Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Besides, that specific bit was in reference to Fighteer talking about people "waving their gun boner around in an attempt to intimidate people."
edited 15th Jun '16 1:42:52 PM by NativeJovian
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.There's a big, obvious reason people don't like seeing guns. Guns are used to shoot people. When shot, people often die. People dislike dying. Minorities are much more likely to be shot, and therefore are more afraid of guns. That's why people freak out when a guy walks into 7/11 with a rifle strapped to his back.
The presence of a weapon makes it impossible to tell you apart from a person with malicious intent until someone starts shooting. Whether it is concealed or open mainly matters in the sense that I can tell at a distance which people to stay on the other side of the street from.
Now, there may be legitimate exceptions in certain situations. If you carry lots of cash on a regular basis, then having a weapon for protection may be reasonable, but you should receive a specific license for that situation and also be subject to mandatory security training. You should also carry openly and wear a uniform designating yourself as a security professional.
If you can't meet those standards, then you should rethink the whole "walking around with tons of cash" thing. I'm sorry if that's inconvenient; we all make sacrifices.
Edit: If firearms ownership does indeed contribute measurably to personal safety, then there should be statistics demonstrating that a person who carries a weapon is:
- Less likely to be a victim of a crime. Concealed carry would seem to be pointless for this purpose, unless criminals have developed X-ray vision when I wasn't looking.
- More likely to defend themselves successfully against a crime. I have not heard any statistics backing this up.
- Not more likely to injure themselves or others, or have their weapon used maliciously. Statistics show that the reverse is true: gun ownership is correlated with accidental gun death at a disturbing rate.
edited 15th Jun '16 1:47:24 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"You can't have it both ways. You can't say that anyone who is open carrying is an asshole trying to intimidate people and that anyone trying to conceal carry is most likely a loose cannon who wants to jump at the chance to shot anyone who gets on their nerves.
Like, yeah, being uncomfortable around guns has a very obvious and understandable reason, but unless banning all guns, everywhere is an option, which it's not, it's got to be one or the other.
Edit: although, my reaction to seeing someone with handgun strapped to their waist would be very different than an AK whatever slung over their back. Well, outwardly it probably wouldn't be, but the latter would probably unnerve me a lot more.
edited 15th Jun '16 1:47:13 PM by LSBK
I did not suggest banning all guns, everywhere. Let's not read more than is present. I am saying that no person, save for trained and uniformed security personnel, should ever be armed in public — meaning with a weapon that is easily reachable, loaded, and able to be fired.
Carrying a weapon in public, for general citizens (in other words, not licensed security personnel), should be limited to properly secured guns transported for the purpose of sales, hunting, range shooting, training, safety demonstrations, or similar activities.
edited 15th Jun '16 1:50:14 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I'm not sure you understand that the idea here is to avoid being robbed, not painting a giant "I'm carrying something valuable, please shoot me and steal it" sign on my forehead.
Seriously, there's an enormous difference between being indistinguishable from your average guy walking around, and being dressed like an armored car guard except without the armored car, the additional guards, the bulletproof vests, etc.
@Conceal carry is an option, therefore open carry is malicious.
Weird, the intuitive thing seems to me to be the opposite. Open carry (in a respectful holster) means you show you're open to scrutiny, your intent is peaceful, and all around you are warned of your weaponry and capable of taking pre-emptive measures if they see you as a threat. That includes, of course, criminals looking to get rid of armed people first in a violent scenario; it's why open carry is a show of vulnerability.
Conceal carry, on the other hand, hides the fact that you're a potential threat, and doesn't let people take measures until it's too late. If you've got a lethal weapon on you, I think people around you are entitled to know.
Canadian lawmakers seem to be of the same mind:
The practice of CCW is generally prohibited in Canada. Section 90 of the Criminal Code prohibits carrying a concealed weapon unless authorized under the Firearms Act.[1] Section 20 of the Firearms Act allows issuance of an Authorization to Carry (ATC) in limited circumstances. Concealment of the firearm is permitted only if it is specifically stipulated in the conditions of the ATC, as section 58(1) of the Firearms Act allows a CFO to attach conditions to an ATC.
Provincial chief firearm officers (CF Os) may only issue an authorization in accordance with the regulations. Specifically, SOR 98-207 section 2 requires, for an ATC for protection of life, for an individual to be in imminent danger and for police protection to be insufficient. As such, if the relevant police agency determines its protection is sufficient, the CFO would have difficulty in issuing the ATC over police objections.
For issuance of an ATC under 98-207(3) for lawful occupations, provision is made for armored car personnel under subsection a), for wildlife protection (while working) and trapping under subsections b) and c). Unless hunting or other activity is occupational, it would not be possible to issue an ATC under the section.[1] As noted, a CFO can exercise some discretion but must follow the law in considering applications for an ATC.[2]
So I'm guessing the "walking around with loads of cash" is replaced with "hiring an armored car"? Inconvenient, but isn't it ultimately safer? If your lone courier has a gun, how will that help them against an opponent who knows who they are, where they're going, and what they're carrying? Wouldn't that opponent just assume a gun? So what's the point of concealing it?
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
That's a valid point. If someone knows you're carrying tons of cash and wants to take it from you, your weapon won't be a deterrent to them. If people don't know you're carrying cash, then your likelihood of being mugged is exactly the same as anyone else's. In neither case is a concealed weapon of any use in deterring the crime.
edited 15th Jun '16 2:34:45 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Wait a minute...
Holy shit that's scary.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.My general understanding of the situation isn't the lack of laws on the books for gun control. It's a lack of enforcement and follow through (not to mention, severe underfocus on the mentally ill and weaponry access). The ATF (or whatever agency is best suited) needs to be given more power in keeping things in check.
You carry a gun in preparation for a robbery but not a bulletproof vest and other safety equipment?
They can carry the sort of caliber that humanely one-shots a beast?
edited 15th Jun '16 1:59:45 PM by TheHandle
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
And you make arrangements to securely transport that cash, if you have any brains in your head. Because if there's a badguy out there who wants to take it from you, he won't care if you have a gun.
edited 15th Jun '16 2:02:21 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
![]()
Absolutely, the hunting rifle versions tend to look a bit like this
◊
Chambered in .308, one of the more popular deer hunting cartridges there is.
edited 15th Jun '16 2:02:39 PM by LeGarcon
Oh really when?I'm thinking that, if you're going to the range, or to hunt, or anything like that, your weapon's place isn't anywhere on your body, but in a nice locked safe case, suitcase, or trunk of the appropriate proportions. If you don't expect to need to use it, carrying it in a way that makes it covenient to use seems unnecessary.
Nice. But not something I'd carry around to the grocery store, that's for sure.
edited 15th Jun '16 2:05:27 PM by TheHandle
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Exactly my point. The only reason to carry a loaded, accessible weapon in public is if you anticipate using it, and nobody should be doing that who is not a security or police officer.
![]()
And for the record this
◊ is a hunting shotgun that's little more than a modified AK.
Anyway, this sorta highlights how careful we have to be with legislation. Both of the images I linked show weapons that are basically AK-47s but they're both very tasteful and useful hunting tools than any sort of spree weapon.
Oh really when?Carrying a weapon in public, for general citizens (in other words, not licensed security personnel), should be limited to properly secured guns transported for the purpose of sales, hunting, range shooting, training, safety demonstrations, or similar activities.
This. There's not really any reason why a person should have a rifle slung over their shoulder while perusing the aisles at Wal-Mart unless he's
- Trying to look cool.
- Planning to start shit.
- Imagining himself valiantly saving the day by gunning down someone who started shit.
The problem here is that a lot of people in Option 1 are fundamentally unrecognizable from people in Options 2 and 3, either of which are extraordinarily dangerous people. If Option 1 is what a person's seeking when they walk into the store with the gun toted over their shoulder, they need to find better ways to define their self-image because they don't look as cool as they think they do. They look like a dangerous menace.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.I find that most people who open carry like that are making a big, public point of exercising their Second Amendment rights, which makes them (a) assholes, and (b) part of the fundamental problem with gun culture in the U.S.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Depends on the location. If it's, say, New Jersey or something, yeah. If this is bumfuck, Texas, then no.
But I do agree its a cultural issue. I'd even say its more that than it is an actual access issue, since I've been to countries with (VERY) lax gun laws who don't have this problem (though they have other problems due to said laxness).

edited 15th Jun '16 1:38:35 PM by FFShinra