Wow! Why is it that crime doesn't happen when police are around then? Is it the big, shiny, scary badge? Or the gun behind that badge? You decide.
Neither. It's the power of the state behind the man behind the badge. And you may project self-sufficiency when you carry openly, but you do not project the power of the state.
Fish Or Man, hey?
On this one, at least, you're pretty obviously Fish - and a pretty poor-quality, out-of-water fish, at that
Tkdkerry, since the power of the state is ultimately the power of armed violence, aren't we talking about the same thing?
And J.S.Bridges, Did you have a point? I realize that first reaction for gun owners is to defend Clayton Cramer, he is definately on "our" side, but telling me I am a fish out of water is weak. (Even 3 day old fish would have been better).
Tkdkerry, since the power of the state is ultimately the power of armed violence, aren't we talking about the same thing?
Not really, since the armed individual and the armed representative of the state represent different things. As an armed individual I am saying I will not let you force me to do what I don't wish to do. The state, on the other hand, is ultimately saying they will force you to do what they want. Armed violence is behind both, but there is a big difference in philosophy.
How do you deal with carry in your car without a CPL? It's illegal here, isn't it?
Ben, carrying in a vehicle is difficult. There are some exceptions--a CPL is not needed when traveling to or from outdoor rec. areas. (Haven't seen that one tested in court but it is on the books.)
But generally, like when i was traveling thru Spokane, the gun must be unloaded. Mag out, chamber empty. There is no law on how far ammo must be kept away or such BS. But unloaded is the manner to carry when in a car without a CPL in Washington State, unless you meet the exceptions to the CPL laws.
70efa6 567f85e2e0
Sir,
I find merits to both sides of this particular debate, and I am not usually one to be so ambivalent. Open carry does promote a great many values, to which I subscribe. Yet, some of us are more reticent. I do not think that if I had to go about with my gun fully exposed at all times, that I would go armed at all. Family, friends, and acquaintances would all look at me as a nut case, and I would change few minds. There are many people, who move in academic, or professional circles where, right or wrong, being armed is frowned upon. More to the point you are raising, Clayton is right. In any group of people where, some, or all, may be armed, and there is no way to tell, the bad guy has to work harder to bring about his nefarious purposes. If everyone who wants to had to carry openly, the strategy used by a bad guy would be to take out those who are armed first, then procede with their criminal enterprise. Or, alternatively, wait until the unarmed are not in proximity to the armed, and then strike. As a tactic, it makes sense to keep the bad guys guessing.
Regards,
PolyKahr
Wade,
My point did not require an either/or fantasy. Your quote: "...If everyone who wants to had to carry openly..." As the law stands BOTH open and concealed are legal in WA state. Just because the criminal may see some people openly carrying does not mean the rest are not concealing. In fact, more people visibly showing guns positively could very well drive the number of concealed carriers up as well.
Commenting by HaloScan
