Hoping to Understand MOC

[ME1985]

Hello All,

I have been curious about your organization for a while now, and I thought it time to open a dialogue that might further my understanding. I know that often people with differing viewpoints are perceived as hostile by your members. I would like to be very clear that the thoughts and questions I am sharing come from a genuine desire to further my own understanding of Michigan Open Carry. They are not meant to disrespect any member or cause any disturbance on these forums. I expect, and indeed look forward to hearing why some of you disagree with my any or all of my current positions. I know that listening to your positions might help further my own understanding.

Let me first explain a bit about my current beliefs, which could be amended via this discussion. I consider myself a strong supporter of gun rights. I own several guns, and hold a Michigan CPL. I carry frequently because I think that one should always hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. I also feel very strongly that we (the United States) should not illegalize any behavior without just cause. Therefore, I am generally supportive of open carry. I am however troubled by some of the actions MOC has undertaken.

I first became aware of MOC after the well publicized news coverage surrounding the Ponderosa incident in Lansing. It is my understanding that MOC had prior authorization to hold a meeting at the restaurant, but that permission was rescinded when a member brought some sort of long gun. I read in the objectives on MOC’s main page “To exercise a natural right to self defense using the most efficient and common tool, a handgun.” While open carry of any weapon is legal in Michigan, your stated objective focuses on a lawful carry of handguns. I suspect that the Ponderosa meeting might have gone off without a hitch had members chosen to carry only handguns. I am somewhat bothered by this, because it appears to me that the inclusion of a long gun was designed to elicit a police response and/or media attention.

I have also followed the ongoing saga between MOC and the CADL. If memory serves me correctly, the first action your members took there was to carry a shotgun into the library. It begs that same question as above. If your stated focus is hand guns, was the shot gun an attempt to draw police/media attention? I also have it on good authority that a person was contacted by both the security staff and the police for carrying an airsoft gun. I know that fact has been disputed by your members but I find it troubling.  How is the lawful and responsible carry of handguns furthered by someone using a toy gun to incite a problem at an already unfriendly location?

As I stated above, I am generally supportive of open carry. However, just because something is legal does not mean it is always a good idea. It is perfectly legal for me to put on a Speedo bathing suit, high heels, and a pair of aviators and stand in front of the capitol building doing the hustle. Legal or not, that is most certainly a stupid idea that would be met with hostility by those who were subjected to it. I have similar views of open carry in an urban setting. I think openly carrying a firearm makes you a target in the event of an incident. You would present the strongest threat to a criminal which would rob you of the element of surprise. Open carrying also puts you in a position where you might be expected to act. Responsible gun owners know that being justified in the use of deadly force is not the only factor to be considered. You must also have a clear line of fire both in front of and behind the target. There are many possible settings within a restaurant or library where taking a shot may not be the best course of action. Openly carrying a gun could result in an uneducated person expecting a response you know is not proper.

I also worry about the image MOC is presenting to the general public. Whoever coined the phrase any publicity is good publicity is an absolute idiot. The media coverage I have seen of your group pertains to the situations above. Might you be better served my involving yourselves in community events where your presence is invited? I am picturing a large MOC presence in a cancer or aids walk. I see community service events, and floats in parades. If your organization is already involved in such activities, I think greater effort should be placed on getting publicity. I know the media is less likely to run with such positive stories, but even in their absence, you are still reaching members of the general public in a positive way. I worry that the militant, in-your-face actions that have dominated the news coverage harm both MOC and the greater community of gun owners. I would hate to see libraries added to pistol free zones as a result of public outcry, or CPLs become harder to obtain. I would hate to see anti-gun forces unite to illegalize open carry entirely.

In closing, I would like to thank anyone who took the time to read this. I hope that your responses will help me better understand MOC and your mission. Perhaps you may change my position on certain issues, and hopefully you are open to some of my constructive suggestions. I already agree with you in principle, just not necessarily in practice. Hopefully my thoughts will help you engage a large group of Michiganders who are undecided on these matters.

[METL]

There are many reasons to open carry...  some are listed here:    http://forums.michiganopencarry.org/index.php?topic=435.0


Personally, I think the "open carry makes you a target" argument is mostly false.  The crime deterrant value of having everyone know you are armed and prepared to defend yourself is going to have more frequent results (maybe not even known results) than the opposite.  If someone is looking to mug someone and you are there, they will mug you if you seem like a good target.  If they see you have a gun, they will likely look elsewhere as they will try to find the weakest targets.


I think your post was very well thought out and I am glad you have come here with an open mind.   I myself am a rather new poster, but I have learned A LOT from this forum.  I would encourage you to hang out here, and at opencarry.org and ask questions.  People are more than willing to answer them and provide you with all sorts of information.


Mostly what I think it boils down to is the government doesn't get to decide where and when and how you defend yourself.  That is a decision for YOU to make for YOURSELF personally.  The government and other people don't get to decide MY constitutional rights for me.  Open carry is legal and if I so choose, I should be allowed to defend myself in that manner.

[TheQ]

Hello All,

Greetings, I welcome you open minded discussion.  In the spirit of educated discussion I will attempt to answer your questions presented in a curious and non-attacking way to the best of my abilities without introducing drama or hostility.

I first became aware of MOC after the well publicized news coverage surrounding the Ponderosa incident in Lansing. It is my understanding that MOC had prior authorization to hold a meeting at the restaurant, but that permission was rescinded when a member brought some sort of long gun. I read in the objectives on MOC’s main page “To exercise a natural right to self defense using the most efficient and common tool, a handgun.” While open carry of any weapon is legal in Michigan, your stated objective focuses on a lawful carry of handguns. I suspect that the Ponderosa meeting might have gone off without a hitch had members chosen to carry only handguns. I am somewhat bothered by this, because it appears to me that the inclusion of a long gun was designed to elicit a police response and/or media attention.

First, let me assure you, while we do not opposed Long Gun Open Carry (or LGOC as we call it) it is not our primary mission.  The individual who OC'd the Carbine style weapon at Ponderosa was not a member of Michigan Open Carry, but was rather a person of the general public, much like you, who decided to attend the MOC event.  I hope you can understand we are not responsible for what every person in Michigan does while carrying a firearm.  Nor can we control what members of the general public do at our events.  We ask that people consider how bringing a Long Gun to events will effect our message and think about the consequences of their actions in advance.  While we cannot kick someone out of an event that is not on our property, our business host can.  You can understand why we were a bit disappointed the business owner opted to kick us all out rather than just the person who brought the long gun.  Also know, the owner was a bit disturbed by the scene that was mostly caused by the police response -- and how that would affect his business.  When the dispatcher told him OC of a long gun was legal, he was fine to leave it be, but the dispatcher insisted on sending out the police.

I have also followed the ongoing saga between MOC and the CADL. If memory serves me correctly, the first action your members took there was to carry a shotgun into the library. It begs that same question as above. If your stated focus is hand guns, was the shot gun an attempt to draw police/media attention? I also have it on good authority that a person was contacted by both the security staff and the police for carrying an airsoft gun. I know that fact has been disputed by your members but I find it troubling.  How is the lawful and responsible carry of handguns furthered by someone using a toy gun to incite a problem at an already unfriendly location?

Again, the person who brought the shotgun into the Library was not a member of MOC, Inc. at the time (unsure of this fact and the exact date his membership expired) and it is my understanding this person may be no longer welcome within the organization.

The person you reference with the "airsoft gun" was actually the same person as the shotgun.  He was not carrying an "airsoft", but rather a CO2 propelled Pellet/BB Gun which is lawfully registered as a pistol in Michigan.

Once again, I hope you can understand we can't be responsible for the actions of every Michigan gun owner.  We do not endorse his (or others) efforts when their only reasonable foreseeable end is to draw attention to himself.

As I stated above, I am generally supportive of open carry. However, just because something is legal does not mean it is always a good idea. It is perfectly legal for me to put on a Speedo bathing suit, high heels, and a pair of aviators and stand in front of the capitol building doing the hustle.

Many college girls in Lansing walk the public streets wearing less than you describe during the fall/spring as they visit the nightclubs downtown.  These girls are often "open carrying" in another way.  Being a Libertarian, I support them in their right to express themselves as they see fit as long as they do no harm to another.  Most people subjected o this don't become hostile.  You may not be as attractive as these young ladies, but having met you I do not feel qualified to address that issue.

Legal or not, that is most certainly a stupid idea that would be met with hostility by those who were subjected to it. I have similar views of open carry in an urban setting. I think openly carrying a firearm makes you a target in the event of an incident. You would present the strongest threat to a criminal which would rob you of the element of surprise.

You are entitled to your preferences regarding OC v CC, as I am entitled to mine.

1. We have not found that someone OCing is first to be shot.  This simply doesn't happen.  Someone committing a crime is in tunnel vision and probably won't even see the OCer.
2. OC is a faster draw.
3. OC is a visual deterrent to criminals.  Yes, they may have a gun also, but they know if they get into a gun fight they could always lose.  Most criminals aren't out to risk their lives (versus dead) while committing their crime.
4. OC is a faster draw.  From practice and by timing I can tell you I can draw my firearm and squeeze off my first shot somewhere within .7-.9 seconds and accurately hit a person-sized target within 30' with that first shot.  Can you draw from concealment that quickly?  I can't.  If you can, please teach me how...

I'd recommend the book entitled through Whitefeather Press.  It's available at: http://www.myparentsopencarry.com .  The author, who is a regular member of this forum explains in details the advantage of OC over CC.  I hope you'll take the time to read it.

Openly carrying a gun could result in an uneducated person expecting a response you know is not proper.

I believe each person has personal responsibility.  Someone looking to me thinking I have a duty to defend them in peril might do well to buy their own firearm and train.  This isn't to say I wouldn't help them.  I honestly don't know, each situation is different.

I also worry about the image MOC is presenting to the general public. Whoever coined the phrase any publicity is good publicity is an absolute idiot.

"Let no crisis go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel. 

I agree, he is an idiot.

The media coverage I have seen of your group pertains to the situations above. Might you be better served my involving yourselves in community events where your presence is invited? I am picturing a large MOC presence in a cancer or aids walk. I see community service events, and floats in parades. If your organization is already involved in such activities, I think greater effort should be placed on getting publicity. I know the media is less likely to run with such positive stories, but even in their absence, you are still reaching members of the general public in a positive way. I worry that the militant, in-your-face actions that have dominated the news coverage harm both MOC and the greater community of gun owners. I would hate to see libraries added to pistol free zones as a result of public outcry, or CPLs become harder to obtain. I would hate to see anti-gun forces unite to illegalize open carry entirely.

Have you seen our recent I think you may find it more educational in value, like you suggested.  Unfortunately, we can't control how the media often spins things.

In closing, I would like to thank anyone who took the time to read this. I hope that your responses will help me better understand MOC and your mission. Perhaps you may change my position on certain issues, and hopefully you are open to some of my constructive suggestions. I already agree with you in principle, just not necessarily in practice. Hopefully my thoughts will help you engage a large group of Michiganders who are undecided on these matters.

I am always open to open minded, non-attacking, and intellectual discussion.

[autosurgeon]

Hello All,

I have been curious about your organization for a while now, and I thought it time to open a dialogue that might further my understanding. I know that often people with differing viewpoints are perceived as hostile by your members. I would like to be very clear that the thoughts and questions I am sharing come from a genuine desire to further my own understanding of Michigan Open Carry. They are not meant to disrespect any member or cause any disturbance on these forums. I expect, and indeed look forward to hearing why some of you disagree with my any or all of my current positions. I know that listening to your positions might help further my own understanding.

Let me first explain a bit about my current beliefs, which could be amended via this discussion. I consider myself a strong supporter of gun rights. I own several guns, and hold a Michigan CPL. I carry frequently because I think that one should always hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. I also feel very strongly that we (the United States) should not illegalize any behavior without just cause. Therefore, I am generally supportive of open carry. I am however troubled by some of the actions MOC has undertaken.

I first became aware of MOC after the well publicized news coverage surrounding the Ponderosa incident in Lansing. It is my understanding that MOC had prior authorization to hold a meeting at the restaurant, but that permission was rescinded when a member brought some sort of long gun. I read in the objectives on MOC’s main page “To exercise a natural right to self defense using the most efficient and common tool, a handgun.” While open carry of any weapon is legal in Michigan, your stated objective focuses on a lawful carry of handguns. I suspect that the Ponderosa meeting might have gone off without a hitch had members chosen to carry only handguns. I am somewhat bothered by this, because it appears to me that the inclusion of a long gun was designed to elicit a police response and/or media attention.

The person who carried the Long Gun was not an MOC member but rather just another OCer who chose to attend the public event. Also the police non emergency line was called only to find out if LGOC was legal and in fact the police were asked NOT to attend. They the police chose to intervene against the wishes of the manager.

I have also followed the ongoing saga between MOC and the CADL. If memory serves me correctly, the first action your members took there was to carry a shotgun into the library. It begs that same question as above. If your stated focus is hand guns, was the shot gun an attempt to draw police/media attention? I also have it on good authority that a person was contacted by both the security staff and the police for carrying an airsoft gun. I know that fact has been disputed by your members but I find it troubling.  How is the lawful and responsible carry of handguns furthered by someone using a toy gun to incite a problem at an already unfriendly location?

Prior to the LGOC at least one member of MOC had OCed a pistol into the CADL and there was no issue made about it. As I am not entirely sure if the person who carried the LG was still a member at the time he did so. He currently is not as he did not renew his membership.

As I stated above, I am generally supportive of open carry. However, just because something is legal does not mean it is always a good idea. It is perfectly legal for me to put on a Speedo bathing suit, high heels, and a pair of aviators and stand in front of the capitol building doing the hustle. Legal or not, that is most certainly a stupid idea that would be met with hostility by those who were subjected to it. I have similar views of open carry in an urban setting. I think openly carrying a firearm makes you a target in the event of an incident. You would present the strongest threat to a criminal which would rob you of the element of surprise. Open carrying also puts you in a position where you might be expected to act. Responsible gun owners know that being justified in the use of deadly force is not the only factor to be considered. You must also have a clear line of fire both in front of and behind the target. There are many possible settings within a restaurant or library where taking a shot may not be the best course of action. Openly carrying a gun could result in an uneducated person expecting a response you know is not proper.

I also worry about the image MOC is presenting to the general public. Whoever coined the phrase any publicity is good publicity is an absolute idiot. The media coverage I have seen of your group pertains to the situations above. Might you be better served my involving yourselves in community events where your presence is invited? I am picturing a large MOC presence in a cancer or aids walk. I see community service events, and floats in parades. If your organization is already involved in such activities, I think greater effort should be placed on getting publicity. I know the media is less likely to run with such positive stories, but even in their absence, you are still reaching members of the general public in a positive way. I worry that the militant, in-your-face actions that have dominated the news coverage harm both MOC and the greater community of gun owners. I would hate to see libraries added to pistol free zones as a result of public outcry, or CPLs become harder to obtain. I would hate to see anti-gun forces unite to illegalize open carry entirely.

MOC currently has adopted 1 section of I94 on the east and the west side of the state and has been keeping them clean for over a year. We are also involved in various charity events from food drives to a bowling fundraiser for the Care House.

In closing, I would like to thank anyone who took the time to read this. I hope that your responses will help me better understand MOC and your mission. Perhaps you may change my position on certain issues, and hopefully you are open to some of my constructive suggestions. I already agree with you in principle, just not necessarily in practice. Hopefully my thoughts will help you engage a large group of Michiganders who are undecided on these matters.

Thank you for taking the time to air your concerns. My comments in red.

[TheQ]

Also, thank you for coming to us with open minded questions and discussion rather than attacking us based on what you have heard in the news (which isn't nearly often the whole story and may be written to purposely portray us in poor light).

[METL]

One thing that also appeals to me about open carry is the fact you can carry standard sized pistols.   I feel like many guns designed for concealed carry are lacking in accuracy, round capacity, and sometimes concessions need to be made with regards to power and recoil with smaller weapons.

[Beo]

I agree with what has been said already. I just want to expand on one point:

...just because something is legal does not mean it is always a good idea.

This argument goes the other way as well. Just because something is a bad idea, does not mean that it should be illegal. The constitution protects your freedom of expression just as it protects your right to bear arms. You have a right to wear your bannana hammock just as I have a right to LGOC if I see fit.

[northofnowhere]

Welcome to the forum, and the thought of OCing a handgun.  I think the questions regarding OC of a long gun and MOC in general have been answered fairly well, so I shall not bore you with any of that info again.

With regards to why open carry, so many of us have different reasons and beliefs, some constitutional, some personal, some self defense.  Before 5 years ago I had never touched anything other then a .22 during Boy Scouts as a young lad.  I am not 35 and open carry where convenient, and always carry where legal, which is everywhere but work.  I got my first el cheapo Hi Point handgun after months of news coverage on school shootings and years of watching criminals, violent criminals, go free and commit more crimes.  I felt in my heart I had to be prepared to defend myself and my family and my loved ones, as it was clear our government has completely let down hard working, honest, and law abiding citizens.  The establishment has completely failed us, except in one area, the right to self defense.

I bought my first gun, within a year of teaching myself to shoot obtained my CPL, and within a few months of researching deadly force laws found OCDO.  Soon thereafter a group started MOC, which I am proud to be a Charter Member and Regional Coordinator of. 

In the end, I carry to defend me and mine, period.  I open carry because I want others to learn that guns are NOT EVIL, they should be part of everyday life.  I firmly believe all those with the mental and physical aptitude to carry a pistol on them, SHOULD!  If we law abiding Americans stood together against crime, eliminated the criminal element and instead focused on helping people work hard and learn ethics and morality at a young age, our society could be vastly improved.  I carry openly to teach others and to bring self defense out of the closet it has been basking in for far too long.

Gonna go put a second coat of paint down on the bathroom now, it was a pleasure to express why I OC, it's been awhile since anyone asked.

-jason r. aka northofnowhere

[Bronson]

Welcome to the MOC forums ME1985.

I would recommend the link that METL provided in the first reply for many of our reasons for OCing over CCing.  I'll also follow northofnowhere's lead and not expound on Ponderosa, CADL, or long gun OC as previous posters have covered that fairly well.

I will offer you these two links:

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-atlanta/open-carry-deters-armed-robbery-kennesaw  This is a link to a news story where the presence of two citizens openly armed with pistols was enough to deter two cars of thugs armed with rifles.

The Armed Criminal in America  This is an article by Dr. Paul Blackman that references a study done by Professors James D. Wright and Peter H. Rossi where they conducted interviews with convicted felons in prison.

Some excerpts from the study:

Emphasis mine,

Fifty-six percent of the felons surveyed agreed that "A criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun;" 74% agreed that "One reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot."

I contend that the only reliable way for the criminal to "know" the victim is armed with a gun is for it to be carried openly.  I have yet to see numbers from any study that tell me that a higher percentage of criminals will be enticed into robbing/assaulting somebody with an openly carried firearm.

A 57% majority agreed that "Most criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."

If that is one of the criminal elements greatest fears then I want to be the realization of that fear.  If they are afraid of armed people I want them to know, in no uncertain terms, that I AM armed.

Significantly, almost 40% said there was at least one time when the criminal "decided not to do a crime because [he] knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun."

Again, I don't want the criminal to have to guess that I'm armed.  I want him to know because the numbers indicate that a larger segment of the criminal element will be deterred by a known armed person than will be enticed.

Welcome again and thanks for taking the time to ask reasonable questions.

Bronson

[JSteinmetz]

Hello, and welcome to the forums!

While the other points were very eloquently answered by other members, I did want to point one thing out.

I also worry about the image MOC is presenting to the general public. Whoever coined the phrase any publicity is good publicity is an absolute idiot. The media coverage I have seen of your group pertains to the situations above. Might you be better served my involving yourselves in community events where your presence is invited? I am picturing a large MOC presence in a cancer or aids walk. I see community service events, and floats in parades. If your organization is already involved in such activities, I think greater effort should be placed on getting publicity. I know the media is less likely to run with such positive stories, but even in their absence, you are still reaching members of the general public in a positive way. I worry that the militant, in-your-face actions that have dominated the news coverage harm both MOC and the greater community of gun owners. I would hate to see libraries added to pistol free zones as a result of public outcry, or CPLs become harder to obtain. I would hate to see anti-gun forces unite to illegalize open carry entirely.

In closing, I would like to thank anyone who took the time to read this. I hope that your responses will help me better understand MOC and your mission. Perhaps you may change my position on certain issues, and hopefully you are open to some of my constructive suggestions. I already agree with you in principle, just not necessarily in practice. Hopefully my thoughts will help you engage a large group of Michiganders who are undecided on these matters.

I am fairly new to this forum (joined back in November), and the changes I have seen in the past few months are extraordinary.  Our membership is growing quickly, and with more and more members in a given area, we have the manpower to take on events and projects such as those you have asked about.  While currently we are concentrating on our seminars and informal dinners (attempting to educate as well as draw in new members), we are also actively working on other projects.  As an example, look at this thread: http://forums.michiganopencarry.org/index.php?topic=1043.0.  We are helping sponsor a bowling fundraiser to benefit the Care House. 

At this point, we are still a small (but growing) organization, but we have a number of things to focus on.  While the publicity to date has not been the greatest, you will find a great group on here, and will find most of your questions answered (if not in current threads, then most likely fairly quickly).  As to 'attacking' points of view not in line with our own, I have not yet seen that occur.

Please, feel free to ask more questions, and by all means 'Carry on'!

[kubel]

My comments in blue.

Hello All,

I have been curious about your organization for a while now, and I thought it time to open a dialogue that might further my understanding. I know that often people with differing viewpoints are perceived as hostile by your members. I would like to be very clear that the thoughts and questions I am sharing come from a genuine desire to further my own understanding of Michigan Open Carry. They are not meant to disrespect any member or cause any disturbance on these forums. I expect, and indeed look forward to hearing why some of you disagree with my any or all of my current positions. I know that listening to your positions might help further my own understanding.

I hope we behave as well as you are .

Let me first explain a bit about my current beliefs, which could be amended via this discussion. I consider myself a strong supporter of gun rights. I own several guns, and hold a Michigan CPL. I carry frequently because I think that one should always hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. I also feel very strongly that we (the United States) should not illegalize any behavior without just cause. Therefore, I am generally supportive of open carry. I am however troubled by some of the actions MOC has undertaken.

I first became aware of MOC after the well publicized news coverage surrounding the Ponderosa incident in Lansing. It is my understanding that MOC had prior authorization to hold a meeting at the restaurant, but that permission was rescinded when a member brought some sort of long gun. I read in the objectives on MOC’s main page “To exercise a natural right to self defense using the most efficient and common tool, a handgun.” While open carry of any weapon is legal in Michigan, your stated objective focuses on a lawful carry of handguns. I suspect that the Ponderosa meeting might have gone off without a hitch had members chosen to carry only handguns. I am somewhat bothered by this, because it appears to me that the inclusion of a long gun was designed to elicit a police response and/or media attention.

I believe it's good that our organization makes open carry of handguns the focus of our objectives. You are probably right, the Ponderosa meeting would have probably gone well without the long gun, but the police decided to intervene of their own will and against the wishes of the manager (who only contacted their non-emergency line to verify that it was legal, as I understand it (I wasn't there).

I have also followed the ongoing saga between MOC and the CADL. If memory serves me correctly, the first action your members took there was to carry a shotgun into the library. It begs that same question as above. If your stated focus is hand guns, was the shot gun an attempt to draw police/media attention? I also have it on good authority that a person was contacted by both the security staff and the police for carrying an airsoft gun. I know that fact has been disputed by your members but I find it troubling.  How is the lawful and responsible carry of handguns furthered by someone using a toy gun to incite a problem at an already unfriendly location?

I could go on and on about this point, but I'll try to be brief. In short, MOC does not open carry. Individuals do. When someone from the public (like yourself) asks of actions that MOC members take, I think we need to distance MOC from those actions. So in short, my answer to you would be, "While we do not condemn the legal, ethical, and safe open carry of long guns, MOC did not coordinate, sponsor, or otherwise organize that event" and then I would proceed to give you links to our forum where we have MOC 'sponsored' events posted, and I would invite you to attend, with a smile on my face. On to the specifics of that event: That individual was a member but I don't believe he was a member when those actions took place. He chose to not renew his membership. I would welcome him back if he so chose to re-join, but I would respectfully encourage (perhaps mentor) him into what is practical and what may bring less negative attention. But I would not condemn him or restrict him of his liberty to open carry a long gun if he decided to.

As I stated above, I am generally supportive of open carry. However, just because something is legal does not mean it is always a good idea. It is perfectly legal for me to put on a Speedo bathing suit, high heels, and a pair of aviators and stand in front of the capitol building doing the hustle. Legal or not, that is most certainly a stupid idea that would be met with hostility by those who were subjected to it. I have similar views of open carry in an urban setting. I think openly carrying a firearm makes you a target in the event of an incident. You would present the strongest threat to a criminal which would rob you of the element of surprise. Open carrying also puts you in a position where you might be expected to act. Responsible gun owners know that being justified in the use of deadly force is not the only factor to be considered. You must also have a clear line of fire both in front of and behind the target. There are many possible settings within a restaurant or library where taking a shot may not be the best course of action. Openly carrying a gun could result in an uneducated person expecting a response you know is not proper.

I completely agree about your speedo point. But at the same time, that which is "practical" or "a good idea" or "stupid" or "ridiculous" is only our opinion. That individual still can do the hustle in front of the capitol building because that individual has liberty. Perhaps the most essential part of freedom is tolerance. It's something that I find lacking both within and outside of the gun rights movement. We as gun rights supporters cannot be intolerant of other gun rights supporters simply because we fear the intolerance of those that are against gun rights. But that's exactly what it happening.

As far as open carry making you a target, I don't believe there's sufficient evidence to support this. On the contrary, nature demonstrates that the weak are preyed upon. As far as concealed carry vs open carry: Concealed carry is a purely reactive method of defense. Your only option when a threat comes your way is to engage the threat (if you are unable to flee). Open carry, on the other hand, is both reactive and proactive. It gives you the ability to reactively resort with deadly force just like concealed carry, but it also gives you the benefit of proactively preventing a crime from even occurring since the presence of a gun acts a crime deterrent. You can potentially stop a crime from occuring with open carry where with concealed carry, you would be forced to use deadly force.

I also worry about the image MOC is presenting to the general public. Whoever coined the phrase any publicity is good publicity is an absolute idiot. The media coverage I have seen of your group pertains to the situations above. Might you be better served my involving yourselves in community events where your presence is invited? I am picturing a large MOC presence in a cancer or aids walk. I see community service events, and floats in parades. If your organization is already involved in such activities, I think greater effort should be placed on getting publicity. I know the media is less likely to run with such positive stories, but even in their absence, you are still reaching members of the general public in a positive way. I worry that the militant, in-your-face actions that have dominated the news coverage harm both MOC and the greater community of gun owners. I would hate to see libraries added to pistol free zones as a result of public outcry, or CPLs become harder to obtain. I would hate to see anti-gun forces unite to illegalize open carry entirely.

One of our goals is to dispel the myths that a holstered gun is dangerous, that we are nutcases with guns, that we pose a threat to society, that we are out to scare people, etc.... The more that people see us with guns acting responsibly and respectfully in our every day lives, the more we hope people will change their mind about us. I don't agree with the militant, in-your-face approach. But I do agree with open carrying where ever you normally go. If that means to the store, fine. If that means to the library, fine. But I don't think we should go to the library just to scare people or stir up trouble. Unfortunately, in doing our every day activities, we come across governments that think they can illegally infringe on our rights. The press coverage may be negative when this occurs, but it's simply us standing up for our rights, employing all of the peaceful legal means that we have available to us. I think we can do more charity work (we already to Adopt-a-Highway).

In closing, I would like to thank anyone who took the time to read this. I hope that your responses will help me better understand MOC and your mission. Perhaps you may change my position on certain issues, and hopefully you are open to some of my constructive suggestions. I already agree with you in principle, just not necessarily in practice. Hopefully my thoughts will help you engage a large group of Michiganders

It's good to talk with people on all sides of the issue. I appreciate your tolerance and respect here even though you might not have the same position we do. I also hope we can learn from each other, and am glad to see that happen here without descending into flame wars as it unfortunately so often does. You are welcome to stay if you would like!

God bless.

[ken243]

Thank you for your post. I would echo all points made but for the sake of saving time, I have only one point.

Media coverage is exactly that, media. Solid, logical and accurate stories are boring to the general public. Debate, conflict and drama tune  people in. The media coverage on any person or group can be "adapted" to fit the flavor of the day. A perfect sample is the war on terror. Common sense dictates the obvious. But, some media outlets portray such terrorists as "holy warriors" and "heros" to feed the moral of such people.

When it comes right down to it, common sense isn't. So as long as such "americans" feed on this drama the media will go with the larger audiance. This should be a lesson to us all, as a country.

[CrossPistols]

  "You Loose your element of surprise"   Oh god I love that one every time I hear it...lol.    If I had a dime for every time I heard that I'd be rich.  I also love the other one... I am an Advocate of gun rights but...   Woo wee are we all having fun yet!

[kryptonian]

hate to sound paranoid if he is an actual interested person but the more press we get the more lurkers we are going to get. anti-guns or left wingers looking for a quote to hang us would find it easy in here if we aren't careful. i have read what i thought to be "baiting" in the forums before and it easily stirred it up. look out.

[autosurgeon]

Since the OP has not posted again I suspect it may be a bait post as well.

Reply with care people.

Sent from my Droid Flipside using Tapatalk

[CV67PAT]

If I loose the element of surprise, then there is no surprise.

I smell troll... And I should know, according to someone who's brain is curdled.

[hamaneggs]

If I loose the element of surprise, then there is no surprise.

I smell troll... And I should know, according to someone who's brain is curdled.

I believe 100% situational awareness while OCing should suprise any BG intent on staying alive.

[kubel]

Since the OP has not posted again I suspect it may be a bait post as well.

Reply with care people.

Sent from my Droid Flipside using Tapatalk

You almost make it sound like we have something to hide. 

We should have no such concerns. If we do have concerns that someone may say something that can be used against us, that person is wrong and that needs to be addressed immediately, not silenced. We should never worry that what we say can be used against us as long as we are confident we are acting professionally, respectfully, and legally (as in, a clear conscience).

Besides, I know if I wanted to bait you guys, I would throw a $20 membership fee at you, get within your ranks, and then harvest whatever I needed without members being worried about what they say to outsiders. I could be doing that now. You never know. 

[CV67PAT]

Since the OP has not posted again I suspect it may be a bait post as well.

Reply with care people.

Sent from my Droid Flipside using Tapatalk

You almost make it sound like we have something to hide. 

We should have no such concerns. If we do have concerns that someone may say something that can be used against us, that person is wrong and that needs to be addressed immediately, not silenced. We should never worry that what we say can be used against us as long as we are confident we are acting professionally, respectfully, and legally (as in, a clear conscience).

Besides, I know if I wanted to bait you guys, I would throw a $20 membership fee at you, get within your ranks, and then harvest whatever I needed without members being worried about what they say to outsiders. I could be doing that now. You never know. 

I sincerely do not think that autosurgeon was inferring that anyone should be silenced. Nor that what we would say could be used against us. Rather I took it as an attempt to exercise some prior restraint in our decorum.

[BTAvery]

Since the OP has not posted again I suspect it may be a bait post as well.

Reply with care people.

Sent from my Droid Flipside using Tapatalk

You almost make it sound like we have something to hide. 

We should have no such concerns. If we do have concerns that someone may say something that can be used against us, that person is wrong and that needs to be addressed immediately, not silenced. We should never worry that what we say can be used against us as long as we are confident we are acting professionally, respectfully, and legally (as in, a clear conscience).

Besides, I know if I wanted to bait you guys, I would throw a $20 membership fee at you, get within your ranks, and then harvest whatever I needed without members being worried about what they say to outsiders. I could be doing that now. You never know. 

I sincerely do not think that autosurgeon was inferring that anyone should be silenced. Nor that what we would say could be used against us. Rather I took it as an attempt to exercise some prior restraint in our decorum.

Thought the same thing