The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old October 21, 2013, 07:56 PM   #26
dakota.potts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Saint Augustine, Florida
Posts: 1,150
This is an interesting thread to me.

I like OC and would do it if legal. OC tends to be unlicensed and he passage of it in my state is my only chance to carry until I turn 21 and I'm a full citizen

I like OC because the evidence presented to me has told me that there are shockingly few times a gun has been taken from someone open carrying, and I'm of the opinion that it dissuades crime before it ever starts.

I think those who open carry should get some grappling training, if not outright retention training, and do so with respect. I believe if you honestly think you need to OC an MG42 for self defense, you should do so. But I also believe most of the guys open carrying AK's into Starbucks and Target aren't doing it because they think they need it for self defense. Demonstration has its place, but in public areas and done with respect. Not on private property with hate flags.

It seems throughout history that open carry was preferred by the states and generally accepted, and it's only recently that that role has reversed. At least from my amateur research.
dakota.potts is offline  
Old October 21, 2013, 09:29 PM   #27
cheezhed
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2007
Posts: 284
I am not opposed to open carry in any way shape or form, but having said that I conceal carry, not because it has any great advantage over open carry or that concealed carry makes the public comfortable I conceal carry because it makes me more comfortable. I also think that on body open carry is more secure than say concealed carry in a purse or man bag. I do think that concealed carry people have had there weapons taken from them also I am just not aware if there a greater or lesser percentage of this occurrence. I am for anyone carrying the way they feel like it.
cheezhed is online now  
Old October 22, 2013, 09:30 AM   #28
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,677
Grappling training is wonderful. Be sure you try it against two or more opponents. See also how it works against knives. Also, see if you can block a BG shooting you with a Lorcin 25 ACP and then taking your gun.

Last - as far as evidence - we have clear evidence that many police have had their gun taken away in struggles. Of course, we all are better than the police in such incidents.

Last we have NO studies that show that OC changes crime rates. The support for CCW had massive criminological studies indicating its utility.

It's all well and nice to OC in a relatively safe gun friendly environment. I suggest for a study, you OC - by yourself - in grappling mode in a high crime area. Esp. if the local populace decides they like your gun.

OC in Starbucks and Whole Foods - why that's a jungle

Pointed out to me by Tom Servo:

http://wendyista.blogspot.com/2011/0...bullet-to.html

Defense: I was walking out the store and this nut carrying a gun started harassing me and following. Thus, I was in fear of my life and retrieved my gun and had to shoot him.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter

Last edited by Glenn E. Meyer; October 22, 2013 at 01:43 PM.
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 02:21 PM   #29
dakota.potts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Saint Augustine, Florida
Posts: 1,150
Glenn, just a question for you.

If you were facing the choice between legally open carrying or not having an option to carry at all, would you choose to open carry or not carry at all?

That's the choice given to me by my state -- unfortunately I can't even open carry a "real" pistol, only an antique firearm like an 1858 Remington cap and ball. At least for another 3 years.

Perhaps this is why I feel the way I do about open carry. It tends to be "constitutional" and unlicensed, as I feel it has to be if concealed carry is not.

I also live in a small suburban town area. I definitely wouldn't do it at the inner city. I might do it at my local mall, but not in a packed environment or downtown in a near big city like Jacksonville.
__________________
For firearms news and discussion from a fellow TFL member, visit shootersreportblog.wordpress.com. If you have a suggestion or would like to comment or contribute, I welcome private messages!

The Shooter's Report is also on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theshootersreport
dakota.potts is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 02:36 PM   #30
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,302
Quote:
It tends to be "constitutional" and unlicensed, as I feel it has to be if concealed carry is not.
It isn't "constitutional." The Framers were mute on the issue of manner or circumstances of carry in public. Some of the political chest-beaters love open carry, so they've branded it "constitutional carry." That's a misnomer, however.

We had a thread on the term very recently, and it's worth reading.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 02:55 PM   #31
dakota.potts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Saint Augustine, Florida
Posts: 1,150
In many states, the argument is made (typically based on a state constitution) that if one form of carry is regulated, the other must be unlicensed, because the licensing of a right converts it to a privilege. I believe it was Arkansas that recently one the court challenge based on this to legalize unlicensed open carry. That's the basis for my use of the term constitutional.

I did read that thread recently, and it was actually the reason I chose to put the word in quotes, since it's now a phrase that's recognized by many in the firearms community.

However, as that's a topic worthy of entire discussion, we can replace the term "constitutional" with unlicensed in order to stay on topic.
__________________
For firearms news and discussion from a fellow TFL member, visit shootersreportblog.wordpress.com. If you have a suggestion or would like to comment or contribute, I welcome private messages!

The Shooter's Report is also on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theshootersreport
dakota.potts is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 03:20 PM   #32
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by dakota.potts
I believe it was Arkansas that recently one the court challenge based on this to legalize unlicensed open carry.
I don't think that was here. We may be gearing up for a challenge, but I don't know of one off the top of my head.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 03:33 PM   #33
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,677
Simplistic question, Dakota. The method of carry depends on how it puts me at risk.

If only open carry was available, Yes - I might carry in a low risk of confrontation environment like Whole Foods.

However, I would not open carry in an environment where the gun itself will bring bad people to me. I also try avoid such places.

Despite grappling and situational awareness bravado, if OC folks are seen worthy prey by predators with planning - they will be taken down.

What is the purpose of your carry? To actually reduce risk to yourself or make a statement in the mall?

Why not open carry a large amount of money around your neck and depend on grappling to defend you against unarmed muggers? Assume you have no gun.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 03:40 PM   #34
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,302
Quote:
If only open carry was available, Yes - I might carry in a low risk of confrontation environment like Whole Foods.
And the problem is, I have a much more acute need to carry in high-risk areas than I do at a pro-gun rally in the suburbs.

There's no way I would want to go a high-risk area with an exposed firearm. As such, if the allowed mode of carry was open vs. concealed, I would throw open carry under the bus in a heartbeat.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 03:56 PM   #35
dakota.potts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Saint Augustine, Florida
Posts: 1,150
Outside of limited demonstration purposes on public government property, I'm against open carry for demonstration purposes as well. My question is purely for the purposes of self defense. Not to walk into target with an AK 47 as was done with the recent "come and take it" protests in Texas.

I probably would also not carry in a high risk area. I live maybe 15 minutes from a pretty poor, high crime area right on the edge of historic Saint Augustine. I've lived here 7 years and have only found reason to go to that area maybe 3 or 4 times since I've lived here. I generally avoid it at all costs, especially any time after dusk. There are certain areas where we avoid wearing watches, rings, and other jewelry when we go as a matter of habit. The same precautions would be prudent for an openly carried firearm, I think. There are some places I have been in states like North Carolina where I wouldn't think much at all of a gun openly carried, but in Philadelphia I would think it was a terrible idea. Likewise, in my area, there are places where I would open carry if it were my only option, and places where I would rather make myself scarce and leave as quickly as possible.

Given the option between unlicensed open carry or unlicensed concealed carry, I would choose concealed carry as long as it had a reasonable accidental view cause like Florida has adopted.

However, from a regulatory point of view, if you can only license one, it makes more sense for the state to regulate concealed carry, making it a crime for those who want to keep their gun hidden without a license. Everybody else can wear their gun in the open where they can see it. That's probably what I would do if I were regulating from a state, not an individual point of view.

Am I making sense, or are we talking the same thing in different ways?
__________________
For firearms news and discussion from a fellow TFL member, visit shootersreportblog.wordpress.com. If you have a suggestion or would like to comment or contribute, I welcome private messages!

The Shooter's Report is also on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theshootersreport
dakota.potts is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 04:05 PM   #36
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
Perhaps I am misremembering, but I do not think there's ever been a successful challenge based on licensing only one of the two modes of carry. Instead, the challenges have been based on, allowing one or the other and not restricting both. ie, the difference between you have to allow both but only one can be regulated and you have to allow at least one.
sigcurious is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 04:14 PM   #37
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,677
Quote:
Given the option between unlicensed open carry or unlicensed concealed carry,
I think you mean licensed concealed carry. But you have put your finger on the great debate. Is it a statement and is it silly to have states regulate open carry vs. the utility of open carry? It seems that many conclude it is safe in safe places and a danger in dangerous places above and beyond the intrinsic danger of the place. The concealed carry method doesn't add to the danger in this latter scenario.

If it is primarily a statement, then does the statement have positive value for the RKBA or negative in the current debates? Concealed carry is much more important for public safety than open carry given the pragmatics.

If you won't open carry in dangerous places then what is it good for? One admits it is a risk then. Should I be able to legally - sure. I can tote my AR into Neiman - Marcus, also. It's near my house.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 04:36 PM   #38
IdahoCarry
Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2013
Location: Hidden Springs, Idaho
Posts: 33
Response to those demanding evidence that criminals avoid armed citizens

In a survey of criminals(read that as FELONS IN PRISON), Professors James D. Wright and Peter Rossi of the Social and Demographic Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts conducted a study in 1982 and 1983 paid for by the U.S. Department of Justice. (Professor Rossi was a former President of the American Sociological Association.) The researchers interviewed 1,874 imprisoned felons in ten states.

88% of the criminals surveyed by Wright and Rossi agreed with the statement that, “A criminal who wants a handgun is going to get one.”(read this to mean that these felons are not obeying the gun laws and the Legislature cannot figure this out)

Wright and Rossi reported that:
81% of interviewees agreed that a “smart criminal” will try to determine if a potential victim is armed.

74% indicated that burglars avoided occupied dwellings, because of fear of being shot.

57% said that most criminals feared armed citizens more than the police.

40% of the felons said that they had been deterred from committing a particular crime, because they believed that the potential victim was armed.

57% of the felons who had used guns themselves said that they had encountered potential victims who were armed.

34% of the criminal respondents said that they had been scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed citizen.

Based on this government-funded research by Wright and Rossi, it would appear to a reasonable and prudent man that armed citizens do have a deterrent effect on crime.
IdahoCarry is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 04:59 PM   #39
K_Mac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 470
Quote:
Concealed carry is much more important for public safety than open carry given the pragmatics.

If you won't open carry in dangerous places then what is it good for? One admits it is a risk then. Should I be able to legally - sure. I can tote my AR into Neiman - Marcus, also. It's near my house.
Glenn the above quote pretty clearly defines the argument for me. I do not want you to bring your AR to the mall just to prove a point. I am good with you carrying a concealed weapon there though.

I believe concealed carry and the right to the personal protection it affords is an important Constitutional issue worth fighting for. That is "the bold, beautiful face of the 2 Amendment" IMO. I do not need to prove my patriotism or Constitutional support by openly carrying a gun on my hip or shoulder. I do believe it is an issue worthy of serious discussion. Wrapping our arguments in the flag and using fear and hyperbole to sell them is not the way this fight will be won.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin

"If you let "need" be a requirement and Government be the arbiter of that "need", then Liberty is as dead as King Tut." Jimbob86
K_Mac is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 05:02 PM   #40
manta49
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,261
Quote:
40% of the felons said that they had been deterred from committing a particular crime, because they believed that the potential victim was armed
It's hardly news that criminals will try to avoid someone that is armed. Did they need a survey to figure that out.
manta49 is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 05:15 PM   #41
Vanya
Staff
 
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 3,877
Quote:
40% of the felons said that they had been deterred from committing a particular crime, because they believed that the potential victim was armed
So, 60% reported that they had never been deterred by such a belief. Hmm.
__________________
"Once the writer in every individual comes to life (and that time is not far off), we are in for an age of universal deafness and lack of understanding."
(Milan Kundera, Book of Laughter and Forgetting, 1980)
Vanya is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 05:27 PM   #42
IdahoCarry
Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2013
Location: Hidden Springs, Idaho
Posts: 33
Response to request for studies proving armed citizens reduce violent crime

Lott and Mustard, Journal of Legal Studies, 1997
Bartley and Cohen, Economic Enquiry, 1998
Lott, Journal of Legal Studies, 1998
Bartley, Economic Letters, 1999
Benson and Mast, Journal of Law and Economics, 2001
Moody, Journal of Law and Economics, 2001
Marvel, Journal of Law and Economics, 2001
Lott and Whitley, Journal of Law and Economics, 2001
Lott and Whitley, Journal of Law and Economics, 2003
Helland and Tabarrok, Advances in Economic Analysis and Policy, 2004
Wilson, National Academies Press, 2005
Lott and Whitley, Economic Enquiry, 2007
Moody and Marvel, Econ Watch, 2008
IdahoCarry is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 05:35 PM   #43
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by IdahoCarry
EVERY study shows that criminals will avoid armed persons.
Where is the support for this particular statement?

Actually, the statement as made is unprovable. It's impossible to prove that there's NOT a study that shows something, only that there IS a study that shows something.

Second, any study that "shows that criminals will avoid armed persons" is going to be a matter of degrees. There's no possible way to prove that ALL or NO criminals (or anyone else) will or will not do anything. Therefore, it's a matter of degrees. How many (what percentage) are likely to do something? There are no absolutes.

Studies which rely on convicted felons telling the truth. Frankly, my assumption would be the opposite of whatever they claimed was more likely to be true.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 05:39 PM   #44
Vanya
Staff
 
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 3,877
Whether armed citizens reduce crime is not the question. The title of your thread is " Open Carry vs Concealed Carry," and you've been asked for evidence supporting your contention that open carry is superior.

It's also customary here to provide links to any studies you cite, as well as summaries of their findings. You're the one making the assertion, so it's on you to do the legwork, not on the rest of us to dig up your references.
__________________
"Once the writer in every individual comes to life (and that time is not far off), we are in for an age of universal deafness and lack of understanding."
(Milan Kundera, Book of Laughter and Forgetting, 1980)
Vanya is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 06:00 PM   #45
IdahoCarry
Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2013
Location: Hidden Springs, Idaho
Posts: 33
Quote:
If you won't open carry in dangerous places then what is it good for?
Seriously? Have you ever walked through the hood? I was a private investigator and process server in Washington DC and walked through groups of bad guys on their turf almost daily where I was warned my them, "You'd better be walking sideways here". You don't challenge the BG's place of dominion. They take it as an insult to their dominance. You might make it for a block or two, but those 10 and 11 year old punks looking or creds would kill you and then take your gun. All Open Carriers should use "Wisdom & Prudence" before deciding whether to OC or CC.

There are very few places safe from criminal attacks, that is why we all carry. There were 17,523 crimes against persons in Idaho in 2012, but of those 17,523 Idaho victims, I doubt that any of them were OCers.
IdahoCarry is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 06:03 PM   #46
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by IdahoCarry
In a survey of criminals(read that as FELONS IN PRISON), Professors James D. Wright and Peter Rossi of the Social and Demographic Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts conducted a study in 1982 and 1983 paid for by the U.S. Department of Justice. (Professor Rossi was a former President of the American Sociological Association.) ...
I'm familiar with the Wright/Rossi study, and, even, based on your summary it does not support your categorical, unqualified statement in post 1:
Quote:
Originally Posted by IdahoCarry
ALL OF THE STUDIES show that criminals avoid armed people...
At best, the Wright/Rossi show a deterrent effect when there's a possibility that a victim might be armed. Thus prevalent concealed carry can also have a deterrent effect. Indeed that was John Lott's premise in More Guns - Less Crime.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IdahoCarry
Lott and Mustard, Journal of Legal Studies, 1997
Bartley and Cohen, Economic Enquiry, 1998
Lott, Journal of Legal Studies, 1998
Bartley, Economic Letters, 1999
Benson and Mast, Journal of Law and Economics, 2001
Moody, Journal of Law and Economics, 2001
Marvel, Journal of Law and Economics, 2001
Lott and Whitley, Journal of Law and Economics, 2001
Lott and Whitley, Journal of Law and Economics, 2003
Helland and Tabarrok, Advances in Economic Analysis and Policy, 2004
Wilson, National Academies Press, 2005
Lott and Whitley, Economic Enquiry, 2007
Moody and Marvel, Econ Watch, 2008
Phooey!

As Vanya pointed out:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanya
...It's also customary here to provide links to any studies you cite, as well as summaries of their findings. You're the one making the assertion, so it's on you to do the legwork, not on the rest of us to dig up your references.
You made a number of unsupported statements of fact. It's your job now to support those claims. That is not properly done by tossing out a bunch ot journal titles and authors' name. Good God, you can't even be bothered to specify the title of the paper and the exact issue of the journal it appeared in.

When citing authorities to support a claim it is proper to:
  1. Cite the author, title, publisher and date (or, when a journal article, the issue and volume in which the article was published); and

  2. Describe the research and findings; and

  3. Demonstrate exactly how it supports your claims.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 06:50 PM   #47
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,677
Quote:
You might make it for a block or two, but those 10 and 11 year old punks looking or creds would kill you and then take your gun. All Open Carriers should use "Wisdom & Prudence" before deciding whether to OC or CC.
Then if you open carry only in safe places, what is it good for?

BTW, I grew up in NYC.

Now if you want to do a study - here's what Lott did.

You look at crime rates in an area. You covary out the drop in crime rates that we are seeing across the country (even in NO gun places). Then you if after a law is introduced there is a discontinuity (meaning sharp drop) after the law is introduced.

We have no data yet concerning such an analysis of OC vs. crime rates that I know of.

The quoted studies:

1. Looked at economically motivated criminals. They avoid those who might be armed. If you know the literature they also make the decision based on gait and awareness even in No carry states. The economic motivation is money or jewels, cards, etc.

2. We do not know if an economically motivated criminal will figure out out to take a valuable gun from an OC'er. We have shown cases of OC'ers coming to grief. OH, those are nutsos attackers and thus removed from your consideration. If the gun is seen as a target -as admitted would happen from a squad of inner city 11 years olds - then OC is a liability. So bravely OC in Whole Foods.

3. Not Idaho but in Wyoming, Mr. Drennen was OC'ing and then still attacked. He shot his attacker and guess what OC was used by the prosecution as an indication of premeditation. Oops.

4. Nuts don't care about OC if they are coming for. See the 4 police officers shot at morning coffee.

If carry was legal in NYC - it would be a hoot in the crowded subway. I used to ride it in the evenings. Interesting folk.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 06:54 PM   #48
dakota.potts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Saint Augustine, Florida
Posts: 1,150
"There are very few places safe from criminal attacks, that is why we all carry."

That is the essence of why I would carry in "safe" areas. No area is safe from being robbed or shot up by an active shooter or having some drugged up guy strip off his clothes and bite a chunk out of a police officer's stomach (happened here not long ago).

For my personal uses, I believe the chances of other crime happening are higher than my chances of having a gun forcefully taken from me. In certain areas, I believe this analysis to flip upside down in certain areas where I would rather carry a knife and some pepper spray and try not to get myself noticed.

If it's between open carry and not carrying at all, I'll open carry most places. I avoid the places I wouldn't at any possibility anyways.

I believe we should have the right to open carry as I believe it to deter crime and I think it would be a bigger deterrent if more people open carried.

I believe some personal responsibility should be taken in deciding when it's a good idea, recognizing that a right can be a bad idea, and that that decision should take place in the hands of the individual and not the government.
__________________
For firearms news and discussion from a fellow TFL member, visit shootersreportblog.wordpress.com. If you have a suggestion or would like to comment or contribute, I welcome private messages!

The Shooter's Report is also on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theshootersreport
dakota.potts is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 07:53 PM   #49
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,302
Quote:
I believe we should have the right to open carry as I believe it to deter crime
Except that we've no documented instance of that happening. We do have documented instances of it failing as a deterrent.

What we're down to is this: it's a practice that causes public-relations issues, has no measurable protective effect, and may be unsafe.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old October 22, 2013, 08:02 PM   #50
dakota.potts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Saint Augustine, Florida
Posts: 1,150
So, Tom, do you believe it should be illegal or that it's an unwise practice? I think there's a big difference between the two.

EDIT: and that's not a dig at you, I'm just curious what your opinion is here.
__________________
For firearms news and discussion from a fellow TFL member, visit shootersreportblog.wordpress.com. If you have a suggestion or would like to comment or contribute, I welcome private messages!

The Shooter's Report is also on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theshootersreport

Last edited by dakota.potts; October 22, 2013 at 08:11 PM.
dakota.potts is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14430 seconds with 7 queries