Ammo For Sale

« « 5.56 and barrel length | Home | JWH Custom Laser Engraved Bolts » »

Speaking of open carriers, NRA goes quiet

So, the NRA came out and agreed that the open carriers at Chipotle were not helpful and linked to a piece on the issue. Now, if you haven’t clicked that link, I’l tell you it disappeared since. If you have, welcome back and I hope you see this before you leave a comment telling me I’m a retard. Here’s a cache of it. And it linked to Bob Owens’ bit on how open carriers are being retards. I, at first, admired NRA seemingly advocating the position that maybe gun rights folks should try not to do anything stupid. But then it disappeared. Anyone heard exactly why?

14 Responses to “Speaking of open carriers, NRA goes quiet”

  1. mikee Says:

    Just a guess: Why make the anti-gun argument for the anti-gunners?

    Make THEM do the work of demonizing law-abiding but obnoxious people. Don’t help the anti-rights bigots demonize these gun totin’ yahoos, because that only makes the demonizing of all us normal folk easier.

  2. nk Says:

    I don’t like donkey-meat burritos, so I don’t get them at fast food chains. Is that why they call them burritos, BTW? But anyway. If you have a no-gun sign on your door, you don’t get my business. Regardless of whether I have a gun on me.

  3. Paul Kisling Says:

    This is actually one of those things I do not worry about. The more shootings in gun free zones that occur the less I give a shit about signs and placards. What is the old adage? Judged by 12 rather than carried by 6…

  4. Terry Jackson Says:

    Andrew Branca has a piece up at Legal Insurrection and open carry damage:

    The only place I ever saw open carry long guns in the ’50s, ’60s, ’70s was during hunting season, and then limited to required travel. Remember the complete deer strapped to the hood and fender of a car?

  5. JTC Says:

    “Anyone heard exactly why?”


    Not that there’s an actual correlation, but the point is that anything perceived as internecine criticism gets the smackdown. Even when it’s as justified as with the idjits in that Chipotle pic.

  6. DocMerlin Says:

    It disappeared because the story was complete BS.

  7. DocMerlin Says:

    I know the open carry guys and its a non-issue. When they open carry, people come up for pictures with them, and such.

  8. Rob Says:

    Does anyone else think it’s hypocritical for a site called Bearing Arms to attack people for bearing arms?

  9. NavyDoc Says:

    One issue the Open Carry movement (acknowledging it is not that well organized) has is that it is horrible at PR. As gun owners we are fighting the stereotype that we are all overweight, lower class, camo-clad, white males with little education. Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with that, in fact I’ve met many truly wonderful people who fit that mold. But Open Carry needs to fight that stereotype because it’s easy for liberals to mock, and thus marginalize. How to do this? Dress professionally and be exceedingly polite… and maybe go for a handgun over a long arm. The goal should be for the public to see upstanding citizens exercising their rights, not a bunch of clowns trying to shock people. I have open carried in some pretty liberal areas, but found that people were disarmed by the fact that I was well-dressed, put together, and smiling. The unshaven, gun t-shirts, and camo shorts look does not have this effect.

  10. JTC Says:

    You know *these* carry guys? If so, and their behavior here is a non-issue, I guess they’re not the only idjits on “our” side.

    Bearing Arms is attacking people for *baring* arms, in just about the most harmful way possible in terms of public perception.

  11. KM Says:

    and maybe go for a handgun over a long arm

    Remember, this is in Texas. There is *no* OC for handguns in TX.
    The TOC group is horrible at PR. Why do they feel the need to go into a private business?
    Is there a law that prevents them from holding their protests in front of the capitol/legislature?

    Dear Tx Open Carry,
    Please enforce a dress code at your protests. It doesn’t have to be a suit but clean pants and a shirt with a collar will go a long way to avoid looking like a dipstick.

  12. JTC Says:

    Of course I was addressing DocMerlin, not NavyDoc…what a coinkydink that another Doc came in at that point; I don’t know what kind of doc either of you is, but I think I’d go with the latter one if I needed something doc’ed.

  13. Matthew Carberry Says:


    If the point is truly to get *pistol* OC legal, then point out the stupidity that CC is okay but OC is not by OC-ing an empty holster. The problem is many of these tools seem to think they can normalize *rifle* OC, which has never been “normal” in this country, except maybe on the frontier with active threats of Indian raids and such.

    Even if someone does think for some reason rifle OC is the way to go to illustrate that they’d “rather just be able to not wear a vest or tuck in their shirt behind their defensive pistol”, there is no justification for carrying loaded “scary black rifles” on single-point slings like they are patrolling the Galleria. A back slung wood stock .22 rifle sends the same message and a cc’d handgun provides sufficient defense.

    The attention-whoring is proven by the unnecessary use of what the anti’s and undecided electorate call “assault rifles”; using them adds a layer of confusion that actively interferes with the *pistol* OC legalization message.

  14. Incurvatus Says:

    For the butters like Owens who regularly get their panties in a bunch, I’ll point out that in my area the local long-arm OC men have directly caused of the largest (for the area) municipalities change their internal procedures. I’m glad keyboard commandos like Owens think their electron-words have such mighty power. It turns out, though, that actually sitting down the chiefs of police are what get POLICY changed. And C.O.P.s don’t meet with bloggers. It helps also to organize “Y’All Come Armed” picnics in parks in order to openly violate unlawful municipal ordinances (which are contrary to black letter state preemption laws.)
    Butters: 0
    Iron-balled Activists: muy