JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
If you look at one of the online maps of crime reports, you will see that most crime is concentrated near large population centers, and less so in surrounding communities. The further away from those large metro areas the less crime there is.

E.G., my community, which is unincorporated and sparsely populated, is not that isolated because there is a small distance to both Portland and Hillsboro, the latter having gang crime problems. Crime does migrate out to my community from Hillsboro (less so from PDX, except maybe by way of Hillsboro).

Mollala OTOH, is more isolated but more densely populated. Some people in NW Orygun who haven't actually been there, don't even really know where it is without looking on a map.

So yes, proximity does matter. Other factors are whether a community is on a route between larger communities, and whether there are relationships between people living in the community and the larger population area.

Beyond that, I don't have a problem with people doing a neighborhood patrol/etc., I just think that the open carry was counter productive.
 
And open carry advocates are playing right into the hands of the anti-gunners.

Think about it, if even pro-gun people think open carry is often a stupid thing to do (e.g. walking through PDX with an AR-15 slung over your shoulder) in today's anti-gun political climate, do you really think it is effective or smart to convince those on the fence, that it doesn't give the anti-gunners even more ammo to point at you and say "there is an example of why we should ban guns"?

So you want to help the anti-gun crowd by dissing on law abiding people who open carry?
And did the guy open carrying use it in anew illegal way or in a crime?
If not then what is the problem? 100% legal. Oh but it will offend some one.... SO WHAT, let them run to their safe space and cry.... not my worry that America has become a bunch of panzies.o_O
 
So you want to help the anti-gun crowd by dissing on law abiding people who open carry?
And did the guy open carrying use it in anew illegal way or in a crime?
If not then what is the problem? 100% legal. Oh but it will offend some one....

So if I have a criticism that is a valid concern I can't voice it lest the anti-gunners pick up on it or I "break ranks" with pro-gun people?

Too late - the anti-gunners didn't need my help; all they need to do (and have done) is take a pic of someone carrying openly, and publish it to make their point to those who see gun ownership/owners as a possible threat. Nothing more need be said, but they do.

Do you really think that anti-gunners are so clueless that they need to come here and see my comments to make the connections?? :rolleyes:

I don't care if someone takes offense - obviously - or I wouldn't be making these posts here (get a clue from my username - I am resigned to not being popular with most people - most people, regardless of their position on any issue, don't like hearing the truth, and attack those who speak it).

I do care when people advocate to restrict my rights, and I care when the actions of those who are supposedly on my side of an issue, cause more harm than good, acting like spoiled children saying "it is my right to do so, so I am going to do it, and to hell with the consequences".

SO WHAT, let them run to their safe space and cry.... not my worry that America has become a bunch of panzies.o_O

So you don't care that they will vote and work towards taking your guns away?
 
They are going to try and do what they want anyway. It's my job as a law abiding gun owner to try and get the truth out that the law abiding gun owners are not the enemy, even if we are exercising our rights.
Have a nice life on the other side....:rolleyes:
 
LOL, you can try and argue up one side and down the other that visibly carrying a firearm will harm your right to carry. Well, I have news for you. If you are afraid to exercise your right for fear of losing it then the right doesn't exist in the first place. As for the community being fearful stop buying what the media tells you. I have been open carrying for more than 4 years and have done so both in Oregon and Washington, both in and out of cities. I have yet to encounter anyone that expressed any fear over it. Frequently people will say thanks though it is not necessary since I open carry for my own protection or the protection of family that may be with me. In fact the one place that a cop specifically stopped me to thank me was in downtown Seattle. I use to have people ask about it a couple of times a week however as it becomes more common this has declined to once every few months. (Rather than it making things worse it has had the opposite effect) As to how much crime is in any particular area it doesn't matter. People most often are caught off guard and unprepared where they feel the most comfortable. I don't simply put my seat belt on when I think I am in an area that I might get into an accident. I wear it every time I drive the car because I have no idea what will happen on a given day or trip. Will a criminal see me carrying today and decide to go elsewhere? I have no idea but I will be carrying in case it happens.
 
They are going to try and do what they want anyway. It's my job as a law abiding gun owner to try and get the truth out that the law abiding gun owners are not the enemy, even if we are exercising our rights.
Have a nice life on the other side....:rolleyes:

So you think that by walking around with an AR or AK on the street, and/or a Glock on your hip, is going to convince the undecided that "gun owners are not the enemy"?

Nobody to be feared?

Really? :rolleyes:
 
It's actually more of what I know through having directly witnessed it. When people see open carriers that are acting in a safe and responsible manner they are less likely to be bothered or notice it and are less likely to fear the presence of firearms. Those in the gun community that take the attitude that we need to hide our firearms just help those that want everyone to see it as abnormal behavior. Your just reinforcing their attitudes.
 
It's actually more of what I know through having directly witnessed it. When people see open carriers that are acting in a safe and responsible manner they are less likely to be bothered or notice it and are less likely to fear the presence of firearms. Those in the gun community that take the attitude that we need to hide our firearms just help those that want everyone to see it as abnormal behavior. Your just reinforcing their attitudes.

Or, you are just engaging in wishful thinking and not seeing that people in general today are not at all used to seeing firearms openly carried by civilians. I see and hear it all the time because most people don't know I am a "gun nut" and so they speak openly about it. I have never heard anyone who wasn't already a gun owner speak favorably of open carry - never - ever.

I don't reinforce their attitudes because I am silent on the issue, except here.
 
When people see open carriers that are acting in a safe and responsible manner they are less likely to be bothered or notice it and are less likely to fear the presence of firearms.

Is this like the open carriers that showed up at the WA legislature wearing gas masks and standing around racking the action on their AR's? If I saw someone walking down my street carrying an AR, they would quickly be in my cross hairs. My families safety in more important. I have no way of knowing if it is simply someone exercising their right or it is some nut job looking to do harm. Stop and think for a minute. If I and other gun owners feel this way, how do you thing the general public feels?
 
Is this like the open carriers that showed up at the WA legislature wearing gas masks and standing around racking the action on their AR's? If I saw someone walking down my street carrying an AR, they would quickly be in my cross hairs. My families safety in more important. I have no way of knowing if it is simply someone exercising their right or it is some nut job looking to do harm. Stop and think for a minute. If I and other gun owners feel this way, how do you thing the general public feels?
It seems some people here have proven the point I was trying to make: no one knows the attitude with which these people were carrying, what exactly and how exactly they were carrying, and that isn't even broached in the article. But now the thread has devolved into a pissing match about open carry, mostly in contexts not similar to a neighborhood patrol like in Mollalla. See how the issue just spins out of context? See how people assume the worst, like the Apologist, er, 'Heretic' who is calling these people idiots, or others saying they were waving around their guns, had AK's or AR's. Really? What if the three individuals who were mentioned carrying guns in the article/patrol, were grandfatherly types, old 1911's in their holsters, the kind who exude wisdom and calm, the kind you want to be carrying? It doesn't say that, but some of you assume the worst and project popular fear mongering propaganda onto an event you know (as far as anyone says) nothing about, except the scant content of the article. Some of you need to seriously bone up on your critical thinking skills, and check your heads: if people in Mollalla want to carry guns (in a manner no one seems to even know anything about) that's their right, and it's their deal. It' supposed to be a free country after all (it was anyways . . .)
 
Is this like the open carriers that showed up at the WA legislature wearing gas masks and standing around racking the action on their AR's?
FWIW, I was the master of ceremonies at that rally and was not happy that they did so. Regardless though, it was their right and I must support it. As to the damage done? Let's see now, they insured that it gained national attention. Beyond that? None, zip, nada.
 
When people see open carriers that are acting in a safe and responsible manner they are less likely to be bothered or notice it and are less likely to fear the presence of firearms.

Nope.

This is a post reflecting the attitude of somebody in an ideological bubble. @Heritic here is well grounded in the reality of the situation: frightening people does not win them over, and in fact, drives them away. It 'proves' to them that gun owners are a bunch of nut cases who do not understand what is appropriate.

I'd liken this to the "right" to swing my fists. This "right" ends at your nose. To make people feel unsafe ...especially with guns... is about as counterproductive and misguided as throwing people with a fear of water into a swimming pool.

The right to free speech allows us go stand up at a family dinner and make obscene jokes about nuns and children. But is it a good idea? Because you can do something does that mean you should?

No.
 
The whole point of the thread is no one knows how those in the patrol with guns were presenting themselves. As you say, Doc,
When people see open carriers that are acting in a safe and responsible manner they are less likely to be bothered or notice it and are less likely to fear the presence of firearms.
[Apparently Doc didn't say this, but at the time I quoted it, it looked to be his own posting. It appears edited now.]
And the poor journalistic skill of the article's author neglected to even give any representation of how the gun owners involved were 'behaving'. This wasn't some grotesque display of wag-it-in-your-face-gun-nuttery, these were people doing something responsible in their community. If you can't, or won't take care of your own, what good are you anyway? Again, with nothing more than the anti-gun sentiment of the article, no one knows the tone or demeanor of those carrying; it could of been completely appropriate for the scenario. I was hoping that someone familiar with the situation would speak up. Instead there is nothing but speculation and conjecture and assumptions, and judgement based on all that falsehood. It is mystifying how so many here turned an absolute lack of any knowledge of the event into some very hyperbolic evil gun image hysteria. Nothing grounded about creating a manure storm out of a fart.
 
Last Edited:
I find the open carry movement interesting because in all my years I have barely seen anyone actually open carrying in the city, or in the country in fact. My impression is that where open carry is more accepted is in the conservative areas but in the liberal areas its actually fought against... and Oregon is very much a liberal state now. As such, I have concerns open carry will do more harm to the cause than good... Didn't open carry get outlawed in California because open carriers kept doing it?

But what I don't have concerns with is with citizens taking action in their community. I think this is a very different situation than the open carry debate...

In the case of Mollala, or any other local, if the citizens feel crime is on the rise I don't need a formal study done to agree with them, they live there. Citizen patrols are, IMO, are not an act of vigilantism as long as they are only using their presence to deter crime by reporting suspicious activity... and considering the only reason cops carry guns if they chose to be armed that's well within the scope of the Second Amendment. And the reason I can support this is because I do know their intent. As an organized community effort to reduce crime, I have no problem if they open carry.
 
Open Carry in California was outlawed after Black Panthers decided to march around threatening and intimidating people. If we look at Texas though they were not allowed to open carry side arms. The images everyone sees of people open carrying AR15's and other long arms come from Texas primarily because that is all they could open carry. It also was all they could carry without getting a state permission slip. (It actually still is) As a result of activists doing so there they exposed the fact that they were not allowed to open carry side arms and the laws were changed. They now can do so although they need a concealed permit to do so. By exercising their right to the extent it was allowed they were able to restore some of what had been lost.
 
Or, you are just engaging in wishful thinking and not seeing that people in general today are not at all used to seeing firearms openly carried by civilians.

So, I wonder what your preferred recipe is, for getting ordinary people used to seeing guns. Other than carrying them openly...

The other thing about this discussion is that you are unlikely to change the minds of the OC crowd. We have heard all these arguments before, and we don't believe them. We are still going to OC. We think gun owners should come out of the closet, just like gays did. :)
 
Open Carry in California was outlawed after Black Panthers decided to march around threatening and intimidating people. If we look at Texas though they were not allowed to open carry side arms. The images everyone sees of people open carrying AR15's and other long arms come from Texas primarily because that is all they could open carry. It also was all they could carry without getting a state permission slip. (It actually still is) As a result of activists doing so there they exposed the fact that they were not allowed to open carry side arms and the laws were changed. They now can do so although they need a concealed permit to do so. By exercising their right to the extent it was allowed they were able to restore some of what had been lost.

Orygun isn't Texas - it is closer, both literally and politically, to California.
 
So, I wonder what your preferred recipe is, for getting ordinary people used to seeing guns. Other than carrying them openly...

Not sure - but a few isolated people, every once in a while, slinging an AR/AK over their shoulder and/or carrying a Glock on their hip, isn't the answer. That is much more likely to instill fear than to get them used to seeing guns.

Moreover, who said having people get used to seeing guns is the answer to protecting our 2nd Amendment rights??
 
(particularly, guns being used for reasonable tasks like neighborhood watch),
Yes, neighborhood watch is a reasonable task - but adding OC of a firearm into the mix elevates it to a form of de facto Law Enforcement. It essentially removes the 'watch' part of it and gives it a 'proactive' defensive positioning which is NOT what 'neighborhood Watch' is supposed to be. And what specifically would the carrier of the gun do in the event a crime was observed in progress? I hope nothing because carrying a gun while 'watching' does not give one any legal right to approach or detain someone - especially outside their own property line.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top