Knoxville PD apologizes for open carry incident in Wal-Mart

[The Rabbi]

I would counter that their argument was only weak by today's "forward thinking, intellectually superior [read: smug]" standards which hold little or no regard for a supreme being and have elevated men to that position of authority. In that period of time, God (or the Deity) was unilaterally recognized as the supreme authority from which all worldly power originated.

Actually it was a lousy argument then too. The question was whether the colonies had the ability to rebel, since they were represented in the government. The legal basis essentially said no, they were not.

So they dipped into the idea of Natural Rights to say these were being denied. It was historically-speaking poor and they knew what they were doing. If they had lost the whole idea of "natural rights" would have gone away with them.

[Guest Hyaloid]

Actually it was a lousy argument then too. The question was whether the colonies had the ability to rebel, since they were represented in the government. The legal basis essentially said no, they were not.

So they dipped into the idea of Natural Rights to say these were being denied. It was historically-speaking poor and they knew what they were doing. If they had lost the whole idea of "natural rights" would have gone away with them.

Good thing they didn't lose then, I suppose. I have not heard many describe ANY arguments presented in our founding documents as 'intellectually weak'. As a matter of fact, upon further reflection, I don't think I have EVER heard that before.

Are you inferring that the reference to 'natural rights' were invoked by the founding fathers because they knew they didn't have a 'legal' leg to stand on, so they converted to a more 'emotional' basis for their argument against the Crown? If so, that's an interesting take that I haven't heard before. Do you have any references that hint at that, or is it a conclusion you arrived at yourself?

[The Rabbi]

Good thing they didn't lose then, I suppose. I have not heard many describe ANY arguments presented in our founding documents as 'intellectually weak'. As a matter of fact, upon further reflection, I don't think I have EVER heard that before.

Are you inferring that the reference to 'natural rights' were invoked by the founding fathers because they knew they didn't have a 'legal' leg to stand on, so they converted to a more 'emotional' basis for their argument against the Crown? If so, that's an interesting take that I haven't heard before. Do you have any references that hint at that, or is it a conclusion you arrived at yourself?

That's kind of an over-simplification of what happened, but basically yes. And I cannot remember where I saw this but there is a very rich literature on Natural Rights, John Locke, and the Declaration.

[Smith]

[Guest Hyaloid]

That's kind of an over-simplification of what happened, but basically yes. And I cannot remember where I saw this but there is a very rich literature on Natural Rights, John Locke, and the Declaration.

For the record, I wasn't being a wise-ass, I really am interested in learning about that viewpoint. <-- He's new!

[The Rabbi]

I didnt take it the wrong way.

[Cruel Hand Luke]

Two things.

1. KEEP YOUR GUN COVERED UP!

If no one sees it then it never becomes an issue. If the guy in the original post had not been carrying openly NONE of this would have happened.I'm NOT saying what Officer Unfriendly did was right. He should be reprimanded heavily if not suspended. But if he never sees it...there is no event to start with. It may be perfectly LEGAL to stick my head in a lion's mouth. But it is not wise.....and that doesn't even begin to get into the tactical disadvantages of open carry.

2. Rights vs Privelage. The 2nd Ammendment limits the federal government's ability to infringe upon individual liberty. It does not directly limit STATE governments from REGULATING things. Sorry. I wish it were different but it is not. However most state constitutions have a clause about recognizing the right of the people to be armed. But it really gets into confusing "equal protection under the law" 14th ammendment arguments over whether the states can de facto ELIMINATE a right protected by the Bill of Rights. Originally though a state could restrict things MUCH farther than the fed gov could.....

The point is whether it is a right or a privelage, whether it is legal or not,keep it concealed , and don't be stupid and don't draw attention to yourself!

[Marswolf]

I guess I should take the guy at face value, but I have to wonder if the VP at Coal Creek really just forgot to cover his handgun with his shirt.

This story can be either good news or bad news for us handgun packers. We'll see how it plays out.

[towerclimber37]

Two things.

1. KEEP YOUR GUN COVERED UP!

I submit that if you don't excercise that right, INSIST on that right then others will take it from you.

you're welcome to cover your firearm if you care to.

I myself will not if I don't deem it necessary.

nobody said freedom was free.

[Guest Hyaloid]

Make sure you don't say anything they don't want to hear too... 1st Amendment be damned.

Cover up your weapon, can't be flaunting your 2nd Amendment around either.

Oh, and that pesky 4th? Just consent to the search of your vehicle or house, you have nothing to hide after all right?

Well... to get back on topic and avoid another round of OC idiots vs CC elitists, I actually heard about this in a quick hit news story on AM radio on my way into work. The newsman never mentioned OC specifically, but went out of his way to say that the officer was reprimanded and that the citizen got an apology. So far, so good.

[fury2neon]

Remember, it isn't the size of the dog in the fight, its the size of the fight in the dog.

Unless its an English Terrier vs two Akita's. Poor little guy had about 30 stitches but he survived. The Akita's made short work of him. The guy who owned the Akita's had to put them down once they took down someone else's emu.

The Terrier had a whole lotta fight in him though to jump two Akita's as they crossed his yard. I miss that little dog.

[The Rabbi]

While I realize I can be called on at any time to become a martyr for my religion, I have little to no desire to become a martyr for my citizenship.

Those who relish martyrdom, please step right this way.....

[molonlabetn]

Who said anything about martyrdom? And even so, who makes a man or woman into a martyr, anyways? The person who refuses to compromise their principles, or the people who would rather kill them than accept those principles?

If I have to conform to the will of this sick society to avoid being a martyr, if it comes to that... you'd better believe that I would not go quietly. Though I realize that there are always those who would sell-out, I do not wish to be counted among them. May they live forever.

[towerclimber37]

While I realize I can be called on at any time to become a martyr for my religion, I have little to no desire to become a martyr for my citizenship.

Those who relish martyrdom, please step right this way.....

I think THIS sort of thinking is the reason they now call it the PRNJ instead of just Joisey.

[Cruel Hand Luke]

I submit that if you don't excercise that right, INSIST on that right then others will take it from you.

you're welcome to cover your firearm if you care to.

I myself will not if I don't deem it necessary.

nobody said freedom was free.

I'm probably the LAST person on this board or any other board who needs to be encouraged to exercise their rights. I doubt very many others here REALLY, HONESTLY carry a full size pistol 365 days a year, attend as many classes as they can afford and make time for,teach the TN CCW classes, teach even more advanced classes, VOTE in every election, send emails and phone calls every time a gun vote comes up both in the TN legislature AND nationally and stay abreast of what is going on in both legislatures regarding those rights, not just paying attention when I'm told by the NRA magazine that something is going on. Who else here has the congressional switchboard phone # in their rolodex at work? Anyone?

I had almost 200 hours of training time (classes and events like NTI, Warriortalk Symposium and Polite Society/Rangemaster Tac Conference) logged in 2006 and by end of this year I'll be at about 150 hours for 2007. What can I say I had to be a slacker this year because I spent more time teaching. And those training hours do not include matches I go shoot in or individual gunhandling and marksmanship practice I do by myself.

So suggesting that I don't exercise those rights or implying that I'm somehow not as serious about this as those who parade around making a spectacle of carrying a gun like some kid who just got his first cap gun is just utter BS, and frankly offensive.

The way I look at it is this. I'd rather be the "gray man" and not look all tactical or worse, look like I'm "proving a point" by wearing my gun exposed. And don't give me the "open carry is a deterrant" argument. No, open carry makes you a target of attention by LE who hate people carrying guns. Not all LE are like that, but enough are. It also lets everyone on the street know you are armed, eliminating your greatest tactical advantage...the element of surprise and the attendant action vs reaction advantage you would have. I don't even wear "gun clothes". I don't want to advertise. But then again I'm not looking for attention.

And don't think for a minute that the BGs ...REAL BGs are scared of your openly carried gun.If you are food they can still tell you are food even if you carry openly. It is not about the weapon on your hip, it is your body language and the way you carry yourself that bespeaks the weapon between your ears that they respect. Hell if they will try to disarm a COP, what makes you think you are scarier carrying openly than the police? Food with a gun is still food.

Too many guys think that strapping on their favorite safe queen custom pistol makes them ready to take on the world, or worse think they are making a political statement. Well guess what. The statement they are making is that they are far out of the mainstream of polite society and that they WANT ATTENTION. Why are they craving that attention? If you want to make a political statement, I'll give out some email addresses and phone #s that will get a lot more done than wearing your gun for all to see at Burger King.

But that won't get them the personal attention they get when they "Cowboy up" and strap on their favorite smoke wagon and stroll through the flea market. Those who are professionals don't flaunt their guns. They go about their business like professionals, not tell the world "look at me and my gun, I'm a big boy now!".

Do I EVER carry openly? Yes. Rarely. But even then it is in my car if I'm not getting out and I was just going to run errands I don't need to get out of the car for. If I get out I cover it up. It is just not worth the loss of the element of surprise and not worth the potential problems to show off my gun.

So if you guys that are so fired up about open carry want to do that then fine. But don't for ONE SECOND think that you are any more a defender of your rights than I am. I just look at it from an increasing my survivability standpoint not from a "feel good-making a statement-attention grabbing" standpoint.

If you want to be Ghandi go ahead. If I see you getting roughed up by a cop like the guy in the story I'll be sure to pass on the word to the folks in the next class so I can get them fired up to call their representatives and their police chiefs....something that really makes a difference, instead of parading around like John Wayne waiting to get hassled by the cops or worse, getting disarmed by someone who your openly carried gun doesn't scare......

[The Rabbi]

What is it about open carry that seems to bring out the best in people??

[molonlabetn]

What is it about open carry that seems to bring out the best in people??

Same as anything else that is controversial.

And for the record, I don't think that anyone who doesn't OC is any less 'worthy', respectable, or capable of influencing freedom. We just don't agree, and some of you like to hypothesize grave consequences for actions which you disagree with. That's you prerogative, I suppose. The problem isn't with the opinion, it's with the mentality perpetuated by it... which falsely concludes that rights must be hidden to be protected.

[Guest Hyaloid]

I'm probably the LAST person on this board or any other board who needs to be encouraged to exercise their rights. I doubt very many others here REALLY, HONESTLY carry a full size pistol 365 days a year, attend as many classes as they can afford and make time for,teach the TN CCW classes, teach even more advanced classes, VOTE in every election, send emails and phone calls every time a gun vote comes up both in the TN legislature AND nationally and stay abreast of what is going on in both legislatures regarding those rights, not just paying attention when I'm told by the NRA magazine that something is going on. Who else here has the congressional switchboard phone # in their rolodex at work? Anyone?

Thanks for all of your hard work.

I had almost 200 hours of training time (classes and events like NTI, Warriortalk Symposium and Polite Society/Rangemaster Tac Conference) logged in 2006 and by end of this year I'll be at about 150 hours for 2007. What can I say I had to be a slacker this year because I spent more time teaching. And those training hours do not include matches I go shoot in or individual gunhandling and marksmanship practice I do by myself.

Great!

So suggesting that I don't exercise those rights or implying that I'm somehow not as serious about this as those who parade around making a spectacle of carrying a gun like some kid who just got his first cap gun [1]is just utter BS, and frankly offensive.

And to over generalize people who would advocate OC as 'kids' who 'parade around' is equally offensive.

The way I look at it is this. I'd rather be the "gray man" and not look all tactical or worse, look like I'm "proving a point"[2] by wearing my gun exposed. And don't give me the "open carry is a deterrant" argument. No, open carry makes you a target of attention by LE who hate people carrying guns. Not all LE are like that, but enough are. It also lets everyone on the street know you are armed, eliminating your greatest tactical advantage...the element of surprise and the attendant action vs reaction advantage you would have. I don't even wear "gun clothes". I don't want to advertise. But then again I'm not looking for attention.

That's YOUR personal choice, and I certainly appreciate that you carry, and like to carry concealed... and that doesn't make me angry one bit! I like it!

And don't think for a minute that the BGs ...REAL BGs are scared of your openly carried gun.If you are food they can still tell you are food even if you carry openly. It is not about the weapon on your hip, it is your body language and the way you carry yourself that bespeaks the weapon between your ears that they respect. Hell if they will try to disarm a COP, what makes you think you are scarier carrying openly than the police? Food with a gun is still food.

Hell, then why carry a gun at all... if I look like a Bacon Double Cheeseburger, then concealed ain't gonna help me either by that logic.

Too many guys think that strapping on their favorite safe queen custom pistol makes them ready to take on the world, or worse think they are making a political statement. Well guess what. The statement they are making is that they are far out of the mainstream of polite society and that they WANT ATTENTION[3]. Why are they craving that attention? If you want to make a political statement, I'll give out some email addresses and phone #s that will get a lot more done than wearing your gun for all to see at Burger King.

This has all been hashed out. I don't OC for political gain. I OC as the situation dictates and for comfort. Not every one that OCs is looking for attention, quite the contrary, I just want to be left the hell alone.

But that won't get them the personal attention they get when they "Cowboy up" [4]and strap on their favorite smoke wagon and stroll through the flea market. Those who are professionals don't flaunt their guns. They go about their business like professionals, not tell the world "look at me and my gun, I'm a big boy now!". [5]

So, more schoolyard remarks. Why can't you just accept that others may not agree with you without the name calling and divisive rhetoric?

Do I EVER carry openly? Yes. Rarely. But even then it is in my car if I'm not getting out and I was just going to run errands I don't need to get out of the car for. If I get out I cover it up. It is just not worth the loss of the element of surprise and not worth the potential problems to show off my gun.[6]

Your choice, and God Bless America, you are free to make it. Good on ya.

So if you guys that are so fired up about open carry want to do that then fine. But don't for ONE SECOND think that you are any more a defender of your rights than I am. I just look at it from an increasing my survivability standpoint not from a "feel good-making a statement-attention grabbing" standpoint. [7]

I don't look at it from a "feel good-making a statement-attention grabbing" standpoint" either. I just find it ironic the level of avarice one can garner from otherwise like-minded individuals, all from wanting to wear a pistol on the hip.

Look, if my statements offended you, then I apologize as it certainly was not the intent. It was a quick rehash of other rights that we are too often 'encouraged' to give up. I never said you didn't train. Never said you didn't call legislators. I cannot see where anyone else did either.

If you want to be Ghandi go ahead. If I see you getting roughed up by a cop like the guy in the story I'll be sure to pass on the word to the folks in the next class so I can get them fired up to call their representatives and their police chiefs....something that really makes a difference, instead of parading around like John Wayne[7] waiting to get hassled by the cops or worse, getting disarmed by someone who your openly carried gun doesn't scare......

John Wayne... I am most certainly not. And here you are assuming that none of us OCers make phone calls either? Rather presumptuous isn't it?

When we pro-gunners talk to anti-gunners, they almost always blow-up at us and start emotionally based attacks, and trump out how much smarter and more 'progressive' they are than us pro-gunnies. That was an awful long diatribe aimed at letting us know how well trained you are, and full of otherwise emotionally charged rhetoric and name calling. The similarities are ironic.

Look back, the numbers in [RED BRACKETS] in your post, indicate where you took the time to make disparaging comments or emotionally based rhetoric against OC. See how many of those could be used by antigunners to describe CC, or any firearm for that matter. I count at least 5. Let me be crystal clear, I am not calling you an antigun person by any stretch. I am not trying to convince you to OC. I could care less HOW you carry, I am just glad that you do. My point is that perhaps we should be careful how we advocate the concealing of weapons, lest that logic be used against us for all carrying of firearms.

Oh, and the other point is not all OCers are attention whores who take their safe queens out, strap them to their hip, just so they can walk around the local Burger King and pretend they are cops, or that they want to 'cowboy-up' like John Wayne. Some of us are nice guys that have thought out their position rather well, and it hurts our big boy egos to be called names.

[dariks]

It's fun to watch people on both sides get riled up about this.

On a serious note though.......both viewpoints have their merits but there is not one correct answer for everybody. Some prefer OC, while others prefer CC. Life would be pretty boring if people always agreed with each other.

[Guest Hyaloid]

What is it about open carry that seems to bring out the best in people??

Projection?

[Guest Hyaloid]

It's fun to watch people on both sides get riled up about this.

On a serious note though.......both viewpoints have their merits but there is not one correct answer for everybody. Some prefer OC, while others prefer CC. Life would be pretty boring if people always agreed with each other.

That's the thing... it's USUALLY only one side that gets riled up... and just like any debate, the riled up side is usually wrong.

*ducks for cover*

I keed I keed.

[Cruel Hand Luke]

For those who OC just for the sake of comfort, OK, I can maybe get on board with that. I think it gives up in the element of surprise more than it gains in deterrance, but that is just my opinion.

What I have the problem with is (and I have personally talked to way more than my fair share of these guys) when guys say "Well by goodness it's my right and I don't care what other people on the street think". "It's the Constitution and no Jack Booted Thug is gonna stop me" and all that crap that really makes me have to question whether there should be some kind of basic common sense test added to the CCW test.These are the "Look everyone I have a gun and you can't do anything about it because it is my right" crowd.THAT DOES NOT HELP OUR CAUSE. We do not need to be associated with that kind of behavior.

These are almost always the guys who hint that you are not really pro gun unless you wear a GOA hat, a "Waco -Never Again" T shirt and carry openly a 6" 44mag and have gun stickers all over your vehicle.Usually these are the same guys who carry a 1911 with the hammer down on an empty chamber in $6 nylon holster with a mag pouch attached to the holster. They tend not to vote, tend to spend a little too much time scanning the tree tops for black helicopters , almost never know who their Senators or Congressman is or how THEY vote,and honestly rarely even carry a gun at all.And yes I'm stereotyping A LITTLE, but I'm a lot closer to truth than not. While GOA is a fine organization and WACO was real American tragedy, that image does NOT help our cause!

Again, it is well within my rights to wear a lunch meat suit to the zoo. But climbing in the lion cage while so attired is not the wisest choice I can make. While it is well within your rights to drive 45 miles an hour on the interstate (assuming 45 is the minimum) it does not mean that that is wise to do either. It causes other drivers to react to you differently than if you were just driving somewhere near the speed limit. Carrying openly ESPECIALLY IN AN URBAN AREA causes a different response from people (especially cops) than if they do not know you are armed. And yes I know that it shouldn't be any different , but that just is not reality. No matter how much we would like for people to all be OK with being among armed folks, that just sadly is NOT reality. And when I was younger I railed against the way things are. But as i've gotten older I realize that things are the way they are and reality is reality whether I like it or not.Work smarter for change. Don't be a spectacle that hurts our image.

The other group I tend to run into are the ones who carry openly because it will "deter crime". Cops carry openly. Crime still happens. Some of them argue that the open carry allows faster access. True, but it also eliminates the chance to blend in. I'd rather not "show my hand" early in the card game. But most of these guys I talk to, I honestly think they just carry a gun openly to look cool. If that does NOT describe you then no worries. If it does, then maybe some rethinking of priorities is in order.

If no one here fits either of these stereotypes then great. But in my experience those are the two camps most likely to be predisposed to carry openly and question your ideals of liberty if you don't. And maybe I get a little pissed off when it sounds like someone is questioning my ideals of liberty. I do more than my share. I really wonder if they do . I know which original amendments of the bill of rights are which..without using Google. Do they?

I'll be honest. I tell everyone who comes through my class that it is 1000% legal to carry openly. But I don't recommend it unless you are on private property. They are free to do as they like, but common sense should always be in play. Reality is reality whether we like it or not.And I'm going to print off the first post of this thread and read it in class. Sending them out into the world armed but thinking that open carry is looked at as no big deal in urban areas would be just frankly irresponsible on my part.

Again, I teach this stuff. I do bear some moral responsibility if my students get hurt or killed so I look at this differently than the typical "It is my right" idealist. I'm not interested in my students winning arguments with police or anti gunners. I'm interested in helping them go home alive. And THAT is what overwhelmingly colors my view of this.

[towerclimber37]

So suggesting that I don't exercise those rights or implying that I'm somehow not as serious about this as those who parade around making a spectacle of carrying a gun like some kid who just got his first cap gun is just utter BS, and frankly offensive.

now THATS offensive!

You forget yourself sir... I neither require your approval nor do I seek it.

wow..this is the 4th time I've edited my post.

rarely do we on this board come across this vehemently.

I submit to you luke that perhaps out of all that training you do, you spend some time in a class room where the subject is tact and courtesy.

[Guest CrazyLincoln]

Hey, just on a side note. I know this guy, and he is credible. I bought one of my guns from him. On a side note, he open carries all the time. One day I was in there and he was talking about other instances when he was harassed for OC. Before I read the article, and when I read the thread, this was the first guy I thought of because I know how much he OC's

[DaveTN]

So what do you guys think…. Should I get a .45ACP or a 9MM?