Friday, March 9, 2012

Open Carry Makes You As Dangerous as John Wilkes Booth, Tim McVeigh, Sharon Angle, and Ted Nugent?

A well publicized anti firearms rights advocate wrote last week that those who openly carry firearms make a political statement just like John Wilkes Booth, Timothy McVey, Sharon Angle, and Ted Nugent. What? They are like a Presidential assassin, a mass murderer, a female Nevada politician, and a rock star/hunter?

This isn’t a fringe concept. This is mainstream liberalism. This is why gun sales have begun to soar again just like before the 2008 election of Barack Obama. All of this was over a man who was legally openly carrying.

A  Michigan Concealed pistol permit holder walked into a polling place to vote in Michigan’s primary while he carried a holstered handgun. That polling place was located in a school. That’s legal in the State of Michigan. The County Prosecutor said that he was within his rights, but used poor judgment. He was asked to leave immediately after voting.

On one hand, no one can determine when he or she will be a victim of a crime. No one knows if a person will walk into an otherwise “gun free” zone and into the middle of an ongoing crime scene. On the other hand, open carry is not as common in Michigan as it is in a state like Arizona. It seems like guns carried openly are seen almost everywhere in Arizona. It’s safe to say that the overwhelming majority of Michigan residents have no idea whatsoever that openly carrying a firearm is legal there. And, that’s where the problem lies.

Nonetheless, Michigan school officials are required to contact local law enforcement anytime a person with a gun enters a school building. He was detained in the school’s office while police verified that he had a CPL. Then he was released.

A Philadelphia man recently was detained by Police there three times for legally carrying a sidearm there. The observations written here are not about the wisdom of open carry of firearms because many people carry openly. Others simply choose not to for their own reasons. In other places like Florida, its against the law. This is about a Michigan man who chose to legally carry openly and the consequences of that action.

This anti gun rights advocate voiced outrage on this open carry incident in his blog. He bemoaned that buying a firearm is easier to do than to vote. The man who entered the polling booth has demanded an apology, and he has hired an attorney to possibly file a lawsuit. He says that his rights were violated.

The anti gun rights advocate was stunned that the man was able to carry a gun into a school, that he has “rights” to do so, and that he has the temerity to threaten lawsuit. And, he is outraged that the Kent County, Michigan resident wants an apology. Of, course, this anti gun rights proponent claims that no one has a right “to carry firearms wherever and whenever one wants." But in the real world, one can carry “wherever and whenever” the law allows as is the case in Michigan. He also complains that just about every state that allows open carry has “liberal” gun laws.

His primary beef, aside from your having any gun rights, is the carrying of a firearm into a polling place at a school. As noted earlier, that’s a legal act in Michigan. He says that carry into a polling place at a school is intimidation of voters. He claims that the act says, “I wear a gun; therefore, you must vote by my rules.”
No, voter intimidation is the Black Panthers carrying baseball bats and actually threatening and turning away would be voters outside a polling place in Philadelphia during the 2008 elections, an action defended by radical Black Panther leaders.   

He parroted Virginia State Senator Janet Howell, who said that it was going to be “harder to vote that buy a gun” after Virginia worked on a “voter suppression” law that requires identification, even photo identification in some states to vote, and when the state canned its one handgun per month law. Even Unions require identification to vote in Union elections, but that’s an entirely different subject for that hypocrite.

His rant then turned to private firearms sales at gun shows without background checks and with no identification. It appears that he would be happier if voters underwent background checks before voting too. Then, he went absolutely ballistic when he stated that some states are considering showing a valid resident concealed weapons permit as a valid voter identification.
These permit holders would have actually undergone a background check if they decided to use that form of identification.

He was extremely agitated that a gun owner tweeted his organization that “votes are more dangerous than guns.” The 2008 elections showed the truth of that statement.  


Philadelphia Police Unmercifully Persecute Gun Owner For Just Obeying The Law


  1. Citizens with no criminal record should be able, at will, to carry, concealed or open, any firearm they please, hand gun or long gun, anywhere they please without let or hindrance by government authorities.

  2. While I agree with thus statement overall, I must say that I find openly carrying to be a way of trying to "grab attention." If you have a concealed permit then why wouldn't you carry concealed? I have my permit and I refust to openly show that I have a firearm. That makes you a target for negative attention. Since it was legal for him to carry like that I understand why he is upset, be he must understand that some people jsut feel very uncomfortable with firearms being plainly flaunted in their face. Both sides need to understand the other in this instance.

  3. Lots of people aren't comfortable with carrying openly, even where they can. Many will not carry openly simply for the attention it creates; and, it may just show a thug another piece of personal property that he will try to get from you.

    But, where legal, its a personal choice.

    And, it can lead to police harassment even where open carry is lawful.


    Philadelphia Police Unmercifully Persecute Gun Owner For Just Obeying The Law