Challenger

Jay reminded me:

23 years ago, Janurary 28th, 1986

I was in the lunchroom at Deerwood elementary school in East Orlando approximately 45 miles from the launch complex. Within seconds of the breakup, myself along with hundreds of other students were outside watching the debris falling to earth.

I can still remember crying and not knowing why... I still have an autographed 45 record of a song recorded the week of the disaster with a song named "Challenger."

Years later, I was on the playground at Union Park Elementary in Orlando, also about 40 miles from the launch complex, when the space shuttle missions resumed. I can still remember other children screaming "Blow up! Blow up!" and thinking how horrible and mean those kids were.

Several years later, I was able to visit Arlington National Cemetery and see the graves of the astronauts. Only the grave of Kennedy had more solemn meaning for me.

To this day, I can still hear the voice of Michael Smith saying "Uh oh"... And I remember the numerous local news stories of people finding debris washing up on Cocoa Beach.

Like you, I did not experience anything this monumentally life changing until 9/11/01... A year and a half later, I was again ripped apart when the Columbia disintegrated on reentry. The helplessness of being a bystander to tragic history is only drowned out when you realize that the event you are watching was not just an accident but was deliberate... Perhaps that is why Challenger and Columbia make me sad and 9/11 makes me seethe in anger.

The most emotional thing about the whole Challenger incident was the words of Reagan that night... It brings tears to my eyes every time:

"We will never forget them, nor the last time we saw them, this morning, as they prepared for their journey and waved goodbye and 'slipped the surly bonds of Earth' to 'touch the face of God."

Stolen Gun Belonging To Davy Crockett Returned

From CBS 11 Dallas/Ft. Worth:

An important piece of Texas history is back safe with its owner.

This week, a thief stole the rare pistol once owned by Davy Crockett.

Mark Disanti collects military memorabilia. "I'm a history buff," he said.

But he said he never expected he'd buy a gun rich in Texas history.

It turns out the Deringer .44 caliber pistol he purchased was owned by American folk hero Davy Crockett, who was killed in the battle of the Alamo during the Texas Revolution back in 1836.

God, can you imagine? Holding such an amazing piece of history in your hands. I am glad that the guy did the right thing and returned the pistol.

Worker shoots himself in arm without a gun

Ok, I am at a loss:

DELAND — DeLand police are investigating a bizarre shooting at a cemetery that involved bullets used in a military funeral service but no gun.

Howard Sheppard, 30, of Deltona, was shot in the left biceps and went to Florida Hospital DeLand for treatment, Officer Jacob Hudson wrote in a report.

Sheppard, who works at DeLand Memorial Gardens, told a nurse he picked up six rounds of ammunition and one of them discharged and struck him in the arm, Hudson said. When Sheppard said the other five rounds were in his shirt pocket, a security guard took the shirt and called police.

Sheppard initially said the ammunition was on a shelf and one of the bullets may have discharged because he threw a hammer and a string trimmer on the shelf, police said. After being pressed, he told Hudson that he secured the sixth bullet in a vise clamp, placed a metal punch into the cartridge primer and hit the punch with a hammer.

Sorry but this one doesn't add up.

Obama's secret weapon

From Black-and-right:

Obama and the GOP moderates will not produce the kind of post-partisan harmony that Obama promised and the public now expects.

But I believe Obama has an ace in the hole among Senate Republicans. This unlikely ace can deliver not only the GOP moderates needed to break a filibuster, but also the stamp of bipartisanship: the 2008 GOP standard bearer, John McCain.

In McCain's mind, however, losing the presidency will not be the final chapter of his life story. He knows the path to "Big Media" redemption. Working with the man who vanquished him in November will show them all the real McCain again.

This is no surprise to those of us that didnt like McCain in the first damn place.

Flag desecration, the hopechange edition

Thanks to Say anything:



Of course when you consider the utter lack of respect for the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence that most of the Obots have, this is no surprise at all.

Obama is Clinging

From Breitbart:

Despite legal and security hurdles, president-elect Barack Obama says he has a plan to retain his beloved Blackberry once he moves into the White House next week.

Interviewed by CNN Friday, Obama said the smartphone was among the tools that he would use to stay in touch with real Americans and avoid becoming trapped inside the presidential "bubble."

"I think we're going to be able to hang on to one of these. My working assumption, and this is not new, is that anything I write on an email could end up being on CNN," he said.

"So I make sure to think before I press 'send'," he said of his Blackberry, which was an ever-present fixture on his belt or in his hand on the campaign trail.

Obama did not divulge just how he will overcome legal constraints, given the requirement of the post-Watergate Presidential Records Act of 1978 to keep a record of every White House communication.

Nor did he say how he would persuade his Secret Service protectors that the Blackberry does not pose a security risk, for instance if it is hacked over the air.

So refusal to give up things that comfort him, any bets on what will happen to gun owners when they try to do the same thing after he passes a ban?

I say we flood DC with FOIA requests for the contents of his blackberry emails every day starting tomorrow. After all, the info will be public record.

A Historic Election

By now, we all know that we have a new President-Elect. No one should ever overlook the enormity of this election. In less than 50 years, this nation has gone from a place where blacks were beaten for trying to vote, to a nation that elected its first black leader.

Even though I do not agree with many if any of his policies, he is a history maker. As such I must respect that achievement. When I feel that he is wrong in what he does, I will speak out against him. When I feel that he is right, I will support him.

Let free to kill

From FOX News:

SEATTLE — A traffic stop in the woods led to the shooting death of a U.S. Forest Service officer, a shootout in which a fugitive was killed and the discovery of a third gunshot victim at the home of the owner of a pickup truck he was driving, the Washington State Patrol said.

The FBI was investigating the shooting of USFS Officer Kristine Fairbanks, 51, a certified canine officer with 15 years in the forest service, and the other shootings in the Sequim area were being investigated by the patrol and Clallam County sheriff's deputies, state Trooper Krista D. Hedstrom told The Associated Press early Sunday.

Shawn M. Roe, 36, whose last known address was in Everett and before that in Shelton, had three handguns and fired at least one shot before he died in a shootout with two deputies at a convenience store, Hedstrom said.

Roe was a convicted felon with "an active criminal history" and was supposed to be under state Corrections Department supervision but details were not immediately available and he apparently was not being sought on any warrant, she added.

Another tragic victim of a failed justice system.

Building a symbol of Communist oppression.

Got my 1977 Romanian 'G' AK-47 kit in the mail today. Man, what a beautiful thing it is. The wood is beautiful, the metal is not scratched and the bore looks nice and new. Hopefully this will get put together into a nice rifle here soon. Pictures will be forthcoming.

Where have I been?

Well, it was nice of you to ask. I have been doing roughly the same thing I have always been doing, just being too lazy to post.

In the last few months I have:

Found out that the wife is expecting again.
Taken my 2 year old to his first air show.
Decided that my 9 month old daughter cannot ever have too many clothes.

Bought a new (to me) .22 rifle
Participated in my first steel plate action match
Joined a private shooting range
Bought an AK parts kit (should be here any day)

Also, I have discovered that my 9 year old son is a way better shot than his old man.


Details on some of these to follow.

Clear!

Thwap.... beep...... beep..... beeep.......


Ok, I am going to try to get some life back in this thing.

Damn I'm lazy.

Amazing Joe Horn Walkthrough Video

I'll comment on this later today. For now, I am still in awe with just how close the two bad guys were to him.

UPDATE:

Ok, I now have time to comment a bit on this video.

As I said before, the thing that strikes me the most about the whole thing is how close the bad guys were to Mr. Horn. Now I am not going to get into the legality of what he did, he has already been cleared of the charges. Nor am I going to talk about what he could have done differently.

As near as I can tell, this video was taken less than 4 hours after the shooting.

What I am focusing on is his reactions on that video. You are watching the full gambit of emotions run through this man all at the same time. He is visibly shaken. He is still very scared. He is also upset but feels like he was forced to do what he did. He also shows anger, he is downright mad at being forced to shoot.

All of those emotions are textbook examples of how people act in a defensive shooting.

Also, in my opinion he was way too talkative. I have heard that this is very common, that usually the cops have a harder time getting the guy to stop talking than they do getting him to talk. The usual advice is to say something like "I will be glad to cooperate but I need to have my attorney present first." The only problem is that when you are in a super high stress situation like this, you tend to forget things like that.

Hopefully this video will serve as a good lesson on how you might act if faced with a similar situation.

Another thug let free to commit another crime

Saw this one today from FOX News:

NEW YORK — An ex-convict has been sentenced to life in prison for the sadistic, 19-hour rape and torture of a Columbia University graduate student.

Robert Williams was convicted last month in Manhattan of attempted murder, rape, kidnapping and arson.

The victim managed to testify about her agonizing ordeal. Her tormenter scalded her with boiling water and tried to blind her with bleach. She was forced to swallow fistfuls of painkillers and ordered to gouge out her eyes with scissors. The attacker glued her lips shut and gagged her with duct tape before torching her apartment.

The defense had tried unsuccessfully to have Williams declared mentally unfit to stand trial.

But let's look a bit further at his past shall we?

Williams had his first brush with the law in 1990 when he was accused at age 13 of robbing someone in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn. At 16, he was arrested on murder charges in University Heights, the Bronx. The dispositions of the cases weren't available because he was charged as a juvenile.

On May 15, 1996, Williams tried to kill a man in Hamilton Heights while attempting to steal his platinum-and-diamond necklace. The victim, now a 41-year-old father of three, was shot in the back, chest and groin, records show.

"He grew up in the streets," the shooting victim told the Daily News. "He never had a job. He dealt some drugs, but robbery was his thing."

Williams was convicted of attempted murder and served eight years in prison, a span marked by a three-month stint in a psychiatric hospital and 28 prison infractions. State records show he threw feces at prison guards and beat up other inmates.

"We're relieved and thrilled that he was caught," said a classmate of the rape victim.

So, we have another life long thug, let free to keep on with his life of crime. Another case where victims could have been spared their fate if only the criminal system had kept this animal locked up and off the streets.

Incident on my college campus

Got this in my campus email over the weekend.

Subject: Serious Incident Report - East Wendover Campus

Please be aware that a male student on the East Wendover Campus, was a victim of an armed robbery, Thursday June 20, 2008, at approximately 8:00 PM. The student reports that the incident occurred in the Men's Restroom in the AEC Building. An investigation is in progress by the Campus Police.

The assailants have been described as three (3) African American males. Their descriptions follow:
Male 1 approximately 19 years old, bald head, carrying semi automatic weapon
Male 2 wore a baseball type cap with NY Yankee logo, dark shirt, knife, teenage?
Male 3 wore a hat, and a shirt with something brown written on it riding an orange
Moped teenage?

GTCC strives for a safe and healthful learning environment. Your help is necessary to support this effort.

Note: Instructors, please read the contents of this message to your students at the beginning of each class period, effective upon receipt through Monday, June 30.

This report is provided in accordance with the requirements of the Crime Awareness and Campus Security ACT of 1990. For further information, contact me at the Jamestown Campus, telephone extension 2425.

Jacqueline Pettiford
Dean, Student Support Services

I was not going to reply to it until I saw today's news regarding the shooting in Phoenix on a community college campus.

My response is as follows:

Sadly the incident talked about below is just one more in a long list of incidents that continue to happen at gun free zones. Here in NC, state law and school policy has ensured that we students will be unarmed and unable to fight back if confronted by attackers that care nothing for laws and policies.

The fact that it was illegal to carry a gun onto the campus obviously meant nothing to the people that were already intent on committing the much more serious crime of robbery. So that means that the only people following the laws are the ones that are not criminals and are not prone to committing crimes.

The fact of the matter is, persons who choose to legally carry guns as a means of defense are almost never involved in crimes. They tend to be the most law abiding citizens in society. Because of this, it makes no sense to have laws prohibiting them from possessing a means to defend themselves from those that are criminally minded and willing to hurt other people.

Virginia Tech, Columbine, The Utah mall, Northern Illinois University, and dozens of other places have all been scenes of rampages that left countless victims unarmed and defenseless. While there is no guarantee that an armed, law abiding gun owner could have prevented any of those incidents, at least those people might have had a fighting chance. Instead, state law and school policy ensures that all victims inside these places will be unarmed and completely defenseless. When faced with a situation like that, those poor souls are given only two options, run or hide.

As a father, my concern when I come to campus is my safety. I wish to make it home safely to my children. Sadly the State of North Carolina and the school feel that a policy banning guns on campus will somehow make me safer when nothing could be further from the truth. As a law abiding citizen I urge you and this institution to join me in petitioning the legislature of NC to change the laws so that people are not left to become victims any longer.

Lawfully and respectfully yours,

Chris

GTCC Student,
NRA Certified Instructor,
Law abiding gun owner,
Proud father
And responsible citizen.

I am now going to see what the response, if any may be.

Victim called an attacker.

This one from FOX News:

A bottle of hydrochloric acid was stolen from the back of a pool supplies van and thrown on a pregnant woman and her partner in a horrific attack in an Adelaide suburb today.

Witnesses said the woman, 19, and her partner, 28, had walked from the Centrelink office in Oaklands Park and became involved in an argument with a third person - a male described as aged 16 or 17 - at about 1.50pm.

It is understood the six-months pregnant woman and/or her partner started throwing blocks of concrete at the other male, Adelaide Now reported.

He retaliated by stealing a bottle of hydrochloric acid from the back of the van, which was parked in the same street. The driver of the van, who was also leaving the Centrelink office, happened to recognize the male who was having concrete thrown at him and offered to help drive him from the scene.

"But before I knew it, the acid was taken from the van," the driver, who did not wish to be named, said.

"How much acid the woman had poured on her I'm not sure, it all happened so quickly."

The woman and her partner, from Sturt, were taken by ambulance to Flinders Medical Centre suffering from acid burns.

The woman had burns to her right arm.

Their immediate condition is not known but the injuries are not life-threatening, police said.

A 13-year-old witness described the man who fled from the scene as wearing black shorts and running through the car park of the nearby Bunnings store.

"I could hear all of this screaming and yelling coming from the car park and then people were running everywhere to help this woman," he said.

"There was a lot of panic and before I knew it there were two police cars and two ambulances." The offender, who is known to the victims, has not yet been caught.

Ok, now as horrible as it must have been for a pregnant woman to have acid thrown on her. She and her "partner" were throwing concrete blocks at the person that threw the acid. I cannot fathom how the teenager that did this is being called the attacker and this girl and her "partner" are being called victims.

Lets take a look at this a bit:

• Argument between two parties. Check
• One party escalates the confrontation and starts using deadly force. Check
• The other party retaliates with deadly force. Check

Sounds like a clear case of self defense to me. In fact, in most places that value freedom (most of the US), the person that had concrete blocks thrown at him would have been 100% justified in drawing a pistol and shooting both of his attackers dead on the spot.

The only thing that I can see that could make the person getting attacked by two people that were hurling deadly objects at him would be if he was a willing participant in the confrontation or if he had thrown the acid at them after they had stopped being a threat to him. Perhaps there is more to this story, but as it is written (and I have checked both the Australian news and the news from the town it happened in, this seems like a case of self defense to me.

At least it would be in a country that allowed self defense.

Walk away

More than just a song by Chicago apparently. From Gunpundit:

Apparently the mayor of London is asking his subjects to ignore crime and not get involved.

Boris Johnson urged people to walk away if they see a crime committed rather than risk their own lives.

Yet another fabulous reason why I can no longer call Britain 'great'.

Scumbag was let go, went back to what he did best

Ok, so this has been on the news a good bit lately. Basically, last year 12 year old Brooke Bennett vanished. The prime suspect, her uncle, has been arrested and charged with her kidnapping. Her body was found a week after her disappearance. Sad, tragic, and utterly reprehensible.

The primary problem, the person being charged with her kidnapping is a twice convicted sex offender who will most likely be charged with her murder once the lab results get back.

So why was this man walking free?

According to FOX News:

In 2004, with Kearney's recommendation, Judge Amy Davenport ruled that Jacques' probation end in 2006, as long as no violations occurred and despite strong objections from prosecutors.

"According to Mr. Jacques' probation officer, he is a 'probation success story,"' Davenport wrote in her order. "He is married and has a child. He and his wife own a home in which they reside. He has been very successful in his employment and is now in a position which entails significant responsibility."

But wait, it gets worse. Brooke was not the only one he was victimizing. According to the Boston Herald:

On June 29, before he was charged in Bennett’s disappearance, Jacques, 42, was charged with aggravated sexual assault in an unrelated case that police learned about while investigating the Bennett matter.

Investigators said he molested a girl over a five-year period, beginning when she was 9.

If true, that would mean he was molesting the girl at the time of the probation hearing.

A peek at his past according to the local Vermont news:

Jacques is a registered sex offender. He was arrested and convicted of kidnapping and sexual assault in 1993. State records show he completed a sex offender treatment program before he was released from state supervision in 2006.

From FOX News:

According to a police affidavit, in the 1992 case Jacques abducted the high school senior after she left a Barre bar, handcuffed her, put a rope around her neck and cloth in her mouth and forced her to engage in sex acts. He told her he had killed a girl in Arizona seven years earlier and at one point held a knife to the woman's throat, the affidavit said.

Davenport agreed with the state's assessment of the brutality involved, but disagreed with the state that he should spend another eight years on probation.

So I now ask, why was this man allowed to be free? Ever!

Since the Supreme Court recently ruled that the death penalty was not applicable in child rape cases, the next best option is life in prison. If this animal had been sentenced to a life term and kept in prison, he would have been unable to victimize at least 2 more people. If I were related to these girls, I would sue the state, the judge, the parole board, the sex offender program, and anyone else involved in his release. I would also make it my life's work to ensure that these kinds of animals weren't let out of prison, not just early, but ever.

Another new category

The other thing that has become more and more apparent to me lately is the growing implementation of the huge nanny state in England. Thus, I have created a new category of posts called "The former 'Great' Britain."

I simply cannot consider the country of Britain to be 'Great' any more.

A slight change of pace

Ok, well I feel kinda weird about just copying and pasting articles from all of the other gun bloggers... So, I am going to start a change of pace... One of the things that I am starting to see more and more of are high profile cases where criminals that should have never been let out of jail are released and go on to commit horrific crimes. Growing up in Central Florida, I was quite inundated by the news coverage of the Jessica Lunsford murder.

What struck me the most about the whole thing is that the vile act was committed by someone that should have never been walking the streets in the first place.

Lately I have seen another flood of these similar stories. From the animals that killed the Philly cop last month to the guy that killed the Charlotte cop a few weeks ago, there seems to be a severe epidemic of people walking the streets and committing horrendous crimes even though they have extensive criminal records that should have resulted in them never being allowed to be free.

I have long said of the gun laws in this nation, if a person is so dangerous that we as a society cannot trust them with a gun, then they should not be allowed to walk free. So, in light of this, I am going to start posting about these tragic events as they happen.

Scope of the ruling

Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

A Slap At the Dissent

JUSTICE BREYER’s assertion that individual self-defense is merely a “subsidiary interest” of the right to keep and bear arms, see post, at 36, is profoundly mistaken. He bases that assertion solely upon the prologue—but that can only show that selfdefense had little to do with the right’s codification; it was the central component of the right itself.

I wonder if that left a sting?

To Keep Arms

From the Heller decision

Thus, the most natural reading of “keep Arms” in the Second Amendment is to “have weapons.”

Heller won

As I sit here, they have announced the decision in Heller 5 to 4 for Heller and the right to keep and bear arms...

UPDATE:

10:13
Ben Winograd -

The Court has released the opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290), on whether the District’s firearms regulations – which bar the possession of handguns and require shotguns and rifles to be kept disassembled or under trigger lock – violate the Second Amendment. The ruling below, which struck down the provisions in question, is affirmed.

Justice Scalia wrote the opinion. Justice Breyer dissented, joined by Justices Stevens, Souter and Ginsburg. We will provide a link to the decision as soon as it is available.

UPDATE:

text of the majroity decision located here:

UPDATE:

10:24

Tom Goldstein - Quoting the syllabus: The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditional lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

Open Carry

This subject comes up quite often, and frankly it is misunderstood by both pro and anti gun advocates. So, I am going to attempt to write a detailed post about it. Hopefully this will clear up some of the misconceptions...

First of all, what is open carry?

1. Open carry is the carrying of a firearm that is visible and unhidden. More aptly stated, it is the exact opposite of concealed carry.
2. Open carry involves the use of a holster that keeps the firearm in plain view.
3. Open carry is usually the carrying of a pistol, some states prohibit carry rifles even if slung.
4. Open carry is legal in a majority of the states, though there are some places where local laws will come into play.
5. Open carry may be the only option for people that do not have a concealed carry permit or cannot get one (usually due to age).
6. Open carry is much more physically comfortable than concealed carry in most cases.
7. Most importantly, Open carry is a statement. By open carrying, you are declaring that you are a gun owner, that you are not dangerous and that you are not ashamed. You will receive extra scrutiny because of your decision, expect it and be prepared with facts and knowledge. Your carrying openly makes you a representative of the entire shooting world, with one simple statement you could create a new shooter, or you could drive someone away from the sport.
   

What open carry isn't.

1. Open carry is not for everyone
2. Open carry is not brandishing. In most states open carry is completely legal.
3. Open carry does not mean that you can walk around with a gun in your hand.
4. Open carry does not make you a bad ass.
5. Open carry is not any more likely to make you a target in a robbery than a gold watch.
6. Open carry most likely will not get you in legal trouble.
7. Open carry does not make you special or better than anyone else.
8. Open carry is not a magnet for people to come up behind you and try to steal your gun. Think about that for a second, how brazen would you have to be to try to take a lethal weapon away from someone?
   

What happens when you open carry?

• Usually nothing. People are generally used to seeing objects attached to other people's belts, so most of the time it goes unnoticed.

Now, that is not to say that nothing will happen every time you open carry. It is entirely possible to be harassed, looked at funny and even approached by strangers with questions. It is also entirely possible for you to be harassed by law enforcement, handcuffed and arrested. Knowing your local laws goes a long way in keeping this from happening.

The trick is, what you are doing when you are openly carrying is perfectly legal. The likelihood of you being arrested and actually charged or convicted of a crime is very low. In most situations where a law abiding gun owner is harassed by law enforcement for open carrying, the reason for the harassment is because the individual LEO does not know the laws pertaining to open carry. The other reason that people commonly get harassed by law enforcement for open carrying is that the officer believes that it isn't something you should do. We will get into LEO encounters in a bit.

Knowledge is your friend:

Here in NC, I have been informed that the open carry statutes are clearly discussed in the basic law enforcement training courses that all LEO's go through, but your mileage may vary. Having knowledge of the relevant laws in your area will go a long way in ensuring that you have a trouble free experience.

Another consideration is that the general public typically does not have any idea of the laws in their area. One of the most common things I hear about when it comes to open carry encounters is that someone gets asked "Do you have a permit for that?"

This is a teaching experience, in most cases the proper response will be "No I do not, no permit is required unless it is concealed." (Please keep in mind, some states DO require a permit to open carry.) Now, usually the conversation will stop right there, but occasionally that statement will open the flood gates for more questions.

Things like "Is it loaded?", "Why do you carry that?", "Why do you need a gun?", "Are you that worried about getting robbed?", "Are you looking to get into trouble?" And on and on.

Remember that the person asking these questions just had reality slap them in the face. They may have lived their entire life thinking that only criminals and cops carry guns. They might be someone that has always wanted to learn more about guns but wasn't sure where to start. They might also be someone that has serious anti-gun feelings. Again, be prepared to strike up discussion with these people. Use facts and laws instead of emotions.

You will also have people make comments to you and about you. Things like "I would never carry a gun.", "I don't believe in guns.", "Guns are too dangerous." etc... My typical response will be something along the lines of "Well, unfortunately for you, a criminal that might be looking to make you his next victim will not care one iota about your personal feelings about guns."

Give it some thought and come up with some good ways to respond to people. My favorite response to the question "Why do you need a gun?" is very clear. "I would rather live my entire life knowing that when I was forced to defend my family I was able to do so. Than to live my entire life knowing that I might have been able to save my family and I didn't." To anyone that has a family, that is a very powerful thought to have to chew on.

A few days ago a friend of mine started in on his kick that guns aren't needed to solve problems. In his words "Be a real man, use your fists." Now in the real world, cocky people that think they can handle a fight get killed quickly. Usually when their attacker pulls out a gun. All of us in the gun world know and embrace this philosophy, but non-gun owners may not have ever given it any thought. My response to him was simple. "You have a fire extinguisher in your house don't you? Or are you man enough to simply use your fists?"

Do not let this dissuade you from open carrying, just realize that you will be representing the shooting community as a whole. If that is not something you can handle, then don't open carry. Most importantly, with any encounter that you have, you must remain calm, cool and collected.

Know your laws:

As gun owners, we typically pride ourselves in being as law abiding as possible. Because of this, it is of the up most importance that you know every law that is relevant to your situation. Cities, counties can and sometimes do have differing laws so something that is legal in one city may not be in the next city. For example, here in NC there is only one city that has a carry ordinance. In that city, openly carrying a firearm with a barrel shorter than 4 inches is illegal.

Also make sure you know what places are prohibited places. Again these laws can and do different between city to city. There are the usual places where all weapons are prohibited. Post offices, federal buildings, schools (in most states) are all prohibited by federal law. Most states also restrict state buildings, banks and bars. Now here is where the interesting thing comes into play. What is prohibited for concealed carry may not be prohibited for open carry. For example, here in NC it is illegal to conceal carry into a bank, but open carry is permitted.

It is your responsibility to know the laws in the areas you will be in. If you do not know the laws, you risk going to jail, and that would be counterproductive.

Signs:

Sign postings are the bane of every gun carrier. In almost every state there is some legal provision that allows property owners or businesses to post signs prohibiting the possession of weapons. In some states, those signs carry legal weight and not obeying them is a crime. In other states, the signs carry no legal weight, but if the owner asks you to leave, you must or you are trespassing. In other states if the sign isn't a specific size or doesn't have specific wording, it is invalid. It is worth noting that if a sign says "no concealed weapons" then openly carrying is not a violation of that sign.

Now, with few exceptions, most places do not post signs. I have personally carried openly into multiple gas stations, two different Wal-Mart stores, several restaurants and various other places. I have never once had a problem or even had someone say anything to me. Should I ever get approached by a store employee, I would ask for the manager. If the manager asked me to leave, I would comply and then I would notify the general manager and owner of my intentions to stop shopping at their establishment. There are several places on the internet that you can get form style letters that will fit your situation, check the links below. These letters do work, usually business owners can see reason when they are clearly informed about how law abiding gun owners really are.

Dealing with law enforcement:

Every person will eventually have a run in with a law enforcement officer. In some places these incidents will go much more smoothly than in others. Generally speaking, if you are not breaking the law you are fine. But you need to know the laws so that you know what your rights are. In most states, openly carrying a firearm is not a valid reason to detain you. You must be suspected of committing a crime, and openly carrying a firearm is not illegal.

Should you encounter a LEO, do not freak out, remember, you are not breaking the law. You should expect that the LEO will take your weapon and secure it for his own safety. You can also probably expect to get a quick pat down. Typically, the LEO is responding to a "man with a gun call" where some soccer mom saw you with a holstered gun and freaked out, calling the cops all hysterical about seeing a man with a gun. Remember, the LEO does not know the situation he is walking in to and has to assume the worst. There is no need to make his job harder.

After the initial encounter, which will probably include you being disarmed, asking "Am I being detained?" is a good thing to do. If the officer answers to the affirmative, then the next question should be "Of what crime am I suspected of committing?". If there is no clear answers to those two questions, then there is no valid reason for the LEO to continue to give you a hard time or to ask you further questions. You are free to go at that point.

Some states and/or jurisdictions have had cases in the past where officers have seized firearms without making an arrest, should that happen to you, don't freak out, demand that you get issued a receipt. If you are given a hard time about this or are told that your firearm is being seized permanently, contact a lawyer. You do have a constitutional right to be secure in your person and possessions and anyone that deprives you of that right without due process can be held liable for civil rights violations.

Again as with all encounters, you must remain calm, cool and collected.

Finally, I will go into some more personal things.


Why open carry?

Ok, I open carry for several reasons. First and foremost, I am a huge supporter of the second amendment. I feel that the second amendment is one of the very foundations of our society. And since the courts have ruled that states may regulate how concealed permits are issued from state, open carry is the one fundamental part that we have left of the whole "and bear arms" portion of the second amendment. Hopefully this weeks Supreme Court ruling will change that, but I doubt it.

Because of my beliefs, I am driven to advocate for what I believe in. In my experience wearing Glock T-shirts or Beretta hats does not work as well as wearing a gun. Gun related clothing is actually much more likely elicit a negative response from people than wearing a gun is. I suspect that people are much more likely to be impolite when they do not know for a fact that you are armed. I do not think of this as intentional intimidation on my part, but as the old saying goes; "An armed society is a polite society."

Lastly I open carry because to me it is much more comfortable than trying to conceal a 26Oz. hunk of metal and plastic. Plus, when I am carrying openly, there is no need for me to worry about who might see that I am armed. I have noticed that I am much more aware of my surroundings and the people that are near me. I suspect that it will be the same situation once I have my concealed carry permit, but since that will not happen for a few more months, I am left to open carry.

For a lot more information, advice, questions about the laws in your area and a good discussion forum to boot, check out www.opencarry.org

I hope this has been an entertaining and helpful read.