[rktman]

Well, I just tried to stomach my way through the salon.com piece and my stomach couldn't handle the whole thing. Let's just say........mularkey.(SP) What a load of crap. The implied undertone(?) is that the mere sight of a firearm will trigger all sorts of alarms. Well, after all the enormous costly campaigns to make it so, lots of scared folks out there react just that way. If there's a gun around, by golly it's gonna go off sooner or later. No/low info, brain dead, didiots.

[cripplecreek]

the mere sight of a firearm will trigger all sorts of alarms.

It will among liberal weenies but they'll live. It only takes a couple of high profile cases in each state before police pretty much leave the issue alone.

[umgud]

and it “is more dangerous than you think.

I assume he backs this up with emotions, not actual proof.

[Standing Wolf]

Times I’ve carried openly, it’s extremely rare for anyone to notice.

[Da Coyote]

The sight of anyone packing heat doesn’t offend me.

The sight of the Obamadork, Boxer, Pelosi, Reid, (and pretty much any congresscritter) anyone on MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, anyone from CAIR or the ACLU, greatly offends me.

And - coming soon - we’re just gonna say no.

Oops, make that h*ll no, and make our day.

[Yo-Yo]

Isn’t open carry currently illegal in Texas? Then why would a University of Texas professor have his panties in a wad over it?

[driftless2]

The Salon article is just another one of many from the lib/leftists view of the "evil" gun. The Evil Gun has a life it its own. Possessing the Evil Gun turns a normally mind-mannered person into a raging, psychotic killer who shoots at anything that moves.

It was best typified in a movie with Jamie Lee Curtis and Ron Silver called "Blue Steel" where Silver's character takes a gun from a crime scene, and the mere possession of the gun turns Silver into a murderous lunatic. Libs actually believe that stuff.

Which is why any accidental gun deaths are loudly trumpeted in the news while the prevention of a crime by a legally-armed citizen is never printed or aired.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

While I appreciate open carry as a way of reassuring the public that there are armed citizens about; tactically, concealed carry is far more practical.

Open carry sends a message to everyone. Concealed carry sends a message just to criminals, and one they cannot see coming. A message that even dimwits can get.

Finally, something I harp on, if you carry a concealed carry handgun, you should definitely carry a quick draw sheath knife, as the two are very complementary for self defense.

It’s all good, and the more, the merrier.

[William Tell]

From the linked article: "One of the more valuable precepts of our civil society is that one’s having a constitutional right to do something does not necessarily mean that one should do it. In much of the country, Second Amendment advocates are quite right when they insist that openly carrying guns is legal. But that’s not the point. Of course people are going to be upset if you walk brazenly into a coffee shop with an AR-15, and no amount of “It’s my right” will change the fact. Suffice it to say that you probably won’t do a great job of attracting people to your cause if your idea of proselytizing is to stick a gun and a copy of the Constitution in their faces."

Someone help me with this concept.

What would have possessed our Founders to have enumerated a right that "should not" be exercised?

This seems to mimic the atheist stance that religious people "should not" exercise their religion. Similarly, one "should not" exercise their right to be secure in their persons and homes because honest people have nothing to hide.

Is there something special about coffee shops which make the Constitution irrelevant?

[Charles Nichols]

Meanwhile, in California my Federal Civil Rights lawsuit seeking to overturn California’s 1967 ban on openly carrying loaded firearms as well as overturning the two recently enacted unloaded open carry bans is fully briefed and awaiting a decision from the district court judge.

As luck would have it the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recently established a framework for evaluating Second Amendment cases. California Attorney General Harris must prove that Open Carry falls outside of the scope of the Second Amendment as it was understood at the time of ratification and she must prove that the bans on open carry do not burden the Second Amendment right. http://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

[neverdem]

Why did you post it in chat?

The left is picking all the wrong fights, and open carry is one of them, IMHO.