CDZ Texas Open-Carry Laws Blurred Lines Between Suspects and Marchers

[Fishlore]

DALLAS — As a demonstration against police shootings made its way downtown here on Thursday, it differed from others around the country in one startling way: Twenty to 30 of the marchers showed up with AR-15s and other types of military-style rifles and wore them openly, with the straps slung across their shoulders and backs.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/11/u...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

 

[OldLady]

Fortunately, everyone kept their wits about them and none of the armed marchers were shot by mistake. I also have wondered if the actual shooter would have found it so easy to infiltrate the scene with his rifle and bullet proof vest if so many others had not been wearing them as a matter of course.
We have open carry here, too, but I have never seen anyone carry a rifle to a public gathering of any sort. Texas seems to have a lot of cowboys left.

 

[Fishlore]

Fortunately, everyone kept their wits about them and none of the armed marchers were shot by mistake. I also have wondered if the actual shooter would have found it so easy to infiltrate the scene with his rifle and bullet proof vest if so many others had not been wearing them as a matter of course.
We have open carry here, too, but I have never seen anyone carry a rifle to a public gathering of any sort. Texas seems to have a lot of cowboys left.

I agree. The massacre could have been a lot worse. And it would have been a lot worse if the thirty or so armed protesters had not run like chickens. According to NRA doctrine, those thirty good guys with guns should have stopped that one bad guy with a gun. In reality, of course, it never works that way. The whole silly idea is just another gun nut brain fart.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Fortunately, everyone kept their wits about them and none of the armed marchers were shot by mistake. I also have wondered if the actual shooter would have found it so easy to infiltrate the scene with his rifle and bullet proof vest if so many others had not been wearing them as a matter of course.
We have open carry here, too, but I have never seen anyone carry a rifle to a public gathering of any sort. Texas seems to have a lot of cowboys left.

I agree. The massacre could have been a lot worse. And it would have been a lot worse if the thirty or so armed protesters had not run like chickens. According to NRA doctrine, those thirty good guys with guns should have stopped that one bad guy with a gun. In reality, of course, it never works that way. The whole silly idea is just another gun nut brain fart.

It NEVER works that way? LOL Of course it sometimes works out that a good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun. That is provable.

I don't think it's particularly good policy to allow to citizens to open carry long guns either, but it's no more of a danger to the general public than say blocking 8 lanes of a major interstate highway, probably less so.

 

[martybegan]

Fortunately, everyone kept their wits about them and none of the armed marchers were shot by mistake. I also have wondered if the actual shooter would have found it so easy to infiltrate the scene with his rifle and bullet proof vest if so many others had not been wearing them as a matter of course.
We have open carry here, too, but I have never seen anyone carry a rifle to a public gathering of any sort. Texas seems to have a lot of cowboys left.

I agree. The massacre could have been a lot worse. And it would have been a lot worse if the thirty or so armed protesters had not run like chickens. According to NRA doctrine, those thirty good guys with guns should have stopped that one bad guy with a gun. In reality, of course, it never works that way. The whole silly idea is just another gun nut brain fart.

Considering they weren't the ones being attacked, and the police did not ask the for assistance, they did exactly what was expected of them.

 

[BlueGin]

Why are libs armed? Thought they wanted gun control?

 

[Fishlore]

Why are libs armed? Thought they wanted gun control?

Killing police simply because they are police is an act of armed insurrection against the government, i.e. a revolution. Liberals do not commit acts of murder or start revolutions. The affair in Dallas was a slave revolt. That is an American tradition too.

You ought to learn what a liberal is because there are several different kinds of critters on the left and it is good for your health to know which is which.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Yesterday I heard this asshole referred to as a martyr.

Black Lives Matters needs to be classified as a hate group.

 

[Picaro]

Open carry cultists are a bunch of weirdos just waiting to win a Darwin Award. I'm all for concealed carry, but open carry is just stupid on its face; all it does is wave a 'Hey Look Me!!! Aren't I Kewl??? Shoot Me In The Back Of My Head First, And Use My Weapon For Your Murder Spree Instead Of Bringing Your Own Rifle!!! signal to wannabee gimps.

F'ing Morons. Buffoons. Tards.

 

[TheOldSchool]

In this day and age where conservatives celebrate the killings of unarmed Americans, it is more important than ever for people to be armed. You don't have to be a lunatic gun nut, buying dozens of guns and helping to add millions into circulation. But have one just in case.

 

[320 Years of History]

I also have wondered if the actual shooter would have found it so easy to infiltrate the scene with his rifle and bullet proof vest if so many others had not been wearing them as a matter of course.

I have at times wondered whether bullet proof vests do more to deter or abate gun violence than do guns.

 

[yiostheoy]

DALLAS — As a demonstration against police shootings made its way downtown here on Thursday, it differed from others around the country in one startling way: Twenty to 30 of the marchers showed up with AR-15s and other types of military-style rifles and wore them openly, with the straps slung across their shoulders and backs.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/11/u...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

This is how you are supposed to wear your assault style carbines in public.

You should also have a pistol in an external holster with you too as a backup.

You are not safe anywhere in the world without your own open carry assault style carbine and pistol.

Ironically when the shooting started by the lone gunman in Dallas the police were grabbing everybody and anybody with a gun on in the open carry mode. When that happens all you can do is hands up don't shoot!

This is the great weakness of open carry. Anybody can see your gun(s) and try to take them.

This is why concealed carry is superior -- because 55% to 90% of the public will NOT be armed and nobody can tell that you are.

While I favor open carry wherever possible, concealed carry has its advantages at times.

 

[yiostheoy]

I also have wondered if the actual shooter would have found it so easy to infiltrate the scene with his rifle and bullet proof vest if so many others had not been wearing them as a matter of course.

I have at times wondered whether bullet proof vests do more to deter or abate gun violence than do guns.

The lady cop sitting right behind the podium in today's speeches was wearing a vest under her blouse and you can tell she was very uncomfortable in it. But being right next to the POTUS, Mayor, Police Chief, and Senator she probably was smart to wear it.

Vests are bulky and uncomfortable.

But if you want to be safe from a chest shot you need to wear one.

 

[yiostheoy]

Why are libs armed? Thought they wanted gun control?

Texas is not Lib.

Texas is a far right as you can get.

Maybe Utah too.

and Arizona for that matter.

 

[2aguy]

Fortunately, everyone kept their wits about them and none of the armed marchers were shot by mistake. I also have wondered if the actual shooter would have found it so easy to infiltrate the scene with his rifle and bullet proof vest if so many others had not been wearing them as a matter of course.
We have open carry here, too, but I have never seen anyone carry a rifle to a public gathering of any sort. Texas seems to have a lot of cowboys left.

He didn't.....he came in a car........and how would that have changed anything anyway....he could have been in the march with one or more concealed pistols and actually killed more people than the way he went about it......

normal people carrying guns would not have changed that in any way......they could have possibly stopped him since he would have been closer....

 

[2aguy]

Open carry cultists are a bunch of weirdos just waiting to win a Darwin Award. I'm all for concealed carry, but open carry is just stupid on its face; all it does is wave a 'Hey Look Me!!! Aren't I Kewl??? Shoot Me In The Back Of My Head First, And Use My Weapon For Your Murder Spree Instead Of Bringing Your Own Rifle!!! signal to wannabee gimps.

F'ing Morons. Buffoons. Tards.

No....you are wrong....open carry helps show the uninformed that normal people carrying guns are not a threat. There aren't other ways as good to demonstrate this...since the media, and journalists too often show normal gun owners in the worst light possible......

Tactically, concealed carry is the way to go.....

Open carry is for educational purposes......

 

[2aguy]

Fortunately, everyone kept their wits about them and none of the armed marchers were shot by mistake. I also have wondered if the actual shooter would have found it so easy to infiltrate the scene with his rifle and bullet proof vest if so many others had not been wearing them as a matter of course.
We have open carry here, too, but I have never seen anyone carry a rifle to a public gathering of any sort. Texas seems to have a lot of cowboys left.

I agree. The massacre could have been a lot worse. And it would have been a lot worse if the thirty or so armed protesters had not run like chickens. According to NRA doctrine, those thirty good guys with guns should have stopped that one bad guy with a gun. In reality, of course, it never works that way. The whole silly idea is just another gun nut brain fart.

No .......the people carrying guns are exactly who we said they would be....there were actual cops right at the scene of the attack...what did normal gun owners do in that situation....they let the trained professionals handle it.....they did not take it upon themselves to deal with the attacker.......and they were not shot by the police...even in all of the confusion....because they were not shooting people....

nothing you anti gunners say about people carrying guns came true in that attack, not one thing....you were wrong on all of it.....

And in reality...when there are no police around, but there is a concealed carrier......they do stop mass shooters and save lives....you are wrong about that too........

You are wrong on everything....

 

[2aguy]

In this day and age where conservatives celebrate the killings of unarmed Americans, it is more important than ever for people to be armed. You don't have to be a lunatic gun nut, buying dozens of guns and helping to add millions into circulation. But have one just in case.

Yeah.......tell us which ones those are.......you no longer get to throw that out and expect not to be challenged on it.....

 

[2aguy]

I also have wondered if the actual shooter would have found it so easy to infiltrate the scene with his rifle and bullet proof vest if so many others had not been wearing them as a matter of course.

I have at times wondered whether bullet proof vests do more to deter or abate gun violence than do guns.

Could you explain that theory?

 

[2aguy]

DALLAS — As a demonstration against police shootings made its way downtown here on Thursday, it differed from others around the country in one startling way: Twenty to 30 of the marchers showed up with AR-15s and other types of military-style rifles and wore them openly, with the straps slung across their shoulders and backs.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/11/u...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

And here is an accurate look at what happened....

Open Carry Worked in Dallas - The Truth About Guns

Whatever you may have heard in the aftermath, open carry at the Dallas Black Lives Matter protest worked. No protesters who open carried were shot; nor did open carrying protesters shoot anyone. Police are now less likely to harass or arrest peaceful open carriers.

The doomsayers who rail against open carry make numerous nonsensical claims. Primary among them is that open carriers will be the first ones shot by criminals. And if they aren’t they’re then likely to be shot by police.

===========

According to various reports here were several protestors openly carrying long guns in the march that night. They exhibited good discipline. They didn’t fire indescriminately, they shot no one and weren’t shot by anyone, either.

Police officers have noticed that it’s not hard to determine the bad guy with a gun from the good guy with a gun. In Dallas, the bad guy was pointing the gun at them and shooting. The good guys had their rifles slung over their shoulders.