The last entry here, on \u201cin your face\u201d open carry versus concealed carry or discreet open carry, caught interest with a three-digit comment count.\u00a0 I also raised some new issues I hadn\u2019t discussed here previously.<\/p>\n
Basic truth, folks: economic rhetoric has never fed the hungry, and Second Amendment rhetoric has never armed the helpless.<\/p>\n
The gains the gun owners\u2019 civil rights movement have made can be attributed to decades of legal scholarship, working within the system, and reforming anti-gun laws which largely trace back to anti-black bias in the antebellum and Reconstruction-era south, anti-immigrant bias in the industrialized north, and culture war at multiple levels.<\/p>\n
Gun-banners will never convert most who read this blog, and we who support a responsibly armed citizenry will never win over the Pelosis and Bloombergs of the world. The battleground lies with the vast majority of people who are in the middle on this polarized issue.\u00a0 I am old enough to remember when Massachusetts and California each held a referendum on whether possession of handguns should be banned in their states.\u00a0 Neither state had a majority of gun owners in the voting pool, but in each case our side won the referendum, because \u201cthe people on the fence\u201d didn\u2019t want to go that far.<\/p>\n
Doing things that alarm those people in the middle will do nothing to help the pro-gun side.\u00a0 Fear is the key ingredient that creates hatred. \u00a0<\/em>Doing things that put the general public in fear will cause more people to hate us, and anyone who seriously thinks flaunting rifles around schools in cities and suburbs will somehow acclimate the public to an acceptance of armed citizens is simply delusional.<\/p>\n Please, don\u2019t compare the heavily armed guy who video-records himself confronting police to Rosa Parks on a segregated bus. Ms. Parks did not put anyone in fear of their lives. Don\u2019t tell me that \u201ca right not exercised is a right denied,\u201d when we\u2019ve seen confrontational open carry result in stricter <\/em>laws in California, and hamper the responsible open carry movement in Texas much more recently.<\/p>\n This blog post, like the most recent one, grew from a fellow prancing around a school with a visible rifle and handgun.\u00a0 Even gun experts will tell you that handguns are carried holstered, in case they\u2019re needed for a life-threatening emergency, while long guns are traditionally carried only when their immediate use is anticipated. For us, that\u2019s hunting, response to an already identified emergency (think \u201cRodney King riots\u201d), or a target shooting range.\u00a0 To the general public, that image instantly calls to mind Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Newtown.\u00a0 When an otherwise obviously smart and articulate poster says the officer confronting such a person with hand on service pistol is the one being provocative, I can only say \u201cWow\u2026just\u2026wow.\u201d<\/p>\n Some open carry advocates hope for test cases to go to courts and validate their cause. I wouldn\u2019t be betting on that outcome. When someone\u2019s behavior is sufficiently frightening that the school in question goes to lockdown, I don\u2019t expect the courts to say that\u2019s just fine.\u00a0 Depending on the jurisdiction, the mood of the court, and the mood of the prosecution, some of the cards on the table may include \u201cdisturbing the peace,\u201d \u201ctrespass after warning,\u201d and \u201cgoing armed to the terror of the public.\u201d<\/p>\n But, the people who want to traipse around schools with visible military rifles and camcorders will have had their fifteen minutes of YouTube \u201cfame.\u201d<\/p>\n