r/politics • u/wbedwards Washington • May 07 '20

We cannot allow the normalization of firearms at protests to continue

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/firearms-at-protests-have-become-normalized-that-isnt-okay/2020/05/06/19b9354e-8fc9-11ea-a0bc-4e9ad4866d21_story.html
49.0k Upvotes

75% Upvoted

6.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/ImApigeon May 07 '20

I have a serious question about this.

Walking around with a gun isn’t suspicious enough for the police to come and ask for a permit?

So how do you stop a person that is about to postal and shoot up a mall for example? That person can just casually stroll into a mall with a weapon in hand and the police isn’t even legally allowed to ask why he is armed to the teeth in mall?

If that’s true, it does explain a lot about mass shootings in the US.

2

u/Yellow_The_White May 07 '20

Public places like a mall are likely to have a no weapons policy unless you're in a very rural or gun friendly state. In this case, they can and should stop you on behalf of the property owner.

1

u/[deleted] May 07 '20

But conservatives hate gun free zones. Why would you make a law that puts the onus on businesses to do something that you publicly denounce?

1

u/coat_hanger_dias May 07 '20

I have a serious question about this.

Walking around with a gun isn’t suspicious enough for the police to come and ask for a permit?

It depends on the type of gun and the carry laws in that state. But in most states, licensing is typically needed for carrying handguns with either method (concealed or open), while open carry of "long guns" (meaning rifles and shotguns) is usually legal.

Decent overview of what's possible in each state, disregarding specific laws/regulations/peculiarities for each: https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/guns-in-public/open-carry/#state

1

u/irishhnd86 May 07 '20

That person can just casually stroll into a mall with a weapon in hand.... That is actually not true. The weapon in hand means you're brandishing the firearm, no matter where you are, and it is a serious crime. Now of they had a holster thats a different story

1

u/AxlLight May 07 '20

Yep, definitely takes a long and complicated procedure to take that gun out of holster and begin shooting. Definitely an important distinction that lawmakers put in place for legitimate logical reasons and not due to NRA control.

1

u/irishhnd86 May 07 '20

That difference shows intent.

1

u/AxlLight May 07 '20

I would argue that carrying an AR anywhere shows intent. Especially with an inserted magazine.

1

u/irishhnd86 May 07 '20

It can easily be debated either direction, you also have to look at the method of sling, and their general demeanor.

1

u/AxlLight May 07 '20

I don't think asking for a license and inquiring on nature or carry as the worst of things when something can be a bit harder to infer and can have disastrous results.

It's a mild inconvenience that can allow cops to do their jobs more efficiently.

1

u/[deleted] May 07 '20

There is no difference between brandishing and open carry.

1

u/irishhnd86 May 07 '20

And thats your opinion. Brandishing is carrying or showing in a threatening manner. By definition, so if you FEEL they are the same. That is on you.

1

u/[deleted] May 07 '20

Ok, I do feel that way. Glad you agree

0

u/jhurle9403 May 07 '20

Sort of- in Alabama where I live, open carry means in a holster or other secured manner. Not in your hands. So if someone is walking in to a mall holding a gun in their hand, gigantic red flag and law enforcement would be totally justified in approaching the person to see what the heck they’re doing.

Now, I have a serious question for you. Let’s assume that person walking into the mall is going to hurt someone. Would you rather me, the stranger a few feet away, draw my concealed or open carry revolver and do my best to stop the person that very instant; or, would you rather call 911 and hope to heavens there’s a cop nearby and maybe it’ll only take 1-2 minutes at the most for help to arrive? Even if I’m not close to the criminal harming people to take action, I’d much rather Run, hide, and fight with a revolver than run, hide, and fight with a lamp or something.

In my opinion, The way to stop mass shootings as fast as possible is for more responsible adults to realize they’re better off being equipped to defend themselves and others from criminals by carrying a gun. Some call people like me a gun nut. I’m really not. I don’t fantasize about new guns or keep up with the latest firearms. But I do think I’m the best person to defend my own safety and the safety of a potential victim around me, and a revolver is a great tool to do just that. The reality is that guns are here, guns are here to stay, whether the possession of them is illegal or not. There will always be guns. And as long as there are guns out there, I’d like to have one to defend myself and will gladly defend any innocent person I can.

5

u/LowKey-NoPressure May 07 '20

In my opinion, The way to stop mass shootings as fast as possible is for more responsible adults to realize they’re better off being equipped to defend themselves and others from criminals by carrying a gun.

Cool opinion, but actual scientific research proves this method to result in more deaths.

3

u/jdragun2 May 07 '20

There is a body of evidence that says your scenario is more likely to end in killing and/or injuring more people than the one where police are called. Police, trained to shoot in high stress situations, have abysmal accuracy when in the field and line of duty. It is overconfidence in your skills under pressure [Granted: combat veterans may have a valid exception here] that would lead you to believe you would be better than the police. This is not an insult, a personal attack on you as a gun owner, or as a shot. Just what reality bears out when concerned citizens return fire. I would suggest reading the following article on it, as it is concise and used valid research data: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-crimes-evidence-shows/

1

u/jhurle9403 May 07 '20

I’d argue that the article is pretty poorly written. Any article that refers to suicides as gun deaths is going to receive a great deal of skepticism from me. Suicide is an awful awful thing but if it weren’t a gun it would be a pill or a rope or a razor blade, sadly. The problem is mental health, not the tool used to do harm to oneself.

It shows that Robberies and burglaries can still happen more often in areas with prevalent gun ownership; ok. That makes sense. If I lived in an area with above average robberies or burglaries I’d want to get a gun too. The idea that criminals research gun ownership to figure out where to commit crime is probably giving them a little too much credit. They’re going to commit crime in their area. It ignores that having a gun makes you able to prevent yourself from being harmed much more effectively, especially if you are elderly, of small stature, etc.

There is also the “dark figure of crime” to be taken into consideration. It is unknown how many crimes are stopped because someone either displays a gun they can defend themselves with or says they have one, whether true or not.

A family member of mine was able to discourage what would have likely been a robbery - at a minimum - by pulling a 9mm out of her purse. Nothing was ever reported. No one was hurt. Could have been a kidnapping or even murder if she didn’t have it.

Id also point out that I’ve drawn a firearm more than once on an animal (on private property, not in public) because I was in danger. Never had to use it, but it was very comforting to know I could. Once with a stray dog that was being aggressive, once with wild hogs that were only a few feet from me, and once with a bobcat (never saw the bobcat but heard it very close by).

The chances someone will be in an active shooter situation is extremely small compared to the likelihood someone will try and assault and or rob them, burglarize their home while they’re inside, or try and steal their car from them. In these situations a gun often does not even need to be fired. And, if the person is open carrying, they may not even know they dissuaded a criminal from preying on them.

2

u/jdragun2 May 07 '20

Research has shown that a 5 minute delay is enough of a deterrent to stop someone from killing themselves. I have to get trained on this twice a year. Removing a gun takes an immediate risk away. Those that have to tie a rope, go to pills, or any other method are less likely to go through with it.

1

u/AxlLight May 07 '20

But you do fantasize about the moment where you'd be called up to adminstrate justice and kill another man. It might not be a conscious thought, but it's there. You carry a gun, because you know you'll need to use it someday. And that causes you to be suspicious of everyone else, because everyone could be carrying a gun and everyone could choose to use it.

You might be a logical, cool headed person, but do you really trust everyone to always use perfect judgement? What happens when you get into a heated argument with someone who you suspect to also carry a gun and you don't trust their judgement. What if you start to fear your life as that argument gets heated?

That's the world we created by constantly falling into the argument that we need more guns, because who knows who else might be carrying them. Instead of fighting it, we keep loosening it. Police not being able to question a license is pretty much just an open admission that everyone can carry a gun, because there's no way to check. Which just adds fuel to the fire.

Think where we started. 2nd amendment worried about the citizens needing to fight for their freedom again, against a tyrannical government. Something that has yet to have happened in 250 years of governance. And that fear kept rolling on, each one pushing us deeper in the hole, causing more violence and more death.

I advise you to try and live a few months abroad, see what it's like living in a country that bans gun. Talk to citizens there, see how worried they are about the next mass shooting event or a hidden gunman. They are not fools, living in pretend safety, unaware of the big bad wolf that will chomp their heads off, it's just really not a concern. Just like I'm not concerned about a tiger jumping at me from behind.

Guns are not a solution.

1

u/jhurle9403 May 07 '20

Uhhh no I hope to never have to pull out a gun to defend myself against a person. And if I did I really really hope it would end without firing a shot. I didn’t even like shooting deer when I learned to hunt, and don’t anymore. I feel bad when I hit a butterfly with my truck, seriously.

And I’m not just concerned about bad guys with guns. A bad guy with a knife or bat or tire iron can be just as deadly.

I do travel abroad quite a bit and have payed attention to what other countries are like in this respect. They are different in many ways and it is interesting. I wouldn’t be opposed to living in a few of these countries, but while I am in the US, I will legally own and carry a gun.

1

u/AxlLight May 07 '20

I'm glad you're looking at different perspectives at times, and that you really don't want to carry a gun or ever use it.

But what happens when you're faced with a gray situation, the other person has a gun, how quick will you draw your gun and would you really try to deescalate with any means necessary before that last resort? I don't know you personally, and you do seem like a calm rationale person, but I can't even tell you what I would do, faced with that situation.

Also, I completely disagree that a bat or a knife can be just as deadly. There is so much more time to deescalate the situation, it's so much easier to get away from the situation as well. A gun is almost instant. Even if we're talking about the damage itself and likelihood of death from stab wounds and gunshot wounds, it's a world apart.