Post by: MicroBalrog on July 27, 2008, 09:38:03 PM
Imagine walking down the street and next to someone with a gun strapped to their hip. It's an image a group of Texans are hoping to turn into reality and they're gaining support by the thousands every day.
This is a basic right, said former state Legislator, Suzanna Hupp.
In Texas you can fire a gun, you can buy a gun, and you can walk around with a gun, but only if you have a concealed carry permit and the gun is out of sight.
I feel safer. My home should it be breached, I can take care of it. Should somebody try to take my car, they'll be taken care of too. That's the way it should be, said gun owner Charles Minter.
However, thats not how it always works.
Criminals by their very definition ignore the laws, said Hupp.
In 1991 a gunman drove his truck into a Luby's restaurant in Killeen, TX. He got out and opened fire.
That was before we were allowed to carry in the state of Texas, said Hupp.
Hupp was there with her parents.
He killed 23 people, including my parents. So I've been fairly angry since that time, said Hupp.
In 1991 Texas didn't allow people to carry a gun.
The only thing the regulations did was prevent people like me from being able to protect myself and my family. That's the only thing gun laws and gun control do. They prevent good people from protecting themselves and their families, said Hupp.
Hupp helped pass the current concealed carry law in the mid 90's.
It wasn't blood and chaos in the streets when we enacted the concealed carry, said Hupp.
Now she wants more.
We should allow people to carry. That means in their pocket, in their purse, on their forehead, on their hip. I don't care how they carry. If they can legally own a gun I think they should be able to carry it in public, said Hupp.
She's not alone. An open carry petition online is gaining popularity by the thousands every day. More than 21,000 people have already
signed the petition online.
I couldn't have foreseen all the support that I've gained, said petition creator, Ian McCarthy.
McCarthy posted the online petition in October last year.
In Texas we're proud of all of our rights especially when it comes to gun rights, said McCarthy.
McCarthy's petition will likely go to state lawmakers in the next session along with a proposal to enact an open carry policy in Texas.
We're hoping for unlicensed, open carry, said McCarthy.
The group is asking for a open carry law like what's already seen in at least ten states in the U.S. Those ten states allow open carry without a license. Another 12 states allow open carry but with a license.
Texas is just one of six states on record that completely bans open carry. However, to some the idea of seeing people with guns, doesn't sit well. Even some gun owners are worried an open carry policy could lead to more crime.
It might just turn into the wild, wild west, said Minter.
Those Wild West images where it seemed like everyone had a gun.
Guns in Texas though are pretty much kept to the range.
I come here to shoot. I don't carry around on the street, said gun owner, Steven Cui.
Cui is one of many gun owners that think owning a firearm is a privilege, not a right.
If it's open then everybody's going to be walking around with a gun now. I think it's only for the cops and people that are licensed, said gun owner, Kyle Ramirez.
Others worry open carry will get out of hand.
You don't want to use a gun just because somebody called you or your mother a bad name. You only want to use a gun when you're in fear for your life, said gun owner, and owner of the Astro Shooting Range in Florence, TX, L.E. Williams.
People don't know what they're doing, added firearms trainer Mike Nellis.
Nellis is a former state officer and now is a firearms trainer for the Texas Department of Public Safety. He supports gun rights; he even had a gun strapped to his belt the entire time we talked, but you couldn't tell by looking at him that he was armed. Nellis says that's the advantage of concealed carry.
I think if it's going to require having a license and have requirements and there's no difference between that and a concealed carry law you might as well go to a concealed carry license, said Nellis.
However, for Hupp and the thousands of others who have signed the online open carry petition, the issue boils down to one thing: our Bill of Rights.
I believe that they will pass it. This time around I think that it will pass, said Hupp.
State lawmakers are not yet saying how they will vote on the issue
http://www.kvue.com/news/top/stories/072408kvueopencarry-sb.8aaac2f3.html#
Post by: seeker_two on July 28, 2008, 01:09:12 AM
Post by: El Tejon on July 28, 2008, 03:21:50 AM
Quote
People don't know what they're doing, added firearms trainer Mike Nellis.
If by "people" you mean "police officers", then I agree.
Don't apply the standards of fail that you are used to in law enforcement to the population as a whole. We are far better trained than cops.
Quote
I think if it's going to require having a license and have requirements and there's no difference between that and a concealed carry law you might as well go to a concealed carry license, said Nellis.
That sentence is so tortured it could only come from police brass. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt as I know the media screws things up.
All Texicanos want is to carry their pistols without concealing it. That's it. We've been doing it up here since 1816. Where's the problem?
It's bloody hot down there and I absolutely hated having to cover up when it was 90 in April. Bleh.
Post by: Standing Wolf on July 28, 2008, 04:41:19 AM
Quote
It might just turn into the wild, wild west, said Minter.
Another extremely intelligent Chicken Little heard from.
Post by: Perd Hapley on July 28, 2008, 04:53:37 AM
Quote
Imagine walking down the street and next to someone with a gun strapped to their hip.
Can we start teaching journalists how to write a coherent sentence, or is that out of the question?
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 28, 2008, 05:00:48 AM
Quote
It might just turn into the wild, wild west, said Minter.
Another extremely intelligent Chicken Little heard from.
According to any serious research, the West was far safer and nicer than any big modern city.
Texas turning into the Wild West would be awesome.
Post by: Manedwolf on July 28, 2008, 05:06:27 AM
Quote
Imagine walking down the street and next to someone with a gun strapped to their hip.
You mean like a cop?
While I think OC is a bit silly in cities, it is everyone's right, and I'm all for it because it provides the bad guys targets to shoot at while I'd be finding hard cover. People who OC are my chaff and flares.
Post by: El Tejon on July 28, 2008, 05:37:18 AM
I know Floriduh was hot too, but something about seeing 90 in April made me a huge proponent of open carry for Tejas.
Post by: Manedwolf on July 28, 2008, 05:55:10 AM
Mane, maybe, but it's just soooo hot down there. Have I mentioned how bleeding hot it is there?
I know Floriduh was hot too, but something about seeing 90 in April made me a huge proponent of open carry for Tejas.
I know Floriduh was hot too, but something about seeing 90 in April made me a huge proponent of open carry for Tejas.
The Cuban shirt has always been an excellent cover garment in hot weather.
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 28, 2008, 06:04:36 AM
Mane, maybe, but it's just soooo hot down there. Have I mentioned how bleeding hot it is there?
I know Floriduh was hot too, but something about seeing 90 in April made me a huge proponent of open carry for Tejas.
I know Floriduh was hot too, but something about seeing 90 in April made me a huge proponent of open carry for Tejas.
The Cuban shirt has always been an excellent cover garment in hot weather.
Depends what you want to carry, no?
Post by: Perd Hapley on July 28, 2008, 07:55:28 AM
I'm hoping the ironic thrift store t-shirts are good cover, too. People will be so busy puzzling over the Wheelchair Bowling graphic, or the "I had a ski-riffic time at Jason's Bar Mitzvah," they'll never notice a bulge at my hip.
Post by: coppertales on July 28, 2008, 09:17:14 AM
Post by: xavier fremboe on July 28, 2008, 09:43:31 AM
Mane, maybe, but it's just soooo hot down there. Have I mentioned how bleeding hot it is there?
I know Floriduh was hot too, but something about seeing 90 in April made me a huge proponent of open carry for Tejas.
Got in the car this morning in DFW at 0700 and it was already 80. We might set a record at 105 today.
I know Floriduh was hot too, but something about seeing 90 in April made me a huge proponent of open carry for Tejas.
Post by: MechAg94 on July 28, 2008, 10:15:44 AM
Mane, maybe, but it's just soooo hot down there. Have I mentioned how bleeding hot it is there?
I know Floriduh was hot too, but something about seeing 90 in April made me a huge proponent of open carry for Tejas.
I know Floriduh was hot too, but something about seeing 90 in April made me a huge proponent of open carry for Tejas.
The Cuban shirt has always been an excellent cover garment in hot weather.
Depends what you want to carry, no?
Post by: Serena on July 28, 2008, 10:20:46 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on July 28, 2008, 10:28:28 AM
Open carry would be nice since I wouldn't have to worry about printing or the shirt blowing up.
Exploding shirts generally tend to cause a commotion in those about you, yes.
Post by: ilbob on July 28, 2008, 11:08:16 AM
Quote
Imagine walking down the street and next to someone with a gun strapped to their hip.
Can we start teaching journalists how to write a coherent sentence, or is that out of the question?
Post by: Perd Hapley on July 28, 2008, 11:17:37 AM
Post by: seeker_two on July 28, 2008, 12:58:55 PM
Quote
Imagine walking down the street and next to someone with a gun strapped to their hip.
Can we start teaching journalists how to write a coherent sentence, or is that out of the question?
I always feel better when surrounded by many people with guns strapped to their hips.....esp. when I'm one of them....
Post by: xavier fremboe on July 28, 2008, 01:47:53 PM
Yeah, but as a gun nut, you're one of those crazy people. How would normal people feel about it?
Dammit, it's bitter and clingy. We have guns because we're bitter and clingy.
Post by: Perd Hapley on July 28, 2008, 01:50:51 PM
Post by: Lennyjoe on July 28, 2008, 03:17:44 PM
Post by: Joe Demko on July 28, 2008, 03:21:05 PM
Post by: stevelyn on July 28, 2008, 03:52:29 PM
Quote
Imagine walking down the street and next to someone with a gun strapped to their hip.
You mean like a cop?
While I think OC is a bit silly in cities, it is everyone's right, and I'm all for it because it provides the bad guys targets to shoot at while I'd be finding hard cover. People who OC are my chaff and flares.
I think the real issue with open carry in TX has more to do with doing away with the criminal liabilities for exposing a firearm even when it's done accidentally than it does with carrying openly.
However, open carry is more practical when engaging in outdoor activities.
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 28, 2008, 06:20:20 PM
If you all want it, maybe you'd best get it codified in your state laws. Here in Pennsylvania, it isn't illegal because it isn't expressly forbidden in state law. Even so, an awful lot of cops have a tendency to get overexcited at the sight of open carry. This results in unpleasantry all around. The carrier, absent any real wrongdoing, prevails; but that doesn't undo the hassle.
I think the solution to this is not legislation. If anything, if more people carried openly, everybody would get slowly used to a more pro-gun culture. In fact I would argue that's one of the big strengths of OC.
Post by: Nitrogen on July 28, 2008, 06:24:16 PM
Then, in turn, we should remove all the restrictions on open AND concealed carry for people that pass the background check.
I think that'd at least nod toward the scardycats, and get everyone a bit of what they want.
Post by: Perd Hapley on July 28, 2008, 06:35:40 PM
If you all want it, maybe you'd best get it codified in your state laws. Here in Pennsylvania, it isn't illegal because it isn't expressly forbidden in state law. Even so, an awful lot of cops have a tendency to get overexcited at the sight of open carry. This results in unpleasantry all around. The carrier, absent any real wrongdoing, prevails; but that doesn't undo the hassle.
I think the solution to this is not legislation. If anything, if more people carried openly, everybody would get slowly used to a more pro-gun culture. In fact I would argue that's one of the big strengths of OC.
Hence, the organized OC movements, that plan special events or days in which they all carry together. That way it's not just individuals getting popped here and there, then having to deal with the aftermath.
Post by: LAK on July 28, 2008, 11:18:33 PM
Quote
Then, in turn, we should remove all the restrictions on open AND concealed carry for people that pass the background check.
Background checks are a waste of time, and they should not be a prelude to exercizing a right.And part of the problem with "concealed carry permits" is that it amounts to a substantial tax. Anyone that might fail a background check is no more "damgerous" than any thug carrying a concealed handgun without a "permit".
Many thanks to the Honorable Suzanne Gratia-Hupp for supporting this; and anyone that wants to sign the online petition can go to:
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/texasoc/
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 29, 2008, 12:35:57 AM
In a free society, a sixteen-year-old Girl Scout will be able to walk into a WalMart, plop her change basket onto the counter, and walk out with an M1921, no questions asked.
But we can't get there overnight - if only because we know that most of the people who claim to agree with us would surrender on the very brink of victory if the opportunity presented itself today.
So we must work hard. Part of it is to reacquaint society with the notion that their neighbors carry arms as well.
Post by: seeker_two on July 29, 2008, 12:46:12 AM
Yeah, but as a gun nut, you're one of those crazy people. How would normal people feel about it?
Dammit, it's bitter and clingy. We have guns because we're bitter and clingy....and religious....don't forget religious....
Post by: Manedwolf on July 29, 2008, 05:22:53 AM
AKA, free gun for any nutcase who wants it.
Post by: Perd Hapley on July 29, 2008, 07:31:17 AM
Post by: seeker_two on July 29, 2008, 08:04:38 AM
The one major problem I see with OC is the issue of extremely out of shape or physically weak people carrying a weapon in a holster without sufficient retention, or one in a stupid place like small of back.
AKA, free gun for any nutcase who wants it.
AKA, free gun for any nutcase who wants it.
....because the nutcases can't get access to firearms now......
Post by: yesitsloaded on July 29, 2008, 08:06:36 AM
Quote
The one major problem I see with OC is the issue of extremely out of shape or physically weak people carrying a weapon in a holster without sufficient retention, or one in a stupid place like small of back.
Same idiots that drive while talking on a cell phone. Every village has its Post by: El Tejon on July 29, 2008, 08:45:11 AM
Quote
The one major problem I see with OC is the issue of extremely out of shape or physically weak people carrying a weapon in a holster without sufficient retention, or one in a stupid place like small of back.
Oh, geez, how many snatches from private citizens have there been?
I'll tell you what, Mane, can the Texicanos open carry if they sign an affidavit that they refrain from HFC and join a gym?
Post by: Manedwolf on July 29, 2008, 08:48:12 AM
Just as long as you don't want the nanny-state to outlaw it.
No, but a holster of adequate retention minimums can be mandated, just as they are for cops.
That also would stop the "I have no idea how it went off" people with those stupid Glock and Kel-Tec clips who think they don't need a holster.
http://www.alpharubicon.com/leo/images/keltec32stryder8.jpg
For people who think they didn't need that femoral artery, anyway...
Post by: freakazoid on July 29, 2008, 09:38:20 AM
Quote
For people who think they didn't need that femoral artery, anyway...
Your picture no worky,
Post by: MechAg94 on July 29, 2008, 09:59:58 AM
Quote
The one major problem I see with OC is the issue of extremely out of shape or physically weak people carrying a weapon in a holster without sufficient retention, or one in a stupid place like small of back.
Oh, geez, how many snatches from private citizens have there been?
I'll tell you what, Mane, can the Texicanos open carry if they sign an affidavit that they refrain from HFC and join a gym?
I'm just glad you didn't specify Popeye's.
Post by: Balog on July 29, 2008, 10:04:18 AM
Post by: Nitrogen on July 29, 2008, 10:07:09 AM
Quote
Then, in turn, we should remove all the restrictions on open AND concealed carry for people that pass the background check.
Background checks are a waste of time, and they should not be a prelude to exercizing a right.And part of the problem with "concealed carry permits" is that it amounts to a substantial tax. Anyone that might fail a background check is no more "damgerous" than any thug carrying a concealed handgun without a "permit".
Many thanks to the Honorable Suzanne Gratia-Hupp for supporting this; and anyone that wants to sign the online petition can go to:
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/texasoc/
I agree with you 100%, but I also realise that we'll get there in baby steps. This is just one way I think would be palatable to everyone involved for the next 10 years or so until we take the next step.
Post by: Perd Hapley on July 29, 2008, 10:10:46 AM
Just as long as you don't want the nanny-state to outlaw it.
No, but a holster of adequate retention minimums can be mandated, just as they are for cops.
Except that cops on duty are agents of the state, therefore rightfully subject to greater govt. control than the private citizen.
Post by: Balog on July 29, 2008, 10:33:55 AM
Quote
Then, in turn, we should remove all the restrictions on open AND concealed carry for people that pass the background check.
Background checks are a waste of time, and they should not be a prelude to exercizing a right.And part of the problem with "concealed carry permits" is that it amounts to a substantial tax. Anyone that might fail a background check is no more "damgerous" than any thug carrying a concealed handgun without a "permit".
Many thanks to the Honorable Suzanne Gratia-Hupp for supporting this; and anyone that wants to sign the online petition can go to:
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/texasoc/
I agree with you 100%, but I also realise that we'll get there in baby steps. This is just one way I think would be palatable to everyone involved for the next 10 years or so until we take the next step.
Amen. I truly don't understand why the pro-freedom crowd is so incapable of understanding incrementalism....
Post by: Manedwolf on July 29, 2008, 10:36:03 AM
Just as long as you don't want the nanny-state to outlaw it.
No, but a holster of adequate retention minimums can be mandated, just as they are for cops.
Except that cops on duty are agents of the state, therefore rightfully subject to greater govt. control than the private citizen. I don't see a problem with basic safety requirements of retention. It's just like how you can't drive a car in unsafe condition on the road.
Post by: Nitrogen on July 29, 2008, 10:41:19 AM
Just as long as you don't want the nanny-state to outlaw it.
No, but a holster of adequate retention minimums can be mandated, just as they are for cops.
Except that cops on duty are agents of the state, therefore rightfully subject to greater govt. control than the private citizen. I'd feel better just mandating "Your gun can't fall out on it's own, and if it does, you're liable for xxx fine and yyy penalty.
If someone makes a good retention rig with bailing wire, all the better for them.
I don't see a problem with basic safety requirements of retention. It's just like how you can't drive a car in unsafe condition on the road.
Post by: ilbob on July 29, 2008, 12:01:26 PM
If you all want it, maybe you'd best get it codified in your state laws. Here in Pennsylvania, it isn't illegal because it isn't expressly forbidden in state law. Even so, an awful lot of cops have a tendency to get overexcited at the sight of open carry. This results in unpleasantry all around. The carrier, absent any real wrongdoing, prevails; but that doesn't undo the hassle.
I think the solution to this is not legislation. If anything, if more people carried openly, everybody would get slowly used to a more pro-gun culture. In fact I would argue that's one of the big strengths of OC.
Post by: Manedwolf on July 29, 2008, 12:02:45 PM
If you all want it, maybe you'd best get it codified in your state laws. Here in Pennsylvania, it isn't illegal because it isn't expressly forbidden in state law. Even so, an awful lot of cops have a tendency to get overexcited at the sight of open carry. This results in unpleasantry all around. The carrier, absent any real wrongdoing, prevails; but that doesn't undo the hassle.
I think the solution to this is not legislation. If anything, if more people carried openly, everybody would get slowly used to a more pro-gun culture. In fact I would argue that's one of the big strengths of OC.
It's also not quite that straighforward. OC is legal here, but if someone is alarmed and calls the cops to report someone with a gun, you can still be arrested for disturbing the peace.
Post by: Tallpine on July 29, 2008, 12:11:04 PM
Quote
I truly don't understand why the pro-freedom crowd is so incapable of understanding incrementalism....
And I don't understand what's wrong with having ideals and goals
You can't get where you want to go without a destination in mind.
Post by: freakazoid on July 29, 2008, 12:45:03 PM
Quote
It's also not quite that straighforward. OC is legal here, but if someone is alarmed and calls the cops to report someone with a gun, you can still be arrested for disturbing the peace.
That is something that I have been wondering, could you still get fined and stuff for "disturbing the peace" for OC when it isn't said to be illegal, but also isn't saying that is legal.
Post by: ilbob on July 29, 2008, 12:58:02 PM
I love when people want to impose hurdles to exercising rights because they dream up a situation that's never happened.
actually there is at least one case of an OCer in VA being mugged and his gun taken.
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 29, 2008, 02:23:19 PM
I love when people want to impose hurdles to exercising rights because they dream up a situation that's never happened.
actually there is at least one case of an OCer in VA being mugged and his gun taken.Unlike Balog, I do not doubt that such stuff has happened. There's even one recorded case of a woman having her gun taken away and used against her.
But that's not the point and you know it.
Post by: Joe Demko on July 29, 2008, 03:39:56 PM
The last thing in the world we need is a legal system that tells us what is legal as opposed to what is illegal. If it is not illegal, it is legal. If it is not illegal, just what is a cop going to arrest you and charge you with? Even if the law explicity says OC is legal, it would not change anything. A rogue cop could still arrest you and charge you with whatever he was going to charge you with if OC is not on the books.
Normally, I'd be inclined to agree with you. PA is a very gun friendly state, on of the most so I'd say. None the less, open carry is very uncommon here despite being legal. As a result, since they don't see it often it does tend to agitate some folks and they call the cops who also get agitated. I've seen it happen, myself.
Cops, it seems, are told at academy about what the law does address rather than all the myriad things it does not address and their default reaction to OC is that the carrier must be doing something wrong.
Change the cops or change the law; the way things are now OC is like requesting attention from John Law.
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 29, 2008, 03:42:03 PM
Post by: Manedwolf on July 29, 2008, 03:51:28 PM
I thought the whole point of conservatism is the idea that the world can't be changed by legislation?
Wrong.
It's questioning whether the status quo needs to be changed, or whether it's doing fine as it is. In other words, "Is it working, or isn't it? If it's working, why do we need to spend all that money to change it?"
Read Goldwater.
Post by: seeker_two on July 29, 2008, 03:55:41 PM
I love when people want to impose hurdles to exercising rights because they dream up a situation that's never happened.
actually there is at least one case of an OCer in VA being mugged and his gun taken....and that's an important distinction because criminals have never taken guns away from LEO's who open carry.....
....Onion Field, anyone?.....
Post by: Manedwolf on July 29, 2008, 04:11:19 PM
I love when people want to impose hurdles to exercising rights because they dream up a situation that's never happened.
actually there is at least one case of an OCer in VA being mugged and his gun taken....and that's an important distinction because criminals have never taken guns away from LEO's who open carry.....
....Onion Field, anyone?.....
The point I'm trying to make is that with a proper retention holster, it's nearly impossible for anyone but the person wearing it to get the gun out of it. Try it with someone you know. It's really hard to do.
But some people will wear guns in holsters that don't fit the gun, that are bigger than the gun, are those $5 meant-for-airsoft awful nylon ones, ill-fitting holsters that they can be pickpocketed right out of, that they'll FALL out of, or just those silly clips that also let stuff get into the trigger guard. Most popular with no-safety guns like Glock or Kel-Tec models, ironically!
I can see some basic safety rules regarding that, similar to not driving a vehicle in unsafe condition.
Post by: seeker_two on July 29, 2008, 04:47:34 PM
I love when people want to impose hurdles to exercising rights because they dream up a situation that's never happened.
actually there is at least one case of an OCer in VA being mugged and his gun taken....and that's an important distinction because criminals have never taken guns away from LEO's who open carry.....
....Onion Field, anyone?.....
The point I'm trying to make is that with a proper retention holster, it's nearly impossible for anyone but the person wearing it to get the gun out of it. Try it with someone you know. It's really hard to do.
But some people will wear guns in holsters that don't fit the gun, that are bigger than the gun, are those $5 meant-for-airsoft awful nylon ones, ill-fitting holsters that they can be pickpocketed right out of, that they'll FALL out of, or just those silly clips that also let stuff get into the trigger guard. Most popular with no-safety guns like Glock or Kel-Tec models, ironically!
I can see some basic safety rules regarding that, similar to not driving a vehicle in unsafe condition.
In that case, why don't we regulate the types of guns Texans can carry. No Glocks or Kel-Tecs or pistols without safeties or pistols with hammers that can be cocked back or pistols that can take more than 12 rounds (...'cause those are machine guns, doncha know...)....
How about people learning safe gun handling from people like us who offer to help....not any further "reasonable gun legislation"?.......
Post by: Manedwolf on July 29, 2008, 05:23:55 PM
Properly retaining holster for any sidearm of choice. And a weapon in good working order. After all, that's what "well regulated" meant...
Post by: Perd Hapley on July 29, 2008, 05:27:50 PM
I don't see a problem with basic safety requirements of retention. It's just like how you can't drive a car in unsafe condition on the road.
A holster with "adequate retention minimums" isn't a basic safety requirement like, say, working headlights.
And can I assume you're also OK with mandating basic safety requirements like trigger locks, no SA autos, smart guns, etc.? Same thing, of course.
Post by: Manedwolf on July 29, 2008, 05:37:02 PM
I don't see a problem with basic safety requirements of retention. It's just like how you can't drive a car in unsafe condition on the road.
A holster without "adequate retention minimums" isn't a basic safety requirement like, say, working headlights.
And can I assume you're also OK with mandating basic safety requirements like trigger locks, no SA autos, smart guns, etc.? Same thing, of course.
I don't think that's the same at all. That sort of thing prevents the firearm from being used for its intended defensive purpose, decreasing safety. A proper retention holster increases safety.
And yes, people are stupid about it. Someone recently shot the bathroom in a Wal-Mart here because they were an idiot with a Glock stuck in their pants without a proper holster, and managed to catch the trigger when they pulled up their pants.
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 29, 2008, 05:38:03 PM
I thought the whole point of conservatism is the idea that the world can't be changed by legislation?
Wrong.
It's questioning whether the status quo needs to be changed, or whether it's doing fine as it is. In other words, "Is it working, or isn't it? If it's working, why do we need to spend all that money to change it?"
Read Goldwater.
I read Goldwater. And Reagan. And Buchanan. And Irving. And Scalia. And Sowell.
Post by: seeker_two on July 29, 2008, 05:39:54 PM
I don't see a problem with basic safety requirements of retention. It's just like how you can't drive a car in unsafe condition on the road.
A holster without "adequate retention minimums" isn't a basic safety requirement like, say, working headlights.
And can I assume you're also OK with mandating basic safety requirements like trigger locks, no SA autos, smart guns, etc.? Same thing, of course.
I don't think that's the same at all. That sort of thing prevents the firearm from being used for its intended defensive purpose, decreasing safety. A proper retention holster increases safety.
And yes, people are stupid about it. Someone recently shot the bathroom in a Wal-Mart here because they were an idiot with a Glock stuck in their pants without a proper holster, and managed to catch the trigger when they pulled up their pants.
....and, because some people are idiots, we should have "reasonable gun legislation" to protect us all.....
....I think I've heard this tune before....
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 29, 2008, 05:41:36 PM
Do slings count as holsters?
Post by: Manedwolf on July 29, 2008, 05:48:40 PM
I don't see a problem with basic safety requirements of retention. It's just like how you can't drive a car in unsafe condition on the road.
A holster without "adequate retention minimums" isn't a basic safety requirement like, say, working headlights.
And can I assume you're also OK with mandating basic safety requirements like trigger locks, no SA autos, smart guns, etc.? Same thing, of course.
I don't think that's the same at all. That sort of thing prevents the firearm from being used for its intended defensive purpose, decreasing safety. A proper retention holster increases safety.
And yes, people are stupid about it. Someone recently shot the bathroom in a Wal-Mart here because they were an idiot with a Glock stuck in their pants without a proper holster, and managed to catch the trigger when they pulled up their pants.
....and, because some people are idiots, we should have "reasonable gun legislation" to protect us all.....
....I think I've heard this tune before....
You think nothing but "have a holster that keeps your firearm secure" is onerous?
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 29, 2008, 05:56:27 PM
Given Manedwolf's previously stated support for forced labor for those who violate NH's concealed carry permit laws, I shudder to think what the punishment for using a Barami grip would be.
And do slings count as holsters in Manedwolf's world?
Post by: seeker_two on July 29, 2008, 06:10:56 PM
So in Manedwolf's world, I can be imprisoned if my holster does not fit an arbitrary standard of retention, or if I choose to use a Barami grip.
Given Manedwolf's previously stated support for forced labor for those who violate NH's concealed carry permit laws, I shudder to think what the punishment for using a Barami grip would be.
And do slings count as holsters in Manedwolf's world?
Given Manedwolf's previously stated support for forced labor for those who violate NH's concealed carry permit laws, I shudder to think what the punishment for using a Barami grip would be.
And do slings count as holsters in Manedwolf's world?
Hope he's not for public whippings.....
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 29, 2008, 06:21:48 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on July 29, 2008, 06:39:42 PM
Quote
You think nothing but "have a holster that keeps your firearm secure" is onerous?
As a legal requirement, yes, I think so. But you need to clarify what you're after here. At first, you seemed to be saying that the holster needs to have an anti-theft retention system like a thumb-break. Now, you seem to be saying that the holster just needs to keep the gun from falling out. The latter is less onerous, but I'm not sure the issue really warrants legislation. On the other hand, if we simply prosecute people who leave their guns lying around, or drop them...
Quote
That sort of thing prevents the firearm from being used for its intended defensive purpose, decreasing safety. A proper retention holster increases safety.
"It increases safety" is a frighteningly broad basis for public policy. Read Goldwater.
Post by: Nitrogen on July 30, 2008, 12:16:24 AM
All I meant is that you "must use a holster where the gun doesn't fall out on its own. If it falls out, you are liable for a fine or jail if a child gets the gun, etc.
Just saying, "your gun can't fall out of its holster, no matter how you want to accomplish that."
I'm just as against "Holster must use a retention device such as x, y, or z" as you are, I'm proposing an alternative to that. Make sense?
Post by: MicroBalrog on July 30, 2008, 12:51:53 AM
If your gun falls out, or you otherwise drop it - nevermind if there was a holster or not - you can be sued in a civil court AND arrested for negligence. The forms of punishment would probably have to be linked to how egregious the negligence is, because while dropping a gun on your lawn is dumb, dropping it on a playground is umpteen times dumber.
If you can manage to carry a gun with a Barami Grip and not lose it, more power to ya.
Post by: seeker_two on July 30, 2008, 01:08:56 AM
Even a better idea:
If your gun falls out, or you otherwise drop it - nevermind if there was a holster or not - you can be sued in a civil court AND arrested for negligence. The forms of punishment would probably have to be linked to how egregious the negligence is, because while dropping a gun on your lawn is dumb, dropping it on a playground is umpteen times dumber.
If you can manage to carry a gun with a Barami Grip and not lose it, more power to ya.
If your gun falls out, or you otherwise drop it - nevermind if there was a holster or not - you can be sued in a civil court AND arrested for negligence. The forms of punishment would probably have to be linked to how egregious the negligence is, because while dropping a gun on your lawn is dumb, dropping it on a playground is umpteen times dumber.
If you can manage to carry a gun with a Barami Grip and not lose it, more power to ya.
I'm good with that.....of course, Austin PD may have some problems...
http://www.statesman.com/search/content/news/stories/local/07/09/0709gun.html
Quote
Moms, kids find officer's loaded gun in South Austin park
Police reviewing the incident, officials say.
By Tony Plohetski
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Editor's note: The original posting of this story briefly included a mug shot that was not officer Daniel Eveleth, but another K-9 officer.
A group of mothers and children at a Southwest Austin park found the loaded gun of an Austin police officer who did not know for hours that his weapon was missing, officials said Tuesday.
Austin police Lt. Donald Baker said supervisors are reviewing how officer Daniel Eveleth's Glock handgun might have fallen from his holster while he was training a police dog about 5 a.m. Monday at the Circle C Ranch Metropolitan Park on Slaughter Creek.
Department officials said Tuesday that they could not specifically describe what training exercises Eveleth was conducting with the dog, why they were being done at pre-dawn hours or the type of holster he was wearing.
Officers responding to the park after one of the mothers called 911 learned that the gun was registered to Eveleth, who has been an officer for about 11 years and worked as a Travis County jailer before joining Austin police.
They returned the weapon to Eveleth at his home about four hours after he left the park and told him where it had been found, Baker said.
"He had no idea he was missing the weapon from his holster," Baker said. "It doesn't look like it was done in negligence."
Calls to Eveleth's home phone were not answered.
Wuthipong Tantaksinanukij, vice president of the Austin Police Association, said Eveleth is "devastated."
"First and foremost, we are thankful that nobody got hurt," Tantaksinanukij said. "No one feels that more than the officer himself."
He said the incident raises questions about the type of equipment they use.
Austin police policy requires officers to secure their weapons "by every practical means."
Danielle Pieranunzi, who went with her baby to the park to walk with a friend, said she first noticed the gun on a playground slide.
"It was in very plain view," she said. "It wasn't hidden or anything."
Police said it was unclear whether the gun had been left on the slide or placed there by someone else.
Pieranunzi said one of the mothers moved the gun from the slide and propped it between a couple of tree branches out of the reach of children. Several of them guarded the weapon until officers arrived, she said.
"You don't think a policeman would lose his gun," she said. "It's pretty surprising and kind of disappointing."
tplohetski@statesman.com; 445-3605
Police reviewing the incident, officials say.
By Tony Plohetski
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Editor's note: The original posting of this story briefly included a mug shot that was not officer Daniel Eveleth, but another K-9 officer.
A group of mothers and children at a Southwest Austin park found the loaded gun of an Austin police officer who did not know for hours that his weapon was missing, officials said Tuesday.
Austin police Lt. Donald Baker said supervisors are reviewing how officer Daniel Eveleth's Glock handgun might have fallen from his holster while he was training a police dog about 5 a.m. Monday at the Circle C Ranch Metropolitan Park on Slaughter Creek.
Department officials said Tuesday that they could not specifically describe what training exercises Eveleth was conducting with the dog, why they were being done at pre-dawn hours or the type of holster he was wearing.
Officers responding to the park after one of the mothers called 911 learned that the gun was registered to Eveleth, who has been an officer for about 11 years and worked as a Travis County jailer before joining Austin police.
They returned the weapon to Eveleth at his home about four hours after he left the park and told him where it had been found, Baker said.
"He had no idea he was missing the weapon from his holster," Baker said. "It doesn't look like it was done in negligence."
Calls to Eveleth's home phone were not answered.
Wuthipong Tantaksinanukij, vice president of the Austin Police Association, said Eveleth is "devastated."
"First and foremost, we are thankful that nobody got hurt," Tantaksinanukij said. "No one feels that more than the officer himself."
He said the incident raises questions about the type of equipment they use.
Austin police policy requires officers to secure their weapons "by every practical means."
Danielle Pieranunzi, who went with her baby to the park to walk with a friend, said she first noticed the gun on a playground slide.
"It was in very plain view," she said. "It wasn't hidden or anything."
Police said it was unclear whether the gun had been left on the slide or placed there by someone else.
Pieranunzi said one of the mothers moved the gun from the slide and propped it between a couple of tree branches out of the reach of children. Several of them guarded the weapon until officers arrived, she said.
"You don't think a policeman would lose his gun," she said. "It's pretty surprising and kind of disappointing."
tplohetski@statesman.com; 445-3605
Post by: LAK on July 30, 2008, 03:12:19 AM
When it comes down to the bottom line, anyone who cannot fight off or resist someone strongarming their piece from a holster will not be much of an obstacle to a thug with a pair of heavy duty shears or a blade and their parted leather belt.
In states that allow open carry already there really are not any significant, if any, cases of gun snatches from open holsters.
Post by: MechAg94 on July 30, 2008, 06:16:21 AM
Post by: freakazoid on July 30, 2008, 03:40:15 PM
Post by: Nitrogen on July 30, 2008, 05:42:26 PM
Off topic - What is a Barami grip?
Here's how it "works"
http://www.baramihipgrip.com/hipgrip.html
(or should I say, operates)