Rising Democratic star and gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis has joined her top Republican rival in supporting a proposed "open carry" law. It would allow people with concealed handgun licenses to wear a pistol on their hip, in full view, while in public. . . .
I am skeptical of the benefits of open carry for reasons that I have detailed before. Still, passage of the law has one benefit, it will presumably stop those people who are openly carrying long guns into public places. Hopefully, open carry advocates will realize that it is best for them to lay low and not create more of a ruckus until the legislation gets passed and then that they will openly carry only handguns, which is what I understand that they have been wanting all along.
A big deal has been made of Starbucks, Jack in the Box, Chipotle, Wendy's, Applebee's, Chili’s and Sonic’s supposed bans on guns, with Bloomberg’s groups declaring “victory.”
Yet, Starbucks “respectfully requesting” customers no longer bring in openly carried guns is not a ban on guns.
Calls to all these restaurants revealed that none of them have changed their policy about posting any signs banning either generally banning guns or permitted concealed handguns.
With 11 million concealed handgun permits in the United States, it is understandable why none of these businesses want to risk losing that many customers.
From a general crime-deterrence perspective point of view, . . .
During a one-on-one interview with The Detroit News, and a press conference outside police headquarters later Monday, Craig said he not only supports the right to bear arms, but Michigan’s Open Carry law, which allows licensed gun owners to carry their firearms in non-restricted areas, as long as they’re not concealed.
“It’s the law, and I support the law,” he said. “The Second Amendment was written more than 200 years ago. It’s not a James Craig law. “
“We’ve heard instances of accidental discharges; or guns getting into the hands of children,” Craig said. “That’s terrible. But we’re talking about law-abiding, responsible citizens. ‘Responsible’ is the key word here.” . . .
Craig said he doesn’t understand why anyone would have a problem with a police chief saying he supports the Constitution.
“I’m pro-life,” he said. “I’m pro-safety. I support law-abiding citizens’ right to protect themselves against imminent danger.”
Craig said responsible gun ownership was analogous to responsible driving.
“The majority of people on the roads drive responsibly,” he said. “So if a few people drive irresponsibly, what’s the solution? Do we take away all cars?” . . .
“Privately, I’m sure some (chiefs) will agree with me,” Craig said. “There was a study done where 15,000 line officers were polled, and they overwhelmingly supported the right to carry.” . . .
Don’t carry long guns into Texas businesses.That was the message that gun-rights groups delivered Thursday to tens of thousands of supporters statewide through an open letter released to the media. If that’s not enough incentive, officials remind Texans that long guns aren’t allowed in businesses that sell alcoholic drinks. Any business in violation could lose its permit to sell drinks, and any person who violates the law faces criminal trespassing charges, according to state officials. More than anything, leaders of the effort to make open carry legal in Texas fear that the uproar over efforts to carry long guns into local restaurants is detracting from their overall goal. “We ask that members take a step back and make an objective assessment of what we are trying to accomplish and help us get open carry passed for everyone,” according to the letter jointly sent out by Come and Take It Texas, Texas Carry, Gun Rights Across America and Open Carry Texas. “We must be willing and able to recognize what works and what doesn’t, but we need your help to make these efforts a success.” . . . Statewide leaders of the movement — who are also encouraging supporters to consider switching from long guns to black powder revolvers — say they needed to reach out to fellow open-carry advocates to make sure they draw the right kind of attention to the movement. “We think that the groups have grown so large so fast and we have so many new people,” said Terry Holcomb Sr., a pastor and president of Texas Carry. “With all the mistakes we’ve seen recently, we decided we needed to go ahead and put the policy out.” . . . .
The main point of allowing people to carry guns is protection, not intimidation. And on that point I have generally favored concealed versus open carry.
. . . Several officials, including the Hinds County district attorney, sued to block the law, saying there could be chaos if people were openly carrying guns in public places. Circuit Judge Winston Kidd put the measure on hold just before it was to become law July 1.
After hearing arguments, Kidd issued an injunction July 12, saying the law was on hold until the Legislature can clarify it. . . .
So the official date that the law goes into effect is August 29th.
"Gun-toting advocates protest charges against teen in Birmingham"
I lived in the Birmingham area off and on when I was a kid and I have one memory of kids walking down the street where we lived with rifles. I suppose that things have changed a fair amount. While I generally prefer concealed carry, this article still provides an interesting discussion of the emotions at play. From the Detroit News:
. . . At issue is the April 13 arrest of Sean M. Combs, a Troy High School student, after he strolled Old Woodward Avenue in downtown Birmingham with a M-1 rifle strapped to his back.He faced three misdemeanor charges for brandishing a weapon, resisting and obstructing police, and disturbing the peace — each punishable by up to 93 days in jail.
Gun enthusiasts and supporters of "open carry" flocked to the regularly scheduled meeting of the commission, which was not expected to take action or address the charges, to voice their opposition.
They say the penalties ignore a right protected by law, even if that might be unpopular among some. They also called for improved police training.
"Why ruin the life of an 18-year-old man for the actions of an overzealous police officer?" said John Roshek, president of the Citizens League for Self Defense, a group that works to educate people on their Second Amendment rights and open carry. . . .
There were two interesting pieces of news here: 1) Open carry has passed in Oklahoma and 2) there are now about 125,000 permit holders in the state. This open carry law is relatively restrictive in that it requires a concealed carry permit. From CNBC:
A bill to allow Oklahomans with a concealed-carry permit to openly carry their handguns is headed to the governor, who is expected to sign the legislation that passed the state Senate on Thursday. The bill, approved by a 33-10 vote, would allow those with a concealed-carry handgun permit to openly carry their firearms in holsters from November 1. Those without such permits could obtain a gun permit and openly carry a firearm if they meet legal criteria, pass a background check and undergo firearms training. . . . about 125,000 people in the state. Oklahoma has been one of six states in the country to prohibit the open-carry of firearms, along with Texas, Florida, Illinois, New York and California (handguns only), according to the Brady Campaign, the gun control advocacy group in Washington, D.C. . . . Some 44 states allow some form of open-carry firearms, with only 11 requiring permits to do so, according to the Brady Campaign. . . .
For some information across states see here, though double check things because there are some errors.
Advocates of "open carry" laws have been pushing for several years to make it legal for gun owners to display their handguns in public places, arguing the practice would increase public safety and is protected under the Second Amendment.
Their campaign has had mixed results. Florida last year enacted a law allowing people to "briefly and openly" display firearms, provided they don't do so in "an angry or threatening manner." That law loosened how people can handle guns in public but is considered too restrictive by most open-carry proponents.
California last year banned the open carry of firearms, as have Illinois and Texas.
Fourteen states have laws allowing handgun owners to openly display their weapons. Advocates say the practice is legal in 29 states that are silent on the issue, according to OpenCarry.org, a gun-rights organization. "Just because it is not in vogue to openly carry doesn't mean that it is improper or illegal," said Dave Workman, editor of TheGunMag.com. . . .
Number of Concealed Carry Permits by County in California
With Governor Jerry Brown signing a law that banned the open carry of unloaded guns, in some counties people are effectively banned from carry a gun for protection in any way. For example, no civilian in San Francisco has a concealed handgun permit. In Los Angeles, only 220 people have permits. Relatively rural Kern county has given out 3,789 permits. The information was obtained by the CalGuns Foundation and their discussion is available here.
Under the statutory scheme, even if Plaintiffs are denied a concealed weapon license for self-defense purposes from Yolo County, they are still more than free to keep an unloaded weapon nearby their person, load it, and use it for self-defense in circumstances that may occur in a public setting. Yolo County’s policy does not substantially burden Plaintiffs’ right to bear and keep arms. Therefore, rational basis review applies. . . .
The California Assembly voted Tuesday to ban openly carrying handguns in public. . . .
Supporters of the bill, including author Lori Saldana (D-San Diego), argued that the practice intimidates the unarmed and wastes police resources because officers frequently have to respond to worried callers saying there's a person with a gun outside Starbucks, or a similarly crowded public space. The ban is supported by the California Police Chiefs Assn.
It is currently legal to openly carry a gun in public in California as long as it's not loaded. Some gun enthusiasts have been known to carry ammunition in a separate pocket, supporters of the bill said.
Opponents argued that there have been no serious incidents associated with openly carrying firearms in California, and called the bill a solution in search of a problem. . . .
ITEM NO. (26) 11-0109 MOTION (GARCETTI - KORETZ - ET AL.) relative to feasibility and legality of banning the open carry of handguns in the City.
Recommendation for Council action: REQUEST the City Attorney to report on the feasibility and legality of banning the open carry of handguns in the City.
Presumably, the City Attorney Carmen Trutanich is still negotiating with the City Council. After all, the city did cut his office by 30%, he is going to want something in return for signing off on a blatantly unconstitutional (both State and Federal) ordinance.
Item number twenty-seven was passed unanimously, by members present. It reads as follows:
ITEM NO. (27) 11-0109-S1 MOTION (KORETZ - GARCETTI) relative to requesting the Chief Legislative Analyst (CLA) and City Attorney to report to Council to share their legal understandings concerning current federal, state and local parameters concerning gun issues. Recommendations for Council action:
1. REQUEST the CLA and City Attorney to report back to Council, within 30 days, to share their legal understandings concerning current federal, state and local parameters and projected outcomes concerning gun issues and actual or likely gun and ammunition-related legislation, and to share any information, insights, advice and ideas deemed to be pertinent and helpful by the CLA and City Attorney.
2. REQUEST the local community organizations aimed at stemming gun violence, including Women Against Gun Violence and Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, be invited to attend any such presentation and discussion, and to share their information, insight, advice and ideas.
Here is something that I get asked about a lot, and I just posted this note on a facebook page so I thought that I would repost it here.
I have no problem with people openly carrying their guns, but there are crime deterrent benefits from concealed carry that you definitely don't get from open carry. Here is one example. As Israel has learned the hard way, simply putting armed police and military on the streets didn't stop terrorist attacks. Even if you have openly armed police or military on a bus, the terrorist has the option to either wait for them to leave the scene or to kill them first. With CCW, the attacker doesn't know who is able to defend themselves and he doesn't know whom to attack first.
Take the case of attacking individual victims who are not around other people. Having more people carry concealed generally produces more of an overall crime reducing effect than open carry because criminals will leave the open carry person alone and then wait for someone that is unarmed. Concealed carry people produce a benefit for people other than themselves.
The question here isn't whether open carry doesn't deter crime. The question is which deters crime more: open or concealed carry.
The main reason for carrying openly is to make a public statement, to demonstrate to others that it is legal to carry a gun. That is fine if you want to make a public statement and that is your choice. If you want to reduce crime, while having some people with open carry is fine, having the same percentage of people with concealed carry would have a greater impact.
This point is independent of licensing. Obviously some states such as Arizona, Alaska, 98+ percent of Montana, and Vermont allow concealed carry without a license. Hopefully with a few more states changing their laws to adopt a "Vermont" style approach it will be possible to test how effective in reducing crime.
"We think it's an accident waiting to happen," Amanda Wilcox, of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said of gun-toting protesters mixing with frightened citizens in public places.
Wilcox said that allowing firearms in public – recently such a demonstration occurred in downtown Sacramento – sends the wrong message to children. . . .
"California lawmaker would outlaw 'open carry' gun right"
More talk about things that might go wrong rather than giving actual examples. From the Christian Science Monitor:
A California lawmaker has stepped into a growing gun rights debate by introducing legislation that would essentially outlaw what's called the "open carry" of unloaded weapons on public property.
The measure, which was first introduced last month but is not expected to have its first hearing until April, is meant to address the growing “open carry” movement, in which some gun owners have taken to meeting in coffee shops, parks, and restaurants while wearing holstered weapons to raise awareness about gun rights.
“People should be free from the fear and the potential for violence firearms represent,” said Democratic Assembly Member Lori Saldaña of San Diego, in a statement. “These displays of firearms can create potentially dangerous situations.” . . .
AB 1934, as introduced, Saldana. Firearms. Existing law generally regulates firearms transfers, including the use of a register in connection with sales, as specified. This bill would make a technical, nonsubstantive change to those provisions. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 12075 of the Penal Code is amended to read: 12075. The State Printer upon issuing a register shall forward to the Department of Justice the name and business address of the dealer together with the series and sheet numbers of the register. The register shall not be transferable. If the dealer moves his or her business to a different location he or she shall notify the department of such that fact in writing within 48 hours.
A student confronted by police for openly carrying a gun at Utah Valley University says he's within his rights. Now advocates on both sides say his story points to a problem in Utah law.
The student posted on YouTube the confrontation he had with officers after they responded to a report of a man with a gun.
Steven Gunn of the Utah Gun Violence Prevention Center says it points to a problematic gap in Utah law that has not been addressed.
"I can't imagine what the reaction might be, well actually I can," he says, "of a student walking along the campus and seeing another student carrying a shotgun."
Gunn says Utah's gun laws are vague and don't clearly state whether open carry is legal. He says a bill clarifying that issue needs to be drafted.
The student told KSL he was not trying to make a fuss. He agreed to keep his gun concealed for now, but he doesn't feel he should have to.
John Donvan of ABC News has a nice story on people who open carry guns. I meet Donvan at the Intelligence Squared debates and I thought that he was an extremely fair guy. This piece is extremely friendly to the topic.
28,000 signatures nationwide that oppose Starbucks' policy to serve customers who wear guns? Is that it? Just 28,000 nationally?
SEATTTLE (AP) — Coffee chain Starbucks said Wednesday it's sticking to its policy of letting customers carry guns where it's legal and is asking not to be put in the middle of a larger gun-control debate. The company's statement, issued Wednesday, stems from recent campaign by some gun owners, who have walked into Starbucks (SBUX) and other businesses to test state laws that allow gun owners to carry weapons openly in public places. Now, gun control advocates are protesting the policy. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, launched a petition drive demanding that the company "offer espresso shots, not gunshots" and declare its coffeehouses "gun-free zones." And Wednesday, that group planned to deliver 28,000 signatures to the coffee giant's headquarters in Seattle. . . .
Some are emphasizing this as a benefit from open carry. This shows that open carry can have some external benefits in that it protected others at the restaurant, though the external benefit isn't as large as that for concealed carry.
Two customers displaying holstered pistols deterred an armed robbery in a Kennesaw Wafflehouse recently. There is some debate raging in Georgia about whether people should conceal their holstered handguns while in public. Some believe that wearing handguns openly will result in a loss of the element of surprise during a criminal attack, such as an armed robbery, while others believe that wearing handguns openly deters criminal attack. For Matt Brannan and J.P. Mitchell, who carry openly as a routine, the issue is no longer academic. Matt Brannan and J.P. Mitchell were dining in the Wafflehouse on Barrett Parkway at I-575 in Kennesaw at 4:45 in the morning recently when a scout for an armed robbery crew entered the restaurant to case it. At the time, Matt and J.P. thought he looked a little suspicious, as he was wandering around the small restaurant like he was looking for someone. Unknown to Matt and J.P., two cars full of armed robbers where parked behind the restaurant waiting for the scout's report. The scout saw that two of the customers were wearing holstered 1911 Springfield Mil-Spec .45 pistols, and he immediately turned and left the store. Meanwhile, conscientious Cobb County Police Officer D. Lowe had noticed suspicious cars sitting behind the restaurant in the dark and decided to investigate. He caught men with masks and rifles who had been preparing to rob the Wafflehouse. The criminals informed the police that they had changed their mind upon discovering armed customers and were waiting for Matt and J.P. to leave. Ironically, the police car was pulling in to the parking lot just as Matt and J.P. were driving away. In other words, had Matt and J.P. not been armed, the robbery probably would have occurred before the police intervened. . . .
PHOENIX — Travel icon Arthur Frommer says he won't be spending his tourism dollars at the Grand Canyon, or anywhere else in Arizona, because the state's laws allow people he described as "thugs" and "extremists" to openly carry firearms.
The author of budget-travel guides said on his blog Wednesday that he was "shocked beyond measure" by reports that protesters openly carried guns and rifles outside a Phoenix building where President Barack Obama spoke on Monday.
Frommer says he won't personally travel in a state where civilians carry loaded weapons as a means of political protest.
Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon says he spoke with Frommer Thursday and invited him to visit the city to clear up any possible misconceptions about safety.
You can read Mr. Frommer's own discussion here. Unfortunately, he doesn't really understand what happened in Arizona (see here and here).
Well, Opencarry.org has a list of other states that Mr. Frommer won't be able to travel to (their maps are interactive and allow you to see the precise laws in different states). There are ten other states that have laws similar to Mr. Frommer. There are 17 other states that he should probably also want to avoid. For example, Pennsylvania outside of Philadelphia is exactly the same as Arizona in terms of openly carrying a gun and within Philadelphia people can carry openly with a permit. At the very least, Mr. Frommer will be stuck to visiting just Philadelphia in the state.
Thanks to Anthony Troglio for also noticing this link.
UPDATED: Chris Matthews interviewing citizen who brought a gun to Obama's health care town hall in New Hampshire (person was outside the building)
Much of this was originally posted on August 11th, but new information has caused me to move this back to the top of my page (something that I have only done a couple of times in the past). In particular, that William Kostric, the man with a gun, was attacked by union members immediately before the event and behaved extremely responsibly. Kostric was on private property a few blocks and a few hours away from the president. More importantly, he always carries his gun with him, so it was not a provocative act.
This segment on Chris Matthews' show is hard to listen to this simply because Matthews sounds like he is yelling the whole time. Still at about 6:54 into the piece, the person that Matthews is interviewing mentions my book, More Guns, Less Crime. I think that Kostric did an excellent job keeping his cool with Matthews' attacking him. For someone who isn't used to being in the national media, I think that he explained himself quite clearly.
Union members kicked one person with William Kostric and spit on the person with Kostric. Kostric did not behave improperly. As noted in the clip, "initially, the thug didn't see William's sidearm. But once [the union member] did, he backed right up and moved on down the line to the next person."
Thanks to Angela Thornton Canny for sending me these two youtube links.
Interestingly, we do not have any agreement at all on the question of whether it is a good plan to bring a gun to a gathering of angry and overwrought people. To be honest, I thought we might be able to nail this one down.
But no.
“The question is, why don’t people bear arms these days,” said William Kostric, when asked why he came to welcome President Obama to Portsmouth, N.H., on Tuesday with a protest sign and a loaded handgun strapped to his thigh. This turned out to be completely legal under New Hampshire law. . . .
Allah Pundit at Hotair chimed in with this: "I doubt it would have sat well with our readers if lefties carrying Bushitler signs had shown up to Dubya’s events packing heat."
UPDATE: The person with the gun was apparently a couple of blocks away from where the president was.
UPDATE2: Liberal Talker Ed Schultz: Conservatives "Want Obama To Get Shot"
About a dozen people carrying guns, including one with a military-style rifle, milled among protesters outside the convention center where President Barack Obama was giving a speech Monday—the latest incidents in which protesters have openly displayed firearms near the president. . . .
UPDATE4: Federal legislation called for to ban guns near Obama events
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) called on the Homeland Security Department and the U.S. Secret Service on Wednesday to provide tighter restrictions on citizens carrying weapons, openly or concealed, while in the vicinity of President Barack Obama.
Norton, who sits on the Homeland Security Committee, made the request after numerous news reports have shown groups of people brandishing firearms while outside of events held by Obama over the past several weeks.
“It is clear that if the Secret Service can temporarily clear all aircraft from air space when the president is in the vicinity, the agency has the authority to clear guns on the ground that are even closer to the President,” Norton said.
But the Secret Service says that Obama was never in danger when a group of about a dozen protesters brandished their firearms outside the Phoenix convention center earlier this week where he was speaking. . . .
