Owen Sparks said:
We may disagree on which mode of carry is best, but can we all agree that this should be decided by the INDIVIDUAL rather than the state?
ABSOLUTELY +1!
The OC v. CC has been beat to death, resurrected as a zombie, which was dismembered with a samurai sword, came back to life as a vampire and killed yet again with the wooden stake.
The facts are that felons say that dealing with a citizen who is KNOWN to be armed is simply too much trouble for them. Why deal with the guy with the gun when they can wait 5 minutes for them to leave, or go down the street one block and find a plethora of targets not visibly armed? Why try to take a gun off the belt of an armed citizen when they can buy one illegally on the street or steal any firearm they find unattended, often times from police vehicles?
http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/5.1/gun-facts-5.1-screen.pdf
Pages 30 and 31.
Personally, I'll believe the felons when they say they will just move on to a target that is not KNOWN to have a gun, which is very easy for them to do. I'll show them my gun right up front on my belt and hope to deter the crime from happening to me to begin with rather than hoping to use my gun to defend against a crime already in progress.
I fully admit that open carrying will not deter every crime. The gun is not a magic wand. But I will take the odds that are in favor of determent.
I will give TexasGunbie credit, he started the exact same debate for the 100th time with a new spin on the same question.
Sky said:
Jumping Frog good post. There is a difference between a combat zone and a trip down to Walley World that's for sure.....sorry
Absolutely correct, Sky. At Camp Liberty and Camp Victory in Baghdad, Iraq, the Army made me keep my M9 unloaded. At Walley World I carry my gun with 1 in the chamber and 10 in the magazine loaded in the gun!