Believe or not "that movie" can end well, if you take the proper approach with maturity and mindset (for example out east: OCed a M4 and the previously mentioned IN example: https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo.../86880-second_amendment_march_aar_thread.html ) In Indiana, it is a perfectly legal thing to do.
There is a rights side of things, but lets take the pragmatic approach, you want to carry a gun for self defense, you foresee that you may face a situation where you would be required to use deadly force to protect your life (and/or that of a third party). You are preparing for the gravest of circumstance, you are preparing for lethal confrontation, and selecting your tools accordingly. You may carry a light to identify a threat; you may carry OC, stun gun, knife to handle threats not requiring the power of a firearm; you may equip yourself with training on using your tools and carrying the proper mindset and mental skills with you; and making it to the carry issues section you've also likely decided to carry a firearm. When choosing that firearm, are you going to carry the best tool for the job?
How many times have we heard:
"My handgun is what I use to fight my way to my long gun."
"All handguns suck!"
"The best defense is a good offense"
"Make yourself a hard target"
"I carry a handgun because I can't carry a rifle."
Well in Indiana you CAN carry a rifle (just not on DNR land outside of hunting season without a permit while hunting).
Some of those statements come from seasoned and respected trainers as well.
How often does someone new to firearms ask what to get for home defense, and the prevailing answer is a long gun? What are the reasons for that? Does one control better than the other? Does one have better ballistics? Is one more likely not to enter into the neighbors house? Do people advocate that one may cause the threat to end upon sight without shooting more often with one than the other?
If you knew 100% you were going to be in a gunfight tomorrow would you pick up your EDC handgun, or the Carbine (AR, M4, AK, SKS,etc.)/shotgun you keep on hand for home defense?
Does a handgun or a long gun have a better chance and bringing a lethal threat to an immediate stop (given that the amount of time to pull a trigger is fixed which will require fewer rounds and less time to stop the threat)? Will it be a handgun or a long gun that will let to stop that threat from a greater distance more consistently?
LEOs, when you know you are entering into an armed encounter and you have time to make a decision, do you enter into the situation with your sidearm only, your shotgun or your patrol rifle?
You want to open carry (if you could manage it I'm yet to see anything in the IN code about CCing a long gun as well), if you're doing this as a deterrent, think about those that OC handguns all the time and others with thoughts on their mind condition white or nefarious don't see the handgun OCer because of body posturing; ohh you're doing it to educate the public, well then, when the public is in condition white do they notice the handgun all that often? How much education is accomplished then? Open carry is a decision made for easier access to the firearm? Maintaining control of a sling-ed rifle requires a hand on the gun at all times, to assure proper muzzle direction and weapon retention, is it easier to lift what is already in your hands or remove the handgun from the retention holster? Which gets up on target faster?
So you're carrying for self defense, and you're going to select the weapon that carries greater mechanical limits, to save face; because humans are social creatures and peer pressure says not to do it, because people will see that it is obviously a gun and that's not a comforting thought. People don't like to think about the fact that something bad could happen to them, or that like it or not it could all end tomorrow. So doing something that is legal in Indiana, for a morally sound purpose (self defense), but the folkway of possessing a firearm outside of the idyllic hunting setting of killing Bambi for sport that the mainstream movies portray, is going to necessitate your making the choice of an inferior means of protecting yourself.
I've heard of one and only one arrest related to the open carry of a long gun, it was in WI, before they had their CCW system, which meant no firearms within 1500ft of a school; an LEO doing traffic enforcement of the 20mph school zone stopped someone OCing a handgun and AR15 on a bicycle, 1000ft from the school, thus violating the gun free school zone laws. The arrest wasn't because it was a long gun, but that it was the person carrying didn't know the laws and take actions to abide by them before proceeding.
I'm certainly not going to judge anyone for making the choice not to in bending to social pressure, I know I've done it, and will do it again, and it's something that happens pretty much every time I carry concealed instead of openly. Carrying still leaves me better equipped than going without altogether, and I trust that my powers of observation and decision making are going to be the biggest factors in getting my butt home safe and sound at the end of the day.
There is also the consideration that many times, if I were to carry my AR, the .223 round would not have an effective backstop in many situations and the distance beyond the target lacking sufficient backstop that I need to account for is about 2.5 miles instead of 6600ft (based upon DNR hunter education tables comparing 9x19 from a handgun to .222 from a rifle). Also a lack of holster makes protecting the trigger guard inherently more difficult and in day to day activity could become a cumbersome task in a hurry.
If I come across someone openly carrying a long gun, sure it's their right; but if the head is attached to the shoulders and not off at the Gecko mall, who am I to question as anything more than a personal decison that person made? Whatever weapon you do happen to have should the worst ever happen is going to be the one you need to count on to get yourself out of that situation, be it a long gun, and EDC handgun, a BUG, a knife, your fists, OC spray, your words, a flashlight, a rolled up magazine; you're going to need to make the best of it; what you chose to bring to the table for your defense as far as I'm concerned as a some stranger on the internet is up to you. But if you do end up in a situation that is confrontational, on TV news, with Law Enforcement, with the general public at large; please remember that if they see you have a gun, you do in some way or another represent all gun owners, and whether that generalization is fair or not, it helps the rest of us if you're professional and level headed even if they don't agree without or try to get under the skin of of the MWAG.
It's this sporting only, hunting only line of talking that helped edge IL into the state of "reasonable" gun laws that it is. If you've got a lot to protect (and it sounds like it's valuable to you), would it be logical for you to chose the best tool available to you to accomplish that task? Or are you saying that it would be better to go by the lowest denominator and have everybody reduce their firepower so that others don't feel paranoid, so those without guns should have the rest of us disarm? And knives? and sticks? and baseball bats? and water guns? (ok that last one was for the city of Tampa FL) Now if you see others, armed with long guns, and you equipped yourself to feel comfortable and started carrying a long gun yourself, and this process repeated itself over and over, would it then eventually become normal? If it becomes normal, would fear of the objects reduce; even while a healthy respect was maintained? If an armed society is a polite society, then is a well armed society a very polite society?
There is a rights side of things, but lets take the pragmatic approach, you want to carry a gun for self defense, you foresee that you may face a situation where you would be required to use deadly force to protect your life (and/or that of a third party). You are preparing for the gravest of circumstance, you are preparing for lethal confrontation, and selecting your tools accordingly. You may carry a light to identify a threat; you may carry OC, stun gun, knife to handle threats not requiring the power of a firearm; you may equip yourself with training on using your tools and carrying the proper mindset and mental skills with you; and making it to the carry issues section you've also likely decided to carry a firearm. When choosing that firearm, are you going to carry the best tool for the job?
How many times have we heard:
"My handgun is what I use to fight my way to my long gun."
"All handguns suck!"
"The best defense is a good offense"
"Make yourself a hard target"
"I carry a handgun because I can't carry a rifle."
Well in Indiana you CAN carry a rifle (just not on DNR land outside of hunting season without a permit while hunting).
Some of those statements come from seasoned and respected trainers as well.
How often does someone new to firearms ask what to get for home defense, and the prevailing answer is a long gun? What are the reasons for that? Does one control better than the other? Does one have better ballistics? Is one more likely not to enter into the neighbors house? Do people advocate that one may cause the threat to end upon sight without shooting more often with one than the other?
If you knew 100% you were going to be in a gunfight tomorrow would you pick up your EDC handgun, or the Carbine (AR, M4, AK, SKS,etc.)/shotgun you keep on hand for home defense?
Does a handgun or a long gun have a better chance and bringing a lethal threat to an immediate stop (given that the amount of time to pull a trigger is fixed which will require fewer rounds and less time to stop the threat)? Will it be a handgun or a long gun that will let to stop that threat from a greater distance more consistently?
LEOs, when you know you are entering into an armed encounter and you have time to make a decision, do you enter into the situation with your sidearm only, your shotgun or your patrol rifle?
You want to open carry (if you could manage it I'm yet to see anything in the IN code about CCing a long gun as well), if you're doing this as a deterrent, think about those that OC handguns all the time and others with thoughts on their mind condition white or nefarious don't see the handgun OCer because of body posturing; ohh you're doing it to educate the public, well then, when the public is in condition white do they notice the handgun all that often? How much education is accomplished then? Open carry is a decision made for easier access to the firearm? Maintaining control of a sling-ed rifle requires a hand on the gun at all times, to assure proper muzzle direction and weapon retention, is it easier to lift what is already in your hands or remove the handgun from the retention holster? Which gets up on target faster?
So you're carrying for self defense, and you're going to select the weapon that carries greater mechanical limits, to save face; because humans are social creatures and peer pressure says not to do it, because people will see that it is obviously a gun and that's not a comforting thought. People don't like to think about the fact that something bad could happen to them, or that like it or not it could all end tomorrow. So doing something that is legal in Indiana, for a morally sound purpose (self defense), but the folkway of possessing a firearm outside of the idyllic hunting setting of killing Bambi for sport that the mainstream movies portray, is going to necessitate your making the choice of an inferior means of protecting yourself.
I've heard of one and only one arrest related to the open carry of a long gun, it was in WI, before they had their CCW system, which meant no firearms within 1500ft of a school; an LEO doing traffic enforcement of the 20mph school zone stopped someone OCing a handgun and AR15 on a bicycle, 1000ft from the school, thus violating the gun free school zone laws. The arrest wasn't because it was a long gun, but that it was the person carrying didn't know the laws and take actions to abide by them before proceeding.
I'm certainly not going to judge anyone for making the choice not to in bending to social pressure, I know I've done it, and will do it again, and it's something that happens pretty much every time I carry concealed instead of openly. Carrying still leaves me better equipped than going without altogether, and I trust that my powers of observation and decision making are going to be the biggest factors in getting my butt home safe and sound at the end of the day.
There is also the consideration that many times, if I were to carry my AR, the .223 round would not have an effective backstop in many situations and the distance beyond the target lacking sufficient backstop that I need to account for is about 2.5 miles instead of 6600ft (based upon DNR hunter education tables comparing 9x19 from a handgun to .222 from a rifle). Also a lack of holster makes protecting the trigger guard inherently more difficult and in day to day activity could become a cumbersome task in a hurry.
If I come across someone openly carrying a long gun, sure it's their right; but if the head is attached to the shoulders and not off at the Gecko mall, who am I to question as anything more than a personal decison that person made? Whatever weapon you do happen to have should the worst ever happen is going to be the one you need to count on to get yourself out of that situation, be it a long gun, and EDC handgun, a BUG, a knife, your fists, OC spray, your words, a flashlight, a rolled up magazine; you're going to need to make the best of it; what you chose to bring to the table for your defense as far as I'm concerned as a some stranger on the internet is up to you. But if you do end up in a situation that is confrontational, on TV news, with Law Enforcement, with the general public at large; please remember that if they see you have a gun, you do in some way or another represent all gun owners, and whether that generalization is fair or not, it helps the rest of us if you're professional and level headed even if they don't agree without or try to get under the skin of of the MWAG.
So if they're hunters it's ok, if they carry long guns for self defense, it's not ok and you're not okay with it because your gun is smaller?
It's this sporting only, hunting only line of talking that helped edge IL into the state of "reasonable" gun laws that it is. If you've got a lot to protect (and it sounds like it's valuable to you), would it be logical for you to chose the best tool available to you to accomplish that task? Or are you saying that it would be better to go by the lowest denominator and have everybody reduce their firepower so that others don't feel paranoid, so those without guns should have the rest of us disarm? And knives? and sticks? and baseball bats? and water guns? (ok that last one was for the city of Tampa FL) Now if you see others, armed with long guns, and you equipped yourself to feel comfortable and started carrying a long gun yourself, and this process repeated itself over and over, would it then eventually become normal? If it becomes normal, would fear of the objects reduce; even while a healthy respect was maintained? If an armed society is a polite society, then is a well armed society a very polite society?
Last edited:
