open carry - Market Basket, Plymouth NH

[mbr]

Originally Posted by MAXUM

It never crossed your mind that having a person open carrying is a deterrent to a common criminal?

What makes you think the open carry guy is not a common criminal?
How often do we hear about a "good guy with a gun" blasting away at a suspected shoplifter in a crowded parking lot?
How often do we hear of guns being stolen in burglaries, or a child shoots another child with a gun, because the "responsible" gun owner didn't secure the gun?
Just because someone buys a gun legally, doesn't mean he/she is a "good guy", or not irresponsible, or not a blithering idiot.

[BBS3]

Originally Posted by mbr

What makes you think the open carry guy is not a common criminal?
How often do we hear about a "good guy with a gun" blasting away at a suspected shoplifter in a crowded parking lot?
How often do we hear of guns being stolen in burglaries, or a child shoots another child with a gun, because the "responsible" gun owner didn't secure the gun?
Just because someone buys a gun legally, doesn't mean he/she is a "good guy", or not irresponsible, or not a blithering idiot.

Why in the world would you think that a felon would draw attention to themselves by openly carrying a weapon? Absurd. More likely plain clothes LEO.

Sent from my moto g(9) power using Tapatalk

[XCR-700]

States like Arizona are what I call the "new Americans" they dont have the longstanding identities of places like New England with our deeply ingrained beliefs, so sometimes they see the world differently, sometimes with a new clearer perspective. They are not always right, but they can be very different.

So this is their latest thinking on the open carry matter. Its an interesting take and not for everyone, probably not for me, but it is one perspective from "new America"

Enjoy ;-)

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

States like Arizona are what I call the "new Americans" they dont have the longstanding identities of places like New England with our deeply ingrained beliefs, so sometimes they see the world differently, sometimes with a new clearer perspective. They are not always right, but they can be very different.

So this is their latest thinking on the open carry matter. Its an interesting take and not for everyone, probably not for me, but it is one perspective from "new America"

Yes--this is similar to what I was describing before. Not really serious self-defense, more like dressing up and pretending

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

Yes--this is similar to what I was describing before. Not really serious self-defense, more like dressing up and pretending

No disagreement, and it is certainly not what we are used to seeing in the last hundred years, but in reality how are we harmed. Sorry but feeling uncomfortable or intimidated is not legitimate. Many feel just as uncomfortable seeing big burly men with beards and tatoos getting off their bikes and walking into the Market Basket, while most have gotten used to it.

I know of no cases where just the act of open carry has resulted in injury to anyone. The perceived risk is a fantasy. Its like seeing a 40' Fountain with giant supercharged engines on Winnipesaukee. Its just being there is not a risk to anyone, its when it is used improperly that it becomes a problem, and how often does that really happen??? We probably have far more 25' boats causing problems every day than any giant speed boat.

Same for open carry, I'll be willing to bet NH has far more murders caused by stabbing and being beat to death with bare fists then were the result of anyone who was openly carrying a handgun.

So whats next, steak knife registration, smart knives that can only be used by the registered owner, no hollow ground knives,,,

Its all a mater of perspective, not actual data driven fact.

And again, this from a guy who has never carried openly and probably never will.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

No disagreement, and it is certainly not what we are used to seeing in the last hundred years, but in reality how are we harmed. Sorry but feeling uncomfortable or intimidated is not legitimate. Many feel just as uncomfortable seeing big burly men with beards and tatoos getting off their bikes and walking into the Market Basket, while most have gotten used to it.

I know of no cases where just the act of open carry has resulted in injury to anyone. The perceived risk is a fantasy. Its like seeing a 40' Fountain with giant supercharged engines on Winnipesaukee. Its just being there is not a risk to anyone, its when it is used improperly that it becomes a problem, and how often does that really happen??? We probably have far more 25' boats causing problems every day than any giant speed boat.

Same for open carry, I'll be willing to bet NH has far more murders caused by stabbing and being beat to death with bare fists then were the result of anyone who was openly carrying a handgun.

So whats next, steak knife registration, smart knives that can only be used by the registered owner, no hollow ground knives,,,

Its all a mater of perspective, not actual data driven fact.

And again, this from a guy who has never carried openly and probably never will.

You're killin' me-- on the other thread you just advocated regulating paddle boards

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

You're killin' me-- on the other thread you just advocated regulating paddle boards

Yes for factual reasons, not fear mongering.

Do you really believe just having a gun in a holster that is viable to others is of the same kind and level of risk a paddle boarder will be exposed to while navigating around the close quarters of a public dock being used at the very same time as power boats, with constant wakes coming in, variable wind, and a potential current?

I cant see how you can call them similar matters for risk.

But maybe you can articulate your concerns in the form of actual risk, and I will certainly consider any reasonable facts. For example should paddle boarders be required to wear tethers? As if the board gets away from them they are at even greater risk. Or should open carry holsters be required to be specifically fitted to the guns to ensure proper retention? We do not want loaded guns falling out of holsters!

Legitimate concerns are usually clear to everyone, whereas fear and fear mongering look very different.

Your opinions may well vary and clearly do on some matters, and you are entitled to your opinions no argument. Its when you impose restrictions on others that are not legitimate fact based risks that we will have disagreement.

Well so says I ;-)

ATB

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

But maybe you can articulate your concerns in the form of actual risk, and I will certainly consider any reasonable facts.

ATB

Guns in general are obviously much more dangerous than paddle boards--check the interwebs for deaths. And I'm pretty sure that somewhere in the thousands of words you've written in just this thread, you've said that guns should not be regulated at all.

So yes, it's kind if funny that you would go after those crazy dangerous paddle boards

[DEJ]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

Guns in general are obviously much more dangerous than paddle boards--check the interwebs for deaths. And I'm pretty sure that somewhere in the thousands of words you've written in just this thread, you've said that guns should not be regulated at all.

So yes, it's kind if funny that you would go after those crazy dangerous paddle boards

Guns are no more dangerous than anything else, the gun does not commit a shooting, the person does. The hammer did not bludgeon the person to death, the person holding the hammer did. Age old argument some will never get or admit. Carry on...

[LikeLakes]

Originally Posted by DEJ

Guns are no more dangerous than anything else, the gun does not commit a shooting, the person does. The hammer did not bludgeon the person to death, the person holding the hammer did. Age old argument some will never get or admit. Carry on...

DEJ, I honestly get that argument, and there is validity to it to some extent. I just think it can be carried too far.

Should shoulder fired missiles be legal? After all, the missile doesn't fire itself, the person aiming it at the plane does. To me it's just common sense that a pocket knife is more dangerous than a piece of cardboard, a butcher knife is more dangerous than a pocket knife, a handgun is more dangerous than a butcher knife, and a shoulder fired missile is more dangerous than a handgun. For some reason some people that support gun rights steadfastly refuse to say that a handgun (or shotgun or rifle) is a potentially dangerous piece of equipment. I agree that the person operates the gun, no argument from me about that. Just looking for perspective.

[DEJ]

Originally Posted by LikeLakes

DEJ, I honestly get that argument, and there is validity to it to some extent. I just think it can be carried too far.

Should shoulder fired missiles be legal? After all, the missile doesn't fire itself, the person aiming it at the plane does. To me it's just common sense that a pocket knife is more dangerous than a piece of cardboard, a butcher knife is more dangerous than a pocket knife, a handgun is more dangerous than a butcher knife, and a shoulder fired missile is more dangerous than a handgun. For some reason some people that support gun rights steadfastly refuse to say that a handgun (or shotgun or rifle) is a potentially dangerous piece of equipment. I agree that the person operates the gun, no argument from me about that. Just looking for perspective.

A handgun or shotgun or rifle is as much a potentially dangerous piece of equipment as a hammer, baseball bat, etc... It does not matter what the implement is, it is the person using said implement that inflicts harm. Can firearms inflict damage to more people quicker than a baseball bat, of course they can, no argument here. I think you get that and thanks for your comment.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by LikeLakes

DEJ, I honestly get that argument, and there is validity to it to some extent. I just think it can be carried too far.

Should shoulder fired missiles be legal? After all, the missile doesn't fire itself, the person aiming it at the plane does. To me it's just common sense that a pocket knife is more dangerous than a piece of cardboard, a butcher knife is more dangerous than a pocket knife, a handgun is more dangerous than a butcher knife, and a shoulder fired missile is more dangerous than a handgun. For some reason some people that support gun rights steadfastly refuse to say that a handgun (or shotgun or rifle) is a potentially dangerous piece of equipment. I agree that the person operates the gun, no argument from me about that. Just looking for perspective.

Some valid and useful comments for all.

So let me reply be saying firearms ARE dangerous and by intentional design, AND most gun owners want them that way. Otherwise we would buy non-firing replicas.

Sure guns can and ARE used for pure recreation and I see no reason to justify why I enjoy shooting magnum handguns and high power rifles, its my fun, just like any buying a Tesla and bragging about its acceleration or someone buying a powerboat over a sailboat.

Like all things there is a use issue and concern, and there should be as well as accountability. But with few exceptions very modest regulation and restrictions.

As for your comments about shoulder fired missiles, well I dont recall any constitutional amendment specifically being written and passed by our government to ensure a personal right to such, and no writings by the founding fathers to promote such. They dont serve much use as personal protection unless you are in fact in a militia fighting back against a rogue government or military, but I suppose some could argue it. I probably would not support it.

As a country how gun control ever got so high on the list of concerns as to every result in the level of restriction we have is totally dumbfounding.

We cant provide food, water, homes, medical treatment, mental health care, and so many other necessary things to our citizens, and yet we can squander politicians time and taxpayers dollars on gin control! Its SHAMEFUL.

When we get the basic necessities right I'll try to be more open minded about whats next of the list. Until then I will remain totally discussed by the constant and ongoing failures of our politicians. For the most part, they are a corrupt and clueless bunch who should be replaced by computers that follow strict rules of law and the constitution.

[LikeLakes]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

So yes, it's kind if funny that you would go after those crazy dangerous paddle boards

In the hands of an untrained person they are a menace. I've seen a person carrying a paddle board turn suddenly and mow down an entire family like they were bowling pins. Dangerous slabs of plastic for sure.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by LikeLakes

In the hands of an untrained person they are a menace. I've seen a person carrying a paddle board turn suddenly and mow down an entire family like they were bowling pins. Dangerous slabs of plastic for sure.

Might have been said tongue in cheek, but I actually agree, the difference being the paddle board probably being more dangerous to the user.

[LikeLakes]

Originally Posted by XCR-700

Might have been said tongue in cheek, but I actually agree, the difference being the paddle board probably being more dangerous to the user.

You know what, I'm going to agree with you on this. To the user, line up 1000 people with paddle boards and 1000 people with guns, and I'd guess the injury rate is higher on the paddle boards.

As for danger to other people, I don't think they are in the same universe. Guns inflict WAY more harm to others than paddle boards. Note this isn't in reference to the thread subject of open carry, simply commenting on guns in general.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by LikeLakes

Guns inflict WAY more harm to others than paddle boards. Note this isn't in reference to the thread subject of open carry, simply commenting on guns in general.

Again, this is by intentional design and gun buyers what it that way.

No sense in buying a gun for self defense that only annoys a rapist/killer. For that you could buy an airsoft. When choosing a gun and ammo for defense you want the most possible stopping power you can get. If we could get Star Trek Phasers, I would have one!

As for paddle board safety, maybe we could lobby for mandatory sensors like in cars, so that families can walk by paddle boarders without constant fear of being knocked over like bowling pins. It will only double the cost of the board, and we should also license and register them, just so we can track the stats so we can discuss future restrictions based on facts, not just fear ;-)

[LikeLakes]

XCR, great posts.

We agree on many things I think. I too am far more concerned about the health and wellbeing of our fellow citizens. And to be honest my volunteer efforts revolve around the basic needs of people. I am not, and would not, volunteer my time on any sort of gun control debate or efforts.

I just like talking about it on a forum, takes very little time and no effort!

[SAB1]

"Guns inflict WAY more harm to others"

I've never seen this happen.

Now if you introduce mentally unstable, drugged or intoxicated people into the equation...............yup!,

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by SAB1

"Guns inflict WAY more harm to others"

I've never seen this happen.

Now if you introduce mentally unstable, drugged or intoxicated people into the equation...............yup!,

All of which are woefully under addressed. We can and must do better. We waste so much money and time on stupid things and put so little into critical matters, makes you wonder how we manage to get anything meaningful done...

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by SAB1

"Guns inflict WAY more harm to others"

I've never seen this happen.

Now if you introduce mentally unstable, drugged or intoxicated people into the equation...............yup!,

Unfortunately, with 400MM or so guns in the US--plenty of unstable, drugged, or intoxicated people have access to them. As do children, teenage gang members, and criminals.

WRT paddle boards--the children and the can be a problem, not so much the other categories...

[John Mercier]

Just for the record, private property and public property are not comparable.

I am quite sure the local Market Basket would not be openly happy about someone carrying a paddle board around the establishment... maybe even more so than the firearm.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

Just for the record, private property and public property are not comparable.

I am quite sure the local Market Basket would not be openly happy about someone carrying a paddle board around the establishment... maybe even more so than the firearm.

Now thats funny!

[LikeLakes]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

I am quite sure the local Market Basket would not be openly happy about someone carrying a paddle board around the establishment... maybe even more so than the firearm.

And MB would be even less happy with someone carrying a concealed paddle board.

[XCR-700]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

Guns in general are obviously much more dangerous than paddle boards--check the interwebs for deaths. And I'm pretty sure that somewhere in the thousands of words you've written in just this thread, you've said that guns should not be regulated at all.

So yes, it's kind if funny that you would go after those crazy dangerous paddle boards

NOPE, NEVER said guns should not be regulated at all, might have said gun owner say no more regulation in response to way over reaching extremists, and thats not the same thing.

Guns are by design dangerous, especially when used as weapons, paddle boards are generally only dangerous when used in the wrong place and without personal protections.

If you don't see the difference between the two, probably not much I can say will change your opinion.

ATB