Might Wanna Cover That Pistol Better...

[smccrory]

Just carrying a gun is not illegal and not an indication that a crime is about to happen therefore no reason to respond. Your comparison is about the same as saying that riding a sportbike opens you up to have people call the cops because your bike could go fast.

You're grossly misinterpreting and completely missing the point. Going fast and commuting violent crime are very different degrees of potential outcomes, which is why the police are likely to respond to one and not the other.

[Pokey]

Police rarely respond on time while a crime is being committed, typically it is afterward or when they are looking for trouble that just may not exist. The public eye is a pain in the ass more so than not, many cannot mind their own damn business.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Pokey

[cOoTeR]

You're grossly misinterpreting and completely missing the point. Going fast and commuting violent crime are very different degrees of potential outcomes, which is why the police are likely to respond to one and not the other.

Since when did carrying a gun become a violent crime? Since when does carrying a gun mean you are going to commit a violent crime? I must have missed that day at the academy. I can tell you as a law enforcement officer I would never respond to a report that is simply a person is minding their own with a gun. Stopping someone just because they have a gun would be illegal. If they were headed somewhere to do bad things like you seem to be saying since their gun is showing and you stop them what makes you think they will admit they are going to do bad? Would you think it is reasonoble for a cop to stop someone because they have a gun in a rifle rack? Or a knife or baseball bat? You'd probably shit if you came out to the southern rural parts of Arizona, most people carry guns. People often open carry guns even in the grocery store, restaurants and yes in/on vehicles. No one cares because they are used to it and realize good people with a gun is not a bad thing. The reason being is because those who carry guns here don't hide it because they are scared of offending people.

Edited June 3, 2013 by cOoTeR

[conn-e-rot]

Agreed, thanks IP, that's exactly what I meant, but I guess the NRA circle-jerk frenzy you predicted, and now playing out, needed my point to be spelled out better.  My bad...

 

"Ermagerd, ees thertening meh rahts!  Ahnd tahken uer jabs!  Kohld ded hahnds!"

 

Since I gotta spell it out, here goes.  It's not about having the legal right to carry open, or even concealed with a license.  It's about being modest, thoughtful and respectful enough to not shove it in people's faces, when the outcome could result in local, city, state and federal ordinances that curtail those rights.  All he had to do is better plan for his ride with a tucked shirt or better gun placement.  I hope he manages his gun and bike better than that.

 

As motorcyclists we've got enough stereotypes to deal with after The Wild One, The Wild Angels, Sons of Anarchy, Fast and Furious and a bunch of other trashy "biker-ploitation" flicks that give society an exaggerated view of us as danger-hungry violence-prone outlaws.

 

Imagine this - A suburban soccer mom (whose vote counts the same as yours, remember) carrying kiddos around on a Saturday, with hardly any prior contact with firearms, sees a "biker" with a gun.  She might 1) call the cops and report his plate and divert them from more important duties, 2) tell her friends (who also vote) about the crime she surely stopped, 3) lay down the law with her partner that their kids shall not participate in camp shooting sports because that's how these things get started, and 4) vote for gun control at every future opportunity when she might otherwise have been ambivalent in the past.  Ill-informed?  Sure.  But to her, she's protecting her children from a perceived threat and just being a good mom and citizen.  Imagine another person recently separated from a friend or family member and worried about domestic violence, and what their default mindframe would be seeing an exposed gun on the back of a motorcyclist.

 

Again, this has nothing to do with ur gahd-given rahts, it's about not inviting societal responses that will curtail those rights if given enough justification.  Look, I'm a motorcyclist, a CHL holder, gun enthusiast (for more years than some of you have been alive) and NRA member myself, but I believe we should be more respectful (and grateful) for the delicate detente we have with society.  Some of you see this detente as a result of us poking the bear in the eyes and proving our rights, but there's also a critically important layer of trust at play. Currently, we are not seen as enough of a threat to society to warrant additional gun control.  But don't take that for granted.  There are plenty of people who, upon seeing more guns exposed in the open, will take that as a call to respond.

 

We can be all cocky and crow about our constitutional rights on soapboxes, and unashamedly carry ugly guns for all to see and be willing to argue our rights to anyone who has the guts to call us out, but in the end, what have we accomplished to those on the fence?  We come off as arrogant, insensitive and un-attentive to concealment details, mouthpieces for an industrial lobby, and one-sided about demanding respect for our rights while pushing aside others who don't want themselves or their kids to see guns out in the open.

 

If you don't get what I'm saying at this point, there's little hope I'd be able to get it through to you.  But, at least I've speelled it out.

 

Happy carrying and riding, but please, mind how our behaviors shape the overall debate.

Do us all a favor and take your guns to the next gun buyback program then call the NRA and cancel your membership. We don't need anymore hypocritical gun owners whining about open carry while at the same time claiming they support gun owners rights.

Edited June 3, 2013 by conn-e-rot

[smccrory]

Do us all a favor and take your guns to the next gun buyback program then call the NRA and cancel your membership. We don't need anymore hypocritical gun owners whining about open carry while at the same time claiming they support gun owners rights.

Not gonna happen, and here we have it - the "get out of my club if you don't like it the way I do" platitude that comes when someone's unwilling to reflect. How about YOU do us all a favor and consider that open carry on a bike in metropolitan Columbus, while perfectly legal, can have at least as many negative consequences as not exercising a right.

But you won't. That would be outside the NRA script, wouldn't it.

[smccrory]

Cooter, I grew up in WV with family in rural Ohio, so I'm quite familiar (and comfortable) with country norms. Don't make this personal.

[blue03636]

This isn't an open carry issue, you have to have your conceal carry to have it on you while on the bike. Hell before the law change you had to have it exposed in a vehicle including motorcycles with your conceal carry.

[Pokey]

Do us all a favor and take your guns to the next gun buyback program then call the NRA and cancel your membership. We don't need anymore hypocritical gun owners whining about open carry while at the same time claiming they support gun owners rights.

 

Where is he being a hypocrite, you mean just because he doesn't totally agree with how some choose to carry? Just because some of us are much more discrete in how we carry, and some of us would actually not be dicks to law enforcement should they approach us for whatever reason, does not make us hypocrites or less passionate about our rights and others. I support open carry, but I sure as hell don't have to agree with it in some situations or even feel the need to do it myself.

[Tigerpaw]

Do us all a favor and take your guns to the next gun buyback program then call the NRA and cancel your membership. We don't need anymore hypocritical gun owners whining about open carry while at the same time claiming they support gun owners rights.

So, the purpose of owning/carrying a gun is to further an agenda...the truth comes out.  LOL.  The "activists" in this forum are always the first to take the discussion to the immature/personal level.

[cOoTeR]

Not gonna happen, and here we have it - the "get out of my club if you don't like it the way I do" platitude that comes when someone's unwilling to reflect. How about YOU do us all a favor and consider that open carry on a bike in metropolitan Columbus, while perfectly legal, can have at least as many negative consequences as not exercising a right.

But you won't. That would be outside the NRA script, wouldn't it.

Cooter, I grew up in WV with family in rural Ohio, so I'm quite familiar (and comfortable) with country norms. Don't make this personal.

All the "negative consequences" you mentioned are hypothetical what ifs. I'm willing to guess the guy you saw hasnt had any of the negative consequences happen to him. If it were that bad he'd probably not be doing it. The problem is not the man on a bike open carrying. The problem is the ignorant people that freak out about it. The guy is not in the wrong at all. As a gun owner did you really have any issue with it other than scaring soccer moms? The people who will freak out about it are already set in their ways and seeing a gun will not change their perception. It's like people who get all worked up because their neighbor let's his pit bull or rotweilier or doberman or German shepard out in his yard off leashand they get scared. Those dogs could be the nicest dogs in the world and the scared neighbor would still freak out and maybe call the cops. The cops will most likely tell them that as long as the dog is in his yard there is nothing wrong with it. Same as they should tell the scared soccer mom as long as the guy is in an area where guns are allowed and he isn't threatening anyone there is no reason to call.

I mentioned the rural area because you see it everywhere out here in the rural areas. You also see people open carrying in Tucson a lot too . The point being that even people who don't like guns can learn and see that just because someone is open carrying doesn't mean they are dangerous. If enough people do it it becomes a normal sight and the scared people will get over it. But if everyone caters to the scared peoples mentality and hides their guns people will freak out when they see one. So there isn't a reason why you or I should tell someone how to carry their firearm. If the man wants to open carry let him if he doesn't that's his choice. I don't know why you feel its become personal. Sorry if I hurt your feelings.

[blue03636]

The problem is not the man on a bike open carrying.

 

Provided.he has his conceal carry license, if not he's in deep shit.

[cOoTeR]

Provided.he has his conceal carry license, if not he's in deep shit.

In my personal opinion no but legally yes. Provided he gets caught.

[smccrory]

Thanks Cooter, that's a level-headed reply and your mention of dobies and rotties resonates with me - I love big dogs, having owned a rescued shep-rott myself.  And thanks Pokey and Tigerpaw - you definitely understand what I'm trying to convey. 

 

I spent untold hours calming people who saw my pup as a big, powerful black dog with unpredictable intentions, where she really just wanted to lick hands.  This is especially true with little kids because she has this built-in protection instinct from being my daughter's companion - once a kid hugs her, they're her protectorate for life.  Your analogy is especially good in that way - she was an unusual image for most people, and if they were smart, the first thing they'd do is look at my eyes and body language to judge the combined package.  If they weren't, they'd show fear and make me and my dog wonder what they themselves were up to.  So, your analogy goes even further, because I would go out of my way whenever I "open carried" her to be friendly, calm and nerdly positive so that my dog, their dog and they would (almost always) follow suit and it would be a great exchange for everyone.  In fact, I take a certain pride that Tootsie (yes, that was her name) could be depended upon to calm a Bark Park situation down, especially if it meant defending timid dogs from under-socialized aggressors.  It took several years to bring that out of her, but wow, once she found her job...  Anyway...

 

Now, if we return the analogy back to open carry of firearms, we gun owners have an opportunity to not come off as self-entitled power pricks who don't care enough about how we appear on a bike with a gun.  There are plenty of pricks like that with "gladiator dogs" and they give the rest of us a terrible time with anti-pit/anti-rott/anti-dobie ordinances.  We can instead show that we hold ourselves to higher standards of calm, openness, detail, leadership (and if necessary, response) with regards to gun stewardship.  That's all I'm talking about.

 

Sure, at times that could mean open carry with a positive attitude and willingness to answer questions, be nice to the cops, be willing to spend an extra hour while your ID/plates/CHL are run through the computer while we prove that open carry is constitutional and by gawd, we must exercise that right to keep it...!  But many other times, I'd strongly argue it means keeping one's piece concealed so that citizens still wrapping their heads around gun rights vs. control in a violent world don't have negative personal experiences to anchor upon.  I'm not sure everyone wants cops to hang out in their cul-de-sac or favorite breakfast spot while they confirm an exposed carrier.  "Yea it was a pleasant breakfast up until the point where some gun rights political dood packing a pistol attracted the cops, then everyone was on edge and the service went to hell."

 

Conn-e-rot redefined my hypothetical soccer mom example as already being anti-gun, but that wasn't the scenario at all.  Contrary to NRA chest-puffing, not everyone is fer us, or agin us!  A lot of my friends and coworkers are uneasy with private carry but they won't quite say they're against it because they see the potential value of having citizen shepherds around.  At the same time, they do believe they have an equal right to travel down the street with kids in tow without seeing personal firearms exposed.  It's an unspoken social contract.  A functional detente.  Yes, it's more urban/suburban than rural, but that's a political reality.

 

In the end, I wouldn't call the cops on anyone open carrying and I'd certainly discourage others from doing the same.  That is, until their body language appears off, and I'll be the first to either calmly leave and ring up the po-po for a spot-check, or ready a more immediate response of my own if things quickly degrade.  Wouldn't you do the same?  Shouldn't you do the same?  And wouldn't it just be so much better for us all to keep from raising everyone's neck hairs by leaving our guns concealed in places where it's uncommon for them to be out in the open?

 

I mean damn, I rather prefer calm breakfasts.  And I rather prefer being able to tell my moderate friends that we're not all out to press political agendas by wearing guns in the open wherever we go.

[smccrory]

I wouldn't call the police on anyone carrying a gun that was securly holstered and not being touched. No matter how "peculiar" that person seems to be presenting himself. A holstered gun is not a threat, nor should it be treated as such. It's silly when you think about it. How does the perceived nervousness of a gun carrier change because the gun is visible? You walk past nervous people all the time. It's ok just because you can't see their weapon? That doesn't make any sense when you try to apply logic and reasoning.

I agree but I'm not talking about nervousness and a weapon not being touched - that was your word and from which you drew a conclusion of non-logic/reasoning. Or friendly. Or boisterous. Or sleepy. Or sad. Or overwhelmed. Or anything else non-threatening.

Surely you're not assuming that just because someone openly carries that they're good-to-go, right? Because if so, you've just numbed off environmental cues that every personal protection instructor tells you to listen to.

This is gonna sound like juvenile profiling but I'm in a hurry to get out the door for a ride... Are they continually scanning the place? Did they only order water or coffee? Are they making aggressive eye contact with you or other citizens? Are they unusually somber or wearing a 1000-yard stare? None of these would concern me in isolation but together I guarantee they'd raise your spidey sense too, and I'd carefully watch their hand movements until I got a better read. Maybe they're just a paranoid gun nut openly carrying for the first time ever, or maybe they're building up to something newsworthy. Are you willing to bet your life on the former?

Anyway, we're getting off topic.

[cOoTeR]

Thanks Cooter, that's a level-headed reply and your mention of dobies and rotties resonates with me - I love big dogs, having owned a rescued shep-rott myself.  And thanks Pokey and Tigerpaw - you definitely understand what I'm trying to convey. 

 

I spent untold hours calming people who saw my pup as a big, powerful black dog with unpredictable intentions, where she really just wanted to lick hands.  This is especially true with little kids because she has this built-in protection instinct from being my daughter's companion - once a kid hugs her, they're her protectorate for life.  Your analogy is especially good in that way - she was an unusual image for most people, and if they were smart, the first thing they'd do is look at my eyes and body language to judge the combined package.  If they weren't, they'd show fear and make me and my dog wonder what they themselves were up to.  So, your analogy goes even further, because I would go out of my way whenever I "open carried" her to be friendly, calm and nerdly positive so that my dog, their dog and they would (almost always) follow suit and it would be a great exchange for everyone.  In fact, I take a certain pride that Tootsie (yes, that was her name) could be depended upon to calm a Bark Park situation down, especially if it meant defending timid dogs from under-socialized aggressors.  It took several years to bring that out of her, but wow, once she found her job...  Anyway...

 

Now, if we return the analogy back to open carry of firearms, we gun owners have an opportunity to not come off as self-entitled power pricks who don't care enough about how we appear on a bike with a gun.  There are plenty of pricks like that with "gladiator dogs" and they give the rest of us a terrible time with anti-pit/anti-rott/anti-dobie ordinances.  We can instead show that we hold ourselves to higher standards of calm, openness, detail, leadership (and if necessary, response) with regards to gun stewardship.  That's all I'm talking about.

 

Sure, at times that could mean open carry with a positive attitude and willingness to answer questions, be nice to the cops, be willing to spend an extra hour while your ID/plates/CHL are run through the computer while we prove that open carry is constitutional and by gawd, we must exercise that right to keep it...!  But many other times, I'd strongly argue it means keeping one's piece concealed so that citizens still wrapping their heads around gun rights vs. control in a violent world don't have negative personal experiences to anchor upon.  I'm not sure everyone wants cops to hang out in their cul-de-sac or favorite breakfast spot while they confirm an exposed carrier.  "Yea it was a pleasant breakfast up until the point where some gun rights political dood packing a pistol attracted the cops, then everyone was on edge and the service went to hell."

 

Conn-e-rot redefined my hypothetical soccer mom example as already being anti-gun, but that wasn't the scenario at all.  Contrary to NRA chest-puffing, not everyone is fer us, or agin us!  A lot of my friends and coworkers are uneasy with private carry but they won't quite say they're against it because they see the potential value of having citizen shepherds around.  At the same time, they do believe they have an equal right to travel down the street with kids in tow without seeing personal firearms exposed.  It's an unspoken social contract.  A functional detente.  Yes, it's more urban/suburban than rural, but that's a political reality.

 

In the end, I wouldn't call the cops on anyone open carrying and I'd certainly discourage others from doing the same.  That is, until their body language appears off, and I'll be the first to either calmly leave and ring up the po-po for a spot-check, or ready a more immediate response of my own if things quickly degrade.  Wouldn't you do the same?  Shouldn't you do the same?  And wouldn't it just be so much better for us all to keep from raising everyone's neck hairs by leaving our guns concealed in places where it's uncommon for them to be out in the open?

 

I mean damn, I rather prefer calm breakfasts.  And I rather prefer being able to tell my moderate friends that we're not all out to press political agendas by wearing guns in the open wherever we go.

First it is illegal for a cop to detain you without probable cause. Open carry does not give a cop probable cause to detain you. So your scenario about ruining breakfast is hypothetical and bogus. I never said it was a political issue just its none of your business how the guy legally carries his gun. People seeing a gun on the roadway and getting worked up over it are irrational and need to learn there is nothing wrong with it. I bet most of those same people that you mentioned have no problem seeing a law enforcement officers gun what's the difference with a law abiding citizens gun? I would also venture to guess those people you mentioned would have no problem watching a movie with gun violence.

What those people need is to be retrained that good people with guns are not a bad thing. Not having their ignorance catered to by walking on eggshells around them. It's a form of conditioning (i can't remember what its called, I want to say classical conditioning but not sure) that is needed. It's like a young horse when it is first born it is terrified of cars passing nearby on the roadway. But more and more cars pass and little by little the young horse loses its fear of automobiles. Same thing people can handle seeing a gun the more they do see them the more used they get to them and realize that those gun never hurt them.

[MidgetTodd]

Anybody know what oil he used on his gun?

[Tigerpaw]

[Pokey]

First it is illegal for a cop to detain you without probable cause. Open carry does not give a cop probable cause to detain you. So your scenario about ruining breakfast is hypothetical and bogus. I never said it was a political issue just its none of your business how the guy legally carries his gun. People seeing a gun on the roadway and getting worked up over it are irrational and need to learn there is nothing wrong with it. I bet most of those same people that you mentioned have no problem seeing a law enforcement officers gun what's the difference with a law abiding citizens gun? I would also venture to guess those people you mentioned would have no problem watching a movie with gun violence.

What those people need is to be retrained that good people with guns are not a bad thing. Not having their ignorance catered to by walking on eggshells around them. It's a form of conditioning (i can't remember what its called, I want to say classical conditioning but not sure) that is needed. It's like a young horse when it is first born it is terrified of cars passing nearby on the roadway. But more and more cars pass and little by little the young horse loses its fear of automobiles. Same thing people can handle seeing a gun the more they do see them the more used they get to them and realize that those gun never hurt them.

 

 

 

 

That is where the gray area of the law comes into play whether we agree with it or not, and like it or not. And people are NEVER and I mean NEVER going to get used to citizens openly carrying guns, but it can be somewhat accepted in certain areas or states whether it be rural or urban, but I can assure you that police do get sick and tired of responding to the calls. We live in the most vile country in the world when it comes to people suing others over practically anything and everything, and yeah some police officers can be real pricks at times, but so can everybody else too. Police just want to cover their ass in many instances, and not knowing who they are dealing with does not help a situation. Citizens walking around or riding around openly carrying a gun is anything but normal to the public eye, those of us that choose to do so "get it" but the majority still does not. I say open carry to your hearts content, and handle the potential consequences of doing so as you see fit. I will be one of the first to correct a persons negative outlook toward us, and to encourage them to educate themselves and be more accepting of law abiding citizens minding their own business. Might just be one of us gun toting folks that saves innocent lives one of these days.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Pokey

[Gunner75]

People are missing one huge point. The moment the rider got on his bike it doesn't matter whether or not you can see it, he is by law carrying concealed. CHL laws encompass all motor vehicles.

yes I'm posting this from my GS3

[baggyp]

People are missing one huge point. The moment the rider got on his bike it doesn't matter whether or not you can see it, he is by law carrying concealed. CHL laws encompass all motor vehicles.

yes I'm posting this from my GS3

 

 

 

This is true, I got sidetracked about it being visible. In all honesty if someone called to law and they ran his plate, assuming its registered to him, they would know he was a licensed carrier.

[blue03636]

People are missing one huge point. The moment the rider got on his bike it doesn't matter whether or not you can see it, he is by law carrying concealed. CHL laws encompass all motor vehicles.

yes I'm posting this from my GS3

 

Finally someone got my point.

Edited June 4, 2013 by blue03636

[chevysoldier]

I agree but I'm not talking about nervousness and a weapon not being touched - that was your word and from which you drew a conclusion of non-logic/reasoning. Or friendly. Or boisterous. Or sleepy. Or sad. Or overwhelmed. Or anything else non-threatening.

Surely you're not assuming that just because someone openly carries that they're good-to-go, right? Because if so, you've just numbed off environmental cues that every personal protection instructor tells you to listen to.

This is gonna sound like juvenile profiling but I'm in a hurry to get out the door for a ride... Are they continually scanning the place? Did they only order water or coffee? Are they making aggressive eye contact with you or other citizens? Are they unusually somber or wearing a 1000-yard stare? None of these would concern me in isolation but together I guarantee they'd raise your spidey sense too, and I'd carefully watch their hand movements until I got a better read. Maybe they're just a paranoid gun nut openly carrying for the first time ever, or maybe they're building up to something newsworthy. Are you willing to bet your life on the former?

Anyway, we're getting off topic.

Lol, yeah because criminals openly carry their sidearm in a retention holster.

[smccrory]

Lol, yeah because criminals openly carry their sidearm in a retention holster.

Sometimes they have. And machetes.

[smccrory]

And sometimes the police have shot innocent citizens. Do you get apprehensive when you see a cop, too?

No, I don't, but it's not about me, remember? It's about impressions that the general public gets. It's about having respect for their need to not freak out in the normal course of the day, and about not provoking fatigue from the public that could result in tighter gun laws.

Look, wear what you want how you want when you want to wear it. Just don't get sandy when the public has had enough.

[cOoTeR]

No, I don't, but it's not about me, remember? It's about impressions that the general public gets. It's about having respect for their need to not freak out in the normal course of the day, and about not provoking fatigue from the public that could result in tighter gun laws.

Look, wear what you want how you want when you want to wear it. Just don't get sandy when the public has had enough.

Thats your opinion but mine is that 1 there is no reason for them to freak out 2 they need to man the F up. An open carried firearm does them no harm carried in a legal manner.I don't like seeing fat people wear clothes that are too tight but you don't see me freaking out about it or boycotting Wal-Mart because they let people do it.

Ive said it several times before, our society is getting softer and more passive while the world around us keeps getting more and more violent. It makes us appear weak as a nation to other nations and they are probably right.