Does Open Carry Cause Problems?

[BNR32FAN]

Those who say that open carry of guns causes no problems should consider something that happened in Jacksonville, FL, last December. Deputies pulled a man over and ordered him out of the car. He had a gun in a holster. The Deputies decided that was legal. (I’m not so sure.) Still, they did not want to talk to an armed man at a traffic stop. One Deputy tried to lift the gun out of the holster. Maybe it was a tight fit, and did not come out easily. Deputy Mindy Cardwell wound up shooting driver Jason Arrington in the leg with his own gun.

We are told that Deputy Cardwell was dismissed, at least as a patrol Deputy, although she is still working part time for the Sheriff’s Department.

A source very friendly to guns warns us that “criminals do not fear guns—they seek them.” Open carry of a firearm can attract criminals who want to steal the gun.


Sources
Florida officer fired after she accidentally shot a driver with his own gun during a traffic stop
gunsamerica.com/digest/open-carry-goes-horribly-wrong

I would say this is an example of either a combination of stupidity and mechanical malfunction or just stupidity on the part of the gun owner and the officer. First of all you shouldn’t have a round in the chamber unless you have a hammer fire pistol that has a hammer block that prevents it from striking the firing pin when the safety is on. If you have a striker fire or your gun doesn’t have a decocking feature then you should not carry it with a round in the chamber. Second the officer should’ve been more careful removing a firearm that he’s not familiar with from a holster. I have a Ruger SR22 that is a hammer fire pistol with a decocking feature with double action and single action that I can safely keep a round in the chamber with the safety on. The reason it is safe to keep a round in the trigger is because when you put a round in the chamber with the safety on the hammer stays in the uncocked position and is blocked from striking the firing pin by an internal mechanism so if anything were to hit the hammer or slight pull the hammer back and release it, it can’t strike the bullet. And because it’s a double action and single action if I ever did need to use it quickly all I have to do is pull it out, lift my thumb about a half inch to turn off the safety, and pull the trigger and it will pull the hammer back and fire in one trigger pull. I also have a Ruger 9mm Competition Pro which is a striker fired pistol that I never leave a round in the chamber because there’s no way to decock it, so the striker is constantly under pressure just waiting to be released by the trigger. I don’t like to keep my firearms in that position. I don’t do it on my rifles or my shotgun either. I think it’s stupid to carry around or even keep in my safe a firearm that is under tension ready to fire. I don’t usually carry any of my firearms but I have in the past when I was making deliveries for Amazon and Uber Eats because sometimes you could end up in some sketchy places after dark so I carried my SR22 because it’s a safe and quick to use firearm to carry. I carry my 9mm on me when I’m hunting but I don’t carry it with a round in the chamber.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I think sometimes people open carry, because they either can't or don't want to go through the process of getting a concealed weapon permit.

I don’t know about other states but in Texas you don’t have to have a concealed license to conceal your firearm. You can either open carry or concealed carry. The only difference is that if you don’t have a concealed licenses you can’t carry a firearm into any place that has any sign saying that you are not permitted to carry a firearm. If you do have a license you actually can carry your firearm into that place even if they do have signs specifically saying that you cannot carry a firearm in that place unless the sign has the 30.05, 30.06, or 30.07 code printed on it. Then you’re not allowed to carry a firearm into that place even if you do have a license.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The cop shoots the legal gun owner with his own gun and it is the gun owners fault?

I would say that it depends on what actually caused the gun to fire. If the cop accidentally pulled the trigger then I’d say it was obviously the cop’s fault, but if there was a foreign object inside the holster or if it was a mechanical malfunction then I’d say that wouldn’t be the cop’s fault. Ultimately he shouldn’t have a round in the chamber if his gun can’t be decocked. That’s my opinion.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Personally I believe that any and all "carry" makes us less safe, and I think that all those who read the Gospels with an open heart and mind would heed Jesus' message about non-violence.

Broken Arrow seems like a great place to live, and I would guess it's an affluent suburb of Tulsa. I think that it's a great place to live because fewer people are carrying--not because they carry.

I once read that people are mourning the end of the "gun 'culture?'" T'hey are growing up in suburban and urban areas and aren't going hunting.

Fewer college educated people own guns. Fewer suburbanites and urban dwellers own guns. People who grew up in a gun-free atmosphere don't own guns. Gun ownership is least prevalent in the northeast.

I'm proof positive. Grew up in the northeast, had a dad who never fired a gun after WWII ended, grew up in the suburbs (was born in the city), college-educated and married someone who is also a college grad. My children never owned guns, either (although they did fish a little as children, they never hunted.)

And so Broken Arrow, although (I'm sure) Republican and located in the south, has lots of demographics indicating non-gun ownership. How fortunate you are to live there.

The demographics of gun ownership

Understanding gun ownership in America is not as simple as knowing who does and does not own a gun. Some Americans who don’t personally own guns live with

www.pewresearch.org

There’s an estimated 500 million civilian owned firearms in American and according to Chat GPT over the last 30 years an estimated .09% of those firearms have injured or killed a human being either intentionally or accidentally. Chat GPT also estimates about .08 percent of those firearms either protected or prevented someone from being injured or killed. But then you have to factor in, which is impossible to do, how many incidents never occurred because of the fear of being shot by someone who might own a firearm. Personally I think there’s value in criminals knowing that their potential victims might actually have a gun. Just that thought alone could be enough to deter them from committing a crime or causing harm to someone without any gun ever actually being used.

 

[Hentenza]

If the police were here for my good (or your good), that statement might carry some weight.

But the Supreme Court has ruled more than once that the police do not have a duty to protect citizens.

And then throw racism into it.

If the police aren't here to protect me and may even be a danger to me, it's immoral to prevent me from using whatever means necessary to protect myself and my family.

Are you advocating pulling a gun out on police to “protect” your family?

 

[BNR32FAN]

“And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his cloak and buy one.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭22‬:‭36‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Luke 22:36 And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his cloak and buy one. | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now

And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his cloak and buy one.

bible.com

The apostles open carried.

That’s taken out of context. Don’t get me wrong I’m all for gun ownership but you omitted the next verse that specifically says why He said that to them.

“And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one. For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, ‘And He was numbered with transgressors’; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment.””
‭‭Luke‬ ‭22‬:‭36‬-‭37‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Jesus said that in order to fulfill the prophecy that He would be numbered amongst the transgressors. Basically that He would be accused of being part of a band of outlaws.

I would say that if you’re looking for evidence of God’s approval of defending yourself and your loved ones I would point to the countless battles that Israel faced when defending off attackers and God helped them kill thousands upon thousands of attackers in battle. King David is just one of several examples of God blessing someone defending himself and his people. God never once disapproved of the Israelite defending themselves.

 

[Hentenza]

That’s taken out of context.

My brother I have already addressed that. Please read the thread. Thanks.

 

[BNR32FAN]

So why did Jesus ask the disciples to sell their cloak and buy one?

The next verse answers that exact question. It was to fulfill the prophecy that He would be numbered among the transgressors. The prophecy was saying that Jesus would be accused of being an outlaw.

 

[BNR32FAN]

My brother I have already addressed that. Please read the thread. Thanks.

Sorry I guess I hadn’t gotten that far in the thread yet. I’m working on it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Because they will be counted among the lawless. Rev. 1 also touches on this topic

Exactly which part of Revelation 1? I’m not seeing anything relevant to it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The more the US as a nation moves towards an increase in unfettered gun access, the more problems it will create.
It's not rocket science.

Study Finds Significant Increase in Firearm Assaults in States that Relaxed Conceal Carry Permit Restrictions​

A new study by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health found that the average rate of assaults with firearms increased an average of 9.5 percent relative to forecasted trends in the first 10 years after 34 states relaxed restrictions on civilians carrying concealed firearms in public. ​

​

​

We aren’t moving towards nor have we ever been moving towards “unfettered” gun access. I think everyone here would agree that a background check is a necessary step to purchasing a firearm.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The study that you posted has one inherent problem in that they are not using actual numbers but statistical modeling. It’s nothing more than a mental exercise.

“The researchers used advanced statistical modeling to estimate what would have happened if the laws had not changed. Rates of violent crime for each of the 34 states adopting shall issue concealed carry laws in the analysis were then compared to the best “synthetic controls”—predicted crime rates derived from data from eight states that had restrictive permitting requirements in place throughout the study period.”

I think the biggest flaw in that article is that it’s based on a hypothetical scenario of guns being available to anyone without any sort of background check which is not based on reality or rationality.

 

[Hentenza]

Exactly which part of Revelation 1? I’m not seeing anything relevant to it.

Verse 16 regarding Christ two edge sword coming out of His mouth which is metaphor of the strength of the word of God.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Actual numbers show the same trend

That article doesn’t actually give enough information to make a valid point. First of all in the parade where guns were fired into the air apparently no one was injured otherwise that information would’ve been paraded in the article. Second it doesn’t mention whether or not any arrests were made it just claims that there was little the 800 police officers could do which is not a statement of fact. The 800 officers could’ve arrested everyone they saw firing their firearms. Third the article for some reason only mentions what happened during a three year period after the right to constitutional carry law had been passed instead of a seven year period of what the trends were up until the article was written.

“The Trace analyzed gun violence data and found that 16 of the 20 states that enacted permitless carry between 2015 and 2022 saw more shooting deaths — excluding suicides — after the laws took effect than during an equivalent time period before. In Missouri, average monthly shooting fatalities, adjusted for population, were 28.7 percent higher in the three years after the introduction of permitless carry, compared to the three years before. In neighboring Kansas, which enacted permitless carry in July 2015, fatalities were 24.9 percent higher.”

And Missouri has still kept the exact same constitutional carry law until this day. So the article focuses on one spike during the time that the constitutional carry law was implemented, not a trend during the whole time of its existence. It’s suspicious that the article only talks about what happened over a 3 year period during the last 7 years, less than half of the time since the law had been passed. I would expect that if those trends had continued beyond that 3 year period the author would’ve been more than eager to display that evidence, therefore I have to assume that the last 4 years must’ve indicated a less than desirable trend to support his article.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Verse 16 regarding Christ two edge sword coming out of His mouth which is metaphor of the strength of the word of God.

I don’t see how that has anything to do with what He said in Luke 25. Just because He used the word sword?

 

[BNR32FAN]

It should not have come out easily. A good open-carry holster will be specifically designed not to release the gun except from the proper angle and with the proper manipulation of the person wearing it.

This is a point of serious contention. On one hand, I can understand an officer being uncomfortable talking to someone wearing a firearm. At the same time, I think if the situation was significant enough to order the suspect out of the vehicle, it was probably serious enough to have the suspect disarm himself, even if under the drawn weapon of the officer.

I would just never carry a gun with a round in the chamber if it doesn’t have a decocking feature. My position is that if you want to carry a gun with a round in the chamber you should buy a gun that has a decocking feature that is double action that way the hammer is blocked from striking the firing pin and can easily be fired quickly if need be.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Yes, of course. There are going to be variations. There are going to be contradictions. But that variation is an outlier.

Luke 25 is irrelevant, it’s taken out of context. What about the Israelites or king David, or anyone for that matter who killed people in self defense or in the defense of their loved ones? Are there any passages of scripture indicating that God was displeased with anyone defending their self or sending their loved ones? What I actually see is the exact opposite where God actually helped and blessed those who killed thousands of people in self defense.

 

[BNR32FAN]

No one is saying it is one cause. What I am saying as gun restrictions become less a thing, then expect more gun violence.

I would say that you’d have to separate gun attacks from gun defense, you can’t lump defense situations in with attack situations. Obviously if people have a gun to defend themselves you’re going to have guns involved in violent incidents.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I’m not saying that it is not possible but I’m having a problem with by which extent if any. Statistics can be manipulated to support a political agenda.

Yeah I 100% agree because in the majority of statistics that’s exactly what’s happening. In fact that’s usually the reason for conducting the study in the first place.

 

[BNR32FAN]

It was not a call to violence and no where did I argued that. They were indeed entering an uncertain and dangerous time which parallels the reason why we carry a firearm for protection these days.

Yet we don’t have any passages ever indicating that they did actually carry a sword after that night.