Here are some old legal texts about carrying weapons in public:
The Country Justice, by Michael Dalton, from a facsimile of the 1655 edition, as produced in 1996 by The Legal Classics Library, Special Edition Copyright, Division of Gryphon Editions, New York.
So of such as shall carry any Gunnes, Dagges, or Pistols that be charged; or that shall go apparelled with privy Coats or Doublets, the Justice may cause them to finde sureties for the Peace, and may take away such weapons.William Rawle, A View of the Constitution of the United States 125--26 1829 (2d ed.)
This right ought not, however, in any government, to be abused to the disturbance of the public peace.
An assemblage of persons with arms, for an unlawful purpose, is an indictable offence, and even the carrying of arms abroad by a single individual, attended with circumstances giving just reason to fear that he purposes to make an unlawful use of them, would be sufficient cause to require him to give surety of the peace. If he refused he would be liable to imprisonment.By the way, the First Amendment right is:
or the right of the people peaceably to assembleI know that the term "conservative" has come to have a meaning of something along the lines of being out of touch with reality, or just plain off insane in United States usage, but that shouldn't have changed the meaning of the term peaceably to mean people who are armed.
I don't care what planet you are from or what universe you inhabit in your diseased minds, but carrying weapons and peaceably are incompatible.
As for people calling the cops on open carriers, people are immune from prosecution if
you have a valid belief that a crime might be committed. As one site said, criminals feel free to commit crimes, damaging more communities and individuals if no one reports suspicious activity or reports a crime.
If anything, these idiots are a godsend for a mass shooter since they will hope that people will not notice them and do anything.
I think most police departments would rather investigate a person with a gun than have a massacre.
If anyone should get shit for wasting police time, it's the open carriers. But, they want to attract police attention.
And the actual standard would be that the activity "Raises a reasonable concern for public safety." In other words, the cops would be justified in checking out the open carry person in Georgia where he was intimidating the people at a little league game would not be based upon his merely carrying, but because he was acting in a way that was disturbing the peace.
After all, wouldn't you want to be certain that someone you didn't know who was carrying a gun wasn't a threat?
Or would you prefer that you are enabling someone who slaughters in a mass shooting?