Fish & Game News August 5, 2014 Elliott
The Facebook page Hypocrisy and Stupidity of Gun Control Advocates posted what appears to be a comment from an anti-gun liberal on how she thinks her peers should treat open carriers.
Her suggestion is that she and her peers should carry tasers, and when they see an open carrier, they should then tase them without warning. Apparently, she feels that using a less-lethal weapon to commit a crime against is somehow justifiable. It’s also a good way to find yourself staring down the barrel of someone else’s gun. I choose not to open carry for a number of reasons, but I do typically carry concealed when I leave my home. If I were to walk into this hypothetical business and see a person cravenly come up on an open carrier with a taser, I’m going to likely have one of several reactions.
The most likely reaction is that I’m likely to yell a warning along the lines of “drop that weapon!” At that point, I rather strongly suspect that the open carrier is going to turn around, and they aren’t likely to be in an appreciative move once they discover that someone was sneaking up on them with ill intent. How the situation develops from that point is anyone’s guess, but I suspect that it could very well involve the police arresting the person with the taser for attempted battery or a similar criminal charge. In a worst-case scenario, the open carrier could be legally justified in drawing and using his weapon on the assailant with the taser, especially if they can’t easily identify what kind of weapon the assailant has in their hands.
There is also the possibility that I may test whether or not I can still execute a good blind-sided form tackle… regardless of their age, sex, or smaller size. While I doubt I can still run a sub 5-second 40-yard dash, I suspect that I can still achieve a reasonable level of velocity and that achieving proper form is like riding a bike. The experience is likely to be unpleasant for both of us, but I suspect that the person being hit and landed on will suffer the brunt of a legally justifiable use of force.
If I don’t see the attack on the open carrier until after it happens, and perhaps see nothing more than a person on the ground with someone over them holding some sort of weapon in their hand, I may be compelled to draw my own firearm and start issuing commands for them to drop their weapon. Again, this would be a legally justifiable use of deadly force, all brought about by a criminal attack carried out by an anti-gun liberal apparently incapable of thinking through the possible responses to their criminal actions.
In none of these instances could the anti-gun liberal come close to justifying their craven attack on a presumably lawful citizen. Depending upon the specifics of the attack, they could invite a justified and forceful response from the open carrier. A thug in Minnesota was shot by a gun owner while attempting to tase him.
It is also worth noting that tasers are not non-lethal weapons. They are less-lethal weapons, and can and have killed people on numerous occasions. Anyone who attempted to tase a gun own who suffered injury as a result of being tased can be charged with crimes up to and including murder.
While even gun owners can disagree with some forms of open carry (most typically long-gun open carry), anti-gun forces seem to relish in the thought of committing crimes to show their displeasure for the practice.
A North Dakota philosophy professor is suggesting that patrons should immediately leave the area, even if they’ve not paid for goods and services in an ideologically driven “dine and dash.” He later attempted to walk back by suggesting that the mere presence of a lawfully carried firearm justifies “reasonable fear.” Good luck getting that lame excuse past a judge at your trial.
Here’s a novel suggestion for anti-gun activists encountering open carriers: try acting like a reasonable adult, instead of a criminal.