Open Carry... Home Depot Vancouver

[ecricket]

Found this of interest.
Federal judge rules police cannot detain people for openly carrying guns
September 9, 10:16 PM

Open carriers (courtesy Oleg Volk)
On September 8, 2009, United States District Judge Bruce D. Black of the United States District Court for New Mexico entered summary judgement in a civil case for damages against Alamogordo, NM police officers. The Judge's straight shootin' message to police: Leave open carriers alone unless you have "reason to believe that a crime [is] afoot."
The facts of the case are pretty simple. Matthew St. John entered an Alamogordo movie theater as a paying customer and sat down to enjoy the movie. He was openly carrying a holstered handgun, conduct which is legal in 42 states ( <broken link removed> ), and requires no license in New Mexico and twenty-five other states. Learn more (<broken link removed>)
In response to a call from theater manager Robert Zigmond, the police entered the movie theater, physically seized Mr. St. John from his seat, took him outside, disarmed him, searched him, obtained personally identifiable information from his wallet, and only allowed him to re-enter the theater after St. John agreed to secure his gun in his vehicle. Mr. St. John was never suspected of any crime nor issued a summons for violating any law.
Importantly, no theater employee ever ordered Mr. St. John to leave. The police apparently simply decided to act as agents of the movie theater to enforce a private rule of conduct and not to enforce any rule of law.
On these facts, Judge Black concluded as a matter of law that the police violated Matthew St. John's constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment because they seized and disarmed him even though there was not "any reason to believe that a crime was afoot." Judge Black's opinion is consistent with numerous high state and federal appellate courts, e.g., the United States Supreme Court in Florida b. J.L. (2000) see <broken link removed> (detaining man on mere report that he has a gun violates the Fourth Amendment) and the Washington Appeals Court in State v. Casad (2004) see http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/gunstuff/legal/State_v_Casad_(unpublished).pdf (detaining man observed by police as openly carrying rifles on a public street violates the Fourth Amendment). Mr. St. John's attorney, Miguel Garcia, of Alamogordo, NM was pleased with the ruling and look forward to the next phase of the litigation which is a jury trial to establish the amount of damages, and possibly punitive damages. Garcia said that
"t was great to see the Court carefully consider the issues presented by both sides and conclude that the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from detaining and searching individuals solely for exercising their rights to possess a firearm as guaranteed by our state and federal constitutions."
Notably, Judge Black denied the police officers' requested "qualified immunity," a judicially created doctrine allowing government officials acting in good faith to avoid liability for violating the law where the law was not "clearly established." In this case, Judge Black concluded that
"[r]elying on well-defined Supreme Court precedent, the Tenth Circuit and its sister courts have consistently held that officers may not seize or search an individual without a specific, legitimate reason. . . . The applicable law was equally clear in this case. Nothing in New Mexico law prohibited Mr. St. John from openly carrying a firearm in the Theater. Accordingly, Mr. St. John's motion for summary judgment is granted with regard to his Fourth Amendment and New Mexico constitutional claims. Defendants' motion for summary judgment is denied with regard to the same and with regard to qualified immunity."
Judge Black's opinion and order is welcome news for the growing number of open carriers across the United States. Though police harassment of open carriers is rare, it's not yet as rare as it should be - over the last several years open carriers detained without cause by police have sued and obtained cash settlements in Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Virginia, (see additional settlement http://hamptonroads.com/node/491877), and Georgia. More cases are still pending in Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.
Judge Black's opinion and order can be read <broken link removed>.
NOTE: Mathew St. John's attorney, Miguel Garcia, is an associate at John R. Hakanson PC, 307 11th St., Alamogordo, NM 88310 and can be reached at Miguelo.Garcia AT gmail.com.

 

[Oohrah]

Well, don't know what to tell you, but no, firearms can be a matter of policy and ya might need to sneak some! The State Hospital in Salem, no clue if you have ever been there, but firearms. tasers, and knives, and a list of other things do not go through entery door. They all go into the transport's lock box. Once buzzed in with your prisoner, four good steps to the left is a short narrow holding cell, where restraint devices from the hospital are put on, and ours taken off (Cuffs. belly chain, and leg cuffs) We leave, and the responsibility belongs to the state until asked to remove him.
Reservation land depends on tribal leadership and what the circumstances are. I suppose if you get into a South Dakota shoot out like when FBI people were killed, probably no rule book. Crimes on reservation for the most part handled by them. As a citizen and a member of the Marine Corps League's Honor Detail, we have been awarded permission to bring onto Reservation land, four M1 Garands (Klamath, Calif.) for military honors funerals. As a member of LEOs, I would never enter these lands without that permission was granted for firearms possession. It's also a matter of respect of their law.
The Sheriff's office and the courtroom are in the same building. Firearms are checked in. Camera's through out, and yep sometimes there are some issues. Don't know if you have heard of some LEOs that went to the Sturgis Motorcycle ralley, that were not from that area. Seems there was an incident between them and a ****'s Angel. A firearm was drawn. The LEOs arrested and held until a court hearing. The Angel walked. Things got sorted out ranging from juristdiction and being from out of state to you name it. Yep, charges I believe were dropped. However, it truely ruined their trip, and had to spend some lock up time. No matter who was right or wrong, they briefly lost their freedom for awhile. Wouldn't supprise me if the authorities did it because they could. An underlying factor is this is a neutral event for motorcyle 1&#37;ers. The Angels are responsible enforcement for the event. There are not sufficient LEOs in the area to handle 100s of thousands of outside vistors, so go figure!
Believe me when I tell you if you are in a sensitive place and situation, a simple ID and badge doesn't always a solution make. Also many Chiefs and Sheriffs will take you out of the picture should you use it for special care. In your area, I would have no clue.
I can recall a few years back that some kind of a public event occured in the Portland area. Even if you had a CHL, there was a ban in that area of firearms legal or not. My boss would drum me out of the Corps, or anyone else, if they ever badged in a situation.
But not to worry, a little common sense probably goes a long way!!!!!

 

[stonedkirby]

i would probally just conceal it before going into stores to avoid problems. I can understand employees getting concerned. Its like...you can tell someone like a guest or friend not to open carry or carry at all on your property if it makes you uncomfortable. But when you go into a store, the employees dont really have a say on a corporate run company if theres no rule against guns...so they'd have to just grin and bare feeling anxious and nervous while working. that sucks. I wouldnt feel that way, im just saying, its common courtesy...Maybe if and when open carry progresses in the northwest, it will be less of a issue, but until then, i say do not open carry in stores...just my .02

 

[wichaka]

Not sure where you got the info on the LEO/Sturgis thing...that was an acquaintance of mine from the Seattle area. No lock up, the HA was killed, all charges dropped, and his family had to move. I talk with him now and then.

As for the state hospital, yep its treated like a jail, so no weapons allowed in their and for good reason.

I have several reservations near me...Yakima, Warm Springs, Umatilla, haven't met one yet around here where any tribal cared.

 

[gunnoob75]

So, do we print out that Response from Home Depot, and go open-carry in-store?

 

[soberups]

I have a right to open carry while shopping.

I also have a right to wear a pink Speedo while shopping.

I choose to do neither.

I support the right of open carry for those who wish to do so, but I do not feel that they are going to accomplish what they are after by carrying publicly in places where they are likely to draw negative attention to themselves.

I also feel that open carry places one at a tactical disadvantage compared to concealed carry.

I have a permit, so I choose concealed carry.

 

[LoneRider]

I have OC'd in many Home Depot's and never had a problem. I find their customer service to be much better than Lowe's. I was a big fan of Eagles, but it went down when Lowe's took over.

I always chuckle at the tired and worn arguments against OC.

"You lose a tactical advantage" I'm sorry, isn't the element of surprise an offensive advantage as opposed to a defensive one? In all the years I have heard this "reasoning" no one has ever cited a document case of the good OC'er being gunned down first in some attack. Why is it that we don't have cops killed every day as they OC and by this theory they are all targets.

Maybe, just maybe, it is because, like police, OC provides a deterrent effect. When the bad guys see cops, they tend to go elsewhere. Maybe that holds for if they see someone OC as well. It is hard to count the crimes that didn't happen because the BG was deterred. What we DO know is that prison interviews with felons show a preference for unarmed victims, and that when a criminal believes their mark is armed, they generally find an easier target. Sure, one madman may go after you first when he snaps, but he'll be snapping anyway. So really, you have the same risk as if you were CC. If you are there when it happens, you may be first. Now if there was some evidence that OC caused people to snap and gun things up, I might consider it an increased risk.

The easiest gun fight to win is the one you avoid. I am sure there are many times more BG deterred by OC than there are ones who would take it as a challenge.


"We do a disservice to the cause" As others have pointed out, a right unexercised is lost. Now certainly there is a "right" and a "wrong" way to OC. Behave in a responsible and adult fashion, be polite and willing to educate should someone ask questions. Dress like a productive member of society instead of a banger or thug. Let people see that gun people are "normal" and it can go along way towards "normalizing" the acceptance of guns by society.

Look at it this way, how did gays manage to eventually get acceptance? By coming out of the closet and forcing people to acknowledge and face the fact that they exist and are part of society. Sure, there are the over the top, in your face ones that perpetuate the stereotypes and do the others a disservice, but they are the minority in their group and every segment of society has those types of folks.

To say that no one should be open and be themselves and OC because some can control themselves or because some folks are not gong to be accepting only sets gun owners up to be further ostracized. The less OC becomes the "norm" the easier it is for the anti's to argue it as being wrong or something only lunatics do.

Rights are rights whether they offend or not. The only time they should be limited is when they infringe on the rights of others. Being "offended" is not an infringement of your right. I am offended by many things and common sights these days, but absent something being illegal, my choice is to avoid it or ignore it. Those folks who disagree with how I exercise my rights can make the same decision.

I am the same person whether I am CC or OC (and I do both, about 95&#37; CC). Sometimes it is just a decision to exercise my right, sometimes it is a comfort issue, sometimes I just head out of the house and don't even think about it. I carry a gun every day, and have for the past 10 years or so (when legal). The novelty wore off long ago and it is simply another thing I carry like my wallet, keys, and cell phone. I think many of the folks like to accuse those who OC (or CC for that matter) as trying to "prove" something are projecting their own motives to shock or impress people in other ways to others. Get over it already.

 

[BUZO71]

"I have OC'd in many Home Depot's and never had a problem. I find their customer service to be much better than Lowe's. I was a big fan of Eagles, but it went down when Lowe's took over.

I always chuckle at the tired and worn arguments against OC.

"You lose a tactical advantage" I'm sorry, isn't the element of surprise an offensive advantage as opposed to a defensive one? In all the years I have heard this "reasoning" no one has ever cited a document case of the good OC'er being gunned down first in some attack. Why is it that we don't have cops killed every day as they OC and by this theory they are all targets. "

Actually, for a civilian, it should be about about surprise. If you OC, a good killer is going to take you out first. Beslan, Russia 9/1/04- Terrorists take over the school on its first day. First killed- all likely to give them a fight. First killed in Beslan, local officers and an armed civilian.

"Maybe, just maybe, it is because, like police, OC provides a deterrent effect. When the bad guys see cops, they tend to go elsewhere. Maybe that holds for if they see someone OC as well. It is hard to count the crimes that didn't happen because the BG was deterred. What we DO know is that prison interviews with felons show a preference for unarmed victims, and that when a criminal believes their mark is armed, they generally find an easier target."

I agree with that.


" Sure, one madman may go after you first when he snaps, but he'll be snapping anyway. So really, you have the same risk as if you were CC. If you are there when it happens, you may be first. Now if there was some evidence that OC caused people to snap and gun things up, I might consider it an increased risk. "

I will say this. If someone is going to attack you with a gun, you are now fighting for your gun- both of you. Hope you have what it takes to keep your gun. If an officer is fighting for his gun, he just needed to keep it in his triple retention holster and call fifty of his closest friends for help. If you are fighting for your gun in a no retention leather John Wayne holster, guess what, you are hoping for some nice person who wants to get involved.

Ever had to fight for your gun? It sucks- even with a triple retention holster for 30 seconds

"The easiest gun fight to win is the one you avoid. I am sure there are many times more BG deterred by OC than there are ones who would take it as a challenge. "

When do you decide to avoid a gun fight. When it happens it happens. If you are OC'ing you shown the BG your hand. He has his time to plan his attack- you can only react.


""We do a disservice to the cause" As others have pointed out, a right unexercised is lost. Now certainly there is a "right" and a "wrong" way to OC. Behave in a responsible and adult fashion, be polite and willing to educate should someone ask questions. Dress like a productive member of society instead of a banger or thug. Let people see that gun people are "normal" and it can go along way towards "normalizing" the acceptance of guns by society."

I'll say it again, feel free to OC. Also plan for people to call in. Unless you believe you will be the next Moses and speak to the masses.

"Look at it this way, how did gays manage to eventually get acceptance?"

Them and their supporters voted. Look at smokers.

"To say that no one should be open and be themselves and OC because some can control themselves or because some folks are not gong to be accepting only sets gun owners up to be further ostracized. The less OC becomes the "norm" the easier it is for the anti's to argue it as being wrong or something only lunatics do.

Rights are rights whether they offend or not. The only time they should be limited is when they infringe on the rights of others. Being "offended" is not an infringement of your right. I am offended by many things and common sights these days, but absent something being illegal, my choice is to avoid it or ignore it. Those folks who disagree with how I exercise my rights can make the same decision."

Agreed.

"I am the same person whether I am CC or OC (and I do both, about 95&#37; CC). I am not out to flaunt the size of my pecker, intimidate anyone or cause a reaction. Sometimes it is just a decision to exercise my right, sometimes it is a comfort issue, sometimes I just head out of the house and don't even think about it. I carry a gun every day, and have for the past 10 years or so (when legal). The novelty wore off long ago and it is simply another thing I carry like my wallet, keys, and cell phone. I think many of the folks like to accuse those who OC (or CC for that matter) as trying to "prove" something are projecting their own motives to shock or impress people in other ways to others. Get over it already."

Thank you.

On to other posts- As far as LEO carry goes, there is quite a bit of latitude given due to HR 218. Actually tribes can refused to allow- they have the right. I guess since they didn't use that right they lost it???? LOL most, in Oregon, have never had a problem- that I know of. State locations in Oregon- Jails and prisons are a given. federal locations and airports past the secure area as well as on aircraft.

 

[smithmax]

BUZ made a point about fighting over your gun, and it made me wonder something. What type of holster you guys OCing with? My external holster is a lvl2 Serpa and I feel pretty confidant about it's retention abilities (at least that someone is not going to be able to just snatch away, they'll really have to try).

 

[BUZO71]

Well, I had a "state of the art" triple retention(SLS070) when I started. Facing me, someone that could recognize that holster, reached across and released the first two retentions. Then the fight was on.

Make no mistake, if a guy wants your gun, its a FIGHT. See the popular holsters are the hardest to protect because every con and idiot is practicing on taking guns from those holsters.

but, we are hijacking... sorry

 

[LoneRider]

As I said, yo' think if it was such a problem, these things would be happening all the in popular OC states/areas. And yet, no documented cases of it happening. Theory is one thing, fact is another.

The Beslan school takeover - Seriously? that is what you pick for a representative example? Yup, those things happen every day. A well coordinated attack by a force of 20-30 terrorists. CC vs OC is going to make all the difference in that type of situation.

I realize all the bad stuff that happens out there, I get calls about it 8-12 hours a day. I suppose if you are prone to fantasy you can ponder being the hero when some extremely focused, "good killer", is going to make an assault. Me, I'll plan for the more likely threat of common thugs who are opportunistic and take advantage of the moment.

One difference in the likelihood of being in a fight to retain your weapon vs. a cop - Cops spend a lot of time up close and personal with bad guys and being in a situation where the BG might decide to go for it. They are frequently hands-on with BG and trying to get them to comply, so yes it happens.

If you are a "civilian" and carry a gun (OC or CC) you should probably exercise a little more awareness than the average joe. When I am carrying NO ONE gets that close to me. Sure it could happen that someone bum rushes you and the fight is on, but again you just don't see it actually happening.

 

[Benny503]

Yeah. pull your shirt over it, Go about your business and quit intimidating the public. We gun owners have enough trouble as it is.

I am a pro carry concealed and this statement really disappointed me. People have the right to exercise their right is the first thing. Second thing the op said the mom think is wrongfully to carry handgun around... dont we all see what is happening to this country? Almost Everyone think that good american citizen carry handgun are bad... only LE can carry handgun. People whom open carry is a A plus on my book, they exercise their right add educating americans that is OK to carry it's not only LE can carry. And why dont I carry open? My gf work in beauty salon, for her job she have to dressed up all the time and she is very well stylist. She bought me all my clothes all the clothes that I wear make me look like some young hip hop kid. So I concealed carry just to be under other people radar.

 

[Benny503]

Oh.... I am getting all my friends 'recieves from Lowes and make copy of it send it HD and telling them that because they dont allow me in the area for being carry

Does anyone have the HD mailbox that I can send it to? Pershap someone please write a letter so we call can use it and send it to HD?

 

[claypigeon]

Wow! Eight pages in two days. I would say everyone might have to "agree to disagree" on the oc/cc issue.

 

[LoneRider]

Oh.... I am getting all my friends 'recieves from Lowes and make copy of it send it HD and telling them that because they dont allow me in the area for being carry

Does anyone have the HD mailbox that I can send it to? Pershap someone please write a letter so we call can use it and send it to HD?

HD corporate policy is not against OC, read the post where the OP got a reply. The person at the store made a mistake. Don't boycott HD for the improper action of one of the employees.

 

[BUZO71]

As I said, yo' think if it was such a problem, these things would be happening all the in popular OC states/areas. And yet, no documented cases of it happening. Theory is one thing, fact is another.

The Beslan school takeover - Seriously? that is what you pick for a representative example? Yup, those things happen every day. A well coordinated attack by a force of 20-30 terrorists. CC vs OC is going to make all the difference in that type of situation.

Actually it would have. I guess studying it gives you a different perspective. Within the first twenty minutes of that takeover, all viable threats were killed instantly. Also within that twenty minutes, an unseen threat could have saved lives by taking out two terrorists. If terrorism is a FAR OUT concept for you, consider this.

Tacoma Mall. Single active shooter in a mall. A CC carrier pulls his weapon and verbally challenges the shooter- Shooter turn to see the guy with a gun- same as being OC. Now the shooter will be proactive and takes a shot at the CC holder. t takes the human brain 1.5 second to perceive and react to a threat. The CC holder is now at a disadvantage. Right or Wrong? Answer- right- shooter wounds the CC holder and puts him down. "During the course of the shooting, Brandon (Dan) McKown, a legally armed citizen, intervened. McKown drew his 9mm CZ pistol, and verbally commanded Maldonado to put down his gun. Maldonado's response was to fire on McKown, striking him once in the leg and four times in the torso, damaging McKown's spine and leaving him paralyzed. In addition to McKown, five other people were shot but not seriously injured, and a seventh person received a non-gunshot injury. At least one other person in the mall at the time also pulled a gun on Maldonado but did not fire for fear of hitting innocent bystanders."

I realize all the bad stuff that happens out there, I get calls about it 8-12 hours a day. I suppose if you are prone to fantasy you can ponder being the hero when some extremely focused, "good killer", is going to make an assault. Me, I'll plan for the more likely threat of common thugs who are opportunistic and take advantage of the moment.

Don't you think you should plan to protect yourself and the ones you love?

One difference in the likelihood of being in a fight to retain your weapon vs. a cop - Cops spend a lot of time up close and personal with bad guys and being in a situation where the BG might decide to go for it. They are frequently hands-on with BG and trying to get them to comply, so yes it happens.

If you are a "civilian" and carry a gun (OC or CC) you should probably exercise a little more awareness than the average joe. When I am carrying NO ONE gets that close to me. Sure it could happen that someone bum rushes you and the fight is on, but again you just don't see it actually happening.

That is a little short sighted. Cops walk around just like you do. True they can get up close and personal with BG's but are you telling me you have never practiced to fight for your gun? You are doing yourself and the people around you a big disservice.

You can't say people don't get within ten feet of you. Ever go to the bank? How about to the store?

if you are advertising that you have a gun, someone could easily try to take it from you. If you have no plan on how to handle that, you should leave your gun at home.

 

[gunnoob75]

Thank you for being respectful in this discussion, Buzo!

 

[ob1]

Wakejoe.... 'Cause Home Depot being gun-friendly sounds like a good thing.
And as far as the lady who may take offence; Her mind was already made up. And will she ever be in a position that it matters? No.

YES !!!! It does matter ! Yes alot of people have and will continue to have negative attitudes about firearms carry. The problem is that the episode like the one discussed in this thread is not unique. We just dont usually hear about them unless we know the person involved.

This person doesn't matter ? What could she do that would effect us anyway ?
A She votes.
B She spreads her version of this encounter to others.
C She contacts her favorite dim-bulb politician, who jumps on the scenario for further justification of his new anti-carry campaign.

"Start with a person who already has a negative attitude about guns. Add an experience where they themselves or someone close to them is made to feel threatened or intimidated. Add seasoning to taste and chill overnite. Congratulations ! You have just created the next anti-gun activist ! "

 

[LoneRider]

Actually it would have. I guess studying it gives you a different perspective. Within the first twenty minutes of that takeover, all viable threats were killed instantly. Also within that twenty minutes, an unseen threat could have saved lives by taking out two terrorists. If terrorism is a FAR OUT concept for you,

I'll still say the Beslan example is ridiculous. I am certainly a fan of the extreme for the sake of making a point, but that is just not a likely scenario in the areas I visit. Ok, you maybe take out 1-2 of the terrorists. Doesn't really change the outcome, and possibly worsens it.

Tacoma Mall. Single active shooter in a mall. A CC carrier pulls his weapon and verbally challenges the shooter- Shooter turn to see the guy with a gun- same as being OC. Now the shooter will be proactive and takes a shot at the CC holder. t takes the human brain 1.5 second to perceive and react to a threat. The CC holder is now at a disadvantage. Right or Wrong? Answer- right- shooter wounds the CC holder and puts him down...

Well aware of the Tacoma mall shooting. I disagree with your conclusion that drawing your cc and challenging an active shooter is the same as OC. Had he simply been OC, he may have gone unnoticed by the shooter. What drew the shooters attention was the verbal challenge.

Had he simply taken the shot, it may have had a different ending. It was judgment and tactical errors, not OC that caused him to be shot. Life isn't like TV, and screaming "Freeze" or "Drop the gun" doesn't suddenly make a madman sane and rational.

Don't you think you should plan to protect yourself and the ones you love?

That is a little short sighted. Cops walk around just like you do. True they can get up close and personal with BG's but are you telling me you have never practiced to fight for your gun? You are doing yourself and the people around you a big disservice.

I never said any such thing. What I said was that it is an extremely unlikely situation. That doesn't mean that I haven't prepared and planned for it. I use a retention holster if I OC, and I have hand-to-hand experience courtesy of Uncle Sam.

My point was using the number of time officers have to fight to retain their weapon isn't a valid comparison since they have a completely different situation.

Additionally, should someone make a grab for my gun I don't have the same considerations or restrictions that a cop does. As far as I am concerned, a grab attempt is a lethal force situation and I will address it accordingly by either retaining and using my OC piece, or drawing my BUG and using it.

You can't say people don't get within ten feet of you. Ever go to the bank? How about to the store?

if you are advertising that you have a gun, someone could easily try to take it from you. If you have no plan on how to handle that, you should leave your gun at home.

Yes people do get within 10' of me, but I keep my strong side away from people and position my self so they are not in a blind spot or have easy access. When I OC, I carry at 3 o'clock and use my arm to block the gun as well. In fact while I am legally considered OC, it is still mostly hidden from others view by body position and my arm.

"Easily try" and "easily take" are two different things. I do have a plan, again you're assumption that someone who OC's doesn't is wrong.

As another poster said, it may just be time to agree to disagree. I am not saying OC is always right, in fact (as I posted) I do CC most of the time. My point is that it is legal, and people should look at all the considerations and decide for them self. Others should respect that instead of having the infighting amongst gun owners splitting our group.

Anti-s want to force their beliefs on others and say "Guns are wrong, no one should have one". Part of what makes gun owners different is we respect personal decision, if you don't want a gun - fine. Just don't screw with my right to have one.

Many anti-OC folks are no different with their belief of "OC is wrong, no one should do it". If you don't wish to do it, fine. I see no reason to disrespect others who choose differently. Sure, some may go about it the wrong way, but there are plenty of CC folks who set a poor example as well.

 

[LoneRider]

Start with a person who already has a negative attitude about guns. Add an experience where they themselves or someone close to them is made to feel threatened or intimidated. Add seasoning to taste and chill overnite. Congratulations ! You have just created the next anti-gun activist !

Start with a person who is indifferent or has misconceptions about guns. Add an experience where they see normal, everyday folk carrying guns in a responsible manner. Add educational discussion, present factual information, and let them simmer overnight. Congratulations! You have just created a convert to understanding the right to bear arms.

I have not had a single negative experience while OCing. I have had several positive ones ranging from "Really, that is legal? GOOD! It should be" to "Things are out of control, I've been thinking about getting a gun for protection, thanks for the info".

The ones who are against guns already have their minds made up. They are lost to us, and nothing we do will change that. These folks will only change their mind when they have some personal, life changing event. The person with the negative attitude is already voting for gun control measures and working against us. It is the "Independents" we need to reach. The ones who haven't made up their mind and are open to receiving input or maybe a nudge to educate themselves and explore the idea with an open mind.