Open Carry Opinions

Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 1:37 am

I'd like to hear from all of the forum users on the following question:

Should Representative Mark Martin have negotiated with committee members further? Should he have proposed only open carry with a CHCL permit? Is there any other concessions he could have made? I'm curious to hear all opinions!

Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:12 am

Personally, I don't see a problem with requiring some type of licensing for open carry. If they wanted it to be that you area CHCL holder to open carry, thats fine with me also.

Guest

I'm not particularly fond of requiring a CHL permit to open carry, but if it would get the law on the books I think we could work on amending it later just like we have done with the CHL laws since 1994. It may take 10 year after it passes to make it what we want, but at least the foothold would be there.

You can't eat the whole elephant at once...libs figured that out 60 years ago and look where its got them and us. Shocked

Co-Founder Joined: Jan 17, 2009 Posts: 1080

a licnese is an infringment on the the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Active Participant Joined: Mar 10, 2009 Posts: 1457

I am offended by the thought that after what I have seen, learned and decisions made during my journey through the Concealed Carry Process as well as expenses, fingerprinting, checks etc etc etc...

I am offended if after all of that "Presto!" open carry is legal and any old Arkansan can walk into and out of a gun shop packing a gun on his or her belt/purse without any of the things that I had to do to get permission to carry a weapon.

No sir. Let's continue to lean on those who wish to open carry and cause these people to get the same medicine as the conceals do.

Criminals are thier own law, disconnected from any other and will carry (Open or concealed) regardless of any law on the books. They dont care.

Privately I dont care if anyone gets and carries a gun of any kind because I was raised around them and it's no big deal, like a tool to me such as a Power saw or something.

I have a feeling that I live now in a world that has seen one or two generations since I became of age filled with people who twist and squirm around guns because they are icky, awful bad things and wussified to the point of pacifist denial of basal human feelings and instincts related to fight, flight and protection of self and family.

I am grateful to Arkansas for not being so uptight about weapons as the East Coast states are. I got out of the East coast while the getting out was good. Just hate to think that I would have to continue westward on my journey seeking basic freedoms paid for in blood by our father's and fathers going back to 1774.

Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:54 pm

First let me say that I believe that we have a "Right", granted to us by the Constitution, to carry a weapon as we see fit. Not how others believe we should, or shouldn't, as it would seem. That being said, I would agree with concessions to licensing in order to get the process moving forward. We are losing our "Rights" one step at a time, so we cannot expect to get them back to the full intent of the Founding Fathers in one huge leap. An inch forward is better than standing still.

Thanks,

Wade

Board Member Joined: Feb 04, 2009 Posts: 362

It's a catch-22.

With our current Legislative body (which hopefully will be very different next time around) the question they want answered is, "Why do people NEED this law."

They do not see it as a right. They see it as a privilege.

Mark Martin's push for the law was centered around giving people the ability to legally provide for their own self-defense without licensing requirements. His argument for allowing poor boys to carry was spot on.

Unfortunately, current lawmakers could care less. As long as they insist on seeing a NEED proven to justify their support, we will continue to see our RIGHTS denied.

I am against creating any new fees/licensing requirements for carrying a weapon. The current CHCL law is prohibitive enough. We don't need moer gun laws. We need to stick it to the people who break the ones we already have.

It boils down to this: Do you want to exercise your RIGHT to open carry, or do you want the gubmint to grant you a privilege to open carry?

I vote rights of the people over government control any day.

Just my .02

Active Participant Joined: Feb 06, 2009 Posts: 106

RevNate Said

Quote:

I vote rights of the people over government control any day

"COME ON" Rev I'am with ya Mr. Green

Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:24 pm

Negotiate? What for? He's right. It's our right, guaranteed in the Constitution and upheld by the Supreme Court last I heard.

I obviously would have been delighted to get an open carry with a CHL, but it's still only a half fix. Don't loose sight of the ball.

The issue is not whether the state allows us open carry but rather why are they denying us our guaranteed right to do so.

THANK YOU AGAIN MARK MARTIN!!!

Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:18 pm

+1 Rev

Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 1:26 am

For people riding the fence on this issue, and you are wondering whether you should trust your fellow man or woman with the right to self-defense, read some of the laws of Vermont, which allows complete open carry.

I can't think of a time where they had many senseless shootings, either...

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/sections.cfm?Title=13&Chapter=085

Here is the open carry part of it; does it look familiar?

§ 4003. Carrying dangerous weapons

A person who carries a dangerous or deadly weapon, openly or concealed, with the intent or avowed purpose of injuring a fellow man, or who carries a dangerous or deadly weapon within any state institution or upon the grounds or lands owned or leased for the use of such institution, without the approval of the warden or superintendent of the institution, shall be imprisoned not more than two years or fined not more than $200.00, or both.

Board Member Joined: Feb 04, 2009 Posts: 362

Yeah, but you see... In VT, the verb "bear" (as in 'keep and bear arms') is defined as carry. Whereas in Arkansas it apparently means something completely different.

Those silly people from Vermont! Actually reading the constitution. How ridiculous![/b]

Posted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 11:57 pm

arkyhog wrote:

I'd like to hear from all of the forum users on the following question:

Should Representative Mark Martin have negotiated with committee members further? Should he have proposed only open carry with a CHCL permit? Is there any other concessions he could have made? I'm curious to hear all opinions!

IMO, negotiating would be like a Jehovah's Witness arguing with a Catholic wouldn't it?

Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 4:55 pm

I think it is time to contact legislators and form a plan for getting this legislation passed this next session... I am going to contact Mark Martin and see if there is anything we need to do now!


Login or Register	PO Box 13219 • Maumelle, AR 72113 info@arkansascarry.com • 501-291-4839
Home About Us Our Mission Board Members Bylaws Contact Us Donations Feedback Members Your Account Logout Newsletters Store Memberships Coming Soon Information 2010 Questionnaires Senate Candidates House Candidates Arkansas Gun Laws CHCL Instructor Map Firearm Safety Tips Flying with Firearms American Airlines Reciprocity Maps Gun Clubs Product Reviews Post a Review Read Reviews Recommended Sites Shooting Ranges Concealed Carry Arkansas State Police Website CHCL Instructor Database Discussions Reciprocity Maps Open Carry Sign the Petition! HB2184: The "Open Carry" Bill Why we Support Open Carry Discussions Reciprocity Maps Community Classified Ads Disclaimer Post an Ad Most Popular Ads Events Calendar View Calendar Post an Event Forums FAQ/Help New Posts Private Messages Search Upload Avatar Image Gallery Gallery List Your Gallery Upload Images Social Networking Facebook Group Follow Us on Twitter Surveys Media Files Downloads Letters to the Editor TV Appearances Newspaper Articles Radio Interviews Articles Submit News News Archives Show All Stories Top Stories Search Site Forums