Gun Gripes: ‘Open Carry…Texas Version’

On the heels of a controversial video blasting open carry “a-holes,” Eric and Chad clarify some of their comments on the matter.

{ 18 comments… add one }
  • Dave Briggman January 8, 2017, 9:48 pm

    The woman from New Jersey you speak of in this video was responsible to know the reciprocity laws of the states in which she seeks to enter with her firearm PRIOR to entering…

  • James Hall January 7, 2015, 6:08 am

    Gary66, for starters Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. At the time of the Constitutional Convention, he was serving as Ambassador to France. As for your implications in referencing the life expectancy of the time (probably closer to 45 or 50 than 30,) You’ll notice that the Founding Fathers mostly lived to a ripe old age, unlike Joe the Ragman out in the field. I would suspect that this was because of education, availability of food and shelter, and access to medical care, rudimentary though it might have been. Like today, these things were probably a direct reflection of financial status.

  • Tom Wheeler January 6, 2015, 6:14 pm

    The follow-up vid was a good idea..but you know that. My interest, as a Vietnam K-9 handler vet is where can I get that War Dogs t-shirt?

  • gary66 January 6, 2015, 5:09 pm

    Running idea’s trough a historical filter before commenting is a sign of maturity and it takes maturity to have a historical filter. Here’s one from a mature man.

    http://www.claytoncramer.com/scholarly/racistroots.htm

  • Russ January 5, 2015, 1:36 pm

    The Moon Walk!
    Kind of funny watching these guys dancing back and forth because they have opinions.

    The way I see it is; People (communist) that want to control others, have widdled our rights away passing unconstitutional laws.
    They have also influenced history in our educational system to leave out the importance of firearms in the USA

    This has “Pussified” the American public.
    It has been going on now all my life, and I know this because I see it 1st hand here in California. (55 years).
    It’s going to take a long time to “Depussify” America. (people are scared of guns)

    Some, and I mean only some OCW holders need to slow down a little and respect the brainwashed public’s fears.
    We can’t think people will change instantly.

    I say encourage good people to own and enjoy firearms with education and assistance from the experienced.
    No name calling, bitching or moaning.

    Maybe when I’m 110 years old, we’ll have our country back to normal. “I have a dream”

    • mIKE April 7, 2017, 1:35 pm

      Be realistic about consequences of what you want. Imagine if a solo or group of Middle Eastern looking/dressed persons were to walk into your neighborhood or grocery store openly carrying AR-47s. Are you comfortable with that? Are you going to grab your firearm and confront them? If they are citizens then they have the right, too. If they feel threatened what happens next? Or Indians in the Dakotas? Or Hispanics in the Southwest states? Blacks in the South ( Black Panthers? KKK into black neighborhoods? Open carry is inviting trouble from immature reactions, and over reaction. If you’re hunting, or if your concealed carry shows briefly is one thing, If I’m carrying my Thompson sub at arms or slung over my back it’s a different thing.

  • Mark13tol January 5, 2015, 11:28 am

    Thomas Jefferson was 33 when he wrote the Declaration of Independence. I’m sure his views on life were the same when he was 23 as 33.
    I am 56 and you folks that are wagging your “mature” finger at these guys making these videos are maybe just a bit on the ‘radical” side of gun ownership if you don’t understand “normal common sense”. That what these guys are stressing. It’s just dumb to walk around with an AR-15 strapped to your back and claim it’s your right just to prove a point. Citing 200 year old cases about conceal carry may seem like comparing the Second Amendment but it’s not, that is what judicial review is for. The Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence are all documents that set the ground work for laws. Interpreting those belongs to the justice system. Each case is different just like each individual.
    Saying these guys are not mature enough to know what they are talking about is like saying Jefferson should have waited a few years until he matured more to write the things he did. Maturity is not age, it’s how your mind evolves. Having good common sense is maturity, saying it’s ok to walk into a restaurant strapping a rifle to your back and not expect a confrontation is not very mature.

    • Bob Clark January 5, 2015, 1:20 pm

      I have read, and re-read the comment line for this and the previous posts regarding Open Carry. To be honest folks you don’t have to drag out the old dusty history books – just look at the facts. As you read my comments keep in mind I support the 2nd amendment without reservation. period!

      Fact: Guns don’t kill without a finger to pull the trigger. Fact: There are more than a few nut cases that are willing to do just that. Always have been and always will be. Fact: we, as gun and CPL. holders argue that we are responsible in how we carry and under what conditions we would, if need be, use our weapons to defend against a threat. So then, this fact has to follow: We will responsibly limit any negative effect that might result from exercising our right to carry. In other words, we say we’re the good guys so we should think and act like good guys! Using abstract or archaic arguments as we debate these issues like we’re on the Stanford Debate Team is NOT mature or responsible. If open carry of a long gun doesn’t concern John Q. Public then something’s wrong! Hell, I’m ex Army Ranger, lots of combat time, and it makes me nervous to see some character walking through the mall with an AR over his/her shoulder. This is just common sense folks. Quit trying to debate the issue and face it – don’t do dumb and no one will think your are! Many of the reasons that have been argued here make a good point, but with reasonable men should come reasonable thought – if it’s stupid, don’t do it! I carry (concealed) because I accept my responsibility to protect myself, my family and my country from the moron out to murder, and to make certain anyone wanting to threaten my country and our way of life will pay for their trespass if need be (and the fact that those that might threaten this country have a clear knowledge that we are an armed society has a very effective deterrent affect). I also support the Open Carry laws, but not the idiot that feels it makes a slung AR on Main St a “good idea”. When it comes right down to it I guess I just don’t like Stupid!! Enough said.

    • gary66 January 5, 2015, 1:38 pm

      There are many things Jefferson was not prepared for. For instance the constitution he wrote didn’t include the bill of rights, the very rights we are talking about here. He also sold his vote on the assumption bill for a vote on the ground the capital would be built. If you know the history behind the assumption bill then you know how much Jefferson wished he’d of never gone along with it. The man that sponsored the bill and his associates took the revolutionary soldier and raked them over the coals realizing in that day a profit of over 40 million dollars something Jefferson was ignorant of till it was done. To top it off the 2 never got along and for good reasons, but Jefferson being young allowed himself to be caught with honey, Hamilton invited him to dinner and set the trap. Hamilton was true to form, his idea of what the U.S. was, just a place where the wealthy could make money off of it, was well known, Jefferson’s wants blinded him.

      For reference to the history behind the assumption bill look at the history of Daniel Shays and the rebellion named after him.

      Imagine fighting in the revolution, neglecting farm and family and coming home to find your money now worthless. The creditors you owed money to refusing to take it and disappearing so you couldn’t reach them only to have them turn around and get the courts you just fought to defend siding with the creditors to take your farm,,,Shay’s rebellion which ended badly for the troops.

      As they picked up the pieces with their worthless notes Hamilton was planning the assumption bill only few knew about it including the same creditors. The high and mighty bill would make all those notes worth face value, but the soldier didn’t know that and before they did Hamilton and his ilk swept through the land buying those notes for pennies. Jefferson controlled power over many votes and his support key to the bills passage. Your shinning example went along with it being young, he grew to regret it.

      We can learn from the past, what this debate should be decided on, or repeat it sounding mature using emotional issue almost always “for the children” and “it’s dumb”.

      The perception outlined it the Va. quote above is still right on today.

      If you’d care to disprove my earlier claim then you’d better do better. Food for thought, life expectancy in the 1700’s was 30 years, it’s almost 80 now.

  • ted mcdowell January 5, 2015, 11:10 am

    I live in az we can open carry and concealed carry

  • William Young January 5, 2015, 7:32 am

    Gun If you OPEN CARRY your BATTLE RIFLE , then you are a clueless DOUCHBAG ! It alarms the public and wastes Law Enforcement resources ( they will be called to check on “the Gun Crazies “) . Slung on your back is bad enough , but , if you carry at Low Ready or Port Arms with your trigger finger just millimeters from the trigger , the real Gun Guys will consider you a potential threat and subsequently , will be formulating a plan to end your life ,should you misbehave . Even worse , there may be multiple CCW guys on site and if one of them gets “hinkey” there will be a BLOODBATH ! All because you IDIOTS craved a bit of attention . TARGET and APPLEBY’s and the like are NOT the venue to insert your Battle Rifles into public scenarios , especially if Families with children are involved ! Even the N R A condemns this behavior , it is BAD for the gun culture and will only increase opposition to our second amendment rights . Every time a media clip or photo of you gets posted , the comments are hugely against your actions ! It may be technically legal but that does NOT make it right .

    • Russ January 5, 2015, 1:55 pm

      What if the “clueless DOUCHBAGS” you see in videos and hear on the news, are planted there to make firearms owners look bad?
      All the firearms enthusiasts I know are for the most part, intelligent, and would never think of doing the bullshit I’m seeing in the media.
      Just a thought I wanted to put out there.

  • Virgil Caine January 2, 2015, 7:10 am

    I was probably more in agreement with their first video, the point of which has largely been lost in the kerfuffle.

    I support constitutional carry and I will always advocate for it. If you can legally own a firearm you should legally be able to carry it open or concealed. Having said that, just because you can doesn’t mean you should. We’re still in a battle for the hearts and the minds of people. Folks that are a little more moderate than us on the subject aren’t going to be impressed with the USP on the guys hip at Starbucks (or anywhere), they’ll frankly be intimidated. I doubt my mother or sisters would go into an establishment with a bunch of high A macho’s (real or perceived) with guns strapped to their hip and they grew up around guns. We’re a hunting and fishing family. Recent history shows us that if we insist on displaying our weapons openly for political reasons it will lead proprietors to ban weapons on their premises, as is their right.

    Again, I support constitutional carry. I just think we need to be careful. And courteous.

  • gary66 January 1, 2015, 12:07 pm

    Here is the Virginia case:

    “Virginia Grand Jury in 1820, see Daily National Intelligencer, Sept. 9, 1820, at 2 (paragraph breaks added):
    On Wearing Concealed Arms

    We, the Grand Jury for the city of Richmond, at August Court, 1820, do not believe it to be inconsistent with our duty to animadvert upon any practice which, in our opinion, may be attended with consequences dangerous to the peace and good order of society. We have observed, with regret, the very numerous instances of stabbing, which have of late years occurred, and which have been owing in most cases to the practice which has so frequently prevailed, of wearing dirks: Armed in secret, and emboldened by the possession of these deadly weapons, how frequently have disputes been carried to extremities, which might otherwise have been either amicably adjusted, or attended with no serious consequences to the parties engaged.

    The Grand Jury would not recommend any legislative interference with what they conceive to be one of the most essential privileges of freemen, the right of carrying arms: But we feel it our duty publicly to express our abhorrence of a practice which it becomes all good citizens to frown upon with contempt, and to endeavor to suppress. We consider the practice of carrying arms secreted, in cases where no personal attack can reasonably be apprehended, to be infinitely more reprehensible than even the act of stabbing, if committed during a sudden affray, in the heat of passion, where the party was not previously armed for the purpose.

    We conceive that it manifests a hostile, and if the expression may be allowed, a piratical disposition against the human race — that is derogatory from that open, manly, and chivalrous character, which it should be the pride of our countrymen to maintain unimpaired — and that its fatal effects have been too frequently felt and deplored, not to require the serious animadversions of the community. Unanimously adopted.

    James Brown, Foreman.”

    • SSgt Mas January 3, 2015, 10:19 am

      Again Gary66- citing case law from the early 19th Century is missing the mark here and libeling the millions of concealed (permitted and non-permitted alike) who carry daily without incident. From the body of your writings, I gather that you’re an intelligent gent who has read history. I sense a bit of Hamilton-like elitism, where you imply that the average law-abiding citizen will somehow become more prone to murderous rage by carrying a concealed weapon.

      If you are among those who believe this, then you are not with us- the right to responsible concealed carry is as unalienable as the right to owning firearms.

      Ready “More Guns, Less Crime,” and get back to me on your outdated assumptions about modern armed citizens. I’ve got a temper myself, and I’ve concealed carried daily for the past 15+ years- I cannot tell you how many times I’ve allowed a road rage or incident of public rudeness to go unchecked because I did not want to involve myself in a situation where I would use deadly force- same rationale behind driving a car- it’s an instrument capable of causing death, and it makes one assume more responsibility for their actions.

      Gary Hamilton…stop being such an elitist.

  • gary66 January 1, 2015, 12:00 pm

    2 observations. First the age of the 2, they are very young and as a consequence the follow up is needed, this is on the job training/school for them. Maturity is needed.

    Second, there is a load of historical information surrounding this subject, none of it expressed here. What is expressed here is emotion with the intention of being concerned that if rationalized from a historical perspective isn’t concern at all, it’s setting up a more violent outcome. Something the emotional arguments attempt to claim to avoid. Take a look at prohibition for a lesson on allowing emotion to rule.

    Back in the day there were laws forcing people to carry, not for themselves, but to be a part of the protecting force in case women and children were attacked. The crux of the issue today is found in this past law, it was done to protect the freedoms of others, a fulfillment of love your neighbor, today it’s protect your own azz and why people can’t get it. In one instance the person would take a bullet instead of firing if the shot wasn’t safe. In the other the person will just let’m fly with little regard to to safety of others and claim they were doing it to stop the bad guy when saving the lives is the real issue, stopping the bad guy secondary.

    Also back in the day people who concealed weapons (daggers) were seen as the type of people who lurked in dark places and not to be trusted. That was the ruling of the court of Virginia long ago, they admitted they were powerless to do anything about it, but wanted it known the court declared the practice despicable, most people agreed, still do. Allowing CC to be the norm is a recipe for disaster when emotion and not the rule of rights based on historical evidence controls the law which we are very close to.

    Before commenting it is advisable to read up on world history, it will take some years, there are no short cuts to it. This is the education the founding fathers had so if you want to understand them, you have to know where they came from. They didn’t come up with the original documents based on the emotional current events of the day, but the rise and fall of nations of the past; Know why those nations rose and fell and then explain why something like open carry is right or wrong and what is best around women and children and their future.

    Freedom must be allowed mistakes! Many say they understand this, but few actually do.

    Finally, leave it to people to allow a constitutional right to be taxed. Call it a permit to carry if you like, bottom line allowing this allows any right to be taxed and permitted, PERMITTED FOR PETE’S SAKE, as if permitting a right was ever an intention. Again see world history to understand this. Get older history books, ones written closer to the day and not influenced by today’s correctness.

    • Robert January 5, 2015, 10:47 am

      Having read your posting, I find you to be saying;
      ‘I’m Mature and you are not’.
      ‘emotional arguments’ are all you can say unlike my ‘Facts’.
      “Back in the day” lets me discredit ant reply after the fact.
      “concealed weapons (daggers)”and “lurked in dark places” lends to classify people as disrespectful or criminal.
      And
      “Before commenting it is advisable to read up on world history, it will take some years, there are no short cuts to it. This is the education the founding fathers” is self-serving to say ‘ I am educated and highly educated’.
      Sorry to tell you that I do not see that in you posting here.

    • John Fernald January 5, 2015, 3:54 pm

      First, I appreciate the perspectives of these two men. Second, I agree with their views on what changes need to be made to the laws. Third, I disagree with their position on what should be necessary to get a concealed carry permit. Sure, back when I was growing up on the farm, I got lots of safety training and knew how to carry safely. But that is not typical of today’s CCL holder. They need the training that came to us at an early age. Personally, I am scared to think that a bunch of urban Atlantans are carrying guns with no training whatsoever. Here in New Mexico, where training is required, I feel confident that CCL holders will conduct themselves in a safe manner, because I know that they are properly trained by professional trainers and not relying on what pappy told them about guns.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend