imported post
thewise1 wrote:
The whole premise of this site is that if people see a guy with his family, dressed nice, going about his daily business except with a pistol, they will have had a positive experience with guns, and thus one more person won't look at them with as much fear. Awareness is raised, the right was exercised, and it becomes that much easier next time.
That means that we want people to not assume we're about to rob a bank or something because we're carrying a loaded pistol, yet you're assuming that carrying a loaded rifle is a provocative act.
A pistol seems far more useful to me for doing something illegal, personally.
I just don't see why one can judge intent if the individual under judgment is carrying a rifle, but not a pistol.
Not trying to be argumentative by any means, so hopefully you don't take it that way.
I am not "assuming" that carrying a loaded rifle is a provocative act, it
IS a provocative act in virtually any scenario where seeing a person with a loaded rifle is out of the ordinary (i.e. in the woods, during a hunting season, on the gun range, going back and forth between a car and a gun shop), and while I also am not trying to be offensive here, I submit that only someone who is stubborn to the point of being self-delusional would not understand that, in today's political and social environment.
For example, just whatwould not be provocative about some fellow strolling into, say, Bellevue Square with a loaded rifle slung over his shoulder?
What would not be provocative about the same fellow walking down the street in his neighborhood with an AK slung over his shoulder? Oops,
State v. Spencer already answered that.
You or I may not consider certain behavior provocative, but others will and under that annoying last few words in 9.41.270(1), it's
their impression that counts when the cops show up to find out what you're doing, and thanks to the OC movement, take my word for it, cops and county prosecutorsare boning up on 9.41.270 and its spelled-out parameters under the Spencer ruling.
Years ago, I warned my kids not to touch the wood stove. One of them finally did, despite all the warnings, and he got burned.
I deal with cops and prosecutor types a lot, and I also deal with a lot of people who are not part of the gun community and pretty much think we're all crazy. Like it or not, these people have interests too, and they have a voice and they have political clout, and they are the "hot stove" here. I know how such folks will react to a person showing up in an occupied venue (neighborhood, strip mall, Pike Place) with a rifle. The cell phones will come out and the 911 call receivers will get busy. That's not my fault, that's the way it is.
Don't misunderstand. I personally don't care if someone is minding his own business and happens to be carrying a rifle somewhere. If he's not hurting anybody, it's a matter of indifference to me.
But we have to look at this without our gun owner myopia ("My way or the Highway") and understand that not everyone sees the world the same way we do, and a lot of people will be terrified at the sight of a fellow citizen coming around the corner, carrying a rifle. And things will go straight downhill from there.