nstassel
NES Member
You should get that checked out asap.I dunno. I got a little tingly in my loins reading this.![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
I open carried in Boston today
- Thread starter avsterbone
- Start date
not new guy
NES Member
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2009
- Messages
- 36,098
- Likes
- 54,354
So he says. Imagine making the trip and walking around Boston all day and not being able to report that nobody batted an eyelash? That would suck.
I support OP
I would never do it but it should be normalized
Now why did OP not get a second look? Because the people that notice in a state like MA would just assume he was LE and the majority never even noticed
Pre carrying I NEVER notice someone CC
You just do not look or know what to look for until you ...know
I carry everyone I can legally and at this point I do not give a fawk about printing and not once has someone noticed
Even people that know me well
For years, on 114 in Andover or Lawrence a gas station owner that open carried, only person I have seen in MA
I would never do it but it should be normalized
Now why did OP not get a second look? Because the people that notice in a state like MA would just assume he was LE and the majority never even noticed
Pre carrying I NEVER notice someone CC
You just do not look or know what to look for until you ...know
I carry everyone I can legally and at this point I do not give a fawk about printing and not once has someone noticed
Even people that know me well
For years, on 114 in Andover or Lawrence a gas station owner that open carried, only person I have seen in MA
Rosa Parks was a hand picked activist acting as a provocateur to get a case with standing before a friendly court.
This clown is a patsy in waiting to get more unconstitutional bullshit rammed up the Commonwealth’s inmates asses as some Wellesley Karen freaks out on the way to sterilizing her kids.
Last edited:
Grendizer138
NES Member
Was OP wearing the propeller hat? If so, that’s a genius way to draw attention away from a gun on your belt
Good point. Just in case tyrants pass a law saying you cannot open carry in the future, means you shouldn't open carry now. Anyone who exercises their 2A rights is a clown.
I'll never get over how much people on this forum are opposed to the 2A without even knowing it.
I agree, that with now having effective and usable compact and micro compacts, it's very easy to conceal. It's what I now carry most often. I also agree, that doing things to prevent any sort of potential unwanted attention is a completely fair reason to conceal over carrying openly. These two things are the primary reasons I do usually carry concealed. Maybe I'm turning into the grumpy old man cliche, but I'd rather not deal with anybody, including people who maybe just want to have a friendly conversation, unless I initiate it.
In any case, these reasons do nothing to support any notion that people shouldn't open carry. It's suppose to be a free f***ing country, yet my goodness, loads of people here complaining how if someone exercises a right tyrants will take them away, so you shouldn't exercise a right. I find this to be one of the dumbest and most perverse arguments on any topic on this forum, being this is a firearms forum. And it apparently exists here in spades.
Many of these comments are peak FUDD.
Most pedestrians in Boston were probably reading the latest tweet from Pocahontas or looking how to atone for their whiteness.
As far as OC, the state is bound by collateral estoppel. They argued (and won) years ago when the state argued that you could carry openly on a Class B LTC (when they had them) and that was enough for 2A rights.
Most pedestrians in Boston were probably reading the latest tweet from Pocahontas or looking how to atone for their whiteness.
As far as OC, the state is bound by collateral estoppel. They argued (and won) years ago when the state argued that you could carry openly on a Class B LTC (when they had them) and that was enough for 2A rights.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,534
- Likes
- 33,584
Because people expect harrassement, plus fear the old definition of "suitability" could be a hassle.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,534
- Likes
- 33,584
Some rights are strengthend by exercising them. LGBTQXYZ etc.
Some rights are lost by exercising them. For example, open carry of long guns, then later, open carry of unloaded handguns, was banned in CA because people made a point about exercising this right.
Consider, for example, if a MA resident registered and SBRed an AK and carried on a sling in Boston. 100% legal - an SBR is a "firearm" under MA law, and a license to carry firearms allows open carry. Do you think that would educate people that open carry of an AK ("Somali carry") is legal and strengthen the right or incite corrective legislation?
There is scared, such as anti-gunners who freak at the sight (or even mention) of a gun.
And then there the ability to recognize ALL the facts surrounding a situation and make a smarter choice.
YMMV.
Last edited:
If they are lost by exercising them, then you never had them in the first place. This is, BY FAR, the worst and dumbest reason there is to not exercise a "right". BY. FAR.
Sure. And people should be free to make their own decisions on how they want to carry. I think most people here understand the benefits and risks. There are plenty of good reasons why one might not want to open carry. But "if you exercise a right you might lose it" or "exercising rights makes you a clown", aren't some of them.
Believing that he open carried in Boston? I'd presume indoctrination.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,534
- Likes
- 33,584
You had a "light" version that could prevent criminal charges. You have to understand reality and understanding if things will get better or worse if you exercise them. If you are going to start a battle you have a chance of winning - great. But sometimes it would be starting a battle you know you would lose.
Another rock solid point. We should voluntarily give up our rights to avoid government infringing on them. GTFOOF with this crap logic. YOU, need to understand the reality of what YOU are saying AND how your logic works (it doesn't). As if government will magically decide they aren't going to violate peoples rights anymore, so long as people voluntarily agree not to exercise them.
If everyone open carried, and open carrying was normalized, then it wouldn't be a big deal. But it will never become normalized because of illogical opinions like this.
headednorth
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 26,697
- Likes
- 49,293
FYI...1PBTID
This is basically a religious belief that if everyone open carried then it would be normalized, birds would sing, and unicorns would poop skittles.
But then there is what actually happened in CA — people started open carrying unloaded handguns. Did that normalize open carry? No, the legislature simply banned open carry of unloaded handguns. That is fact, not an opinion.
I suspect that in some pro-gun states that open carry could become normalized as you suggest. But MA ain’t Texas.
Am I saying that you should therefore never open carry in MA? No, but I am saying think about why you are open carrying and where it might be accepted and where it might result in an unwanted reaction.
Last edited:
People started open carrying because it was the only option given how hard it was to get a concealed carry permit. The legislature banned it because they realized that it wasn’t enough to make concealed carry damn near impossible if they wanted people to not carry guns. That is a bit different than these circumstances, particularly post-Bruen.
That's not what I said.
Tyrants being tyrants isn't a reason to not exercise a right. If you can't exercise a right for fear it will be banned, then it makes no difference whether it's banned or not. And LakeTrout above posted the actual context behind what happened in CA.
I am please that you aren't saying that, but others are. And it's an opinion that is antithetical to the 2nd Amendment, and should be rejected entirely.
not new guy
NES Member
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2009
- Messages
- 36,098
- Likes
- 54,354
I think a big part of the problem is that our 2A rights aren't in fact viewed as rights by the people wielding the authority in this shithole.
556USER
NES Member
You are absolutely right. Shouldn't it be the Karens squealing like pigs about the "man with a gun" that should be cited for causing a public disturbance. After all they are the ones inciting fear into everyone around you and causing the police to be summoned for no valid reason.
Yes. The majority of the time, if anyone is causing a disturbance, it's the people who call the police and/or the police themselves.
While I agree with the facts as you present them, I think you are missing the point. The legislature in CA hates guns and hates people carrying them and once people started open carrying guns the CA legislature increased restrictions.
Here in MA, does our legislature like guns? Nope, they hate them, just like in CA. In fact, the MA legislature is currently considering a "floor is lava" bill that would effectively make it impossible to carry a firearm (whether concealed or unconcealed).
In my opinion, if a bunch of people started open carrying in downtown Boston, instead of normalizing open carry it would galvanize the legislature to ban open carry. You can argue principal and jump up and down about exercising your rights, but that's what I predict would happen.
Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor and out of sight means out of mind of the legislators.
556USER
NES Member
I have to agree with you with regard to states like Mass. Maybe nobody took notice of OP but if this became even a little bit more common some anti gun person would bring it to the attention of the media that people who are not EVEN the POLICE are going about with guns in public. The next thing you know they'd be interviewing liberals on the streets of Boston asking if they had seen this and what they though about it etc. The only answers that they'd put on the evening news would feature Karens and Birkenstock boys saying how disturbing and likely unsafe it is to have "gun nuts" running around with guns on their hips like it's the old west. (Yes, these people consider most LTC holders to be gun nuts). This is just the way it is in Mass. 65/35 democrat voters most of the time. They would demand that it be outlawed so fast it would make your head spin.
headednorth
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 26,697
- Likes
- 49,293
If anything, it would become a thing for Antifa/BLM types to harass open carriers in the hopes of provoking a response. If they get their response, "look at how unhinged they are". If they dont get it "look at how much of a pussy this guy is. His precious gun didnt do him any good did it?" Lose/lose.
The 2A is the 2A, OC shouldnt be illegal and people can do what they want, but in a state like this I dont see us gaining anything from it. If someone wants to do it then do it but nothing to gain by turning it into a movement.
Also note the OP made one post in this thread (with no pics of his walk around) and hasnt posted in the thread since.
Similar threads
