Every time some fanatical 'Open Carry' attention-hog videotapes himself acting like a punk in an attempt to get a rise out of regular folks and LEO's, I cringe as I know the blow-back is going to be immediate and real, and almost always with a negative impact on access for actual level headed open-carriers.
Seriously guys, don't do us any favors.
The fact that YouTube can make 1 of a 1000 of these interactions 'famous' for a day just keeps motivating them to keep going out and pushing the limits under the guise of Open Carry 'advocacy'.
The rest of us have to start calling BS on it.
The guy in the image below, Jim Cooley, decided to film himself wandering through the airport in Atlanta with an AR and what looks like a double drum mag:
 |
| Atlanta Airport Open Carry Advocate |
Even though the original thought was to include video news stories, I am actually making a conscious decision to not embed or link to any of Mr Cooley's videos as it's just more of the same old nonsense.
In fact, I propose the following -
As some of these guys seem to love mentioning lawsuits, let's put it in language they can understand.
1) If an open carry advocate is warned by a concerned (and armed) citizen not to enter or approach and is then engaged by and shot by the same concerned (and armed) citizen and the advocate's rifle was in, or entered the SUL, Port Arms, or Guard / Ready positions, then no civil lawsuits can be filed against the shooter. A move into the Guard / Ready or SUL position after being warned to 'get back' shall be in itself considered an aggression that warrants lethal force.
2) If an open carry advocate telegraphs his possession of a weapon and the advocate is robbed by being overpowered or by being 'slow on the draw' during a filmed session in which the primary reason for Open Carry was "Showboating", "Entertainment" (making videos for a named YouTube channel), Personal Brand Marketing (trying to be famous) or out-and-out Disorderly Conduct, then he shall be liable for Failure to Maintain Possession and any civil lawsuits resulting from the weapon's use in future crimes.
I am about as pro Open Carry as they get, especially in times of social unrest, natural disaster, and even during protests, but the fact is we have no idea if these guys are on the same page as us and for all we know they could be getting paid to make these videos by anti-gun crowds specifically intending to flood the Internet with videos that garner support from almost zero sensible folks, immediately fuel the anti-gun opposition, and if anything forces management in venues like Airports to scramble to support and push any legislation that keeps it from happening again.
If these guys keep it up, mark my word, we will all lose our rights to Open Carry even when we actually need it most - "the blow-back is immediate, and real and almost always with a negative impact on access for actual level headed open-carriers."
I am about as pro Open Carry as they get, especially in times of social unrest, natural disaster, and even during protests, but the fact is we have no idea if these guys are on the same page as us and for all we know they could be getting paid to make these videos by anti-gun crowds specifically intending to flood the Internet with videos that garner support from almost zero sensible folks, immediately fuel the anti-gun opposition, and if anything forces management in venues like Airports to scramble to support and push any legislation that keeps it from happening again.
If these guys keep it up, mark my word, we will all lose our rights to Open Carry even when we actually need it most - "the blow-back is immediate, and real and almost always with a negative impact on access for actual level headed open-carriers."
JP
