Tuesday - March 16, 2010

Open Carry In Alaska

I saw this over at Alphecca, but I want to go a different direction with it. Jeff, the guy who runs Alphecca, lives in Vermont where concealed carry ( CCW ) is legal without any licensing. That means any adult citizen of Vermont can have a gun in their pocket if they feel like it. Alaska is the same way. No papers. Alaska also allows for open carry ( OC ) which means carrying a pistol at your side in a holster, like a cop or a cowboy. I guess it also means carrying a rifle or shotgun on your shoulder with a sling. Having a firearm in your hands is called brandishing, and at that point you perhaps start breaking laws, depending on why you are doing that.

Anyway, a few people at a town hall kind of meeting in Alaska were OC. Some people noticed and got upset. Some government officials said it was wrong, some said it was no big deal.

My view is that OC is better than CCW in most normal circumstances. I’m not saying that there shouldn’t be CCW, that’s your right too. Just that OC has no sneaky aspect to it.

To which I feel the proper response is “tough shit, this is America, get used it, learn to love it, or get out”.

Guns in Fairbanks: Should you bring weapons to a heated public debate?

FAIRBANKS — Carrying a firearm into a municipal building is legal, but is it wise to openly display a gun at a heated public meeting?

The presiding officer of the Borough Assembly said openly displayed sidearms at a meeting on Feb. 25, when emotions ran high, didn’t bother him. But some assembly members said it concerns them. Borough officials said no one complained to them about the firearms, however.

On the agenda at that Feb. 25 meeting was the introduction of an air pollution control plan, and it drew more than 100 people to the meeting, including vocal opposition. Many criticized the plan and some criticized the municipal leaders. People held picket signs. There was shouting at assembly members and at the mayor. There were threats.

Officials with the three area municipalities said firearms are allowed in most municipal buildings and at public meetings. State law prohibits local governments from restricting gun rights any more than the state’s restrictions.

But that doesn’t mean openly carrying a firearm to a stormy public meeting is an exercise in good judgment, according to Assemblywoman Nadine Winters and Assemblymen Tim Beck, Guy Sattley, Hank Bartos and Matt Want.

“I think it’s an intimidation factor,” Beck said. “And that’s impeding the public process.”

Want, one of the newest assembly members, said if the firearms were meant to intimidate, then that’s wrong.

“I very much appreciate people’s ability to exercise their Second Amendment rights. But to me, if it’s used to intimidate, then it’s an abuse of that right.”

Bartos said openly carried firearms at heated public meetings make him nervous.

Sattley said the fact that bringing a gun to a meeting is legal doesn’t make it advisable.

“I think that’s not the place for it,” he said. “It’s already heated enough without that added to the twist.”

None of the assemblymen said they saw the openly displayed firearms. But Winters did.

“Did I feel threatened the other night or worried? No, not even one little bit,” she said. But Winters said she wonders why anyone would want to openly carry a firearm to a public meeting.

“I can’t think of any reason why you come to a public hearing on something that affects the community and you need to bring a gun,” she said.

Assemblyman Joe Blanchard said he sees no problem with it.

“I think people have the right to carry their firearms wherever they are,” Blanchard said. “As long as you’re not threatening anybody with it.”

Joe Nava, a local firearms safety instructor who formerly sat on the board of directors of the National Rifle Association, said openly carrying firearms unnecessarily upsets people uncomfortable with guns.

Nava made the point in a short essay he posted on the Web site of Fairbanks radio station KFAR, where he hosts a weekly show on gun issues.

“I am not jumping in on any side of any argument that you might put in the newspaper,” he said when reached by telephone.

Ok, fine Joe. Then allow me to do so. No citizen who lives in Alaska has a right to be “uncomfortable” around firearms used or carried in a legal manner. How’s that? It’s friggin’ Alaska fer cryin’ out loud. Where the bears and the wolves outnumber the people 10 to 1. Where a population of 250 is a big town. You betcha!

“Uncomfortable”?? I hear that PC term all the time, mostly from the lefties. What a patronizing, pusillanimous, evasive, agenda-driven, bullshit utterance. How about reaching down into your lacy mini-thong and doing a double touch to see if your balls are still attached, and if so, then just be upfront and mention what your objection is? And what makes you think you have any right to feel “comfortable” in the first place. Isn’t being “uncomfortable” but keeping your trap shut exactly what “tolerance” means?

No, that little rant wasn’t against this guy Joe. He HAS to remain neutral; he has a gun business to run. I don’t. I’m ranting against elitist government employees who know what’s good for you better than you know yourself, who expose that elitism by assuming base motivations about the citizenry, and also against other small minded pissants who use “uncomfortable” as a petty, peevish ploy to get their way WITHOUT even a discussion. Because then they would have to explicitly state what it is that is making them “uncomfortable”, how much, and why, and they just might find themselves laughed out of town. It’s a power play, and 80% of the time it’s a snotty one. Because if it was over a REAL issue, like “stop setting my cubicle on fire you psycho!” you know they’d find a way to express that thought in an instant.

Is open carry a good idea in high density areas with lots of crime and pickpockets? Maybe not. CCW might be better there. Those are not typical, normal circumstances. But I’ll wager the folks in those seedy areas openly brandishing don’t get mugged. They also don’t have to wait on line! And that is a use of firearms to intimidate. But OC at a town hall meeting? Not. At the very worst, it’s a reminder. To elitist government types. Hey, maybe that’s the real reason they’re “uncomfortable”!

Posted by Drew458     on 03/16/2010 at 12:13 PM   
Filed Under: • Miscellaneous •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2008 Domain Owner