Originally Posted by TX Husker Fan

I think you'd have a hard time bringing it back to an open carry policy in most places. As far as I know only two states allow open carry, Vermont(who would guess in middle of extremist liberals), and Alaksa.

Originally Posted by LongRider

Actually most states do allow open carry. Only six specifically prohibit open carry two other have specific restrictions. Twelve states are what are called traditionally open carry specifically permit carry no permit licenses etc required. Eighteen others have no legal restrictions against open carry and 13 require license certification or registration As anti as the media is against carrying guns generally and openly hostile towards open carry it seems that any and all negative instances of open carry would be published far and wide.

Originally Posted by Hawker

There is a movement in this country involving open carry. Most of it is based on publically exercising 2A Rights and political activism.

Originally Posted by LongRider

I think one of the primary reasons to open carry is to show people that reasonable law abiding people carry guns. Let them see their fears are unfounded. That was once the case and hopefully will once again be that case. When enough people open carry and the public gets see to gun owners as normal rational law abiding citizens, the perception of all gun owners will improve thereby gaining support for SD carry of all kinds

Originally Posted by SelfDefense

I think this is absolutely the wrong reason to open carry. Flaunting your gun does nothing to educate the public. What about the 'rights' of the people who don't want to be around guns? Maybe they don't want to get used to people carrying guns. Consider some other 'rights.' I don't want my kids having to see men kissing in public though I respect their 'right' to do so. I don't want to see high school girls dress as prostitutes even though it is their 'right.' I don't want to be annoyed by religious prostheltyzing even though they have a 'right.'

You say to let them see their fears are unfounded. What if they are not afraid? I'm not afraid of the religious people at airports (oops, we passed a law against their 'right' to be annoying.) I just don't want them there. It would be even more unwelcome if I knew their 'primary purpose' was to let me see how there is nothing to fear from religious prosetheltyzers.

People who open carry should be doing so to defend themselves and their loved ones. Even though it is less tactically sound (than concealed carry,) I support open carry in all jurisdiction. But to open carry with the purpose of educating the public, or worse, educating LEO is arrogant in the extreme.

That people who open carry thinking that being confronted by LEO is a badge of honor is a despicable use of Second Amendment rights and endangers all of us who wish to protect our families. In my opinion, those who open carry where it is inappropriate do more to harm our cause (tying up LEO resources, frivolous lawsuits, worrying the public, negative media response) than any good they think they are accomplishing.

There are far better strategies to educate the public concerning guns than to cause a scene and rub their nose in their ignorance.

There is a 'right' to be a sheep if one so chooses.

Originally Posted by nlghthawk

Too much to read so I will just chime in for those who care.

Open carry seems like a way to invite trouble, concealment also allows you to remain anonymous, and provides you the element of surprise. No retention exercises when no one knows your carrying.

Originally Posted by Tubby45

Surprise:
Probably the most common condemnation of open carry comes from the armchair tacticians who believe it’s better to have the element of surprise in a criminal encounter. Although this was touched on in the previous paragraph about deterrence, I’ll expand on it specifically here because there are some important truths you need to consider before you lean too heavily on this false support. Surprise as a defensive tactic is based on unrealistic or ill-thought out scenarios. The circumstance where several street toughs surround and taunt you for a while like in some Charles Bronson movie is not realistic; the mugger wants to get in and out as fast as possible. In most cases you will have only seconds to realize what’s happening, make a decision, and react. Imagine you’re walking along the sidewalk when two gangsta looking teenagers suddenly appear at the corner coming in the opposite direction. You have only seconds to react if their intent was to victimize you. Do you draw your concealed firearm now or wait until there’s an actual visible threat? If they are just on their way to church and you pull a gun on them, you are the criminal and you may forever lose your firearms rights for such a foolish action. If you don’t draw and they pull a knife or pistol when they’re just a couple steps away, your only options are draw (if you think you can) or comply. Imagine staring at the shiny blade of a knife being held by a very nervous and violent mugger, three inches from your or your wife’s throat and having to decide whether or not you have time to draw from concealment. The element of surprise may not do you any good; in fact the only surprising thing that might happen is that your concealed carry pistol gets taken along with your wallet. The thug will later get a good chuckle with his buddies about how you brought a gun to a knife fight. The simple truth is that while surprise is a monumentally superior tactical maneuver, it is exclusively an offensive action, not a defensive one. I am not aware of any army that teaches using surprise as a defense against attack. No squad of soldiers goes on patrol with their weapons hidden so that they can ‘surprise’ the enemy should they walk into an ambush.