Bi-Mart in Gresham Anti-Open Carry

[dolooper]

I enjoy the freedom to have differing opinions and platforms worth debating over.
Your position is a justified platform worth a stance because it has merit. (I remember when the two party system was two parties that both had platforms of meritorious debate.)

However this issue runs deeper. This is not an issue of "no shirt, no service" or sensitivity to the feelings of others.
I don't mean to minimize or mock your position but to separate and define critical sentiment regarding the second amendment and draw a line on that deeper issue.

On the surface it is open carry and a business decision; underneath it is about freedoms, rights and a growing anti-gun sentiment that is getting worse.

• When and where do we collectively draw the line and mobilize to do so?
• Are there mobilized efforts towards minimizing gun rights and sway public sentiment that we should be more sensitive to and take a stand against?
• I suggest that there is reason to be concerned beyond the issue here and that gun owners make greater efforts to work together in every situation.

I submit that the place to draw the line in this regard is not on someone else's property.

 

[slimmer13]

So whose rights take priority, yours or the business owner?
The business owner of course.
It is their right to prevent you from exercising your right on their property if that is what they choose.
The comfort of others may be of no concern to you and that is your right, just understand that your thought process will probably result in consequences you may not like.

Those remarks were directed towards those who seem to have an issue with the concept of OC in general. Of course the business owner has the right to make all sorts of rules just like I have the right to shop elsewhere and the right to OC wherever its allowed.

 

[PolishedBrass]

I submit that the place to draw the line in this regard is not on someone else's property.

The line I am referring to doesn't have to do with the clear and obvious rights of others and their property and business.
That would be a silly position to take. You respect others lines and policies on their property ... period.

The line I am referring to is the eroding line of gun rights and that inherent danger for the future.

If every gun owner made their concerns known and unified and their position noted.
It would have impact on the populace, business owners and the government.

Then trends towards anti-gun would shift or revert.

 

[slimmer13]

Heres part of an essay that says it better than I can. You can find the whole thing here The Open Carry Argument

It Scares People:
One other statement against open carry I hear is that it damages public perception of firearms owners, or that by carrying openly we are not being good ambassadors to the public. While there are some people who have a genuine fear of firearms, due either to some horrible past experience or anti-gun indoctrination, the majority of people are either indifferent to them or quite fascinated by them. I've never kept track of the dozens of fellow citizens I've encountered who have marveled at the idea of open carry, but I do know exactly how many have expressed displeasure at it; one. People are scared of many things for many reasons; however, pretending those things do not exist only perpetuates the fear. Someone who is disturbed by open carry is going to be every bit as disturbed by concealed carry. The only effective way to overcome a fear is to come to the intellectual realization that the phobia is based on emotion and not on fact. By being a firsthand witness that a firearm was carried responsibly and peaceably, and wasn't being carried in the commission of a crime, one who was apprehensive about firearms discovers their fear is not fact based, but emotional. Thus, open carry can be a very effectual way of helping to overcome the emotionally based fear of the firearm. After all, you'd be much more likely to believe in ghosts if you saw one rather than if you listened to a ghost story around a campfire. In other words, we give significantly more credibility to the things we experience than we do to the things we hear. The bottom line is that this argument is made by people who don't, cant, or haven't carried openly; those of us who do so on a regular basis have an entirely different experience.