s work for the bad guys.

              • William O. B'Livion

                I had a huge long post that got eaten by the web browser, but no, if you’re not going hunting and you are armed you DO want to get into smaller rooms where your pistol is on more-or-less equal footing with their rifles.

                Look at how the terrorist moved in Mumbia (minus Nariman House and the hostage taking), how they moved in Paris and in San Bernadino.

                They moved through train stations, streets, open areas of the mall, parking garages etc. and *avoided* getting into smaller places where they could get bound up.

                This is going to go double here in America. A rifle–the standard AK or M16 especially–is most useful from 10 or 20 meters out to the eyesight of the shooter or the scope. They CAN be used at closer ranges, but they aren’t as maneuverable as a pistol (or short barreled rifle). A pistol is good from 1 to 10 meters for most folks (well 3 feet to 10 yards for Americans), and for those who put in the time and practice, well, I know folks who can reliably hit out to 50 yards. Me, I start to look for body shots at about 15 yards usually, although I’ve been pushing my shots a bit left, and I’ve got to get that sorted.

                If you put yourself in a position where they have to get well inside your envelope before they can hurt you then you can KILL THEM FIRST.

                Rifles have two advantages, range and power. Making the space tight compromises the range advantage.

                Shooting them in the face at close range makes the power advantage moot.

                Anyway, getting OUT of the building is a questionable move. SWAT will be there in 3 to 10 minutes, and this ISN’T Nairobi, Mumbai or Beslan. You’re not “as much of a hostage as if they put the gun to your head”, you’re out of their reach until they are in yours. Plus you’re in a place where there’s plenty of water and you can use the toilet.

                Just don’t shoot the cop when he comes down the hallway.

        • I have a vision of one of our administrators standing over the whimpering remains of a would-be school shooter, a very peaceful and happy expression on her face, a battered textbook in one hand, sighing and saying, “Thanks. I needed that, the way this last week has gone.”

    • Re: hitting them as they come through the door. Remember that most folks reflexively look to the right on entering a room. You may get an edge by waiting on what will be their left as they enter.

  18. It’s not constitution carry, but it’s a start. You still need to get a CHL to then be able to carry open or concealed of hand guns.

    As we don’t have a state income tax and the CHL licensing generates rebinue for the state. Not sure if we’ll get rid of it.

    Oh and then there is this…

    PLEASE, Please don’t kick us out of the Union. [Wink,Wink]

  19. Ps. In an armed society it wouldn’t matter if the police prioritized the call or not; as the armed citizens would be the first responders to the scene. Plus think about it the citizens already involved are already the First Responders they just are kept from using the most effective tool to mount a defense.

  20. Some LEO are reasonable, but some are like Pinellas County Florida Sheriff Bob Gualtieri who said if they got open carry in FL his men would throw people to the ground and point guns at them if seen in public with a weapon – “or worse”. I believe or worse means shoot them on sight. There are unfortunately quite a few LEO in small jurisdictions who think they create law at their will. Some basically get away with that for years.
    Kirk in his long comment said first responders are well trained. Actually many police qualify in a ridiculously easy test once a year and can’t shoot well at all. I have been horrified to see police at the range who are doing good to hit paper.
    San Fransisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi failed his shooting qualification back in Oct. and can’t carry a gun now. Why do they even tolerate him in his job if he is that unqualified at basic skills he demands of his men? He not only is a desk pilot – he CAN’T respond to a real emergency.

    • “Kirk in his long comment said first responders are well trained.”

      Your mileage may vary… It might not be a bad idea to learn who your local cops are, what the state of their training is, and go from there. Some departments will no doubt make the Mumbai security forces look like Delta Force, and others are going to put up a hell of a fight. Not a bad time for citizens (vice “taxpayers”, “subjects”, or “peons”) to ask some pointed, pertinent questions about the state of readiness and plans for such events. Also, a damn good idea to educate yourself so that you have half a clue when the answers come back, and you are thus able to evaluate what you’re told. You don’t need to be an expert, but you should be able to identify BS when you hear it pushed your way.

      Around here, they’re mostly competent. Interestingly, I noticed that they were all wearing newish-appearing bulletproof vests and accoutred with AR-15 magazines and all the other gear that goes with a tactical scenario as a norm, right before San Bernardino. I don’t know why that changed, but they used to just wear their belt gear and a concealed vest. Reason for the change? I’m gonna go with there having been a heightened threat assessment made, somewhere. The day of, in San Bernardino, they were doing a training event not far from the actual target… Connecting the dots, you kinda wonder just what the public is not being told.

      • Considering that i have had LAPD SWAT officers make positive comments on my shooting at the range, I am not exactly willing to rely on how good a line officer’s markmanship is.

    • “but some are like Pinellas County Florida Sheriff Bob Gualtieri who said if they got open carry in FL his men would throw people to the ground and point guns at them if seen in public with a weapon – “or worse”. I believe or worse means shoot them on sight. ”

      Let me know if FL ever gets open carry. I figure by the time the lawsuits are done I’d own a good chunk of Pinellas County. Not to mention the majority of the assets previously belonging to ex-Sheriff Gualtieri and whichever deputies were involved.

  21. As a general rule, before you start toting a gun, it is a really, really good idea to get trained how to use it. If possible, start with a good, fundamentals based class to get up to speed on safety, grip, sights, basic marksmanship, ect.
    Next, a good self defense type class with an emphasis on avoiding problems. Mas Ayoob and Tom Givens are pretty much the trendsetters in this regard.
    But beware- there is a whole lot of Tactical Derp out there. According to PDB, some warning signs:
    “– Ratings and comments disabled on YouTube videos, no public forum, or dissenting opinions rapidly squashed on a forum by a gang of uncritical nuthuggers.
    – Emphasis on who they have supposedly trained, not whom they have trained under. Legitimate trainers are all constantly learning from each other, as our art is an open, collaborative process, not a secret handed down from the mountain by a guru.
    – Excessive guru worship, not invented here syndrome.
    – Emphasis on guru qualifications, but handwaving the details. So Bill Beasley was supposedly in the special forces in some manner. When? Where? Who served with him? You won’t find out from ADE!
    – Poor or nonexistent range safety.
    – Non sequitors or ad hominiems defending poor or nonexistent range safety
    – Students running team drills with people they have never met before.
    – Emphasis on flashy drills and tactics while disregarding the fundamentals of shooting.”
    More here:

  22. One note re California on the list of states: Open Carry of an unloaded and fully visible handgun* was not illegal in CA up until very recently, but The One True Party had a cow when activists started open carrying around the state and passed a new law illegalizing it in 2012.

    * I know, about as dangerous as carrying a hammer, but it was way too scary for our elected doofae. And you can’t carry a sword openly here either.

    • Come to Arkansas, and you can carry your switchblade, Scottish claith mhor, or Klingon bat’leth around as you go about your daily affairs.

      It wasn’t that long ago that I could legally carry my Ingram SMG around, but there was no legal way to carry a pocket knife with a blade more than 2-3/8″ long…

    • Well,, in non-urban parts of CA, loaded open carry was legal until recently. IIRC, it was measured by the population of the county you were in…

      and the irony of it is that the ninth circus has told them that they have to have open carry or shall issue CCW…

  23. BobtheRegisterredFool

    I’d had some vague plans for doing something concrete in the Puppy Wars. Of the sort I usually never follow through on.

    I saw the Castalia House series on Safe Spaces today. I am appalled. There is no way I can top that.

    What I had to take to the authorities in jurisdictions where every future WorldCon is to be held seems small potatoes in comparison.

    • I have too much reality hitting me after Saturdays storms to deal with Internet wars with the pervs of the genre. We are working on improving ecomm and security locally. It didn’t help that the regional fish wrapper told ISIS how to take out most of Dallas with a simple truck bomb.

      Also the spouse is seeing 100% enrolment for her ladies gun league. Once they are done a good number shoot better than most of the civs I see at the range.

    • You do what you can. To mix my metaphors one small potato can start an avalanche.

  24. I recall before my first LibertyCon being concerned about the “S.T.A.K.E. rounds” Mad Mike had for one ACME delivery, as I’d been used to the restrictions of furry conventions (particularly one in the Chicago area). The memorable response was, “You might get some funny looks there for not carrying.”

  25. David L. Davies

    Not good enough, Texas. A citizen should be allowed to carry arms WHEREVER that citizen is allowed to go. Including shops that don’t like guns.

    • Baby steps.

    • I’m actually in agreement with this. After all, if we can command a business owner to serve customers in pursuit of a “right” found nowhere in the Constitution, it should be axiomatic that the business owner must serve customers exercising a right explicitly granted.,

    • If you go into a shop that has the no guns allowed sign in Texas and the owner an employee see that you have and ask that you leave, and you refuse you are now trespassing. If you refuse than an officer will come and issue you a trespass warming. You can comply with the property owners wishes, to remain a welcome guest or suffer the consequences. You can’t or should force people to associate with people they do not wish too. There is no conflict between proverty rights and gun rights.

      • But if a business routinely asked members of $RACE to leave, it would be open to lawsuits and fines. Why should those who assume responsibility for defending themselves be less protected from discrimination than homosexuals?

        • No shirts no shoes no service.

          If you can force some to do business with doesn’t want to can also force them to charge what you want.

          How about make them bake you a cake?

          Civil rights boils down to those guys are asshole and I want the goverrnt to force them to do what I want.

          If some doesn’t want to do business with you for what ever reason oblige them, they’re the ones poorer for it.

      • The conflict is between property rights and CIVIL rights. If I can force a business owner to perform certain acts, one of those acts is allowing guns.

        This hasn’t been tested since Obergefell. It will be.

      • I have to give those business owners the same right I arrogate to myself: “Of course I’ll bake your cake. Hey, have you ever seen the move ‘The Help?'”

  26. My opinion (because I just know y’all have been waiting for it with ‘bated breath!) is that Concealed Carry — especially Concealed that’s widely known to be commonplace — gives all the advantages of Open, plus prudent and polite discretion. I think Open Carry should be legal, but I think it’s a dumb move.

    A few people here have mentioned some of the disadvantages of Open Carry — it’s a “shoot me first” sign; it flaunts a valuable that any Goblin would love to gobble (for every fancy-schmancy “secure” holster, there’s a dip who’s practiced beating it). Amanda mentioned the major disadvantage only to disparage it: The sight of guns scares a lot of people. “Grow up,” she tells them. (If only that spell worked!) Yes, people “should be” OK seeing Open Carry; yes, there’s a lot of Should Be that Ain’t.

    People here have also mentioned the advantages of concealed carry — not that it makes you look disarmed, but that it makes the disarmed look like they could be armed. (Viceroy butterflies know that trick). It’s less likely that some Concerned Citizen will call the cops on you (or some malicious SJW will try to get you SWATted). Even though nobody here would be fool enough to do anything other than exactly what the cops said when they showed up, at best it’s a hassle, and at worst… well, why play a high-stakes game where “losing small” is the most you can win?

    I’ve never seen (what I think is) a really good reason to prefer Open Carry over Concealed — the fraction of a second Open shaves off access time seems unlikely to matter much in any situation we civilians are likely to be in, and the Shoot Me First effect probably far outweighs it. Y’all have mentioned the only real advantage I can see to Open: somebody who does spot your Concealed might fret even more than they would about your Open. This sums to a lower chance of being confronted by cops — who will be more unpleasant if they do confront you. I can’t do the math on that. Maybe, since perfect Concealment is hard to get, Open might be better than faulty Concealment.

    Most of the pro-Open Carry arguments I’ve seen are variations on “You ain’t the boss of me!” (with chest-beating subtext) or “I got a right!” (as though dumb moves become smarter if you “have a right” to make them) or “It will Send A Message!” (to whom? Does anybody not know that there are people who favor the Keep and Bear Arms thing? And what message? “I am not to be effed with!”? Buddy, most people wouldn’t consider effing with you anyway; of the few who would, some of them regard that message as a challenge.)

    My opinion is that Concealed Carry — especially Concealed that’s widely known to be commonplace — gives all the advantages of Open, plus prudent and polite discretion.

    If there are solid reasons to prefer Open to Concealed, this forum seems a good place to find one.

    • BobtheRegisterredFool

      Massacre and local terrorism.

      Look at the reverse of few criminal attackers and many targets. Consider a somewhat murderous mob with its attention on a few targets.

      Having the firearm out may influence the mob’s decision to attack. If concealed, the mob doesn’t know, and the mob may be able to easily rush the target.

      If the mob coordinates with the local police, the police may use gun control rules to prepare the target for the mob, or to justify attacking the target directly. Open carry is necessary to ensure some security in one’s residence and on one’s property. Without that security, one can only run from the mob.

      • I don’t see how Open or Concealed Carry would help in that scene. If a murderous mob wants to snuff a small group — even without the support of the local lawmen — that small group is probably hosed, no matter how obviously armed. Running from the mob wouldn’t help unless they can outrun bullets. The mob would be at least as well armed as the designated victims — the mob’s on a mission, after all — and they understand the “Concealed Carry widely known to be commonplace” part as well as a mob understands anything. Some of the mobsters would surely decide that a few snipers, or even a sudden coordinated volley at short range, would solve the Few Victims Shooting Back problem. If the local police are in on it, the Designated Victims’ open carry becomes the after-the-fact justification for the attack.

        If the Designated Victims are holed up in some defensible position, even a mob is smart enough to consider that they may have a few guns in the Keep, visible or no. If the DVs are ambushed out in the open, they are, as previously stated, hosed.

        I don’t think there’s a defense against the many determined to start shooting at the few except for the few to GTFO before it starts.

        • William O. B'Livion

          Being willing and able to take a few with you (or even eager if you’re bent that way) can dissuade a lot of people.

          • BobtheRegisterredFool

            What Bill said. The essence of a mob is that it isn’t exactly a crack unit of shock infantry. Discipline helps willingness to take casualties, but comes with liability.

          • Some people will refrain from attacking you if you’re armed. Others will just change the plan of attack.

            • William O. B'Livion

              Mobs won’t. They can’t.

              If it’s not a mob, then different rules apply.

              • What’s a mob? There’s a spectrum, with trained, disciplined armies (all of whom carry firearms) at one end, and sudden, spontaneous outbursts by enraged crowds (an unknowable fraction of whom may be carrying — or can quickly obtain — any kind of weapon available) at the other.

                [Dead Perp’s Name] rioters are somewhere between those extremes (loosely organized, undisciplined, variably armed) who are unlikely to attack en mass a bunch of armed riot cops, but with individuals who might well be willing to risk a shot at an isolated member of their Target Group — especially one who’s obvious weapon makes him a high-value target.

                The nice thing about Concealed Carry is that you can un-conceal at need, at which point your weapon does everything for you that Open Carry does, without attracting the undesirable attention of Attentive Undesirables during the other 99.9999% of the time.

                Steven Utash’s mob might have been deterred if he’d shown a weapon. Or, someone in the mob might have shot him instead of just beating the cheese out of him if he’d shown a weapon. Only God knows “what woulda happened if.”

                I agree that there are plausible scenarios in which a .44 Mag hung prominently but passively on your hip could keep a Steven Utash-type situation from getting started in a way that actively calling it to a mob’s attention wouldn’t. The chances you’ll find yourself in one are down there with winning significant bucks in a lottery, but it’s possible. Meanwhile, being inconvenienced — slightly or hugely — because you’re openly carrying a Big Scary Gun would happen a few times a week. If you feel Open Carry is worth that kind of avoidable hassle, go for it. I don’t think it’s wise, but I fully support your right to do it.

        • BobtheRegisterredFool

          Just the genocides in the twentieth century show that there are plenty of people who do not ‘GTFO’ in time and do not form a military that would make such too costly.

          The issue with ‘of course the mob will have firearms, and be prepared to use them’, is that it matches only some of the history in the US*. A group of people prepared to use firearms intelligently is an army.

          There are a number of incidents in US history where mobs have been used when the agitators could not field an army, or could not risk the retaliation an army would provoke. Training an army is expensive, and is not invisible.

          Immediately post Reconstruction they needed the plausible deniability, lest the Republicans have an excuse to send Federal Troops back in. A rifle often was the difference between a lynching, and the group deciding that they were not that willing to die for the cause’s trivial benefit.

          For the last half century, mobs have been allowed much more freedom to act, so long as they only use fists and improvised weapons in an organized way. Even if they were capable of it, the organizers would not choose to use firearms as you describe, because of the military and police response it would provoke. Furthermore, said mobs are generally not motivated to the point of being able to take losses. They might cheerfully lynch unarmed Korean shopkeepers, but are not willing to die for that.

          It can’t happen here or now is bullshit. Our magic dirt didn’t stop it happening in the late nineteenth century. Even now, we have signs of collusion between mobs and various levels of government with authority over police.

          Opposing open carry is harmful to minorities. Supporting that form of gun control is white supremacist.

          *1919, Elaine, Arkansas had the Feds on board. 1921, Tulsa, Oklahoma, I heard second or third hand via an unreliable source, that both sides were armed, and the DVs were killed after they ran out of ammunition. So some of my favorite examples fit what you say, and probably are a poor example of a ‘casual’ massacre.

          • You mention two many-attacking-few situations: genocides and lynch mobs.

            You’re right: there have been plenty of people targeted for genocide who didn’t GTFO. I’m right: they should have.

            If wholesale genocide (or any other SHTF scenario) broke out in the US, ‘most every social/legal convention would go on the pyre. Anybody who wasn’t armed, dug in, and eating would take any chance to get that way, and anybody who was would stop at nothing to stay there. I don’t think we can draw useful conclusions about the wisdom of Open Carry now based on such a chaotic hypothetical. Too many unknowns. All we know is that It Would Suck. (I don’t think I have ever said “It can’t happen here.” My philosophy is the opposite: If it happened ever, it can happen again; if it happened anywhere, it can happen here.)

            In the here-and-now, impromptu lynch mobs are more likely than the “Mob with a Mission” I was thinking of earlier. Walking into the wrong bar wearing (or being) the wrong color and saying the wrong thing to the wrong person can be enough to start one. Whether doing that with a Big Iron on your hip keeps the peace or gets you preemptively rushed, shot, or clubbed in the back of the head depends on the bar, time of day, day of the week, the brand of unrest the TV’s currently inciting… too many unknowns. You can’t say in advance that you’d be better off carrying Open there. “All happy mobs are alike; each angry mob is angry in its own way.” You can read the room before choosing whether, and how, to reveal your concealed weapon. If you go into it Open, that’s the choice you’re stuck with.

            We might be talking past each other with examples like Korean shopkeepers defending themselves. Open Carry didn’t deter their attackers; their firing down at them from rooftops did. A weapon that you’re actively using certainly isn’t concealed, but can you really call that Open Carry?

            You might remember the early days of Florida’s Shall Issue permit policy. The bad guys wisely decided that cars with Florida plates had too much chance of having armed drivers — though nobody could see a weapon — so they shifted their focus to rentals and out-of-state plates. Of course only a small fraction of Florida drivers were actually armed. There is a game that most people refuse to play, even though less than 17% of the chambers are loaded.

            The practical message that Open Carry sends to would-be assailants is “Contrary to your expectations, I am armed. Be guided accordingly.” I favor widespread Concealed because it changes the bad guys’ default expectation from the current “I don’t see his weapon, so he’s almost certainly helpless” to “I don’t see his weapon, but I’m still better off playing Russian Roulette.” Open Carry protects only the carriers (to whatever extent its protection outweighs its making of them higher-value targets) while shifting the risk to others. Widespread Concealed protects everybody.

            Opposing open carry is harmful to minorities. Supporting that form of gun control is white supremacist.


            Race-baiting boilerplate tacked on the end of an intelligent post makes me suspect Poe’s Ravin’. Sorry if I’m missing a joke.

            Like I said at the very beginning, I think Open Carry should be legal. I just think the many disadvantages (which I can see easily) outweigh the advantages (which I still can’t see at all). I guess that’s more diplomatic than saying “it’s dumb.”

  27. About that black market,
    Ran across this a while back, here’s one of the interesting parts:
    Well, says the Small Arms Survey, a research outfit established by the Swiss government, the United Kingdom, with just shy of 1.8 million legal firearms, has about four million illegal guns. Belgium, with about 458,000 legal firearms, has roughly two million illegal guns. In Germany, the number is 7.2 million legal guns and between 17 and 20 million off-the-books examples of things that go “bang” (a figure with which the German Police Union very publicly agrees). France, says the Survey, has 15-17 million unlawful firearms in a nation where 2.8 million weapons are held in compliance with the law.

    Even those numbers may understate the case. While the 2003 Small Arms Survey report put the number of legal guns in Greece at 805,000 and illegal guns at 350,000, just two years later, the Greek government itself nudged those figures up, just a tad, to one million legal guns and 1.5 million illegal ones.

    • I don’t think those numbers are anywhere near accurate, either. Anywhere there was fighting in WWII, you’re going to find caches of arms that the locals just casually picked up, and put away for a rainy day with Russians in it…

      And, then there’s all the stuff they hid from the Nazis, up in the lofts of the houses. Judging from anecdotes and personal experience, I’d be completely unsurprised to find out that there were exponentially more arms than even the most pessimistic bureaucrat has nightmares about. The bureaucrats think they run things over there, but the crafty peasant has always keep his options open, right along with the stolid city-dweller.

      Friend of mine spent years assigned down in Vicenza, where the Airborne unit is, and married an Italian girl from back up in the hills. Her grandfather took him up in the mountains, once, to visit some family historical sites, including the caves he and his father had lived in and fought from during their time as partisans in WWII. There was probably enough captured German, Italian, and American arms in one of the caves grandpa walked him through to arm a good-size company, and it was all carefully packed away in grease–“Just in case”.

      I doubt any of that stuff has been, or is ever likely to be turned in.

      • Especially not now, judging by how Austrians and Germans are stocking up on anything gun-like or officially approved for self defense. (And probably otherwise, but that’s not going to show up in the government media.)

      • I am reminded of something I once heard about old French farmers going out occasionally to oil the garden.

  28. We had the same predictions of horror when Minnesota adopted “Shall Issue,” it’d be Dodge City, every fender bender a shootout, blood in the streets. Wonderful! Look, I watch hockey for the fights and racing for the crashes, I want my violence and gore, on television, in Hi Def. But what happened? Typical politician bait-and-switch. Not only are there no shootouts, crime is actually declining. More people get run over by the damned Light Rail Train than are shot by permitted pistol carriers. Pathetic.

    • I’ve got all this popcorn ready to pop, when is the “blood on the streets” going to happen?

      After all, it’s been prominent in the news every single time a state has adopted shall issue laws. If you didn’t know any better, you’d think those with cases of the shrieking vapors didn’t know what they were on about.

      • “Journalist” comes from a Sanskrit phrase meaning “someone who knows nothing about everything.”

  29. In Arizona, we have open and concealed carry, and we don’t need no steenkin’ license. We haven’t had those gunfights the media predicted, the crime rate has dropped. Perhaps Texas can join the Wild West eventually?

    • It was amusing when Arizona shut down their carry licensing system, then had to re-open it due to public demand. Arizonans needed an Arizona license to carry in states that had recipricocity with Arizona…

  30. Geoff Withnell

    Unfortunately, Maryland is included in the states that allow open carry with a permit, but in practice this isn’t the case. The state police have absolute discretion as to whether a permit is issued or not to a given individual, with no need to give a reason. And somehow, alomost no one actually gets a permit who isn’t politically connected.

  31. I think I’ve posted this link before, but if you didn’t read it, read it now.

    And if you think that the inept government response described couldn’t happen in the US, you haven’t been paying attention.