Open Carry California

[magnuslion]

What's the problem, guns can still be used for home defense. I thought that was the whole point of them and not for carrying at all times.

Snip.

I think what you mean to say is that a sad kitten will convince him of the error of his ways. (I might edit that post, were I you)

Nope.jpg Not gonna happen.

 

[Saltyk]

*snip*

Well to clarify, full auto is not illegal. It just costs a shitload (in the end it'll run about $150,000) and takes about 6 months to get the permit, machine guns however are illegal unless it has historic value and you have a historic weapons collector license (also costs a shitload).

Oh? I was under the impression that ALL fully automatic weapons were illegal for American citizens. Wait. $150,000!? Is that accurate? It might as well be illegal. Anyway, learn something new everyday, I guess.

 

[Sacman]

Obviously, you have never been to California, its a big fucking problem even in just the capitol city... just in the last 2 months 2 of my cousins and my step brother were killed in mindless shootings by fucking kids who got their hands on guns...

But honestly its not about the guns, its about the violence, and California generally being a shitty place to live. I don't believe in gun control, but something has to be done... I mean seriously have you ever been to Wilton or Galt, it's like Mad Max with a bunch of drunk retired clan members down there..

I'm really sorry to hear that, and you have my condolences. Unfortunately, California has some of the strictest gun laws on the books. And they also have rampant gun crime. The fact of the matter is - as sad is it may be - I do need the option to carry if I live in California. Because it's just that damn dangerous.

Which is my point, we need to do something about California, and honestly The US in general, to make it a safer and less crappy place, so you don't need to carry a gun to feel safe... we should have the option, but we shouldn't need any reason to exercise it...

 

[StarCecil]

Obviously, you have never been to California, its a big fucking problem even in just the capitol city... just in the last 2 months 2 of my cousins and my step brother were killed in mindless shootings by fucking kids who got their hands on guns...

But honestly its not about the guns, its about the violence, and California generally being a shitty place to live. I don't believe in gun control, but something has to be done... I mean seriously have you ever been to Wilton or Galt, it's like Mad Max with a bunch of drunk retired clan members down there..

I'm really sorry to hear that, and you have my condolences. Unfortunately, California has some of the strictest gun laws on the books. And they also have rampant gun crime. The fact of the matter is - as sad is it may be - I do need the option to carry if I live in California. Because it's just that damn dangerous.

Which is my point, we need to do something about California, and honestly The US in general, to make it a safer and less crappy place, so you don't need to carry a gun to feel safe... we should have the option, but we shouldn't need any reason to exercise it...

I certainly agree with this.

 

[LTAshler]

Snip.
And you're worried about gun owners hurting you? You are aware that gun owners are less likely to commit a fellony, right? Those who've had to jump through all the hoops to get a gun are more likely, legally, to resepct it?

So if I were to walk into a room with a gun straped to my leg, you would fear me? Tis' prejudice, my good man. No more, no less.

Check please. Again, it's the people who are abiding by the law that are being punished in this scenario while the real perpetrators are practically handed a challenge to abuse the equipment that much further.

 

[StarCecil]

Snip.
And you're worried about gun owners hurting you? You are aware that gun owners are less likely to commit a fellony, right? Those who've had to jump through all the hoops to get a gun are more likely, legally, to resepct it?

So if I were to walk into a room with a gun straped to my leg, you would fear me? Tis' prejudice, my good man. No more, no less.

Check please. Again, it's the people who are abiding by the law that are being punished in this scenario while the real perpetrators are practically handed a challenge to abuse the equipment that much further.

Point of fact, I remember watching an interview in which a convicted felon gang member said outright that he and his compatriots preferred strict gun laws because that meant potential targets wouldn't be armed, where any weapons confiscated from the gang could be bought again on the street.

 

[Vankraken]

"By prohibiting the open carry of guns, we can now take our families to the park or out to eat without the worry of getting shot by some untrained, unscreened, self-appointed vigilante,"


Really? Vigilantism with any sort of firearm is in itself illegal so its just a redundant law made for the sole purpose for padding the political resume to show him being "Pro Gun Regulation".

If people are going to commit crimes or vigilante justice then they already don't give a crap about following the laws.

 

[Ghengis John]

I did think these up on my own.

My condolences.

And I'm being facetious. Because I'm tired of debating the issue of gun ownership, I decided to phrase it differently. So I'm comparing it to the issue of gay rights.

And yet you're championing it so tirelessly for someone so tired. Though I commend your attempt at humor then. Tip of the hat.

And you're worried about gun owners hurting you? You are aware that gun owners are less likely to commit a fellony, right? Those who've had to jump through all the hoops to get a gun are more likely, legally, to resepct it?

So if I were to walk into a room with a gun straped to my leg, you would fear me? Tis' prejudice, my good man. No more, no less.

That's the problem, old bean. If you walked into a room with a gun strapped to your leg I could rest assured from our conversation that you had jumped through all the hoops to get one. If someone else did, whom I had never spoken to, I could not. Bit of a sticky wicket that.

It's that inability to read minds that makes carrying a deadly weapon into a crowd of strangers a problem. You have to be reasonable and realize that for everyone else around you the situation is different than it is for you. A very pretty lady once dropped something out of her purse in the street in front of me at night in Riverside. I had been in a fight with my brother the previous day and I was looking less than savory. I was trying to give her back her cellphone without having to shout and she started trying to walk faster. When I said "hey miss" and we were alone on a dark street I could understand why she was jumpy. I didn't take it to heart (much) and after she knew my intentions she was friendly and apologetic. But the fact of the matter is, I know myself but she didn't know me and I can acknowledge this fact. Fear is sometimes only natural, and that is no prejudice. That you see yourself as being persecuted... I don't know what to think about that.

That is why most people are not particularly scared of the police. The badge and uniform visibly imply training, mental screening, and responsibility. And perhaps the threat of getting a ticket. As a civilian with a weapon you have nothing to offer assurances and everything to imply a threat.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

I did think these up on my own.

My condolences.

And I'm being facetious. Because I'm tired of debating the issue of gun ownership, I decided to phrase it differently. So I'm comparing it to the issue of gay rights.

And yet you're championing it so tirelessly for someone so tired. Though I commend your attempt at humor then. Tip of the hat.

And you're worried about gun owners hurting you? You are aware that gun owners are less likely to commit a fellony, right? Those who've had to jump through all the hoops to get a gun are more likely, legally, to resepct it?

So if I were to walk into a room with a gun straped to my leg, you would fear me? Tis' prejudice, my good man. No more, no less.

That's the problem, old bean. If you walked into a room with a gun strapped to your leg I could rest assured from our conversation that you had jumped through all the hoops to get one. If someone else did, whom I had never spoken to, I could not. Bit of a sticky wicket that.

It's that inability to read minds that makes carrying a deadly weapon into a crowd of strangers a problem. You have to be reasonable and realize that for everyone else around you the situation is different than it is for you. A very pretty lady once dropped something out of her purse in the street in front of me at night in Riverside. I had been in a fight with my brother the previous day and I was looking less than savory. I was trying to give her back her cellphone without having to shout and she started trying to walk faster. When I said "hey miss" and we were alone on a dark street I could understand why she was jumpy. I didn't take it to heart (much) and after she knew my intentions she was friendly and apologetic. But the fact of the matter is, I know myself but she didn't know me and I can acknowledge this fact. Fear is sometimes only natural, and that is no prejudice. That you see yourself as being persecuted... I don't know what to think about that.

Very well. I personally don't see why you should fear people who have guns. It's just a gun. More people are killed each year in cars.

But whatever floats your boat, man

Oh, and congratz on 2222 posts.

 

[superpirson]

I think I would be uncomfortable around someone with a gun, which is odd considering that I feel the people of this country have a right to carry a firearm.
then again, I grew up and currently live in a city which more or less outlawed ALL firearms 25 years ago. (they also outlawed air-soft rifles in my town) .
I didn't choose my comfort zone, my parents did when they picked my hometown.

 

[Ghengis John]

Very well. I personally don't see why you should fear people who have guns. It's just a gun. More people are killed each year in cars.

But whatever floats your boat, man

Oh, and gratz on 2222 posts.

Thanks. And I'm happy that you can understand. As for cars, and guns that's a funny thing. There are differences. Every time I get in my car I put on my seatbelt. Maybe it won't save me if an 18 wheeler comes barreling into my lane but mentally, it's there to assure me I've got some measure of protection. It's not like I leave the house every day with a bullet proof vest now. Then there's the fact that almost everyone uses a car everyday but not everyone needs to carry a gun. We understand that for a policeman or a security guard that's just a part of his job. It's probably why it's a little more unnerving to see a civilian walking with one into say, the grocery store. We don't need one to pick up milk and eggs, why do they? What are they doing with it? That might be unfair but it's also inescapable. Then there's the last factor, when you drive a car you have some control over the situation, at least mentally you think you'll have some control. When some one points a gun at you you have no control at all.

Vastly more people die every year from cancer than Alzheimers, randomly and at all ages. that doesn't stop Alzheimers from stomping cancer as people's number one feared disease. You could propose all sorts of reasons, it kills everyone in the end though, just like cancer. So why do I think people are more afraid of Alzheimers? You can fight cancer. People beat cancer all the time. Nobody beats Alzheimers, you are powerless before it, and it's that thing that I think people fear the most, being faced with a situation where their fate is out of their hands. So anyhow I've rambled a lot and this isn't really meant as an argument. Just musing on why maybe I find standing in front of a gun more daunting than getting behind a wheel.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Very well. I personally don't see why you should fear people who have guns. It's just a gun. More people are killed each year in cars.

But whatever floats your boat, man

Oh, and gratz on 2222 posts.

Thanks. And I'm happy that you can understand. As for cars, and guns that's a funny thing. There are differences. Every time I get in my car I put on my seatbelt. Maybe it won't save me if an 18 wheeler comes barreling into my lane but mentally, it's there to assure me I've got some measure of protection. It's not like I leave the house every day with a bullet proof vest now. Then there's the fact that almost everyone uses a car everyday but not everyone needs to carry a gun. We understand that for a policeman or a security guard that's just a part of his job. It's probably why it's a little more unnerving to see a civilian walking with one into say, the grocery store. We don't need one to pick up milk and eggs, why do they? What are they doing with it? That might be unfair but it's also inescapable. Then there's the last factor, when you drive a car you have some control over the situation, at least mentally you think you'll have some control. When some one points a gun at you you have no control at all.

Vastly more people die every year from cancer than Alzheimers, randomly and at all ages. that doesn't stop Alzheimers from stomping cancer as people's number one feared disease. You could propose all sorts of reasons, it kills everyone in the end though, just like cancer. So why do I think people are more afraid of Alzheimers? You can fight cancer. People beat cancer all the time. Nobody beats Alzheimers, you are powerless before it, and it's that thing that I think people fear the most, being faced with a situation where their fate is out of their hands. So anyhow I've rambled a lot and this isn't really meant as an argument. Just musing on why maybe I find standing in front of a gun more daunting than getting behind a wheel.

I guess I can see that. As for me, I learnd to shoot when I was very young.

I'll leave with this thought: There's gun culture, and then there's thug culture. Only one breeds criminals.

 

[StarCecil]

So can I ask a question here? Just what is the point of walking around with an openly displayed yet unloaded weapon? Why do you need to show everyone you have a gun... and what's the point if it's not loaded?

Also, people seem to be misunderstanding the point of the ban. It isn't for "gangbangers", it's meant to dissuade trigger happy armed civilians from deciding, without standardized training and certification, to shoot at someone breaking the law, possibly in a crowded public place.

Of course, every goddamned statistic available shows that this manifestly does not occur anywhere OC or CC are legal. Which means that any ban is manifestly merely an abuse of government power so that people "feel" safer. Well fuck that noise.

I think this is an important point to make. I don't know if it's the same in California, but here you can only open carry with a concealed carry license. Now, not even discussing all the classes and screenings to get said license, there was concern from the anti-gun side about "vigilante justice" and random people being shot in a dangerous situation. Almost a decade later, this has not happened. In fact, there have been no such instances where a person was shot by a man with a concealed carry license, either in anger or by accident. There's one stabbing, but I don't think the two are related.

 

[Tyburn Cross]

What's the problem, guns can still be used for home defense. I thought that was the whole point of them and not for carrying at all times.

Snip.

I think what you mean to say is that a sad kitten will convince him of the error of his ways. (I might edit that post, were I you)

If you folks look at his profile, you may notice it lists him as being from Britain, and thus his unfamiliarity with the U.S. Constitution.

As for the several posts related to criminals carrying Uzis (Full auto Uzis average around $10-20,000 (used), a federal background check, and a transfer stamp for another $200): It almost never happens. And if it does, they are the much easier to obtain semi automatic versions. At that point, the criminal is carrying around the equivalent of an over-sized pistol. Once again, that would only draw attention to them, which is the opposite of any criminals goal.

On another note about vigilantism: In California, it is and has been completely illegal to open carry a loaded firearm. Anyone who is caught with a loaded firearm being openly carried gets to face a lot of problems, regardless of this new law. I don't protest the new law for what it does: I protest it for its existence to begin with. That, in combination with California's restrictive CC process, make for a possible violation of the Constitution/Second Amendment/what have you.

 

[Weaver]

Wait, people used to just walk around the street carrying guns in plain view?

 

[Tyburn Cross]

Wait, people used to just walk around the street carrying guns in plain view?

Technically, yes. And though western movies may portray a murder on every corner, towns like Tombstone were actually pretty peaceful. Sheriffs spent more time policing drunks than dealing with shoot-outs and murderers. Almost everyone had guns, while murders, robberies, rape, and theft were comparatively nonexistent.

As is often quoted: "An armed society is a polite society." [http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/r/robertahe100989.html]

An adage:"If you outlaw guns, only criminals will have them." [http://changelog.ca/topic/If%20you%20outlaw%20guns,%20only%20outlaws%20will%20have%20guns]


Some old west crime stuff [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1102438/posts]

 

[Weaver]

Wait, people used to just walk around the street carrying guns in plain view?

Technically, yes. And though western movies may portray a murder on every corner, towns like Tombstone were actually pretty peaceful. Sheriffs spent more time policing drunks than dealing with shoot-outs and murderers. Almost everyone had guns, while murders, robberies, rape, and theft were comparatively nonexistent.

As is often quoted: "An armed society is a polite society." [http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/r/robertahe100989.html]

An adage:"If you outlaw guns, only criminals will have them." [http://changelog.ca/topic/If%20you%20outlaw%20guns,%20only%20outlaws%20will%20have%20guns]


Some old west crime stuff [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1102438/posts]

So if you had a permit for, say, an assult rifle you could just strap it on and walk around with it so long as it's unloaded? You could walk into the bank with it? Go to work with it?

It just seems crazy to me.

 

[Fayathon]

Wait, people used to just walk around the street carrying guns in plain view?

Technically, yes. And though western movies may portray a murder on every corner, towns like Tombstone were actually pretty peaceful. Sheriffs spent more time policing drunks than dealing with shoot-outs and murderers. Almost everyone had guns, while murders, robberies, rape, and theft were comparatively nonexistent.

As is often quoted: "An armed society is a polite society." [http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/r/robertahe100989.html]

An adage:"If you outlaw guns, only criminals will have them." [http://changelog.ca/topic/If%20you%20outlaw%20guns,%20only%20outlaws%20will%20have%20guns]


Some old west crime stuff [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1102438/posts]

So if you had a permit for, say, an assult rifle you could just strap it on and walk around with it so long as it's unloaded? You could walk into the bank with it? Go to work with it?

It just seems crazy to me.

The reasoning behind it is if everyone was armed and taught proper use of firearms, then no-one would be so willing as to pursue a life of crime, seeing as it would put their well being at risk far too much. Criminals don't want to tangle with people that are willing to put them in the ground for being wronged. It's not that everyone needs to carry a weapon, but they should be allowed to.

If you were to rob someone (hypothetically) would you choose the guy with a 9mm on his hip or the guy protesting to ban guns?

That said, I think that open carry and firearm ownership should come after you get through a training course, an armed man with no knowledge of what he wields is as dangerous to those that would harm him as the people he strives to protect.

 

[StarCecil]

snip

I don't know of many states that allow open carry without first requiring the armed individual to have a concealed carry permit, in which case the person in question does go through quite a number of courses and does have responsibility drilled into them.

It's made quite clear that anyone who carries, concealed or otherwise, in the commission of a crime if they draw their weapon without direct threat of harm.

snip

The person with the permit for the weapon is the exact person that should be allowed to carry it wherever. Not only do statistics show that firearms owners are less likely to commit crimes, but, let's be real here, if you were going to commit a crime with a gun would you go through the trouble of buying it legally and carry it around openly?