Federal appeals court tosses state ban on carrying concealed weapons (Page 2)

I don't think anyone's forcing you to carry a gun.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

It's been a minute since I was into this, so I'm sure there are better answers from those more up to date.

In general most people are NOT comfortable with civilians who open carry.  Unless you are in a unique state.  Texas, Montana, and such.  I mentioned earlier, that in Denver, it was suggested to conceal so you didn't get pinched for creating a disturbance walking into a McDonalds with a open carry weapon (even if it's legal).

Some carry proponents may also say that open carry make you the first target since you would be the one that would provide the most resistance if something should go down.  So take the open carry guy out first?

OTOH, I could argue that if someone came in to do something bad, and saw someone one on their hip, they may just turn around.  Open carry could be a deterrent?

There's obviously a lot of debate on the issue of concealed versus open carried and I don't profess to know all the pro's and con's.

For me personally, I would never carry openly because there a lot of people out there who are ignorant of guns and have been brainwashed to believe they are all bad.  If I were to walk through the mall many people would assume I was a bad guy and freak out "the stranger with a gun on his hip is going to shoot everyone call 911"

The other issue I have is if there is a real bad guy and he's up to no good I am telling him ahead of time that I'm the first one he needs to take out.  Concealed equals tactical advantage.  If the bad guy assumes nobody's armed then he won't single me out.

Agree completely and I do agree that open carry can be a deterrent as well.  However, that's what our fine law enforcement folks are for.  I'll let them be the deterrent, I just want to get my pack of skittles and go home.  (er i mean nutritious granola bar)

They're just afraid of all us gun toting bible thumpers.

That's the thing.  Nevada is a gun state if there ever was one and I NEVER see someone open carry.  If I do, I have to tell myself it's cool, but it never goes without thought/notice.  It draws attention.  Obviously in places where it's far more common (certain states and rural areas), it's probably the norm and doesn't create a stir.

I've lived in Nebraska for 11 years and we're a fairly gun friendly state (if you ignore Omaha city limits).  I've never seen anyone open carry.

If you do a search on youtube for "open carry" or "open carry incident" there are hundreds of video's of people getting questioned and or detained by the police simply because they were open carrying and somebody got scared and called 911.  In pretty much every case it's totally legal and often the police don't even know the law and think the person isn't allowed to carry openly.

It's pretty sad if you ACTUALLY think that will happen...

Or the flip side, if your friend were armed he would have been able to protect himself from said idiot with the bat.  Guarantee you had he presented a firearm badguy with a bat would have pulled a snagglepuss and exited stage left, even.

Well, I suppose that's my education right there.

OR, the the thugs COULD have had a gun and they felt they were comfortable beating someone up with a bat, but not shooting/killing someone so the result would have been exactly as it was.

That's the problem with the gun debate.  Everyone speculates on a situation and spins it to their side of the argument.

Same situation but someone speculates a gun would have been good, the other speculates the gun would have made it bad.  And I'm not sure which is right.

But it's speculation in the end.

Sorry, I need to correct this.  You CAN NOT be pulled over simply for someone THINKING you are here illegally.  You MUST have committed some other offense before you can be asked to show proper identification of being a US Citizen.  Why do people not get that?

On the guns - In Arizona you can conceal carry w/o a permit.  People cried that blood would run in the streets, it would be the wild west with shootouts everywhere.  Yeah, I'm pretty sure that didn't happen.  Allowing people to protect themselves (you are not required to protect anyone else) is an excellent step forward.  As a former IL resident, I applaud this decision.  I hope the legislature doesn't make this an idiotic attempt to put in place beyond restrictive requirements.  

The problem I have with that argument is the guys with the bat already chose to break the law. They already had criminal intent when they went home to get the bats and drove back to issue the beating. 

So if beating someone with a bat is against the law and they did it anyway, what is to stop them from breaking a law that says they can't have a gun?

All an anti gun law would do in this situation is insure that Tony's friend wasn't carrying as he is a law abiding citizen. All it does it make certain he can't defend himself from criminals. It does nothing to stop someone who has already decided to break the law.

A point mr2goggs has made before that I can agree with is as follows (if I have it right)... Anti gun laws work if there are no guns in the system already. But with as many guns as we have there is absolutely no way to stop someone from getting one, law or no law. 

So IMO, the only thing an anti gun law does is prevent the law abiding citizen from having one.

And yes, having a gun in your possession and being "under the influence" of alcohol or drugs is illegal. Under the influence means any presence whatsoever, even a BAC of .001 is illegal. So a drunk shooting up a bar is already breaking the law. 

I think the point you're missing is that the criminals are going to carry them whether it's legal or illegal.  So the laws make no difference for them.

We're talking about the ability for law abiding citizens who pass background checks and go through training (granted not enough training) the ability to carry a firearm to protect themselves or not.  Statistics have proven over and over again that the law abiding carriers are not going to increase the crime rate or danger to the city.  It seems like your only hangup is that people carrying legally will be more apt to commit crimes if they have a gun with them, and the statistics just don't support that.