open carry - Market Basket, Plymouth NH

[chaseisland]

It seems that on this thread a person with open carry is equated as a good guy. Really? How do you know? Could be a bad guy thinking I'll open carry and they'll think I'm a good guy." Think I'll sling my biathlon rifle on and go shopping.

[WinnisquamZ]

Originally Posted by chaseisland

It seems that on this thread a person with open carry is equated as a good guy. Really? How do you know? Could be a bad guy thinking I'll open carry and they'll think I'm a good guy." Think I'll sling my biathlon rifle on and go shopping.

Why are you assuming the individual is a bad guy or gal? Yes, you can sling your biathlon rifle on and go shopping. Throw on the medals too? Unless it’s just for show


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[XCR-700]

Interesting observations and opinions all, but somehow they all seem off the mark to me.

As always we are people that are quick to judge and quick to get worked up over any matter and so SLOW to really consider the other (or any other) perspective.

It would appear from several of the posts here that any notion of freedom of choice in America (you do what you want so long as it doesn’t actually impact or hurt me) seems to be rapidly eroding in the Live Free or DIe state, and this thread is a PERFECT example of it.

Of the ~350 million people in America, has anyone ever been harmed by open carry? (Which as correctly stated was your rule as far back as most can remember,,,) I have not seen a single report of open carry actually resulting in an actual safety problem, EVER. Likely more have suffered from loud speakers in boats than from any case of open carry ever reported!

I am also always surprised by highly inflammatory statements such as “this country is psycho when it comes to guns” or “the Second Amendment as being discussed here and most other places is due largely to the 2008 case District of Columbia vs. Heller. Prior to that, the interpretation was not about an individuals right to bear arms the way it gets discussed today”

“Psycho”, now that’s really going to help convince any gun owner that there might be a better option than open carry to protect themself or their family.

And any statement regarding the Second Amendment as not having been crafted as a personal and individual right to keep and bear arms (and any limitation of what kind of firearms this includes) has clearly not been following this matter, or the foundation from where is comes. The very earliest writings on this matter tell a tale of a desire to ensure protection and not even against other individuals or wildlife (that was always assumed as a personal “human” right to defend oneself) the Second Amendment was intended to allow you to defend yourself against an oppressive government. And as such it would also be assumed that citizens would have the same level/type/kind of sidearm that any military would have, otherwise there would be no purpose to it.

So for the moment I must read most of this with the expectation that it is just drama for drama sake, and all I have to do to validate my perspective is look at the OP who provides us with some of the most entertaining posts since the dialog of the original Letterman show. I thoroughly enjoy such posts as entertainment, but I could never take most of the comments as serious or having validity as this mostly reads like reactionary drama.

Well that’s one persons opinion and something I feel certain some here will treat this as just more drama, so simply sit back and enjoy as the show continues as I will be doing ;-)

[thinkxingu]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

Of the ~350 million people in America, has anyone ever been harmed by open carry?

I mean, every mass shooting has been an open carry situation, right?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[Descant]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

I mean, every mass shooting has been an open carry situation, right?

Not the guy who "smuggle" automatic rifles and fired on the crowd from a hotel room.

[BrunoSR]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

I mean, every mass shooting has been an open carry situation, right?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Well, actually, no!

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by thinkxingu

I mean, every mass shooting has been an open carry situation, right?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

No, not at all, those were mass shootings.

They had NOTHING to do with open carry.

And that is exactly my point, do you really believe that any mass shooting was caused because someone was carrying openly, or did you just say that for the sake of adding to the drama of the thread,,,

As pure entertainment its a great soundbite, but if you actually believe that Sandy Hook or Las Vegas or any other mass shooting happened because an otherwise reasonable person was carrying openly, and then out of the blue a mass shooting just happened as a result of that person having their gun not concealed vs it being hidden under a jacket, then we can never actually resolve this debate.

Matters not to me as I would never announce I had a firearm on my person by displaying it in public. Thats just my philosophy, but the hard truth of the matter is open carry in 2021 is an extreme rarity and does not happen enough anywhere in America to warrant any discussion about it.

I 100% assure you you are far greater risk every day of being killed by a distracted driver using a cell phone or texting on it, or at greater risk of killing yourself while distracted by simply having a cell phone, than any risk from someone openly carrying a hand gun. So when we fully address that problem, I might take the concern about open carry a bit more seriously. Maybe,,,

Until then, this discussion is all just drama for dramas sake.

[LikeLakes]

XCR, I appreciate your posts, agree with much of them, you have a thoughtful approach that it great because it makes me think things through.

One disagreement I have is calling a healthy discussion "just drama for drama's sake". I think this, at least so far, is a pretty good discussion, good points on all sides. Ok, I think comparing a military base to a Market Basket is not a great analogy but then again it started the discussion. It's nice to be on a forum where the discussion is about constitution and amendments and private property and not a bunch of name calling.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by LikeLakes

XCR, I appreciate your posts, agree with much of them, you have a thoughtful approach that it great because it makes me think things through.

One disagreement I have is calling a healthy discussion "just drama for drama's sake". I think this, at least so far, is a pretty good discussion, good points on all sides. Ok, I think comparing a military base to a Market Basket is not a great analogy but then again it started the discussion. It's nice to be on a forum where the discussion is about constitution and amendments and private property and not a bunch of name calling.

I think most discussions here are very reasonable and many very helpful, and I very much appreciate the viewpoints shared here. Well most of the time, but this one started off on a bit of an odd note and it is one of the most polarizing matters Americans are facing. So I intentionally kept away until I saw how all over the place this conversation went. In my opinion calling America (and assuming that means us) psychos for our desire to own (and possibly bear firearms) is drama. In my opinion calling mass shootings a result of open carry is drama. And so on,,,

Too much said about firearms issues is emotional not fact based, and thats what makes it drama for dramas sake.

If the conversation addressed concerns of mishandling open carry weapons, or holsters that did not secure the guns, or any number of legitimate concerns then it would be quite different and I would likely have considered it an in interesting and legitimate discussion. But it is clear that some feel that that simply showing a gun in public constituted a danger to others, and for me thats just drama.

I could speculate and raise the drama level, by saying maybe these folks were off duty law enforcement of some other profession that allows constant carry. I could speculate that these folks had suffered violent crime and simply wanted to send a message that they would not be victims again. I could do a lot of things to ramp up the drama, but I feel like this is a very important matter and one that should be taken more seriously than calling us psychos or blaming open carry for mass shootings.

The fact is it went as these kinds of polarizing issues usually go, too many go to there opposite corner and little meaningful discussion or debate actually happens. Sure there were some productive comments, but mostly drama from catbird seat.

Well thats what I saw, if you disagree, I cant fault you, its just a different observation and I respect your right to see it as you do. No heart burn here.

If you can do anything to elevate the conversation I will applaud you, and maybe you already have in your attempt to reach out to me. So for that I tip my hat to you. If you bump into me on the lake, tell me I promised to buy you a round and we can debate my "need" to buy some expensive and shiny props for the boat, or maybe my desire buy,,, well any of the crazy things on my list ;-) Thanks

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

Interesting observations and opinions all, but somehow they all seem off the mark to me.

As always we are people that are quick to judge and quick to get worked up over any matter and so SLOW to really consider the other (or any other) perspective.

It would appear from several of the posts here that any notion of freedom of choice in America (you do what you want so long as it doesn’t actually impact or hurt me) seems to be rapidly eroding in the Live Free or DIe state, and this thread is a PERFECT example of it.

Of the ~350 million people in America, has anyone ever been harmed by open carry? (Which as correctly stated was your rule as far back as most can remember,,,) I have not seen a single report of open carry actually resulting in an actual safety problem, EVER. Likely more have suffered from loud speakers in boats than from any case of open carry ever reported!

I am also always surprised by highly inflammatory statements such as “this country is psycho when it comes to guns” or “the Second Amendment as being discussed here and most other places is due largely to the 2008 case District of Columbia vs. Heller. Prior to that, the interpretation was not about an individuals right to bear arms the way it gets discussed today”
“Psycho”, now that’s really going to help convince any gun owner that there might be a better option than open carry to protect themself or their family.
And any statement regarding the Second Amendment as not having been crafted as a personal and individual right to keep and bear arms (and any limitation of what kind of firearms this includes) has clearly not been following this matter, or the foundation from where is comes. The very earliest writings on this matter tell a tale of a desire to ensure protection and not even against other individuals or wildlife (that was always assumed as a personal “human” right to defend oneself) the Second Amendment was intended to allow you to defend yourself against an oppressive government. And as such it would also be assumed that citizens would have the same level/type/kind of sidearm that any military would have, otherwise there would be no purpose to it.

So for the moment I must read most of this with the expectation that it is just drama for drama sake, and all I have to do to validate my perspective is look at the OP who provides us with some of the most entertaining posts since the dialog of the original Letterman show. I thoroughly enjoy such posts as entertainment, but I could never take most of the comments as serious or having validity as this mostly reads like reactionary drama.

Well that’s one persons opinion and something I feel certain some here will treat this as just more drama, so simply sit back and enjoy as the show continues as I will be doing ;-)

So you don't believe in private property? Or don't believe that a property owner exerts right over that property?

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

So you don't believe in private property? Or don't believe that a property owner exerts right over that property?

No idea where you get that idea from.

Clearly you have me confused with some other poster.

I believe America is a better place because we have a 1st and 2nd amendment and I fully believe in people having god given rights to defend themselves and their families and their property.

Maybe I am misunderstanding your comments???

[John Mercier]

The restriction on carry would be the invoking of a property right.
There is no ''freedom of choice'' when your ''choice'' is an attempt to override someone else's right.

Other than an owner's personally feeling on the issue, for business, that is mostly the relay of several inputs to revenue and expenses.

For instance, I gave motorcycling, snowmobiling, my PWC, my ATV (even my officer position in the state association), plus many other things... because I wanted to be the choice of old money customers that do not find those things acceptable.

If I learned to sail or ski, or improved my golf game, I could even gain credibility. Luckily, I can handle more of the systems than the other salespeople, and have more of an architectural background... so I get asked for.

So I have had to deal with my ''choices'' both being acceptable to other people and their property rights, along with business interests that are a lot broader than many may understand.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

The restriction on carry would be the invoking of a property right.
There is no ''freedom of choice'' when your ''choice'' is an attempt to override someone else's right.

Other than an owner's personally feeling on the issue, for business, that is mostly the relay of several inputs to revenue and expenses.

For instance, I gave motorcycling, snowmobiling, my PWC, my ATV (even my officer position in the state association), plus many other things... because I wanted to be the choice of old money customers that do not find those things acceptable.

If I learned to sail or ski, or improved my golf game, I could even gain credibility. Luckily, I can handle more of the systems than the other salespeople, and have more of an architectural background... so I get asked for.

So I have had to deal with my ''choices'' both being acceptable to other people and their property rights, along with business interests that are a lot broader than many may understand.

I'm not following, but thats ok, I may be more block-headed than most ;-)

If I can attempt to trace that back to the original post are you attempting to draw some line from my comments to some right of Market Basket to allow or prohibit open carry??? As I made no comment about that it doesn't click with me, but then as I said I'm not following so maybe I'm way off track,,,

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

I'm not following, but thats ok, I may be more block-headed than most ;-)

If I can attempt to trace that back to the original post are you attempting to draw some line from my comments to some right of Market Basket to allow or prohibit open carry??? As I made no comment about that it doesn't click with me, but then as I said I'm not following so maybe I'm way off track,,,

''It would appear from several of the posts here that any notion of freedom of choice in America (you do what you want so long as it doesn’t actually impact or hurt me) seems to be rapidly eroding in the Live Free or DIe state, and this thread is a PERFECT example of it. ''

You suggest that Freedom of Choice override others' rights... it never does.
It does not matter if something doesn't ''hurt me''. Property owners act in their own self-interest.

That self-interest has much more effect on our policies than government mandates.

So should a restriction occur, it would be due to public (i.e. customer reaction ) to what is happening.

People tend to push an advocacy position to the point that the negative occurs.

I am sure that in the past people have cooked on Weirs Beach and listened to music... but they went so far as to agitate the backlash.

[Biggd]

I'm not a gun person myself, could care less about guns. But I have a dozen or so friends that are gun fanatics and at least 2 or 3 of them shouldn't be carrying. They are loose cannons and when I'm with them I try to keep my guard up.
One took his own life, about 2 months ago, not with his gun but he's dead non the less. So I really question the stability of all many of these legal gun owners.
IMO, anyone with a gun can be provoked to use it under duress, whether it's warranted or not.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

''It would appear from several of the posts here that any notion of freedom of choice in America (you do what you want so long as it doesn’t actually impact or hurt me) seems to be rapidly eroding in the Live Free or DIe state, and this thread is a PERFECT example of it. ''

You suggest that Freedom of Choice override others' rights... it never does.
It does not matter if something doesn't ''hurt me''. Property owners act in their own self-interest.

That self-interest has much more effect on our policies than government mandates.

So should a restriction occur, it would be due to public (i.e. customer reaction ) to what is happening.

People tend to push an advocacy position to the point that the negative occurs.

I am sure that in the past people have cooked on Weirs Beach and listened to music... but they went so far as to agitate the backlash.

Ok, maybe we are getting somewhere now, RE; "you suggest that Freedom of Choice override others' rights"

Not sure how "you" came to that conclusion, but lets be 100% clear, thats your interpretations.

If I have a right of freedom of choice that allows me to carry a handgun openly in public, I see no reason that a public space is considered your property. So long as you do not do something discriminatory or sufficiently dangerous as to put me at actual risk, you can make up any stupid rule about access to your property you want. You are the one who will suffer your potentially bad decision.

So if you own the local grocery store and wish to prohibit open fire arms carry inside and your customers decide your policy is not agreeable to them, they can chose to not buy from you and to discourage everyone they know to not buy from you. That is freedom of choice that is exercised by both parties. Likely both will suffer. You will lose sales, and they will have to find another store to shop at.

Does that make any sense/work for you?

Am I still not on the right wavelength to get your message???

I feel like we are talking cross-purposes and manufacturing even more drama and accomplishing nothing.

Sorry if I just cant seem to make the connection to what your point is about how freedom of choice negatively impacts property owners, I feel like its just the opposite. Sorry I just dont see a conflict in freedom of choice and property ownership. Property owner are not prohibited from making their own choices.

Sorry no hard feelings, and not knocking you, just not syncing up.

[Descant]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

The restriction on carry would be the invoking of a property right.
There is no ''freedom of choice'' when your ''choice'' is an attempt to override someone else's right.

Other than an owner's personally feeling on the issue, for business, that is mostly the relay of several inputs to revenue and expenses.

For instance, I gave motorcycling, snowmobiling, my PWC, my ATV (even my officer position in the state association), plus many other things... because I wanted to be the choice of old money customers that do not find those things acceptable.

If I learned to sail or ski, or improved my golf game, I could even gain credibility. Luckily, I can handle more of the systems than the other salespeople, and have more of an architectural background... so I get asked for.

So I have had to deal with my ''choices'' both being acceptable to other people and their property rights, along with business interests that are a lot broader than many may understand.

Sorry, I don't understand where you're headed with this.

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by Descant

Sorry, I don't understand where you're headed with this.

Everyone wants to presume that what they are doing is socially acceptable - then a restriction on what they are doing comes about and they complain rather than realize they never should have been doing it.

[fatlazyless]

If these four different men wearing guns inside the Plymouth Market Basket, all individually by themself, over the last month or so, were not in fact REAL, then why has Walmart felt the need for a no open carry rule? Because it scares the other customers inside the store seeing these different guys walking around with a semi-auto hand gun in a holster on their hip.

In Plymouth NH, the Court House, Post Office, Speare Hospital. Mid-State Health, Pemi Baker Community Health, CVS-Pharmacy, and Rite Aid all have 'no weapons' signs posted at their entry which indicates this has been happening and these locations decided to post a no weapon notice.

It's up to Market Basket if they think a 'no open carry sign' is needed similar to these other places in Plymouth.

In a post up above, someone says the Mount Washington cruise ship has a 'no weapons' sign posted at its entry way, so if it is good for the Mount then it is probably a good thing for Market Basket to do, as well.

[tis]

I guess I don't see why open carry bothers people more than that fact that some carry concealed??? The only difference is you know and are reminded if you can see it vs. wondering if someone has one?

[Newbiesaukee]

Originally Posted by tis

I guess I don't see why open carry bothers people more than that fact that some carry concealed??? The only difference is you know and are reminded if you can see it vs. wondering if someone has one?

I think you are correct. Even many folks made uncomfortable by seeing the guns recognize this seeming irrationality. Although there is also the idea that, true or not, people who open carry are more dangerous.

Unfortunately, instilling fear, willful misinterpretation, and misinformation has played a daily role in many areas of our lives.

Why should the subject of open carry be any different?

[ApS]

Originally Posted by Newbiesaukee

I think you are correct. Even many folks made uncomfortable by seeing the guns recognize this seeming irrationality. Although there is also the idea that, true or not, people who open carry are more dangerous.

Unfortunately, instilling fear, willful misinterpretation, and misinformation has played a daily role in many areas of our lives.

Why should the subject of open carry be any different?

The announcement made today by the U.S. Surgeon General can be expected to result in U.S. Intelligence Agencies' monitoring of Americans' text messages.

[Newbiesaukee]

Originally Posted by ApS

The announcement made today by the U.S. Surgeon General can be expected to result in U.S. Intelligence Agencies' monitoring of Americans' text messages.

Totally off topic.

Speaking of misinformation. I have read the complex 22 page advisory released by Dr. Murthy and I see no reasonable basis for your comment. I admit it’s a lot to digest. Have you read the report or just an interpretation of it?


Whatever your source, it is, at best a stretch or an exaggeration. But I would like to see your reference.

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by ApS

The announcement made today by the U.S. Surgeon General can be expected to result in U.S. Intelligence Agencies' monitoring of Americans' text messages.

The Surgeon General doesn't run the NSA.
And the NSA has always monitored electronic communication.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by ApS

The announcement made today by the U.S. Surgeon General can be expected to result in U.S. Intelligence Agencies' monitoring of Americans' text messages.

And what did they say, getting stressed out over forum posts is much more harmful to your health than someone openly carrying a handgun in market basket ;-)

[dickiej]

Originally Posted by ApS

The announcement made today by the U.S. Surgeon General can be expected to result in U.S. Intelligence Agencies' monitoring of Americans' text messages.

There is a huge Google plant in The Dalles, OR that supposedly scans every text and email sent and received in the country. Thousands of high speed servers scan millions of texts/emails per second, looking for key words, which sends it to another scan. We all better assume that big brother is watching us all the time.

[Mr. V]

Open carry is pretty uncommon here in Portland and its nearby environs, but a lot, and I do mean a lot, of people legally carry concealed.

Easy to get a CWP.

[randalnh]

Looks like this thread is getting off track, so I will try and steer this discussion back to open carry.

Remember where you are. This is the "Live Free or Die" state and some of us do not take that motto lightly. The "Live Free" part only works if we all respect each others rights and do not try to force your will on others because of your personal, irrational fears. If you think it is just a BS motto, do us all a favor and move to another state.

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by dickiej

There is a huge Google plant in The Dalles, OR that supposedly scans every text and email sent and received in the country. Thousands of high speed servers scan millions of texts/emails per second, looking for key words, which sends it to another scan. We all better assume that big brother is watching us all the time.

I call somewhat fake news on this claim.

Google does not have access to every text and email sent in and out of this country. They may be doing it on their own mail (gmail) and voice (google talk) platforms and if so shame on them.

Even if they did they would need to have the ability to break the encryption that is used - where it is used. Now for email many providers and companies do not bother encrypting email so it is possible to intercept and read in the clear messages that are sent. Many however do, some go so far as to use multi factor (multiple layers of encryption) and that makes it impossible to read the contents unless the key chain(s) used to encrypt it is available to them which is highly unlikely.

SMS text messages there could be some truth to this as SMS messages are NOT encrypted and thus could be intercepted and read by anyone. That said, anyone who has an Apple device and sends imessages to another Apple user, those messages are sent via encrypted data stream (NOT SMS). They route through the iCloud not your wireless provider. The only thing the wireless provider does is provide the LTE service the data flows over. There is no way Google would have visibility into this. Apple to non apple communications are done via SMS and thus not encrypted.

[Lakegeezer]

Originally Posted by tis

I guess I don't see why open carry bothers people more than that fact that some carry concealed??? The only difference is you know and are reminded if you can see it vs. wondering if someone has one?

Same thing could be said about your genitals.

[tis]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

Same thing could be said about your genitals.

Well, I guess if they frighten ya'!!!

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by tis

Well, I guess if they frighten ya'!!!

Now thats fully!

[Treerider]

It’s better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it……
Just sayin….

[mowtorman]

I know a number of Iraq/Afghanistan veterans. One thing they have in common is they carry all day work or play. They are all out here working and contributing after having done their part overseas.

Does anyone want to tell them they can't carry a firearm while having possession of a firearm is perfectly legal?

I didn't get it at first, but some of their points were thought provoking, enough to convince me to keep a firearm at home. I rarely take it out of the house but do on occasion, especially if I don't know what I am getting myself into.

There are so any people carrying weapons in public it is commonplace. Unless someone talks to John Wayne in the cowboy hat or the new young Rambo we will never know their reasons for carrying. Maybe someone could ask them a few questions if so interested next time......what are they gonna do....shoot you while you wait for sliced bologna? If they wanted to shoot you they would just shoot you for no reason. They might be two of the most helpful friendly neighbors you could have, cowboy hat or not, and they might even help you out when that random home invasion character finds your front door open.

So much judgement and speculation with so little information.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by mowtorman

So much judgement and speculation with so little information.

So well said!

Might I also add; so much fear and drama over something that has yet to result in any problem.

So far as we have been able to determine, no one in Market Basket has suffered any harm from open carry. Given all the customers that go through their doors, it seems to be even safer than walking, as occasion someone walking will slip and fall and suffer and actual injury.

So again there we have it, walking is more risky to your actual health than open carry.

Are we done yet?

Probably not much chance,,,

[Crusty]

To sum up the open carry vs concealed carry: Ignorance is bliss. As for people with guns being around, criminals normally avoid anyplace where they know or believe people are armed. I'm quite willing to enjoy the protective zone.

As for "gun free" zones, I avoid them whenever possible. In my opinion, anyone or any entity that declares a "gun free" zone has the absolute responsibility to enforce it. Any failure of enforcement should leave them criminally and civilly liable without limit.

[fatlazyless]

In June 2008 Justice Antonin Scalia made a majority decision OPINION in a gun control case involving Washington DC and a police officer trying to get a concealed acrry permit in the District........ Judge Scalia said "there are some buildings like public buildings and schools that are too sensitive for the second amendment and guns are banned from these buildings.

For a supermarket like Market Basket, it's up to the store owner if they think open carry is too sensitive for their store because it scares and intimidates some of the other shoppers which is probably WHY all these four different men I saw choose to wear a gun inside the store ..... to be INTIMIDATING or to be SHOWY. They all could have gone "concealed carry" but they want to be intimidating and showy to others so they go "open carry."

Open carry is intimidating to many and does not belong inside this Market Basket store is what Justice Antonin Scalia would say, if he were still alive and here on this forum!

www.shopmarketbasket.com/about-us/contact-us ........ If you think there's NO Place for open carry inside the Plymouth NH, Market Basket then go ahead and MAKE MY DAY ........ tell the Market Basket WHAT YOU THINK ......... and thank-YOU very much!

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Open carry is intimidating to many and does not belong inside this Market Basket store is what Justice Antonin Scalia would say, if he were still alive and here on this forum!

Clearly you know NOTHING about Justice Scalia or his work or perspectives, your statement is absolutely wrong.

He could already have said what you propose many times over and he carefully did not. So you should not attribute some totally different perspective to a dead man than he had the opportunity to do so himself and chose not to.

And with that statement this thread has now lost any credibility it may have had in creating a dialog about the sensibility of open carry vs concealed carry.

ATB

[fatlazyless]

www.shopmarketbasket.com/about-us/contact-us ....... looks like you left out my last sentence .....hey there Buddy .....the one with the link to the store management where you can tell them that OPEN CARRY does not belong inside this sensitive supermarket building ....... Market Basket-Plymouth NH .... NO OPEN CARRY ALLOWED!

[SAMIAM]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

www.shopmarketbasket.com/about-us/contact-us ....... looks like you left out my last sentence .....hey there Buddy .....the one with the link to the store management where you can tell them that OPEN CARRY does not belong inside this sensitive supermarket building ....... Market Basket-Plymouth NH .... NO OPEN CARRY ALLOWED!

Since you posted contact info for Market Basket,I guess open carry advocates can feel free to contact them encouraging open carry because it makes people feel safer and is legal in NH.
Personally,I'm against it but just sayin'

[fatlazyless]

Originally Posted by SAMIAM

Since you posted contact info for Market Basket,I guess open carry advocates can feel free to contact them encouraging open carry because it makes people feel safer and is legal in NH.
Personally,I'm against it but just sayin'

Yes, people can contact Market Basket and send a message on what they think with regard to shopping at Market Basket .....pro-open carry, against open carry, or whatever they wish to write on any M.B. concern or issue.

Here's the link again ..... www.shopmarketbasket.com/about-us/contact-us

Me ...... I have not been inside the nearby Plymouth Hannaford supermarket in about a year and now just use M.B. and Walmart which also has many non-food items. Is good to know that all Walmarts have a "no open carry" policy since 2019. Would like to see the Plymouth Market Basket go "No Open Carry" as well, similar to the nearby Walmart as a way to discourage these lone, individual men from using the store as a place to go shopping while showing off their hand gun.

[mhtranger]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Would like to see the Plymouth Market Basket go "No Open Carry" as well, similar to the nearby Walmart as a way to discourage these lone, individual men from using the store as a place to go shopping while showing off their hand gun.

But what about those of us that carry concealed? You would never know how many scary handguns are around you in your area.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

If these four different men wearing guns inside the Plymouth Market Basket, all individually by themself, over the last month or so, were not in fact REAL, then why has Walmart felt the need for a no open carry rule? Because it scares the other customers inside the store seeing these different guys walking around with a semi-auto hand gun in a holster on their hip.

In Plymouth NH, the Court House, Post Office, Speare Hospital. Mid-State Health, Pemi Baker Community Health, CVS-Pharmacy, and Rite Aid all have 'no weapons' signs posted at their entry which indicates this has been happening and these locations decided to post a no weapon notice.

It's up to Market Basket if they think a 'no open carry sign' is needed similar to these other places in Plymouth.

In a post up above, someone says the Mount Washington cruise ship has a 'no weapons' sign posted at its entry way, so if it is good for the Mount then it is probably a good thing for Market Basket to do, as well.

Interesting how very quickly the conversation changes from a concern about open carry to having a gun at all. Re; "'no weapons' sign" as opposed to no open carry.

Again this is why we can rarely have reasonable discussions about such matters. The parties too often go to opposite corners, and then revel their true feelings on the matter.

So in the end it is not sufficient to hide your gun, we are back to the you cannot have a gun at all or someone else will "feel" uncomfortable.

Lets think about all the things we have been uncomfortable about over the last 100 years that have all been remedied by sensible people saying we need not fear this. For example; hippies, bikers, people of color, people with physical deformities, people from other countries, people of other religions, ETC Etc etc,,, Its our fear and ignorance that shows brightest when we judge based on appearance alone.

So again,,, what have we learned from all this;

1. First and foremost your concern about open carry has not inhibited you from actually continuing to shop at the offending location(s) in any way. Almost like bad TV, you seem to be drawn back to the show.

2. Your concern for this matter (or interesting in telling us about it) continues to remain very high.

3. You have been able to control your impulses to make a public scene about such matters that would likely have brought even more attention to these individuals than they bring to themselves. But then you probably realized that "they" might actually like that, so your self-control is appreciated.

4. And finally and again possibly the most important lesson, NOTHING happened because of the open carry you observed. No one was harmed. No public riot occurred. No children were trampled because you didn't cause a commotion. We learned that open carry worked and worked well without any incident of any kind. you simply felt uncomfortable for a couple of moments and you got over it.

Well done.

I feel certain if you can keep watching the life coach commercials on TV about how we call best conduct ourselves in public, your progress will continue.

In the end, like it was fully accepted 100 years ago, open carry will soon be of little bother to anyone who doesn't live in fear of spooks or demons or shadows, as we have seen it clearly causes no harm. Not a single case of harm coming to our ~350 million Americans has been posted here as a direct result of open carry. Few things in fact seem safer. Isn't that truly outstanding, that we have discovered such a safe activity. Hard to believe open carry is safer than swimming with a noodle,,,

I feel certain that in time you will overcome your fear of open carry, unless the real reason for the post is to eliminate everyones ability to keep and bear firearms Re: "no weapons' sign" as opposed to a no open carry sign,,,

DRAMA, Drama, drama,,, Makes for interesting reading is nothing else.

[gillygirl]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

Interesting how very quickly the conversation changes from a concern about open carry to having a gun at all. Re; "'no weapons' sign" as opposed to no open carry.

Again this is why we can rarely have reasonable discussions about such matters. The parties too often go to opposite corners, and then revel their true feelings on the matter.

So in the end it is not sufficient to hide your gun, we are back to the you cannot have a gun at all or someone else will "feel" uncomfortable.

It’s not as if the sign is saying you can’t have a gun at all, just not while you’re in that establishment. It’s every business’s right to determine what they will and will not allow in their establishment, just as it is your right to own a gun.

I grew up in suburban Boston having never seen a gun. When I moved to a semi-rural area and saw some hunters caring their shotguns out of the woods, I was startled initially, but then realized it was perfectly normal there. When I saw my first open carry, I remembered I was in Florida…perfectly normal there. Sometimes it just takes people time to adjust.

As for drama, don’t you think your long posts add to it?


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by gillygirl

It’s not as if the sign is saying you can’t have a gun at all, just not while you’re in that establishment. It’s every business’s right to determine what they will and will not allow in their establishment, just as it is your right to own a gun.

I grew up in suburban Boston having never seen a gun. When I moved to a semi-rural area and saw some hunters caring their shotguns out of the woods, I was startled initially, but then realized it was perfectly normal there. When I saw my first open carry, I remembered I was in Florida…perfectly normal there. Sometimes it just takes people time to adjust.

As for drama, don’t you think your long posts add to it?


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Re; stores rights, I 100% agree with you. But the store(s) are not making such decisions in a vacuum. And also likely they are not making such decisions based on a pole of their customers. In America we react to the loudest voice in the crowd, so people who are currently enjoying carrying openly and not perceiving any problem are going to store managers to say I want you to make sure you hear my preference to continue to do so. What store owners usually hear is the few who complain and then they react to that vocal group without gathering input from the masses. And once you put any restriction in place, this X times harder to get it overturned unless there is a massive uprising of concern.

As for you comments about it taking people time to adjust, I totally agree. This will fizzle. NH will not become the wild west of old, and people will get used to the very few who insist in showing off their hardware.

And finally we get to drama, and again you are 100% correct, and thats my goal in those long posts. As I have found over the years that the only way you tamp down utter nonsense is to totally ignore it, or drown it out with an even higher level of drama. Personally I prefer to ignore it and eventually I tire of the nonsense, but some matters hit a nerve as being total BS and I feel some sense to speak up and try to crush the madness.

And so in this case the only two valid points anyone should be interested in is that some people are uncomfortable seeing open carry, much like they were uncomfortable my bikers in Laconia many years ago or seeing people from foreign countries or monks chanting in a public place. But ultimately we got over all of those fears.

And the other point is that open carry has resulted in no actual harm coming to anyone. Virtually no other activity at this time has such a near perfect record of not impacting the public. Even growing flowers has produced more problems with people getting stung by bees!

So there we have it in a nutshell, open carry is an activity that an infinitesimally small percent of our population practice and it makes some portion of our population uncomfortable. AND so far, it has resulted in no actual harm being suffered by anyone. I only wish the discussion could stop here.

[randalnh]

I guess it bears reminding you all that "gun-free zones" are invitations to persons intent on doing others harm. You never know when a former employee or customer of any kind of establishment has a grudge and is about to shoot up a place. Has happened before and odds are it will happen again.

If an establishment prohibits people like me from carrying (concealed, of course) where I want, I lose the right to protect myself, possibly my family and maybe others who are in harms way.

I was taught at a young age to be self-reliant and I believe that "it is better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it." Those of you who disagree can wait 10 minutes for the police to arrive...

[SAB1]

"There is no good reason for a civilian to wear a gun in the supermarket, and several good reasons--safety, manners, neighborliness--why a person should just keep his gun in his car."

And the response to this just as said above:

"it is better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it."

I don't tote a gun around with me all time but this quote randalnh is spot on and pops into my head from time to time. Hopefully a time never comes when its needed and not onboard but for anyone that does have one with them all the time I say good job, just keep it discreet.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

DRAMA, Drama, drama,,, Makes for interesting reading is nothing else.

With all due respect, the length of your numerous posts highlights your passion on the topic and is adding more "drama" without really getting at the heart of FLL's point.

There is no good reason for a civilian to wear a gun in the supermarket, and several good reasons--safety, manners, neighborliness--why a person should just keep his gun in his car.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

With all due respect, the length of your numerous posts highlights your passion on the topic and is adding more "drama" without really getting at the heart of FLL's point.

There is no good reason for a civilian to wear a gun in the supermarket, and several good reasons--safety, manners, neighborliness--why a person should just keep his gun in his car.

Re: Drama, you are 100% correct that is the goal as nothing meaningful can come from this thread or needs to come from it as there is no problem! This thread was created as drama, it is about feelings not an actual danger. If your were speaking about handling a gun in a public place such as loading it, or some other such activity it would be a totally different matter. But its not, for all you or anyone knows the guns are not loaded, or functional or even real. It is all speculative. No actual incident has occurred, no harm has been done, this is simply drama about someone feeling uncomfortable. Well I feel uncomfortable about all kinds of things, and I dont seek outright bans on them. I personally feel more threatened by a very large and mean looking dog than anyone with a gun in a holster. You may feel differently and as such I respect your desire to walk any big mean looking dog you choose, but I dont have to like it, just as you dont have to like someone carrying a gun, but should you be attempting to prohibit it,,,

As for "no good reason for a civilian to wear a gun in the supermarket" Sorry but I thought this was America where we dont need to justify every action we take and most things should not be prohibited or restricted unless there was a credible risk to others, which in this case we have clearly established there is virtually ZERO history of incident.

I fully respect your right to opinions and to your concerns, but unless backed up by legitimate data your concerns and opinions should not result in an imposed restriction on others.

Now please understand this is coming from someone who has never carried a weapon openly, will never carry an weapon openly, very rarely has every carried a concealed weapon, and personally does not like seeing open carry. But I will not ever raise my voice against it, as I perceive no legitimate risk from it, and I do not believe I should be able to step on someone else preference to carry openly.

Once you step on any preference for no valid reason, you open the flood gates. That is a proven fact.

Your opinion is clearly different, I only hope you can attempt to see the other side of this matter such as I do, again as someone not thrilled by open carry.

ATB

[YOLO]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

With all due respect, the length of your numerous posts highlights your passion on the topic and is adding more "drama" without really getting at the heart of FLL's point.

There is no good reason for a civilian to wear a gun in the supermarket, and several good reasons--safety, manners, neighborliness--why a person should just keep his gun in his car.

A gun left in the car is as useful as a condom left in a wrapper. It does you no good when you need protection.

I suggest folks who have an issue with open or concealed carry move to the nanny state to our south. They have a big problem with our Constitution and don't like people defending themselves either.

[Garcia]

Originally Posted by YOLO

A gun left in the car is as useful as a condom left in a wrapper. It does you no good when you need protection.

I suggest folks who have an issue with open or concealed carry move to the nanny state to our south. They have a big problem with our Constitution and don't like people defending themselves either.

It's interesting that in 2017 (the first year I saw after a quick Google search) Hawaii, NY, and MA - all with much stricter gun laws than NH - have per capita gun death rates of 3.7 or lower while NH has a per capita gun death rate of 10.4. Alaska, with one of the least restrictive set of gun laws in the country and the highest amount of guns per capita leads the nation in per capita gun deaths.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by Garcia

It's interesting that in 2017 (the first year I saw after a quick Google search) Hawaii, NY, and MA - all with much stricter gun laws than NH - have per capita gun death rates of 3.7 or lower while NH has a per capita gun death rate of 10.4. Alaska, with one of the least restrictive set of gun laws in the country and the highest amount of guns per capita leads the nation in per capita gun deaths.

Higher death by gun rates is not a problem if its the right people who are on the receiving end of the barrel, so your post begs the question were these murders, or shootings by law enforcement of citizens defending against criminals???

Posts like that without all the information are grossly misleading and usually manipulated.

Details matter.

[gillygirl]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

Higher death by gun rates is not a problem if its the right people who are on the receiving end of the barrel, so your post begs the question were these murders, or shootings by law enforcement of citizens defending against criminals???

Posts like that without all the information are grossly misleading and usually manipulated.

Details matter.

The most recent data I could quickly find for gun murder rates was from 2010, and showed that MA was at 1.8 per 100,000 people while it was 0.4 for NH.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by gillygirl

The most recent data I could quickly find for gun murder rates was from 2010, and showed that MA was at 1.8 per 100,000 people while it was 0.4 for NH.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Was that filtered to exclude police shooting and self-defense deaths?

[gillygirl]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

Was that filtered to exclude police shooting and self-defense deaths?

It didn’t specify.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by YOLO

A gun left in the car is as useful as a condom left in a wrapper. It does you no good when you need protection.

I suggest folks who have an issue with open or concealed carry move to the nanny state to our south. They have a big problem with our Constitution and don't like people defending themselves either.

We don't have to. We just choose not to service you as a customer.

You have no constitutional right to be on another person's property, and no constitutional right to be a customer based on a non-protected classification.

Even if you are under some false sense that you do...

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by YOLO

A gun left in the car is as useful as a condom left in a wrapper. It does you no good when you need protection.

Agreed! But a person's chances of needing a condom in a supermarket are higher than the chances of needing a gun

[thinkxingu]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

Agreed! But a person's chances of needing a condom in a supermarket are higher than the chances of needing a gun

Hahahaha!!!
Having spent the whole of my pubescent years at Purity Supreme, I assure you that that's true.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[MAXUM]

Can somebody please go into the Plymouth MB sporting a hot pink Ruger LCP holstered on a noodle belt? I really want FLL "feel" better about this.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by MAXUM

Can somebody please go into the Plymouth MB sporting a hot pink Ruger LCP holstered on a noodle belt? I really want FLL "feel" better about this.

Now THATs funny!