screen-shot-2016-07-08-at-1-52-08-am

Whatever you may have heard in the aftermath, open carry at the Dallas Black Lives Matter protest worked. No protesters who open carried were shot; nor did open carrying protesters shoot anyone. Police are now less likely to harass or arrest peaceful open carriers.

The doomsayers who rail against open carry make numerous nonsensical claims. Primary among them is that open carriers will be the first ones shot by criminals. And if they aren’t they’re then likely to be shot by police.

Supporters of open carry claim that carrying weapons openly is tactical deterrence. That is, criminals are less likely to attack a person or engage in other anti-social behavior when someone is conspicuously carrying a firearm. They also claim that police will, over time, become accustomed to open carry and stop harassing those who do.

In the Dallas police sniper attack, showed those making the pro-open carry argument to be right.

According to various reports here were several protestors openly carrying long guns in the march that night. They exhibited good discipline. They didn’t fire indescriminately, they shot no one and weren’t shot by anyone, either. 

The police also showed good restraint as well. None of the predicted doomsday scenarios came to pass. Yet this happened under some of the most stressful circumstances possible. It says a great deal about both the discipline of the open carriers and the professionalism of the Dallas police on the scene that there were no problems.

Police officers have noticed that it’s not hard to determine the bad guy with a gun from the good guy with a gun. In Dallas, the bad guy was pointing the gun at them and shooting. The good guys had their rifles slung over their shoulders.

Some anti-open carry activists made the irrational and impossible claim that because open carriers didn’t somehow stop or prevent the shooting from happening, open carry is a failure and should therefore be banned. That’s magical thinking. A straw man. Open carry proponents have never claimed that open carry is a panacea that will put an end to all violence.

Unfortunately, Mark Hughes was identified as a “suspect” from video that showed him marching with his rifle. He went to police headquarter where he was questioned for two hours and accused of firing his rifle. It seems the police still have a ways to go in the normalization process.

After being accused, Mark Huges asked for his lawyer. He’s reportedly considering a lawsuit, as his picture was shown world wide as a person of interest. Perhaps that’s understandable given the situation.

In the end, it was a win for open carry.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Gun Watch

Update: There were 20 or more people openly carrying long guns in the protest march.  Only Mark was questioned.  He was not arrested, fined, or jailed.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

78 COMMENTS

  1. Thank-you, Dean.

    Cue all the “Just because we can, we shouldn’t” virtue signaling against (GASP!) having our firearms visible in public.

    Some will call it ‘stupid.’ Some will say it’s not tactically sound. Etc.

    None of the anti-OC crowd will admit that all their rationalizations are made-up bullshit not supported by any data whatsoever and that OC vs CC is nothing more profound than simple “personal preference.”

      • The header on the picture said he was a suspect, not a person of interest. Did he get his rifle back?

        • The word “suspect” has no magic meaning. No way he’s going to get the payday he wants unless it’s a little ‘go away’ money.

        • In the interim, I don’t know. But per his comments he did not get it back immediately after his conversation. Neither did he get his clothes back (I’m assuming they were taken for testing).

          Based on the social media response and postings, he understandably received death threats. He was denied any protection by the PD, even though their naming him as a person of interest/suspect led directly to the threats.

          After the conversation in which they should have easily determined his intentions and no shots were fired, they also refused to clarify that he was no longer of interest or a suspect.

          Add in the disastrous communication, wherein he provided his firearm and spoke to the police at the outset and yet this was not relayed to the public information folks who plastered his face everywhere….

          I think his case may have legs. There is a certain temper to the sympathy – he was (heavily) hassled while police had 7 hurt and 5 killed – but based on the evidence I’ve seen, I could see a jury award.

    • You can file a civil suit against almost anyone for almost anything, I think. The question is whether a judge will even let it out of the gate.

  4. Gee I saw ABC Nightline last night and they produced a highly negative view of Open Carry Texas. Did open carry “work” in Dallas? Beats me. If I could (illegal in Illinois) I’d wear a gun on my hip. BTW for you Illinois denizens GAT Guns in Elgin was picketed today by the anti 2A weenies. They are good guys and deserve our support…

    • GAT is in Dundee, and frankly, they kinda suck. They wouldn’t let my mother fire .38 +p out of their rental .357 magnum S&W model 60, because it didn’t say “+p rated” on the side. I’ve also had to find and point out guns for their customers after their salespeople said they didn’t have any in stock. While I think they may not deserve my monetary support because they’re not a good business, they have my moral support…

      • Gee sorry-went there ONCE. And I was treated well. Chuck’s gun shop in Riverdale(OFTEN abused by the likes of Jesse Jackson) took my little Taurus TCP and sprayed too much lube on it-made it run horribly.And their neighborhood sucks. And prices are high. I’m over it…I support them against the anti-gun yards

    • i was out there tue. no limit on .22 federal @ .07cents per rd.
      always has been decent there, and it’s just outside the cook county ammo tax border. cabela’s is like 50yds within, so never again.
      i went out to gat to buy an old marlin in the prkng lot. they had .444 in stock…

  5. I’d say it was a partial victory. It showed that open carriers were neither a hinderance to the police nor were they targeted. They didn’t deter the attack. It should also put to bed the lie that cops shoot black people on a whim.

    • “They didn’t deter the attack. ‘

      Deterrence is a “fool’s game” most of the time anyway. It’s like proving a negative. How do we know it didn’t deter another unrelated attacker?

      We can’t.

      Besides…the shooter was specifically targeting the cops, and it would seem he thought those particular OC-ers were on his side (against the cops)…maybe he figured “They WANT me to shoot up the cops” or some such.

      Speculation of course…we’ll never know.

      Point is that it’s rather pointless to talk about “deterrence” in the context of this particular story. The only time talking about deterrence makes sense is when you know it has happened.

      And we know of such cases. So, OC can deter violent criminals from acting. It’s happened. Twisting panties over it NOT happening when there is no way to to for sure does not change the simple fact that it has happened.

      • What do you think would most likely Rob have deterred other criminal activity — the few guys open carrying or the massive police presence at the demonstration? You make the call.

      • “maybe he figured “They WANT me to shoot up the cops” or some such…”

        Once you get crazy enough to start randomly shooting people just for being cops, I suppose being crazy enough to figure any black guy with a gun must necessarily be as crazy as you are, is par for the course…….

  6. Dean, I normally enjoy your work, but this is ridiculous. You need a major reality check here.

    First, no, the open carriers didn’t get shot. Does that prove that open carriers won’t be the first ones shot? Of course not — because the shooter in this case specifically targeted WHITE COPS, and the open carriers (the ones I saw) were BLACK CIVILIANS. So they weren’t in any danger of being shot by the bad guy, at all. You cannot conflate this scenario with the far-more-likely situation of an open carrier being present where an armed crime or terrorism act is happening.

    Second, Open Carry didn’t “work” — it didn’t do a damn thing. These open carriers neither deterred an attack, nor did they help. They forcefully ejected the contents of their bowels into their camo-colored shorts and ran for the hills. They didn’t protect anyone, they served no useful purpose, they didn’t make a statement, they just lost.

    Third, having been an open carrier got Hughes worldwide “celebrity” and death threats. He’s considering suing. But how can the media be blamed for doing what they did — the cops said “circulate this picture”, so they circulated it. And Hughes ended up in potential peril. All for open-carrying at a BLM rally. There’s a phrase we use around these parts: “play stupid games, win stupid prizes.”

    Fourth, you said that open carry worked perfectly, and didn’t cause any problems. The Dallas police chief himself said that the presence of open carriers caused confusion. Quoted: “But it’s increasingly challenging when people have AR-15s slung over their shoulder and they’re in a crowd. We don’t know who the good guy is versus the bad guy when everyone starts shooting.” Now, in retrospect you can say “there was only one shooter”, but they absolutely did not know that in the heat of the moment, the initial reports were that there were three shooters, two up high and one on the ground. So who, among this throng of people with rifles, were they supposed to not be concerned about?

    If this scenario is what you want to call a “victory” for open carry, I’d hate to see what you’d call a loss. It’s like when douchebag Kory Watkins behaved so incredibly douchey that Texas legislators passed a bill to install panic buttons; there are some who probably count that as a “victory” too.

    I don’t care what side of the “open carry” debate you’re on, but there’s no doubt that this particular cluster**** made the open carriers look silly, and will do absolutely nothing to advance the cause of acceptance of open carry in more jurisdictions.

    • Reality Check stated, “… the shooter in this case specifically targeted WHITE COPS, and the open carriers (the ones I saw) were BLACK CIVILIANS.”

      There is some validity to that statement.

    • “Does that prove that open carriers won’t be the first ones shot? Of course not “

      Name one time that that has happened.

      This is a straw man argument brought up quite often by the anti-OC bunch.

      See the first post above…I predicted this sort of post would happen.

      • I can’t name a time that has happened. Nor is it my burden to prove that they would be the first shot. However, I can say that Dean’s argument that it DISPROVES it, is pure folly.

        Secondly, I can’t prove it because — there aren’t any open carriers. As a percentage of the population, practically nobody carries openly. In Texas, I’ve seen one — yes, one — open carrier, besides me. So you take the incredible rarity of the phenomenon of open carriers, and mix that with the likelihood that they will be at the incredible rarity of an armed criminal event, and you come up with zero instances. Seriously — have you ever heard of a shooting where an open carrier was present? No? Do you attribute that to “deterrence” — or do you attribute it to the fact that on a percentage basis of population, open carriers represent something like 0.00000001% of the population?

        Besides, I can name TWO incidents where an open carrier was robbed of his weapon. Because he was open carrying, and the criminals saw it, and decided to take it. So that’s two cases of crime happening because of open carry, that would not have happened if the person hadn’t been open carrying.

        Finally — I am an open carrier. Occasionally. When it makes sense. I am not against open carry. But I am also not going to sit here and listen to such outlandish distortions of the truth. This is The Truth About Guns, not “Distort The Truth To Make Open Carry Look Good”. Stupid is stupid and should be called out, even when it’s on “our” side.

        • “Stupid is stupid and should be called out, even when it’s on “our” side.”

          Even when the NRA does it; over and over again?

          (Okay, I’ll stop now. I’ve made my point.)

        • There are incidents where concealed carriers had their gun stolen. They were attacked, most likely, because they were carrying concealed. I have written about two or three. They do not get the press that open carry does.

        • Wow. Just wow.

          “I can’t name a time that has happened.”

          As I thought.

          So, just bullshit sophistry, then. It sounds good to keep repeating something that is not supported by data. It makes ya “feel good” or something, I guess.

          “Nor is it my burden to prove that they would be the first shot.”

          Sure it is. You are the one that made the assertion. Now back it up.

          If you don’t, you are just as weak as the anti’s and their “blood in the streets” crap.

          “However, I can say that Dean’s argument that it DISPROVES it, is pure folly.”

          Wrong.

          You really don’t know how “logic” works, do you.

          The assertion that is often made is that they will be shot first. Many, many examples exist of OC’ers “not getting shot first” exist. Some documented examples exist of OC-ers stopping crime. At least one example exists of an actual deterrence of an armed robbery…the bad guys saw OC-ers in the business and refused to enter to rob the place.

          What Dean’s “proof” here means is that is a highly visible example of proof that the whole anti-OC screed is just empty headed bleating.

          “Secondly, I can’t prove it because — there aren’t any open carriers.”

          Again, you really don’t “do logic” or “facts” very well, do you.

          We are talking specifically about a very public, very visible incident that involved…what? TWENTY Open Carriers…and you say the don’t exist?

          Robert OC’s. He doesn’t exist?

          Dean OC’s. He doesn’t exist?

          Numerous members on this site OC…including myself sometimes…WE don’t exist?

          There’s a restaurant in Colorado where the waitresses OC….they don’t exist? (Hint: they do; I’ve been there).

          There are other restaurants that have posted “Open Carry Welcome” signs…let me guess, figments of our imagination.

          You are factually, provably wrong. OC is more prevalent than you want to admit because it does not play into your narrative. And all those OC-ers out there? Not getting shot first.

          You can’t prove it. You admitted that. But, that won’t stop you from spouting off your favorite little neutered made up bit of Geezer Science as if it’s fact and trying to sound smart.

          What. A. Joke.

        • “Numerous members on this site OC”

          True. I OC every blessed day, practically everywhere. It is my mode of carry 99.99% of the time and has been for years.

    • By your logick, concealed carry doesn’t work either, since no one actively engaged the guy with drawn weapons. Why is an OC citizen required to engage a person not actively trying to kill them? That scenario is the cluster you describe, but it did not happen. Nor the reflexive gunfight between OC and officer, because it was obviously clear who was shooting who. They went looking for this guy after the initial exchange, after he’d given up his rifle, when the actual threat had been fixed in position, to see if he knew anything or was associated with the shooter (both had guns, both were there).

      They also questioned the protest organizers, and no policy response came of the protests despite the horrible PR for BLM; does that mean public protest is a useless failure in general?

  7. I open carry here in Kentucky and Tennessee. As a black man I have had white strangers smile at me. They call me “brother” and want to shake my hand. Also wearing an NRA hat gets positive comments as well.

    America is not as bad as some people want to believe.
    Unfortunately we have some wealthy and very rich trouble makers causing pain for a lot of innocent people, by paying others to cause trouble.

    I think for the next two years the majority of the country will come to understand why the founders gave us the second amendment.
    There will be many people who never thought they would need a gun. And they will start buying lots of them.

    • “I open carry here in Kentucky and Tennessee. As a black man I have had white strangers smile at me. They call me “brother” and want to shake my hand.”

      Right on.

  8. I agree, this was a win, in the sense that Mr. Hughes was not added to the casualty list of the Dallas massacre simply because of the “difficulty” of sussing out the intent of his open carrying. Had Mr. Hughes run up to the police to lend a hand, as some here perhaps advocate, if my inference is incorrect then I wonder how an OC’er could have helped in any way OTHER than to immediately identify himself and surrender his weapon until being fully questioned by law enforcement, then I see this as being an important first step in renormalizing the appearence of firearms in the American psyche outside of the realm of anti gun media BS. Guns are in our blood, they are the reason we are all on this site, and this man and his brother did more to start a positive conversation between civilians and police on guns that shows them that their fears are as yet unfounded, without media interference. That conversation is a win, hands down. It showed that OCing, while not palatable to some, has started this conversation that can if worked on, move the ball in our direction instead of the promulgation of gun fear by media. Great points Mr. W.

  9. “Worked”? I don’t see how – it didn’t deter the attack, nor did it aid in the response.

    I would argue that there are few scenarios outside of defending one’s own property where it would be wise and legal to use a rifle in self-defense. Not that it couldn’t be useful, but rather in most cases a non-police actor is courting some kind of serious liability if he engages a bad actor at a range that is too great for a handgun.

    Happily it didn’t seem to cause any real harm – I suppose that’s a good thing. And I still maintain that it was a bad idea to carry long arms at that rally.

    • “… I still maintain that it was a bad idea to carry long arms at that rally.”

      Why? Nothing bad happened to anyone as a result of the people who openly carried their rifles. Why was that a “bad idea”?

    • You don’t see how it “worked” because your definitions of “worked” is too narrow.

      Dean is not talking about it working in stopping the attack specifically.

      He’s talking about it ‘working’ in the sense of handing a big fat dose of Cognitive Dissonance to every person that has uttered every one of the anti-OC canards that simply are not true anyway.

      The OC-ers did not make things worse…as is often claimed.

      The OC-ers did not get shot by the cops…as is often claimed.

      They were not shot first by the bad guy…as is often claimed. (Yeah, he was not targeting them anyway, but the point stands).

      This is the Open Carry version of “blood in the streets.” ALL the doom and gloom predictions and pontifications about Open Carry did not happen.

      • Um, ok. So your definition of “worked” is “didn’t cause a calamity”. You should be a government snivel servant with that sort of definition of success.

        I actually don’t have a problem with open carry of a handgun in a proper holster including the appropriate level of retention. I think that carrying a long gun in an urban area is weird and possibly provocative. I understand why Texans were doing it as a form of protest back when open carry of handguns was illegal – but that’s not the case any more.

        • A well regulated milita being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

          Much of the deterrent to tyranny is lost if the only time people bear long guns in public is during times of need. It would telegraph to tyrants that something is afoot if that was the only time long guns were carried day to day. Carry often and keep them guessing. Long guns being carried regularly can help deter tyranny, terrorism, and ordinary crime. It is no surprise that Barry tried to smear the word militia in his Dallas speech. That’s one of the few things that stand between the tyrants of today and their dystopia of tomorrow.

        • <i"Um, ok. So your definition of “worked” is “didn’t cause a calamity”. You should be a government snivel servant with that sort of definition of success. "

          Don’t be purposefully obtuse.

          “Worked” in this case refers to “worked as a gun rights statement.” You are still defining “worked” on one way, and one way only, and I’m guessing at this point it might be because you read only the headline and not the full article.

          If you read the entire article and not just the headline, you might just notice that what he’s talking about is the claims made against OC. It worked to show those claims false.

          Not once did he claim “it worked to stop the attack.”

          Just because you are too narrow and rigid in your definition of “worked” does not mean that Dean’s article is not spot on.

        • I read the whole article. I’ve met Dean and I like him. I usually like his writing, but not this time.

          The only thing that the OCers did here was put a fresh federal target on Texas OC, so I guess that “worked”.

          I guess I’m just not absolutist enough for the crowd on this thread.

        • “I guess I’m just not absolutist enough for the crowd on this thread.”

          Well, put the NE Progressive Slave State Kool Aid down for a minute and open your mind.

          You said you read the article, which is astonishing then if you think he was talking about “worked” = “stopping the attack”

          Every bit of “Cognitive Dissonance” that can be created is helpful…is working. We are all fighting for 2A Rights (and more) against Progressivism (old-school pre-50’s Marxism with a new name).

          This incident showed some OC-ers at not bad guys. That’s winning.

          That “works.”

  11. 5 cops dead, 7 more wounded, 2 civilians wounded… Yeah. Real victory there you fuckin moron.

  12. Did any open carriers shoot back at the dick picking off police? I would assume no because they probably didn’t know where the guy was. No matter, but it would have been awesome if one of the OC people got the guy shooting at cops.

  14. “…… because open carriers didn’t somehow stop or prevent the shooting from happening, open carry is a failure ….”
    Are we talking about the police who are the only ones who should have guns and are well trained (and open carrying) with same or us of the shall not be infringed peeps?

  15. They didn’t deter the attack because THEY WEREN’T BEING ATTACKED! He was on THEIR “side.” Would he open fire if the cops were rocking ARs? Not only that, he passed over black officers, killing only white looking ones. And, if I’m not mistaken none of the rifles were loaded, or at least that is the advice given by the HPN gun club.

  16. In 1966 a guy named Whitman climbed the University of Texas tower and proceeded to shoot 49 leaving 16 dead. Accounts indicate armed citizens with deer rifles from the racks in their pick-up trucks helped keep him occupied and his head down until his final exit. A few years back, but never say an OC’er never has made a difference.

    • Yeah, not open carriers. Not people trying to make a point who had to take cover at the first sign of danger. Just guys with guns in their trucks who knew how to use them.

      A success? Sure. But this wasn’t.

      • “Not people trying to make a point who had to take cover at the first sign of danger.”

        So, just to be clear, here…if you were carrying an unloaded rifle and shooting started happening, you’d do something different “take cover at the first sign of danger?”

        And since when is “taking cover” a bad thing? IDPA, for example, strongly emphasizes the use of cover as a matter of principle in armed self defense.

  17. I guess it depends what your goal of open carrying is. If your goal is to not be shot by the police, okay.

    But if your goal is to actually do anything useful with the gun you have with you this wasn’t a success. If the moment a situation calling for violence actually develops you drop your gun and hope not to die (just like everyone without a gun) it’s really reaching to consider this a success.

    I mean, the Titanic made it more than halfway to NY…

    • Hannibal, you raise an interesting point. One I thought was understood but may be more complex than many of us thought (complex as a social construct).

      I have, and my family knows, that I have a strong tactical background. A day or two after the shooting, we were all eating and I was asked what I would have done had I been in Dallas that night. They also know I am always armed. I told them quite honestly: I would have run like everyone else. I gave some additional explanation, which leads to …

      I guess the question centers on what is the purpose of citizen (open or concealed) carry.

      This is not the old west and I am not Wyatt Earp. I am not looking for a fair fight with some bad guy in the middle of the street. Nor is it a duel from a hundred years earlier over a dropped hanky. I am not looking to give the bad guy an equal chance – if I use my firearm it will be hopefully both surprising and with violence of action.

      I will also only be using it in a clear situation where the shot is almost guaranteed. The bad guy can’t be focused on me perfectly 100% of the time, I will be waiting for the glance to something else.

      I will be using the firearm for my protection, my family’s protection, or the protection of others immediately around me. Not to protect the general public. I am sorry, but general gun fighting is not my way since I cannot be sure of my target nor the situation.

      Finally, I am not a Mr. Tacti-doodle. All my gear is not optimized for some potential fire-fight. My weapon is to provide an opportunity for defense until the police arrive. Once arrived, they have the numbers and the equipment and the responsibility to stop the shooter.

      It is unreasonable (and I opine the police do not want) to have civilians joining the assault on the Bataclan nor the El Centro College.

      This is also why I think it disingenuous when people point out the OCers didn’t stop the Dallas scumbag. The police were already on scene and in force. The personally owned firearm is for when the cops are not available. Here they were on scene immediately.

  18. I keep hearing about “numerous” OCers at Dallas…but I only see pics or video of ONE GUY. Everyone and his brother has a damned smart phone and were supposed to believe no one got any proof of all these OCers and blasted it online or to the TV media?

    Not sure I believe that! As they say on message-boards -PICS or it DIDN’T happen!

    • I’m afraid you’re sorely misinformed Larry, there were between a dozen and two dozen protesters openly carrying long guns, handguns, or a combination of the two.

      Most of the protesters bearing long guns were members of The New Black Panther Party and Huey P Newton Gun Club.

      • pics? video?

        I know what it must be! All the other people carrying guns were VAMPIRES and they can’t be photographed! That’s why there is no footage. Is that it?

        🙂

        • Are you really that stupid Larry not to realize that you alone are making the claim that the dude in the camo shirt was the only protester carrying a long gun. Even Dean knows better. Stop making an @$$ of yourself.

        • I think there probably were more than the one guy present. However I do question the number being reported when I still haven’t seen ANY pics or any video of anyone other than Mr. Camo Guy. I think it’s quite possible that the number was grossly exaggerated so the anti’s can make their stupid comments about Open Carry. If I’m wrong then please SHOW ME.

  19. In all fairness it was very easy for the police to separate the open carry activists from the killers. The open carriers were the ones running away crying with piss stains on the front of their camo shorts.

  21. Not much I can add to the sobering point by point dismantling by RealityCheck of the delusional babble from Dean Weingarten in which he lamely asserts that five dead and seven wounded LEO’s is somehow an affirmation or vindication of his obsession with open carry.

    The fact is that none of the dozen or so protestors carrying long guns were shot because they were all black and the homicidal racist gunman exclusively targeted white LEO’s.

    Thankfully all of the armed protesters had enough sense to run away and make sure not to appear as an imminent threat to any on scene or responding LEO’s.

    The idiotic claim by Dean Weingarten that openly displaying a firearm at a protest turned assassination and running gun battle was in any way a positive speaks for itself.

    • You sactimonius, self-righteous “guns for me, not for thee” control freak types are all alike.

      And very predictable.

      “Not much I can add to the sobering point by point dismantling by RealityCheck”

      That’s funny, considering you completely ignore the rebuttals to the illogical nonsense posted by “I_Want_To_Make_Up__My_Own_Reality.”

      Law #2: Always double down.

      Yep. RealityCheck and now you.

      Predictable.

      • Big difference in having a firearm concealed on you’re person in downtown Dallas for personal defense and carrying a rifle at a protest in mob chanting “f**k the police” that shortly thereafter devolved into mass murder, JR you’re as big an idiot as Dean if you can’t make that distinction, and you’re a liar for inferring that my calling out open carry obsessed dumb@$$€$ in any way implies or suggests that only LEO’s should be allowed to carry firearms.

        The hard truth is that up until the moment he commenced his one man kill whitey race war by executing five police officers, Micah Johnson was just another person in downtown Dallas exercising his privilege under Texas law to carry a rifle in a public place without restriction.

        • “Big difference in having a firearm concealed on you’re person in downtown Dallas for personal defense and carrying a rifle at a protest in mob chanting “f**k the police” that shortly thereafter devolved into mass murder, JR you’re as big an idiot as Dean if you can’t make that distinction, and you’re a liar for inferring that my calling out open carry obsessed dumb@$$€$ in any way implies or suggests that only LEO’s should be allowed to carry firearms.”

          Thank-you. You doubled down.

          So predictable.

        • Exactly JR, a predictable response to idiocy and lies from the open carry obsessed who make incredibly stupid claims like “Open carry worked in Dallas”. The sort of idiocy and lies the anti gun left uses in their propaganda to potray all lawfully armed citizens and defenders of the 2nd amendment as bat$#it crazy folks like you and Dean.

        • There is no evidence he carried it openly until he opened fire. Mass attackers virtually always conceal the weapons until they start the attack. If he carried it concealed he was required to have a permit. I have not seen any evidence that he had a permit.

        • “like you and Dean.”

          I consider that good company. Thanks for the compliment.

          All you do when you show up here is call people stupid, idiot and what not for daring to commit the godawful crime on not agreeing with you about open carry of firearms.

          Why is it that you pretty much only post in OC related threads? I got the impression you are cop. That true? Don’t cops open carry? Ok for those with badges but not the rest of the proles? Is that it, Statist? Us and Them…rights for the .gov approved ELITE?

          Keep on doubling down, man. You show your true “control others” colors every time you post. Everyone knows what you really think of freedom and rights…only those approved by you apply.

          I think I’ll OC again tomorrow, like I did today, and just smile to myself knowing I’m pissing you off. And there’s not a freaking thing you can do to stop it, which I’ll bet pisses you off even more.

        • You don’t know what you’re talking about Dean, there is no statute under Texas law restricting concealed carry of a long gun, all carry licenses issued by Texas DPS are specific to handguns. If someone wants to carry a rifle slung over their shoulder in a public place, that’s legal. If someone wants to carry a slung long gun under an overcoat in a public place, that’s legal. If someone wants to carry a bullpup rifle or folding stock rifle covertly in a bag or case in a public place, that’s legal. If someone wants to carry a rifle or shotgun in their vehicle it can be exposed in open view or concealed, either way is legal. If someone without a carry permit wants to carry a handgun in their vehicle, State law requires the handgun must be concealed and not in open view.

        • JR you can come west and open carry here in Texas to your hearts content (if you’re toting a handgun you’ll need a carry license from a State that has a reciprocal agreement with Texas), I promise you I won’t be the least pissed off. If you came today and I saw you openly carrying a handgun, you’d be the first I’ve seen exercising that privilege here in the Lone Star State since open carry became law on 1-1-16. Yep JR, 6 1/2 months and I’ve yet to lay eyes on even one open carrier anywhere here in East Texas or in multiple trips I’ve made to the DFW, Houston, or Corpus Christi areas. Open carry in Texas has turned out to be about as rare as it is in our neighbor to the north, I’ve worked several months in Oklahoma and made numerous other recreational trips to the Sooner State since 2012 and in all that time I’ve seen only one person open carrying, and that was deer hunter at a cafe. So you see JR, even though Texas (and Oklahoma) law extends the privilege of open carry to lawful citizens and visitors, most folks have better sense and have opted to continue carrying concealed just like they always did. Depending on when and where, I can actually think of a few locations and circumstances where OC actully makes sense, but of course there are many locations where I remain convinced it’s really dumb to open carry and my concern has nothing to do with my safety, but the safety of the poor dumb b@st@rd openly displaying their firearm, downtown Dallas is one of those locations. As I’ve said many times before, the biggest plus is that lawfully armed dumb@$$e$ who’ve always been in our midst but invisible before OC are now a lot easier to spot, I’ll be sure and let you know when I spot my first. If you make a trip to the Lone Star State and come through Dallas, find the Greyhound bus station at Commerce and Lamar in downtown (about 8 blocks north of I-30), then take an open carry stroll on down Commerce to the 7-11 and McDonalds, if you’re feeling brave do it after dark, let us know how it worked out and how much crime you deterred. Dean, you ought to give it a try as well. God Bless Texas!

Comments are closed.