JReedEsq

*you said it right there. I think OC can work either for us or against us depending on the situation. Personally, I'm only comfortable with open carry in three places: 1) my house/yard, 2. my office, 3. In backwoods areas for hiking/camping etc...

Check into Aholster. Home Page. Email and ask if they can do a paddle for you. They make everything one at a time so they probably can. I purchased two of their pocket holsters and have been very satisfied.

I like the ODs for something different. I special ordered my 26 just to get one in OD.

You've stated some good reasons to carry your weapon concealed. Where you lose me is when you make the leap that beause something isn't for you, you don't believe people should be able to make the decision themselves...

Gotcha... gotta admit I'm on the phone... Multi-tasking you know...

Pretty diplomatic way of stating your opinion don't you think? I personally don't feel comfortable open carrying in the vast majority of situations but I not going to make assumptions about those who do. I think launching insults with no real basis for your statement is probably not the most persuasive way to get folks seeing things your way...

I agree with your sentiment about not wanting attention.... That's why I don't OC. I just don't buy into the "he'll shoot you first thing", thing. I think there are very few circumstances in which they wouldn't just find another person or business to rob. If this theory keeps some people being descreet instead of stirring up trouble by OC'ing in a bank or acting like morons by refusing to conceal when politely asked by a business, then so be it. I still don't buy it though....

You must of missed the part of my post where I said I hardly ever OC... Wal-mart dressed like Rambo wouldn't be me. I'm not an OC proponent... Just answering the question you asked by providing what I feel would be an appropriate response to someone raising a stink by yelling and screaming at someone who is carrying. The only time I've ever OCed in a business is when I took off my jacket in a business owned by a friend of mine who knows I carry and is about to take the HCP class himself. One of my problems with OC is that I feel it can result in some whiner saying they feel uncomfortable and a business places a post in response. As far as looking like Rambo- When I'm dressed casually I'm usually wearing a jacket or some time of untucked shirt that will conceal a weapon just fine. If you ever saw me OC it'd be either in a sparsely populated area (like out hiking), or wearing a suit and taking my jacket off for a minute because I'm hot. In the summer, I often pocket carry a baby Glock, yes it prints a little but I honestly think no one stares at my pockets enough to notice. When the weather is cooler I plan to keep the suit jacket on and move up to a bigger weapon. I doubt people think "Rambo" when they see a skinny bald guy with a suit, tie, and brief-case. Again, I hardly ever OC and generally don't like people to know I'm carrying. I just felt like I had a resonable answer to your scenario and I don't really buy into the belief that responsible OC will cause mass chaos. Then again, maybe it's just that I'm a member of such a hated profession that the average citizen isn't surprised I might be packing.

I'd calmly explain to her that I'm not posing any threat to her and the steps I take to protect myself and my family really shouldn't concern her. If you stay calm and she's really yelling and screaming like you describe, can you guess which one will look like an idiot to the average bystander? Then again, this probably wouldn't happen to me since I hardly ever OC. I did take the family on another hike in the Smokies on Friday. Wore the thigh rig so I could carry the 2-year old in a pack with a large waist strap. It was the first hike for our 2-month-old that my wife was carrying in a front pack. As usual, we only saw a few other hikers and no one said a word about my gun. I really don't plan to OC on a regular basis, or in any situation in which I can easily conceal (which is probably close to 99% of the time).

Thank you for all you do. Prayers inbound.

You, my friend, obviously don't talk to divorce clients on a regular basis... I was in a Courtroom looking a my Blackberry so you can guess what my first thought was....

You think most regulations are bad. OK, fair enough. I think it's perfectly acceptable (and probably even a good idea) to question motives behind new regs. Where we differe is when you begin to equate any regulation with Nazi Germany or saying they distrust anyone with a badge. Remember, my job is often to stand up for people when LEOs have overstepped their bounds. Sometimes we have to fight aggressively to see that they get a fair shake. That said, more often than not, the LEO is a good guy just trying to do a job like everyone else. It's refreshing to have a civil discourse without this thread deteriorating into name-calling and paranoia. As for new regs, I probably agree with you more often than I disagree, but for different reasons.

Lately I've seen way more incidents involving presciption opiates than anything else. I guess that doesn't bode well for the idea that making a sudafed prescription only would cut down on the problems with meth. I really don't see a problem with keeping it locked up though. Why make it easier to shoplift? I don't think I fundamentally disagree with some of the posts on the board, I just think people can go a little overboard with references to communism or the 3rd reich everytime there is a regulation on anything. The assumption can be that any regulation will lead to more regulation and eventually regulation on guns and other things. I just see these as different issues. I'm not proposing the regulations; or even saying they would be effective, I'm just pointing out they are different issues and it's a huge leap to regulate something that's not the same not a constitutionally protected to something that is. While I don't necessarily belive that civil rights are being violated if we regulate pain meds, I tend to agree with the arguements that the regulations probably won't stop the problem. On another note, what really chaps my a$$ is the pain clinics. I've had both clients and opposing parties in my cases who recieve prescription opiates (basically heroin in a pill) for years on end, to treat very minor problems. I've usually seen these people involved in the legal system when DCS or another relative is petitioning to take their child or children away for being a drug addict. Regardless whether or not legal opiate use makes someone a negligent parent, I've become very irritated at TennCare or even private health insurance paying for it all. I'm not talking about wounded veterans here, I'm talking about someone that ten years ago had the kind of low-speed soft-tissue damage car wreck that I would turn away if they walked into my office, and years later they are still on pain meds. Doctors can usually recognize someone who is only looking for meds because they don't have much of a quantifiable medical condition yet they keep coming back asking for scrips. When the docs turn them away they go to the "pain management clinics" which really don't do anything except dole out opiates. If these people need supervised drug use, fine. It just irks me to no end that our medical system absorbs the costs. I've had two minor medical conditions recently when my doc offered to prescribe me opiates, and both times I said, you know what? I'm really fine with Motrin. That's just me, and it's another topic, but my work sometimes gives me very little patience for substance abuse. I've had personal injury cases that I've dumped because I didn't trust my client, so many divorce and other family law cases relate to addiction, and of course I see it in my criminal practice as well. I generally don't get sick that often so maybe I've developed an insensitivity to those who really need a medication. Sorry for my rant, but our experiences always shape our opinions.

What just a minute... I didn't propose anything. All I did was agree with NRA's post that Meth is a problem. I never said anything about making it a prescription drug, a registry, or anything else that you've imputed to me. I'm also not sure what you mean by "work for a living" but you are sorely mistaken if you think I'm some spoiled frat-boy. I've worked damn hard to get where I'm at and had absolutely nothing handed to me.

The point I was trying to make is that Meth is a real problem and I think you guys maybe over reacting if you think some 3 letter Federal agency is going to raid your house because you've bought some sinus medicine. Please don't lecture me on the 4th either. You may remember part of my practice is to defend people acussed of crimes. The 4th is one of those little technicalities that gets people off frome time to time. I'm merely agreeing with what NRA said about the severity of the problem and you guys start going off the deep end talking about legalizing drugs. For the record, my problem with drug addicts isn't that they use drugs, it's that they have the potential to fry their brains to the point that they begin to rob and steal to get the drugs.

I can also say I've seen the effects adressed above and I have similair feelings. Before all the knee-jerk reactions about a communist nanny-state you guys may want to consider that there is no Constitutional right to Sudafed and there are many alternative cold medicines available.

*I'm with you on the training. This is a new hobby for me (2.5 years) and I've vowed no more guns until I get more training. I've got my 3rd handgun class scheduled next week and next will be a defensive shotgun or carbine class (whichever I can fit it into my schedule). As for handguns, you don't have a 10mm... Me, I still don't own a revolver. I'm waiting on the right 686 or GP100 to catch my eye....

Glock 19; bought about 2 years ago. I've tried several others since. Bought a few, kept some, traded away some... The Glock 19 is still the one I carry the most.

I was... Just like to keep my money local when I can find a quality product at a fair price.

This is correct. I've seen HCPs taken in the Courtroom.

I'm very happy with the belt Greg made for me... I'd consider him for any custom holsters I may need in the future.... If I wasn't so afraid that he'll make fun of my plastic guns.....

I think you are probably right that most people don't notice, but the reality is that you never know when you might be around someone who will freak out and ask a business to put up a posting etc... Admittedly, I have very little experience with open carry (and I don't plan to OC in urban areas anytime soon), but I don't buy all the "he'll shoot you first" stuff. That's why I posted earlier in the thread that I believe this is really a personal preference. That said, I prefer to conceal 99% of the time. It's just easier than dealing with the potential issues of OC.

The Glock discount defines "first responders" pretty broadly and I believe they do include EMS personnel. You may check Sig and Smith & Wesson as well. A collegue of mine pointed out to me that Glock includes district attorneys and assistant district attorneys. Too bad the rest of us lawyers have to pay full price. Here's a source that specifies EMS: Discount Guns for Law Enforcement by Buds Gun Shop (budsgunshop.com)

This sums up my thoughts exactly...