Why is it .....

... that those who open carry are always referred to as 'activists'?

Sebastian has a post about an 'activist' in Wisconsin was has now been involved in a shooting, leaving one man dead and another paralyzed. Follow the links to see how the media, at least, is portraying the players in all this, including some information about the criminal history of the alleged victims.

Now, I did a quick search for Mr Gonzalez' name at the Journal Sentinels web site, and came up with 5 articles: the three linked at Sebastian's, one announcing Gonzalez' lawsuit, and one where the states DA wrote a memo declaring open carry to be legal.

Now, I did not search the interwebz, mostly 'cuz I'm lazy. I wonder, however, how the JS makes the leap that this fellow is a prominent OC activist? Is he prominent because the JS says he is, or is he really prominent? Or does the JS want to paint Gonzalez as the face of open carry in WI? And in one article, he's listed as an advocate; in another an activist ..... well, which is he?

I think I know how to answer this one. If your thoughts on the subject are that open carry is an acceptable method of carry, and it's legal to do so in your jurisdiction, as long as you don't actually open carry you're an advocate. But if you have the temerity to wear your firearm openly, then you're an activist.

Well thank God for activists; they, like the old west pioneers, take the arrows.

And it looks like the indians are lining up on this one.

pm