NRA Says It Was A Mistake To Call Texas Open Carry Gun Protesters ‘Weird’

[Dave70968]

"Constitutional carry" is a term with a generally-recognized meaning. Wikipedia's page defines it as

In the United States, Constitutional Carry is a situation within a jurisdiction in which the carrying of firearms, concealed or not, is generally not restricted by the law. When a state or other jurisdiction has adopted Constitutional Carry, it is legal for law-abiding citizens to carry a handgun, firearm, or other weapon concealed with or without an applicable permit or license.

Other sources may vary slightly in wording, but are materially similar: carry is allowed without any sort of permission slip from the government. Vermont was the first state to have true constitutional carry. From the same page:

For many decades, the only state to allow "Constitutional Carry" of a handgun (i.e. without any government permit) was Vermont. From the formation of the 13 original states, "constitutional carry" was the law in all states until the 1800s. By the 20th century, all states except Vermont had enacted concealed carry bans, with the exemption in most states for those citizens with a permit. Due to its tightly worded state constitution,[citation needed] Vermont has never been able to have a restriction on the method of how one could carry a firearm, and thus, in this regard, Vermont stood entirely separate from the rest of the United States for quite some time. Because of this, Constitutional Carry is still often referred to as "Vermont carry".

Several other states have expanded their carry laws to allow constitutional carry.

Yes, there is still the restriction on felons (and DV misdemeanants) possessing firearms (this is Federal law, though often mirrored by the states). This is not typically held to offend the concept of constitutional carry, as the law-abiding are not affected. That said, there are those of us--including myself--who believe that once you've served your time, you ought to once again be a free man, entitled to all the rights and privileges thereof, and that continuing prohibitions on any sort of right (including firearms) past the end of the sentence is inappropriate. That's a topic of considerable debate, and I don't mean to address it here. I merely mean to point out the disconnect between your stated preference for a permit system with your statement that "constitutional carry [i.e. no permit required] works fine."

 

[Blaine007]

Gotcha. I'm gonna have to disagree about formerly incarcerated persons, but otherwise, we are good.

 

[abajaj11]

Regarding this open carry controversy, here is why it is instinctively repugnant to most gunowner who are pro 2A and also pro open-carry. The way they are carrying rifles is poorly executed and regulated. Consider open carry of pistols or revolvers. No one would condone carrying pistols at low-ready or in your hand as being safe open carry. In states where it is legal, it is usually required to be holstered...and holstered is defined as at least the trigger and trigger guard being covered. This is done in order to clearly distinguish between safe open carry and brandishing the firearm or appearing to be a threat in any way.

Now compare this to open carry of long guns. Long guns seem to be carried at low ready, or casually slung, with no attempt being made to distinguish between "safe open carry" and a threatening position. This is why most of us say that if we see someone open carrying a long gun they will have our undivided focus and attention till we are out of there. The solution is simple...open carry of long guns needs to be properly regulated...maybe carry in a scabbard, or cover the trigger and trigger guard in some fashion so that the rifle is not ready to be used instantly....in other words we need some way to open carry a long gun so that safe open carry is readily discernible from brandishment of the long gun.

Of course, overall, safe open carry is eminently desirable as a way to help folks recognize firearms for the tools that they are, as opposed to some sort of fetish to be feared or worshipped.

Pity. I thought NRA pegged it exactly right with their initial public statement -- that they're now walking back.

The claim isn't that the open carry of combative long guns in populated areas is never appropriate. But it is weird, and generally socially inappropriate, when in a functioning civil society. Handguns are the normal self-defense arm carried within civil society.

Carrying a slung long gun on the street is for when you're patrolling your neighborhood after a Katrina-style social breakdown.

Ironically, OCT's frivolous, drama-whoring use of rifle open carry rights in normal times risks leading to a legal backlash that could come back to bite gun owners in case of a Katrina-like event, when toting a slung rifle in certain places could, as I said, be a very relevant and valuable form of bearing arms, for a time, in order to deter trouble.

TLDR: Yes, open carry of long guns in public should be legal, because it could be quite valuable in uncommon situations. But OCT's practice of routine long gun open carry at freaking Chipotle or whatever is still weird and socially inappropriate.

 

[Elm Creek Smith]

And trust me, my badge will be the first thing you see.

You are aware that in Oklahoma the mere fact that I, or anyone else, is carrying a handgun openly is not RAS for a stop, aren't you?

 

[Blaine007]

Title 21. Crimes and Punishments
Oklahoma Statutes Citationized
Title 21. Crimes and Punishments
Chapter 53 - Manufacture, Sale, and Wearing of Weapons
Oklahoma Self-Defense Act
Section 1290.8 - Possession of License Required - Notification to Police of Gun
Section B outlines it quite clearly. If, during the course of any investigation through contact on a traffic stop or other similar reason for contact, you must display your license to me and profess it's existence immediately. I'm not gonna pick you out of a crowd and request to see your permit without RAS. I'm a proponent for open carry. Just remember, RAS is determined by the officer, not the permit holder. If you ever feel violated in that respect, get with your attorney. Don't make an issue with the officer during the encounter. That could very easily backfire on you.

 

[twoguns?]

Title 21. Crimes and Punishments
Oklahoma Statutes Citationized
Title 21. Crimes and Punishments
Chapter 53 - Manufacture, Sale, and Wearing of Weapons
Oklahoma Self-Defense Act
Section 1290.8 - Possession of License Required - Notification to Police of Gun
Section B outlines it quite clearly. If, during the course of any investigation through contact on a traffic stop or other similar reason for contact, you must display your license to me and profess it's existence immediately. I'm not gonna pick you out of a crowd and request to see your permit without RAS. I'm a proponent for open carry. Just remember, RAS is determined by the officer, not the permit holder. If you ever feel violated in that respect, get with your attorney. Don't make an issue with the officer during the encounter. That could very easily backfire ...

Well said....