Openly Carrying Guns and Openly Causing Confusion In Dallas

THERE ARE TWO WAYS TO PACK HEAT; one is to hide one's firearm beneath one's clothing, such as in one's pocket, one's underwear, (better be careful) or up one's pants leg, or to carry it so that it is a openly visible, a testament unto all the world that one is a bad ass, or, as the National Rifle Association and American conservative community would have it. a "good person". Open carry, and conceal and carry, your choice. They do it one way in some states, and the other way in other states. That fact alone would seem to indicate that we haven't the faintest idea which is the better style, and if we don't know that, do we even know for sure whether carrying guns is a good idea at all? evidently, we're going to find out, because most states now permit one or the other carrying options' but only for "good people". the assumption that the world can be cleanly divided between good people and bad people, and that we can tell the difference with any degree of certitude, is yet another questionable conservative concept.The open carry movement faced a very public test in Dallas last week, and, by any reasonable standard, it failed. Concealed carry can be justified on the grounds of self defense. Open carry offers the additional "benefit' of making a statement: I have a gun. It has the drawback of eliminating for the bearer the element of surprise. Anyone contemplating perfidious action can count weapons, and make plans accordingly. Open carry seeks to normalize gun toting by making it visible and familiar. Black Lives Matter protesters in Dallas were openly carrying all sorts of powerful weapons, which, among the opponents of the movement might tend to force reconsideration of just who, other than good people, carry. Are they good people, or simply angry people with a gun? When the killer starting taking down cops, the cops were forced were forced to instantly discern just who was doing the firing, under chaotic conditions, and they had a lot of instant suspects from which to select, more than they might have wanted. determining that indeed none of the marchers was firing away was at least a momentary distraction and added work to all officers on the scene. the mayor of Dallas later said, insightfully: "in a shooting situation, open carry can be detrimental to the safety of individuals." he could have gone further. he could have openly stated that open carry is in general dangerous to public safety. Before his murderous rampage, the Dallas cop killer would have been, in fact was, regarded as one of the "good guys", a seven time decorated war hero and patriot. Even his parents had no advance warning; they knew he was a changed man after his military tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, but they hadn't the foggiest idea just how changed, how mentally ill how angry, how dangerous. The word is not neatly divided into good and bad people; good and bad reside in us all, and either can emerge at the most inconvenient moments. No civilian carrying a gun was of any help to the Dallas police force on that terrible night. The openly carrying good citizens provided nothing but added confusion and uncertainty. but don't hold your breath waiting for the National rifle Association or our conservative colleagues to accept this reality. Reality is not in their battle plan.