dbl bbl daryl wrote:What is the problem with calling it a CCW permit?
Before you guys tear me apart - I'm seriously asking. What specifically bothers you about the word concealed (assumingt hat's what part of "CCW" the issue is with)? It basically is a permit to carry a concealed weapon, as I have never (and I'm sure 99.99% of you haven't either) seen a person who carries openly.
Anyway, what's the difference? I really don't get it. I realize it offends some here, and will refrain from referring to it as such; but I really don't understand what exactly makes this a slanderous term.
Please educate me; and be gentle, I am not trying to irritate anyone, I really want to know.
Thanks,
dbd
Aaah, the original question. My opinion is that, unlike states that require your firearm to be concealed, and have penalties that can be applied for even an inadvertent flash of an otherwise legally carried weapon, Minnesota went through the effort to pass a law that actually allows citizens the freedom to carry without concealment if they choose, or, more importantly, if by some accident of the wind or weather, they DON'T choose, and their weapon is seen by another citizen anyhow.
Now, the media elements that were against Minnesotans being allowed to legally bear arms instantly attempted to play off of the word "concealed" and use it to strike fear into the hearts of bliss-ninny sheeple throughout the metro area. The average citizen likely thinks that we HAVE to carry our weapons concealed. We don't.
That alone is reason enough to call it what it is: a permit to carry. I like to leave the lying, obfuscation, and intentional muddying of the waters to, well, liars. I also wish that Joe Q Citizen realized that open carry is legal, so that if I ever were to flash my weapon, the likelihood of me being the subject of a hostile "man with a gun" call would be greatly reduced. Joining the anti-carry media and calling my permit to carry a CCW permit only works to ensure that more people who are uninformed have the wrong impression of what I am legally allowed to do.
Anyhow, I think the way a class of firearms had a name coined by the media, and that made-up name was subsequently used for years to misrepresent those firearms to the point of them being banned (based on cosmetic features) for 10 years is evidence of why we should try and ensure that the language we use is truthful, accurate, and easy to understand.
It turns out that what you have is less important than what you do with it.