Rob Pincus - Appropriate Open Carry

[the1kidd03]

lumping oc'rs into a broad category near marginal reprobates.

Referred to as INEFFECTIVE stereotyping. Everyone stereotypes as is part of human nature and which has evolved into part of our natural psychological defense mechanisms. The distinction is whether you're effectively stereotyping or ineffectively.

If you hold a stereotype against someone, that is fine as long as when they present new data to you which would be contradictory to that you no longer hold them in that category. To effectively stereotype means to be constantly evaluating new data on the topic/subject so that you address it and issues appropriately. If you choose to ignore the new data and still hold the original stereotype against someone, then you are ineffectively stereotyping and it the skill will serve you no good.

 

[Rhoadmar]

So 'wrong until proven right'? Everything he's ever contributed (or will contribute) is garbage because you don't agree with him on open carry?

In your posts as a moderator and since you have never displayed any of the arrogance or condescension that Mr. Pincus has displayed in this thread. Perhaps he should look at this as an opportunity to hone his communication skills. We should all be willing to learn.

 

[jsharmon7]

A question for Mr. ATM from the Peanut Gallery:

I feel as though people should carry however they see fit. I choose to CC, but have no issue with someone who disagrees with me for whatever reason. However, this has become quite the crusade for you. When I think "ATM," my first thought is "the OC guy." Why is this such a personal issue for you? Sure, it's a discussion board, but you seem to always key in loudly when this particular point is brought up. Just curious...

 

[INyooper]

So, I'm not a professional anything. But scratching my head, I have to wonder how someone could say that the 2A should be supported to protect the right to bear arms ....but if you're going to bear arms, you should really be sure to hide them so nobody can see them.

Meanwhile, the latest blockbusters are full of bad guys shooting good guys shooting bad guys ...everybody racks a slide whenever they pull their gun out ...that never runs out of ammunition ...yadda, yadda, yadda.

And then we come home to the 11 o'clock news to see live coverage of the latest "mass murder."

"Guns are bad" is the rally cry from the media. The politicians will save us!

...and a kid gets suspended for biting his pop tart into something that looks like a gun...

...and another kid makes the shape of a gun with his fingers and gets interrogated by the school administration...

Really??? Conceal your pop tarts now?

How is America going to learn that honest, safe, law-abiding citizens vastly, by an incredibly wide margin, outnumber those who are bent on breaking any law that any politician would hope to pass???

Pass out fliers, wear hats, t-shirts, and clothing with gun related graphics, put a bumper sticker on your car ....but God forbid you carry a gun in the open??? Seriously?

It's only based on my experience (and I realize that likely doesn't count for much compared to the bulwark of research against such a view), but I've had a miniscule amount of negative interactions with anyone while carrying. I've been questioned by a police officer once (though I've encountered many while carrying who never as much as batted an eye) who merely asked to see my LTCH and shared his preference to CC while not on duty. I was neither asked to leave nor cover my firearm, though we did agree to disagree before we parted ways. Beyond that, interactions have been largely neutral, and quite a number rather positive. Oh and, btw, I failed to record the single encounter with the police officer that I mentioned ...neither was I looking, expecting, nor prepared for it. Contrary to the prevailing stereotype, I wasn't intending to draw such attention to myself.

Point being: that people may see someone carry a firearm in a public place and everybody went about their business without getting hurt has exactly a zero percent chance of happening if concealment was the only option. I'd like to think that someone could have a conversation around the dinner table about how the guy in front of them at the checkout line had a gun, he seemed polite, respectful, and no one was hurt. That's something neither the media, the movies, nor politicians will do for us. In an age of people "coming out of the closet," it's hilarious (not really) so many people who support the 2A want gun owners to hide their firearms.

Of course, my other well-thought-out option is to wear a "Glock-Perfection" hat along with a "Keep calm and carry on" t-shirt ...maybe a "1911" belt buckle ...and carry my groceries out to my car, making sure everyone can see my NRA stickers plastered in my rear window and bumper in support of the 2A. Oh, I'd be sure my firearm is concealed. Yeah, I thought that sort of logic was found only in D.C.

 

[esrice]

Being a "professional" his opinion can have some serious affects.

Why do you keep putting professional in quotes? Regardless of your alignment with his opinion, Mr. Pincus is a professional in his field. You don't have to agree with his opinion on OC/CC, but you can't deny his incredible amount of experience in firearms training. He lives and breathes this stuff and I think his opinion is at least worth considering.

 

[lrahm]

Being a "professional" his opinion can have some serious affects. Read through my last post which alludes to some of the principals of this and my reasoning for disagreeing with his expressed opinions.

I would hope that any one that reads his posts have enough common sense to seperate points that can be accepted and those that cannot. We all can listen to "professionals" and distinguish "BS" from useful info. While I disagree with his recent post on "empty chamber carry". I do see that he has some interesting points on OC/CC carry. Mind you I do not care how you carry but I have my own preferences. Such as esrice stated "you don't have to agreee with him".

 

[the1kidd03]

Why do you keep putting professional in quotes? Regardless of your alignment with his opinion, Mr. Pincus is a professional in his field. You don't have to agree with his opinion on OC/CC, but you can't deny his incredible amount of experience in firearms training. He lives and breathes this stuff and I think his opinion is at least worth considering.

I had a detailed post, but stroked awrong key and accidentally deleted it. This will have to suffice for now as I’m pooped.

His opinion is indeed worth listening to. Everyone’s is in reality. I didn’t suggest otherwise. He indeed made some good points. Especially regarding utilizing a retention holster, although I would have stressed this to be a balance of one’s training, SA, etc. in choosing an appropriate holster. I will not however “consider” it to be accurate. In this case it is not because he’s chosen to inaccurately stereotype a huge segment of gun owners based on a handful of bad apples. The same thing gun grabbers do to us.

As gun owners we are constantly scrutinized by the gun grabbers and they are constantly holding false stereotypes against us. (You carry a gun! OMG! You must be some psycho who’s looking to kill someone) Or fill in the blank here with any other commonly used false stereotype that gets used against us. How is it inappropriate for them to hold such false stereotypes against us, but it’s somehow appropriate for one of our own to do the same? And someone who represents all of us at that?

Gun owners are constantly preaching about freedom, liberty,the Constitution, etc. in defense of our gun related choices from gun grabber attacks. So, how can we effectively represent freedom of choice and have those representing us promoting an opposing view of limited choice?

I quote the term to signify a difference in interpretation of what some define as a “professional.” Merely being paid to do something is not the definition of a professional. If that were the case than everybody that bags your groceries and hands you your food at the local McDonald’s drive through is a “professional.” For example: https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/break_room/299034-not_your_average_security_company.html He may be good at being a guard, but clearlyhe is not well educated in web design, marketing, technical writing, public relations, and the various other aspects he is taking on. Since he is obviously making an income to purchase a website hosted by GoDaddy does this mean he is a professional?

There is infinitely more to being a true professional than merely making an income and this is also demonstrated by the variety of instructors in this industry. A true professional not only does a job for money but also does it well and in an ethical manner which does not bring undue harm on his team/organization/group or otherwise hinder or hurt their overall efforts. As presented in previous posts he very well may not be fulfilling this obligation with such inflammatory and divisive remarks towards fellow gun owners.

A person who willingly and intentionally puts themself in the light of public observation is in essence taking it upon themselves to be the “face” of their organization. Said organization in this instance would be that of the entire gun owner community. What they say and how they say it will have a profound impact on society. Their opinions, presentations, etc. will be held in much higher regard than that of some nobody antagonistic OCer making youtube videos to appease their ego. A true professional recognizes the potential social impact their actions have on the rest of their “team” and makes appropriate choices in the interest of said team so as not to hurt hisown support system. While everyone is indeed entitled to their opinion, their decision in how to express that can have detrimental effects on the overall team. Creating division lines within it by promoting false stereotypes rather than researching the demographic and/or presenting more useful education on it to help is not indicative of professionalism IMO.

I appreciate all the effort and work Rob does and has done for gun owners in general. I can’t say that I’ve ever had an issue with anything from him prior to this, other than his OC/CC stance. Again, he’s welcome to his opinion, but very obviously we (gun owners) now have a “professional”representing only half of us because the other half are “confrontational asshats.” Division within a team is not what provides a foundation for success.



Hopefully this made sense gentlemen. I’m passing out for the evening. Have a good evening all.

 

[ATM]

A question for Mr. ATM from the Peanut Gallery:

I feel as though people should carry however they see fit. I choose to CC, but have no issue with someone who disagrees with me for whatever reason. However, this has become quite the crusade for you. When I think "ATM," my first thought is "the OC guy." Why is this such a personal issue for you?

My defense of open carry here over the years has certainly been consistent, but I do not consider it personal, more of a public educational service (which I admittedly enjoy).

I've studied the debate points and generally seek to expose and understand the real underlying motivations that drive some folks to openly voice their disdain for how someone else chooses to carry.

Ironically, if many of these folks had "concealed" their disdain or simply asked questions rather than spouting off about it, they wouldn't have ended up refuted, scrutinized and frustrated.

Sure, it's a discussion board, but you seem to always key in loudly when this particular point is brought up. Just curious...

I do everything loudly. After all, I'm ATM "the OC guy!"

 

[iChokePeople]

A person who willingly and intentionally puts themself in the light of public observation is in essence taking it upon themselves to be the “face” of their organization. Said organization in this instance would be that of the entire gun owner community.

 

[the1kidd03]

 

[iChokePeople]

That claim has been loudly and angrily refuted by the "militant OC" crowd here on INGO in the past when it was aimed in a slightly different direction.

 

[the1kidd03]

That claim has been loudly and angrily refuted by the "militant OC" crowd here on INGO in the past when it was aimed in a slightly different direction.

Ahh.

Well, I don't know that I would define myself as a "militant OCer," but I would say that stance is perhaps 1/2 right.

They are putting themselves in the light of observance as an average gun owner, but this would have more limited impact than that of a "professional" who represents the rest of the community at a national level daily. That's not to discount the fact that they indeed would still have an impact though. There's just no way to measure its extent.

 

[Spike_351]

My defense of open carry here over the years has certainly been consistent, but I do not consider it personal, more of a public educational service (which I admittedly enjoy).

I've studied the debate points and generally seek to expose and understand the real underlying motivations that drive some folks to openly voice their disdain for how someone else chooses to carry.

Ironically, if many of these folks had "concealed" their disdain or simply asked questions rather than spouting off about it, they wouldn't have ended up refuted, scrutinized and frustrated.


I do everything loudly. After all, I'm ATM "the OC guy!"

and that's why I have always enjoyed reading your posts, good information that is not one sided but looks at both aspects of the discussion.

 

[iChokePeople]

Ahh.

Well, I don't know that I would define myself as a "militant OCer," but I would say that stance is perhaps 1/2 right.

They are putting themselves in the light of observance as an average gun owner, but this would have more limited impact than that of a "professional" who represents the rest of the community at a national level daily. That's not to discount the fact that they indeed would still have an impact though. There's just no way to measure its extent.

How are you measuring the extent of the effects of Rob's argument?

 

[the1kidd03]

How are you measuring the extent of the effects of Rob's argument?

Realistically there is no scientific way to accurately represent the reach. Especially with today's technology. You would have to have psychological questionnaire given to each and every person who's viewed/heard the point of reference.

What we do know is:

There are millions of people out there seeking to strip us of our rights.

They relentlessly seek out opportunities, no matter how frivolous, to use as proof and evidence of their reasoning.

Someone who's nationally recognized as a professional in the industry will obtain considerably more attention than an average citizen. What they have to say will also be taken into much greater consideration by those who are easily swayed in opinion.

Just by this video we know it has been viewed by at least 1,400 people. Compared to an average OCer who might encounter a handful of inquiring minds over a much longer period of time. That's not including anywhere else he's promoted this ideology or explained it in this fashion.

Do you know with absolute certainty that everyone of those 1,400 are pro-gun and not simply gun grabbers looking for more ammunition to use against us and exploit? We do not.

In business and government this theory is referred to as "social impact." Everything you do and every choice you make has an impact on your shareholders, stakeholders, community, and society as a whole in certain situations. Social impact of decisions being made in business have lead to the fall of many major corporations. Any other organization or group of stakeholders is no different.

 

[iChokePeople]

Tex Grebner: >1.2 million views
LEO who's the only one professional enough to... BANG!: >5 million views.

 

[the1kidd03]

Tex Grebner: >1.2 million views
LEO who's the only one professional enough to... BANG!: >5 million views.

The point?

They set bad examples as well and it's obviously been made light of.

I even use the LEO shooting himself video as an example in one of my classes.

 

[Birds Away]

I'm sure I have a lot more training, study, professional development, continuing education and experience in my profession than a first year teacher or doctor who has earned their "license".... And more than most who practice either profession for a full career. It is "disingenuous and condescending" to ignore that fact.

The hubris in this post is either hilarious or tragic...perhaps both. In any case it clearly establishes that the poster is incapable of introspection or any kind of meaningful self-assessment. Having established that, there is no purpose in further discussion with this individual regarding this topic.

Have a nice day.

 

[iChokePeople]

The point?

They set bad examples as well and it's obviously been made light of.

I even use the LEO shooting himself video as an example in one of my classes.

1400 views? And you're getting panty-wadded about the devastating effects his video will have? This thread is about to double the view numbers of the video. Meh. I could put up a flyer at WalMart and get more than 1400 views TODAY.

 

[the1kidd03]

1400 views? And you're getting panty-wadded about the devastating effects his video will have? This thread is about to double the view numbers of the video. Meh. I could put up a flyer at WalMart and get more than 1400 views TODAY.

Again, we do not know that it's limited to that. I'm not panty wadded by any means. It takes much more than a simple net conversation to accomplish that, but I do have high expectations for those claiming professionalism and then essentially representing me to everyone else.

Regardless, is it an appropriate response from someone representing you, essentially?

I'd rather someone representing me, as a gun owner, to be pro-freedom and choice. Not, "do as I say because only I'm the professional and my way is the right way."