Ammo For Sale

« « Targeting Target | Home | Sometimes, other people’s money is my money » »

Speaking of Open Carry Texas

NRA’s Chris Cox says that admonishment of the open carriers was a mistake:

Chris Cox, the executive director of the group’s lobbying arm, said in an interview Tuesday on an NRA-hosted radio show that the statement was a mistake and that it was written by a staffer who was expressing his personal opinion.

“The truth is, an alert went out that referred to this type of behavior as ‘weird’ or somehow not normal, and that was a mistake. It shouldn’t have happened,” said Cox, who added that the group “unequivocally” supports open carry laws.

Now, I’m going to disagree and say that NRA should not condone these things.

You can see the interview here.

15 Responses to “Speaking of Open Carry Texas”

  1. Dragon Says:

    I’m going to go on a limb here, and say that the NRA is in a position of “damned if they do, damned if they don’t”…

    Should they be supporting the open carry of longarms? I agree with you, Unc, that what OCTX is doing is counter-productive, and in that vein the NRA should be condemning it.

    On the other hand, the NRA has to walk a VERY fine line to not piss off the cash-cows that pay yearly dues and, essentially, pay the salaries of all the folks working at NRA Which is why I think that Chris Cox is doing a boatload of damage control right about now.

    Sucks to be the NRA right about now, because they have multiple factions that they’ve courted, and now must cater to.

  2. Lyle Says:

    Cooper, an NRA board member at the time, said fifteen years ago that the NRA was bing criticized for being too hard-line, while at the same time being criticized for being too soft.

    If you stand on principle, consistently and without rancor, able to explain yourself plainly, you may rest assured that you are doing the right thing regardless. If you fail you may be confident that you failed for the right reason, except for the fact that standing consistently and confidently, able to articulate your principles consistently, practically never fails (and is almost never attempted). The worst thing you can do is try to please everyone, or position yourself, tactically, “in the middle”– In that case everyone sees you for the calculating, unprincipled, scheming, weak-kneed, cowardly douche you truly are (you Republicans) and in that case your best and only hope is that your opposition is even more pathetic, outrageous and sickening than you.

    It’s simple enough to support open carry laws rigorously, while at the same time making the point that there is a right way and many wrong ways to get the point across. It just isn’t difficult. “Don’t be a jerk” is good advice. A troop of advocates marching into a restaurant uninvited carrying rifles is being something of a jerk.

  3. Geodkyt Says:

    The takeaway I got from the Cam interview video was that Cox was walking back the description of OCT as “weird”, and that he wanted to reiterate the NRA’s support for lawful open carry.

    Since the original statement ALSO reiterated the NRA’s unequivocal support for open carry at the same time it lambasted the absurdly stupid tactics of OCT, I don’t see the NRA shifting any position — just removing what is easily perceived as a personal attack on OCT members. As Cox said in the Cam interview, the argument is over TACTICS.

  4. mikee Says:

    I think we can agree that the Bubba Open Carry movement is like manna from heaven to the anti-gun supporters, legal though it be, and annoying though it be.

    I think we can also agree that the legal open carry of firearms should be a normal thing that does not cause PSH among the general populace.

    Getting from our first point of agreement to our second point of agreement might require something like the business plan of the Underpants Gnomes. But I think while we have a stinky pile of stolen underwear right now, despite the ????? remaining, we will get to desired end stage sooner rather than later.

  5. mikee Says:

    And another thing: I posted what were obviously very different positions in my comments than the majority of other commenters on this blog, knowing, absolutely, that I would get back intelligent, honest, non-abusive thoughts and ideas that challenged my position.

    I know from experience that trying to post non-conformist opinions on anti-gun blogs gets met with vituperation, “reasoned discourse” (banning, censoring) and other idiocy.

    In every post I commented on here, and I am not surprised, I got intelligent discussion that enlightened me about the whole issue.

    Thanks, and keep up the good work.

  6. mariner Says:

    The NRA need not condone Open Carry, but should not condemn it either.

  7. Matt Says:

    I support the right to OC (although I doubt I would ever do it), but disagree with the tactics being employed by OCTX. If they wanted to protest the ban on OC-ing handguns; signs, shirts and empty holsters would convey the message. Parading around with OC’d long guns does little more than turn the “on the fence” public anti-OC and anti-gun.

  8. Phelps Says:

    You want a news flash? The bubba carry groups have ALREADY won. Here in dfw, if someone has a rifle, we don’t go into psh anymore — we think “oh it’s another open carry protest thing.”

    Just from what I’ve seen here, I think these clowns are going to win and a lot of people on a lot of pro gun websites are going to look like pansy dipshits in the end.

  9. Burnt Toast Says:

    Wait – WHAT? “open carry laws”

    They need laws in Texas that say WHAT YOU CAN DO?

    I must be getting old, seeming to remember 8th grade civics where a principle taught was you can do anything you want unless it is expressly prohibited, you know, freedom? Something about 2nd and concealed carry being nefarious, hence the outlawing of it…

    Hey TX, it is over.

    Better flush three times just to be sure.

  10. Jeffersonian Says:

    I agree with the faction that knows that open carry is legal in many places, but that it scares the bejeebers out of ordinary (sometimes gun owning types) and is therefore not helpful to the cause.

    Having said that I want to share an anecdote. A couple years ago I was asked by a co-worker if I knew of anyone who might be interested in a S&W Model 629. Well, “of course I do” says I. In the process of purchasing a very nice 4″ Model 629 from a college professor I learned that we had both quit the NRA and could not shoot at the local range. He because they were too hard line. I because they were not hard line enough. He was pissed because CCW. I was pissed because they had carved out a place for theyselves in the anti-free speech Resolve act.

    Go figure. A old hard line Jefferson liberal and Libertarian shit like me and a freak flag flying left wing hippy like him finding common ground. Not a bad guy all-in-all.

    Point is…there is a balance in life. Find it.

  11. CHRIS Says:


  12. JTC Says:

    Jeffersonian touches on an important and scary tangent:

    “…scares the bejeebers out of (sometimes (even) gun owning types).”

    How long before a vigilant CW holder goes piece-out when he sees a couple of Chipotle-type knuckleheads come in the door front-slung and hands-on of the place where he’s feeding (and protecting) his family?

  13. Robert Says:

    I just think that we need to be careful labeling anyone as a “nutjob” for exercising their rights. I am a CCW holder and seldom OC, never a rifle, but I have been on the receiving end of the “nutjob” label just because I conceal carry. Anytime someone does something that someone else does not do, it can come across as odd, extreme, silly, eccentric etc.

    For so long we have had our rights trampled, reduced and eliminated, it’s no surprise that some folks feel the need to over-compensate.

  14. Chris Says:

    I think the confusion is more about semantics. While I agree with idea and general implementation of open carry, I disagree with the attitude of folks who do it agressively to make a scene.

    There is a very fine line between the person who carries a certain way because of utility and the person who carries a particular way to garner attention.

  15. Geodkyt Says:

    Mariner —

    The NRA *NEVER*DID* condemn Open Carry in the (in)famous NRA-ILA statement, that apparantly most OC fanatics never bothered to read (or are functionally illiterate — it REPEATEDLY states its support for OC as a *carry*method*).

    They condemned using Open Carry *for*the*attention*alone* as a *tactic*.