Considerations of sub/urban backpack-carry weapons

Status
Not open for further replies.

ClicheBro

member
Joined
Aug 11, 2022
Messages
94
What should one take into consideration when carrying a firearm in a backpack in a suburban or urban environment?
 
Given how convenient and low-profile it can be to carry a self-defense firearm without resorting to off-body carry, if someone came to me and asked about backpack carry, the first thing I would do would be to work with the person to determine the reason that they believe backpack carry is the option they want to go with and see if it made sense. If it turned out that they had a good reason for backpack carry and good reasons why other carry methods wouldn't work, then it would be appropriate to start working on mitigating the disadvantages.

Carrying off-body always comes with issues.

1. Unless you keep the backpack with you at all times, it is vulnerable to theft. If you are going to carry in a backpack, you need a strategy for dealing with the backpack under all reasonable scenarios that eliminates the chances of having to leave the backpack unattended. This includes how to deal with situations where you need to leave it in the car. Obviously you want the weapon accessible, but leaving it in the passenger compartment is a bad idea as people look for things like that. Putting it in the trunk might be an option but only if you can transfer it to the trunk unobserved. Otherwise you set up an "Oh look, he took that backpack out of the car and put it in the trunk--must be something really good in there." situation.

2. It's reasonable to assume that what someone is carrying in a backpack is valuable which could result in the person being targeted for crime while carrying the backpack. Sort of exactly the opposite effect that one would want from a self-defense firearm. Situational awareness will have to be elevated as a result. Also, the backpack should be as non-descript as possible and the appearance of the person carrying shouldn't suggest that they are carrying anything valuable. None of that comes close to actually fixing the problem, but it can reduce the risk a little bit.

3. Accessing a firearm in a backpack is not going to be fast, nor is it especially easy to do it covertly if the backpack is in the carry position. I don't know how to deal with this limitation.
 
What should one take into consideration when carrying a firearm in a backpack in a suburban or urban environment?
Slow, easily observable access and the need to keep the backpack on or attached to your person at all times. I'm assuming you're talking about carrying this weapon as a defensive/offensive tool, not just to get it from A to B.
 
Given today's climate, someone who is gun knowledgeable and has no reason to trust you, sees no reasonable reason to carry a long arm in an urban environment, doesn't like your looks, etc. - decides to call the law.

If a critical incident occurs, and you produce said weapon - it is not unreasonable for folks to think you are part of the problem and perhaps ventilate you. Good folks (ex. undercover cops) have been shot by mistake.

If the gun is discernible, check out the open carry goes bad cases. It will be child's play for a couple of folks to take the gun.
 
Why would I want to produce a gun slowly or blatantly?[/QUOTYou would not, but hat is what the question implies.

What should one take into consideration when carrying a firearm in a backpack in a suburban or urban environment?
Why one wound do so, how on would expect to use it, whether one can deploy it timely, whether one can deploy the weapon in a manner that meets all of the requirements of legal justification, and the risks ooff-body carry..
 
As a second gun in a bad environment? I am assuming a pistol caliber carbine or short FoldAr style of firearm? As stated above, constant contact with it. I am not sure what area you would be carrying it, after a SHTF event, or through a AntiFa riot situation, maybe?
 
What should one take into consideration when carrying a firearm in a backpack in a suburban or urban environment?

Some things that come to mind:

One should consider speed-of-access. I would not want my go-to weapon to be inside a backpack.

One should consider that some businesses will not allow one to walk about, inside the place, with a backpack. This was more true, in the past, than today, as the proliferation of laptops has made backpacks more common, but I still see the occasional sign posted, that indicates it is still something that may be encountered. “Checking the bag” at the counter may be necessary, if one wishes to patronize a business. I would not feel comfortable checking a bag/pack, at a front service counter, if a firearm were inside.

A backpack is a target for theft, perhaps a bold snatch-and-run theft, or even a violent robbery. Train/Prepare accordingly!

While strapped-in to that backpack, an assailant is provided with convenient handles, to use to manipulate the wearer of the backpack. Train/Prepare accordingly!

Catching a nap, while riding on public transportation, becomes a riskier problem, if a weapon is inside one’s backpack. I would hate to awaken, to find myself facing my own gun. There are backpacks that are designed to be more difficult for unwanted others to access.

I am not not opposed to backpacks; they serve valid purposes, which can include transportation of weapons, but I feel an absolute moral/legal obligation to prevent a weapon from getting into the hands of children or criminals. Backpacks get left behind, all too frequently, by folks who forget them. Don’t be that guy!
 
There are times and places for keeping weapons in backpacks/pouches/bags. I remember an event I attended, where we all slept in a barracks/bunkhouse-type building. The only places to secure a firearm would have been inside my unattended vehicle, and, inside a small water-resistant pack/pouch that I always kept with me. (The showers were not set-up as private stalls.) The applicable physical activity was sea kayaking, in very cold water, requiring relevant protective clothing, so, the off-body pack/pouch was actually more accessible, when dressed for the activity. In actuality, I was not legal to carry, outside Texas, as this event pre-dated the LEOSA, so, I did not have a firearm with me, at this event, but, this example serves as an example of a time/place where off-body carry would be relevant.

Another situation for off-body carry, in a pack/pouch/bag, is the second gun. In the late Eighties or early Nineties, I bought a quite nice woven nylon briefcase, with a side compartment specifically made to accommodate a duty-sized pistol. IIRC, it was made by a company that marketed their nylon gear under such brands as Scuba Systems, Weapons Systems, and Assault Systems, depending upon the targeted customer for the item. This briefcase was intended to be discrete, so had no exterior logo, and was nice enough that I was occasionally mistaken for a lawyer, by some folks, at the courthouse, when I opted to wear civilian attire. (I would go to the courthouse to testify at trials, and was, as a peace officer, legal to carry guns inside the courthouse.) I never regarded this briefcase as a way to carry my only gun. I generally brought a spare duty pistol to work with me, to work night shift, and, if I had court that morning, after my shift, the safest place for my spare duty pistol was with me, until I bought a Jeep, and installed a really good Tuffy Products lock box.

I no longer tend to carry two-plus full-sized handguns, but it still makes sense to have that second weapon. My above-described briefcase eventually became demoted to a range bag, and exiled to a storage unit, IIRC. My newest bag for toting a full-sized pistol off-body is a nicely sharp-looking Arc’Teryx Courier/Messenger bag, though I am more likely to use a Hill People Gear Waist Pack or Attache to tote a medium-sized, shorter-barreled weapon. The second gun is not so much a “NY Reload,” but something to have with me after an initial use-of-force incident, when the bad guys’ cavalry may well arrive before my cavalry. (Local LE can be quite thin on the ground, lately.)
 
Long read here, reflecting many previous discussions.

For concealed carry for defensive purposes outside of one's domicile, the time required to make the gun ready would, quite frankly, make it a non-starter in most foreseeable situations. That and the issues of off-body carry, which apply to any weapon carried off-body in any bag, etc., strongly indicate against that application.

One may not really grasp those concerns unless one has
  1. a complete understanding of the requirements for a successful legal defense of self defense, all of which must be met, and
  2. some appreciation of how a defensive encounter might be expected to unfold.
For the first of these, Andrew Branca's book on the Law of Self Defense is an excellent place to start. For the second, some good defensive training would be helpful. The best would be scripted Force on Force exercises covering more than one possible scenario.

I am convinced that such education would cause anyone to select something else for concealed carry. I know that I am by no means alone in this.

It's a matter of starting with the mission needs, deriving the requirements, and then selecting the tools. That's basic.

Yes, the training will cost some money, but it could prevent the selection of a tool that could not be used effectively, More importantly, perhaps, it could help one avoid imprisonment for much of the rest of one's life.

Now, the backpack could be just the thing for transporting a weapon.

The gun itself could be fun for recreational use, for one who is so inclined. It could also be used for home defense. There is one important thing that one should consider: the determination of whether the use of deadly force, or the threat to use it, was lawful will be made after the fact solely by persons who were not there, on the basis of an incomplete evidential picure. The triers of fact will likely include no "gun people", and as human beings, they will not be able to disregard their emotions.

The gun will be shown to the jury, handed around, possibly referred to as a "murder weapon",and kept int e courtroom for the duration of the trial.. Scientifically conducted jury simulation studies tell us that the very appearance of the firearm shown in the courtroom can have a negative effect on the outcome from the point of vies of the defendant.

Read this, for more on that subject.

https://www.thejuryexpert.com/2009/...s-and-the-fears-of-the-legally-armed-citizen/

Readers should recognize one of the authors.

There are guns on the market today that could present more of a problem than those used in the experiment.

I hope this proves helpful.
 
Other than the obvious issue that have been addressed more than once, the issue @GEM touched on in post #5 is really a big deal. In the event of actually having to use the weapon.

If a shooting event occurs and there is a guy on sight pulling a rifle out of a back pack nearly everyone there will assume him to be a (if not THE) threat. If anyone else in the event has a weapon, the guy with said rifle has dramatically increased his odds of being shot.

Nothing about it seems like a good idea to me.
 
Last edited:
A handgun firing a service cartridge carried on-body is an excellent defensive tool when facing a close-in deadly threat.

However, on occasion 1) the deadly threat comes from further away, or 2) the attacker may be harder than normal to neutralize. These are less-frequent, but not unheard of situations.

Those who claim that longish, completely justified defensive shots on potentially hardened targets are simply fantasy should consider these two widely-discussed and fairly recent examples: the "Batman" movie theater shooting in Aurora, CO, and the attack in the Indiana mall food court that Elijah Dicken faced.

In Aurora, a shot from the back few rows of the theater to the stage where the murderer stood would have been 40-50 yards, and, of course, Dicken's attacker is said to have been 40 yards away across the food court. Both murderers were dressed in a way that was consistent with wearing body armor. Both events occurred in an urban/suburban environment. People could not escape from the Aurora theater quickly enough to save their lives and Dicken was hailed as a hero for engaging and saving lives rather than retreating.

There are more, of course.

A small RDS-equipped SBR is a better tool than a typical concealed handgun in real-life situations like these. And if being prepared for a situation like this is important to you, then carrying that SBR in a daypack as a supplement or backup to your concealed service pistol would seem to be a reasonable choice.

If Elijah had had an SBR, maybe the "Dicken Drill" would be two shots in three seconds at 40 yards with zero misses.
 
Last edited:
An SBR carried in a daypack must be placed in a holster that holds it firmly, protects the trigger, and allows for reholstering one-handed.. And this holster must be securely connected to the backpack, so that the gun's position doesn't shift around.

For those who haven't been trained or thought about it, the drawstroke from a daypack is similar to the drawstroke from an ankle holster.

Here are the basics:

1. Carry the daypack slung only on the non-dominant shoulder.
2. In one motion, step forward with non-dominant-side foot, swing the daypack to the ground inside of this ankle, and ground the dominant-side knee.
3. Open the bag (velcro or zippers that open when the sides of the bag are pulled apart are best...no unzipping using tabs).
4. Assume a firing grip, draw, adjust the stock (on an SBR) or brace (on a pistol), and engage.

Drawing from a daypack is a little slower (like drawing from a pocket), and it does reduce mobility (like an ankle draw), but it can be done easily behind cover.
 
Last edited:
I see very few reasons to carry a long rifle/PCC in a backpack and even less in an urban environment. Unless I start seeing Nairobi hotel type incidents happen in the US, my instances of packing a long rifle will be very slim. Ken Hackethorn covered this in a recent video. We have to focus less on what is possible and more on what it probable. A handgun will deal with the vast majority of self defense issues while out and about without packing in a long rifle, body armor, helmet, 30 magazines, and whatever else people can think of to be more armed than they need to be.
 
Some rando in a typical shopping mall (with a tricked-out SBR) is equally likely to be shot by first responders.
Perhaps much more likely.

We recall when a home defender in Boulder, CO who failed to drop his handgun instantly when so ordered was shot. Some who commented here expressed shock and amazement that the police might do such a thing. There was disappointment and consternation when the investigation quite expectedly ruled the shooting justified. The homeowner survived, fortunately. The idea that the police might have done otherwise reflected ignorance and naivete. There are no brightly flashing halos over "good guys". The incident was not unique.

When we discuss what to do after a defensive shooting, the very first thing to do is to get the gun out of one's hands as quickly as possible.

As GEM put it,
If a critical incident occurs, and you produce said weapon - it is not unreasonable for folks to think you are part of the problem and perhaps ventilate you. Good folks (ex. undercover cops) have been shot by mistake.
I do not think that GEM's credentials in the field of psychology should be required for reaching that common sense conclusion.

However, if anyone is looking for an idea for a doctoral thesis, this would be a great candidate for a controlled experiment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top