Did people ever open carry guns in LA or San Francisco? (felons, school)

[christianity]

Originally Posted by Electrician4you

Orange County. Aka OC
The other OC Open Carry

That wasn't it. You said oc is big county.......

[majoun]

Originally Posted by Electrician4you

It was not very common in big counties (LA OC SD), until a bunch of people decided "to exercise their rights" and the governor and legislative arm took a giant fist and squashed them. I get why they were protesting, but I think they were going about it the wrong way. I personally DGAF if someone wants to open carry. The problem was a bunch of people decided to carry AR 15s, pistols, rifles etc to protest. Cops were called by citizens because it wasn't a common sight. So it became a big deal. At least in big cities. Mostly because a CCW is hard to get in some counties in So Cal people were protesting. I think a CCW should be a simple walk in with your gun safety and a CCW training course completed paperwork and that's that. You f up its your azz that's gonna fry.
I've seen guys OC on motorcycles , in some restaurants etc. never cared much. The thing is those aren't the guys that start unloading. It's the guy who thinks the world wronged him in dime way and he's going to show everyone how wrong they are. Usually with the sound of bullets. Those people just don't function correctly.

OC only became a "big county" towards the very end of the period in which open carry was legal.

But to answer the original question, no, it was not common in L.A., S.F., S.J., etc. but more common in rural areas and small towns

[neutrino78x]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

You will be much more in need of a gun to defend yourself in a big city than you are in the outskirts and open land.

Nope. In any plausible self defense scenario, martial arts applies. The only time it doesn't is if they are more than 21 feet away, and the bad guy can't take your wallet while he's standing 22 feet away.

The thing is someone with a ccw permit is 7 times less likely to commit a crime than the average citizen.

We don't know if that is true of the particular individual in question, though. That particular person could be 7 times MORE likely to commit a crime.

They are even less likely to commit a crime than police officers.

Police officers rarely commit crimes.

We should be encouraging those who wish to carry concealed to get a permit. They should also be issued to anyone who wants one after passing a background check.

No, there needs to be a little bit more to it than that. For example, I would want them to demonstrate proficiency in using the weapon, and pass a psychological screening.

Just imagine if an elected office decided a gay couple shouldn't get a marriage license because they believe they don't have enough need for one. Oh wait, that happened and the media and liberals were rightfully up in arms. They should be just as upset that elected officials are doing the same to gun owners that want to protect themselves and their family.

No, because a firearm is a weapon. Being gay is not a weapon. Being gay is not designed to hurt people.

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by neutrino78x

Nope. In any plausible self defense scenario, martial arts applies. The only time it doesn't is if they are more than 21 feet away, and the bad guy can't take your wallet while he's standing 22 feet away.



We don't know if that is true of the particular individual in question, though. That particular person could be 7 times MORE likely to commit a crime.



Police officers rarely commit crimes.



No, there needs to be a little bit more to it than that. For example, I would want them to demonstrate proficiency in using the weapon, and pass a psychological screening.



No, because a firearm is a weapon. Being gay is not a weapon. Being gay is not designed to hurt people.

Back with martial arts, I'll ask my grandmother if she thinks she will be able to learn martial arts.



Owning a gun is a civil right, ones sexual orientation is not a civil right and marriage isn't a civil right.


It is scary how you want the government to confiscate civil rights and sell them back to you and the government discretion.

[neutrino78x]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

Back with martial arts, I'll ask my grandmother if she thinks she will be able to learn martial arts.

Ask Ip Chun, he's 84. Or Dan Inosanto, he's 78.

Owning a gun is a civil right, ones sexual orientation is not a civil right and marriage isn't a civil right.

"Owning a gun" is not a civil right. Keeping and bearing arms is. You can have a sword and exercise the 2nd Amendment, or even just your bare hands (which is what I do).

And the Supreme Court disagrees with you; they said gay marriage is a civil right protected by the Constitution.

Originally Posted by New York Times

“No longer may this liberty be denied,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority in the historic decision. “No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice and family. In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were.”
Marriage is a “keystone of our social order,” Justice Kennedy said, adding that the plaintiffs in the case were seeking “equal dignity in the eyes of the law.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/27/us...iage.html?_r=0

[tikkasf]

The Supreme Court settled both issues: The Heller & McDonald decisions together defined the 2nd Amend as a individual right to bear arms.....and "bare arms" are referring to firearms......

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/29/us/29scotus.html



The Supreme also decided that same sex couples have the right to marry

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by neutrino78x

Ask Ip Chun, he's 84. Or Dan Inosanto, he's 78.



"Owning a gun" is not a civil right. Keeping and bearing arms is. You can have a sword and exercise the 2nd Amendment, or even just your bare hands (which is what I do).

And the Supreme Court disagrees with you; they said gay marriage is a civil right protected by the Constitution.




http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/27/us...iage.html?_r=0

Marriage isn't a civil right, issuing licenses equally is protect by the 14th amendment. If the government chooses to codify marriage then it must do so equally for everyone. If the government passed a law stating marriage is no longer a recognized form of bonding two people to each other via contract then marriage would stop existing. Legal marriage is not a civil right, it was a Jim Crow law to prevent whites from marrying blacks.

Owning a gun is a civil right, arms at the time of the ratification of the bill of rights were firearms, cannon, knives and ships.

[neutrino78x]

Originally Posted by tikkasf

The Supreme Court settled both issues: The Heller & McDonald decisions together defined the 2nd Amend as a individual right to bear arms.....and "bare arms" are referring to firearms......

Indeed, however, the same decision -- DC vs Heller -- said that the government can put reasonable restrictions on the 2nd Amendment. They said rules against concealed carry are an example.

[neutrino78x]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

Marriage isn't a civil right, issuing licenses equally is protect by the 14th amendment. If the government chooses to codify marriage then it must do so equally for everyone.

Right, in other words gay marriage is a civil right.

Owning a gun is a civil right, arms at the time of the ratification of the bill of rights were firearms, cannon, knives and ships.

Yes, and the Supreme Court said the government can place reasonable restrictions on what type of arms are available to civilians. For example, you are not allowed to own a nuclear weapon as a civilian.

[tikkasf]

Originally Posted by neutrino78x

Right, in other words gay marriage is a civil right.



Yes, and the Supreme Court said the government can place reasonable restrictions on what type of arms are available to civilians. For example, you are not allowed to own a nuclear weapon as a civilian.

that is rather obvious....