Clayton has another article on open carry that’s sure to piss people off. I actually don’t think Clayton is as anti-open-carry as he seems in his articles. I’ve had e-mail conversations with him discussing when and it what contexts that type of activism can be effective, and I don’t think he believes it to always be a negative:
My article didÂ not propose that open carry should be illegal. There are some unusual circumstances where it might be the best choice â€” and in some rare circumstances, in some states, it may be the only choice that you have. (Wisconsin, for example, completely prohibits concealed carry of handguns, but does allow open carry.) What I did argue is that gun owners should think long and hard about whether it serves our best interests to offend, disturb, or concern people that would prefer that we keep our guns as well hidden as our excretory organs.
I think Clayton also makes some good pointsÂ in the comments:
I am mortally tired of being told that I shouldnâ€™t do this or that because it will, or might, â€œoffendâ€ someone.
It depends on your goals. If you want to win political battles, you donâ€™t offend unnecessarily. If you want to express yourself, and donâ€™t mind losing, then go ahead, open carry even when you donâ€™t need to; itâ€™s more important to express yourself than to win political struggles.
Some of the comments are way over the top, however. Anyone who’s read this blog for any period of time knows that I have strong disagreements with Clayton Cramer, particularly on the topic of homosexuality. I think we even disagree a bit on certain specifics within the gun issue. But this?
Yet another cowardly politics-before-liberty article from Cramer. Big shock.Â Hereâ€™s a newsflash dummy â€“ rights arenâ€™t subject to focus groups.
Or accusing Clayton of bigotry? Cowardice? Look, whether I agree with Clayton on everything or not, he’s one of the few Second Amendment activists that can claim being cited in the opinion of a landmark Supreme Court case. This landmark Supreme Court case. I don’t question his dedication or contributions to the cause of the Second Amendment, and anyone who does needs to have their head examined. I don’t think that means you have to agree with Clayton, or me, on open carry, but this is pretty clearly a legitimate disagreement within our community.
UPDATE: Another good point by Clayton:
I exercise my 2nd amendment rights because if I donâ€™t, Iâ€™ll lose them.
Odd. The Black Panthers said the same thing when they marched into the California State Senate, armed, in 1967. The bill under considerationâ€“to ban open carry of loaded firearms in citiesâ€“was at that point controversial, and not certain of passage. But the Black Panthers decided to exercise their 2nd amendment rightsâ€“and the bill was passed immediately, and with an â€œurgency provisionâ€ so that it took effect immediately.
Please: consider the possibility that the Black Panthers are not exactly the best model of how to win friends and influence people.