Open carry or concealed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gamestalker

member
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
9,827
Location
SW Arizona
Since I first began carrying my sidearm I have nearly always carried open. In no way shape or form has this been intended to make a boastful statement or show off my firearm, but rather as a means of possibly discouraging a bad guy from picking me as his, or her, next potential victim.
I do recognize some of the positive, as well, negative implications of either. Several years ago I was in my neighborhood convenience standing in line when I nearly had my firearm taken from me. It was at this time I realized the risk of carrying open with a bit more concern and realization. It had the potential to turn deadly, considering the individual who struggled to remove my firearm from my hip was a gang member. But I also realized much of what took place that lead up to that incident had to do with my lack of awareness. I was very upset with myself, because I know better from experience that the bad guy is out there, and often waits for opportunity.
My family members all carry, and we are split on our favored carrying style. My position on this is not allowing myself to fall victim to my own lack of awareness in the future. I feel and have always considered that concealed carrying may increase the possibility of having to at the very least, draw my weapon. I don't want to be the on the menue if possible, and I think open carry discourages some from considering me a good target for their next criminal act.
 
It is is difficult to be the "grey man" when wearing anything that draws attention. OTOH, if Texas were to legalize open carry for private citizens, I might do it some small bit of the time, after I retire. (I work for a chief who mandates we carry concealed when not in uniform.)
 
Well in my state, open carry is a little fuzzy. I may open carry (with a few exceptions such as government buildings), so long as I am not "going armed to the terror of the public."

In North Carolina, it is unlawful for a person to arm himself with any unusual and dangerous weapon, for the purpose of terrifying others, and go about on public highways in a manner to cause terror to others. The N.C. Supreme Court has said that any gun is an unusual and dangerous weapon for purposes of this offense.

Yeah, that one is oh so confusing and could easily be turned against you IF you met an extreme anti AND the local DA was extremely anti. There is also the possibility you could be subject to harassment by an LEO who misinterprets that horrible little piece of legislature.

So yeah, I just find it easier to carry concealed. Plus in NC that concealed permit also serves as an NICS substitute, and I don't have to apply for my permission from my local sheriff's office to buy a handgun. Yeah, in NC you need to ask permission from the local sheriff and he will give you a temporary pistol purchase permit. The sheriff can deny you for any reason they see fit. That is a leftover Jim Crow law IMHO.

/end rant

I may occasionally open carry, but not very often. If the law were worded differently, I would OC more often. I only OC if I have a holster that has some sort of strap or means of retention, though.
 
I applaud open carriers for making the statement that guns are "normal" in public. But... I often wonder if that exposed gun would you the primary target in a robbery: "That guy has a gun, so I need to shoot him first before turning to the jewelry store clerk."

Know what I mean? Still, I think open carry has it's place and everybody should do it as a public relations statement now and again.
 
I carry concealed because I don't want to draw attention to myself, and I want to have the advantage over the BG. If a crack head that is high as a kite wants to rob your 7-11, and he sees you standing there with your gun, you are going to be his FIRST target. If you are carrying concealed, you are just another person in the store to him. This gives you the opportunity to take the upper hand and take control of the situation. Carrying concealed gives you an advantage over the BG. I can't see him frisking everyone before he draws his weapon. He is probably going to look around the room, and make his move.

I have not had my CCW very long, but I never intend to open carry.
 
Last edited:
I carry concealed in public and don't plan to change that. In my opinion carrying open gives away your main advantage in a fight immediately - the fact that you are carrying a gun. You become priority target number one if someone is intent on committing a criminal act in your vicinity. To me it's the same as not flashing wads of cash in public or talking loudly about how much money you have in your wallet, etc. All that does is let strangers know something about you that they should not and can make you a target.
 
gamestalker said:
Since I first began carrying my sidearm I have nearly always carried open. In no way shape or form has this been intended to make a boastful statement or show off my firearm, but rather as a means of possibly discouraging a bad guy from picking me as his, or her, next potential victim.
Click to expand...
I'm glad you have posted this in the S&R section and ask about it in the tactical sense as opposed to the political sense. I want to thank the members for keeping this in mind when address this issue.

I feel and have always considered that concealed carrying may increase the possibility of having to at the very least, draw my weapon. I don't want to be the on the menue if possible, and I think open carry discourages some from considering me a good target for their next criminal act.
Click to expand...

I think you are attributing qualities to Open Carry that experience has shown do not exist and may be looking at the situation from a less than ideal point of view.

Open carry actually increases the possibility that you will have to draw your weapon, because you've loss the option of concealing the fact that you are armed. Even if it isn't noticed in a confrontation at which you are present, but not involved, it is likely to be noticed by the BG ("look he has a gun") or pointed out by a bystander ("Do something, you have a gun")...it really is a Shoot Me First sign.

Being visibly armed makes you a more appealing target because they can already see the reward (your gun) as opposed to a possibly thin wallet. The difference is that your attackers will either lay in ambush for you or attack with increased violence to overcome your being armed.

From the Tactical standpoint there is very little to recommend Open Carry in a Urban or suburban environment
 
Just me...and some thoughts if I may.

Concealed.

1. Don't go where trouble is.
2. Leave if trouble shows up.
3. Have the mindset, skill sets to deal with trouble with whatever tool sets one has.

SouthNarc shares 3+1.
After waking up in the hospital after having his butt kicked for the whatever time, , he got to thinking and therefore come up with 3+1. These are simply signals that bad guys "advertise" they are about to take you down.

What I am trying to convey is law abiding folks, would be best served to not "advertise" to bad guys, anything, as bad guys do "read people, places and things", just law abiding folks should be doing.


Going back to number three I posted earlier means one should have the mindset, skill sets and these tool sets should be "concealed" until they are employed.

Not just guns.
Anything one might have on person, or expedite, or improvise from environment should be "concealed" until used.

Cane, flashlight, bottle of water. rolled up magazine, flower vase off a desk...etc.

Don't advertise anything , so the bad guys cannot read you, until whatever tool set(s) are employed to stop the threat.

Yes, you can carry a cane for instance and not advertise it as being a defensive weapon. Same goes for the other items mentioned and other items not mentioned.


Steve
 
I have to admit, and also point out, that I'm not taking a stand as to OC being the best option, by no means. But after having been in a deadly situation more than I care to share, I just feel for my own personal security that OC does discourage a certain percentage of criminal encounter's, simply because they see the weapon and prefer not to pick me. Maybe they don't want to get into a gun fight, or possibly their only weapon may be a knife or something that would put them at a disadvantage to an armed citizen.
Then of course there is the other consideration, being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and thus becoming the first person they engage simply because I've given them no other choice. I do indeed consider that possibility. There are times when I'll pull my shirt tail over my weapon for that very reason. For me it's a difficult call though and I'm sure anyone can see the advantage of either carry option having it's draw back.
Many in my state carry open, but many do not. And I kind of think some that OC might just be intending to make a political statement? Either way the response to my post is healthy and sensible, and has given me some things to consider since I live in a very gun friendly state.
Thank you!
 
I'm sure anyone can see the advantage of either carry option having it's draw back.
Click to expand...
If you are open to the opinion of folks with more experience, there really is only one tactical upside to Open Carry...speed of presentation; as you don't need to clear your concealing garment...it is about the same difference in presentation speed as having a safety retention device on your CCW holster.

What Open Carry gives up for this speed advantage is the greatest advantage that a gun carrier has...the advantage of surprise and the option to disengage.

There is an oft quoted phrase, "An Armed Society is a Polite Society", but it is often misunderstood. It refers, as I understand it, to the Japanese Feudal era where the Samurai walked the land carrying two swords (their mark of rank) and with the right to kill any who offended them. Needless to say, everyone was rather polite. But it had nothing to do with the swords, it was about the willingness to use them.

The Old West in American history was surely armed, but no one has every accused it of being polite...reference HBO's Deadwood
 
The Five Stages of Violent Crimehttp://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/five_stages.html:
Crime and violence are processes that take time to develop. The attack is not the first step, the preliminary triangle must be built. There are five distinct stages that are easily identified:
1) Intent
2) Interview
3) Positioning
4) Attack
5) Reaction
Click to expand...

Concealed carry presumes it is better to wait until the opponent has drawn his knife or gun and then try to ‘fix’ the situation. It’s seems a bit foolish to promote the idea that it’s better to attempt to stop a violent crime in the fourth stage when you could instead prevent it in the second.

I don’t want to be a victim that fought back successfully and triumphed; I prefer to not be victimized at all. I recognize that there are some people who (think they) want to be victimized so they can whip out their concealed firearm and ‘surprise’ the mugger...

Whenever you are placed in a defensive situation, you will always lose; it’s only the degree of loss that’s negotiable. Regardless of how skilled you are at drawing your weapon, you are going to lose. It may be only a minor loss, like being very shaken up and not sleeping well for a few days, or it may be a major loss, like becoming fertilizer, or (most likely) it may be somewhere in-between, but you always lose. Your life will not be the same even if you prevail.

Imagine you’re walking along the sidewalk when two gangsta looking teenagers suddenly appear at the corner coming in the opposite direction. You have only seconds to react if their intent is to victimize you. Do you draw your concealed firearm now or wait until there’s an actual visible threat? If they are just on their way to church and you pull a gun on them, you are the criminal and you will likely forever lose your firearms rights for such a foolish action. If you don’t draw and they pull a knife or pistol when they’re just a couple steps away, your only options are draw (if you think you can) or comply. Imagine staring at the shiny blade of a knife being held by a very nervous and violent mugger, three inches from your or your wife’s throat and having to decide whether or not you have time to draw from concealment. The element of surprise may not do you any good; in fact the only surprising thing that might happen is that your concealed carry pistol gets taken along with your wallet. The thug will later get a good chuckle with his buddies about how you brought a gun to a knife fight. The simple truth is that while surprise is a monumentally superior tactical maneuver, it is exclusively an offensive action, not a defensive one. What many internet commandos call ‘defensive surprise’ is nothing more than damage control, a last ditch effort to fight your way back out of a dangerous situation.
 
Last edited:
I've always carried open. I legally don't have the option of concealing a weapon because I'm too young for my residence state's concealed carry permit. I personally think that doing open carry makes good deterrence and PR, because it shows that the target is armed and liable to open fire while showing the public that the man walking around with the gun is just as nice and sane as everyone else. I really don't buy the whole element of surprise argument. Having a concealed weapon for surprise is only good as an offensive option and if someone is pointing a weapon at you already, it takes extra time to begin fighting back if you concealed carry. Open carry makes some people nervous and made one Australian lady I ran into have a seriously epic freakout.
 
9mmepiphany said:
If you are open to the opinion of folks with more experience, there really is only one tactical upside to Open Carry...speed of presentation; as you don't need to clear your concealing garment...it is about the same difference in presentation speed as having a safety retention device on your CCW holster.

What Open Carry gives up for this speed advantage is the greatest advantage that a gun carrier has...the advantage of surprise and the option to disengage.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Actual research and statistics indicate just the opposite. Research and statistics indicate that a potential target that is known to be armed is more likely to be passed over in favor of the easier target. Research and statistics indicate that criminals obtain their guns primarily from illegal purchases and stealing unattended guns.

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.0/Gun-Facts-v6.0-screen.pdf

Primarily on printed page 12 (electronic page 20), but also throughout the entire document.

When you give up the "element of surprise" you gain the possibility of deterrence. Open carry gives you the possibility that the criminal will simply move on to an easier target. And research and statistics indicate that is exactly what will happen the majority of the time. Concealed carry can do nothing to deter a crime, because the criminal has no knowledge of any increased consequences for their actions, such as getting shot at and killed. If you rely upon the "element of surprise" you are betting that your ability to surprise the criminal will overcome their already tactically advantageous position that they are in because they already have the upper hand. I prefer to place my bet on odds that are in my favor, rather than the criminal's, which is why I choose the possiblity of deterrence over the "element of surprise".

Although, it is a correct statement that the "element of surprise" is the best thing that the concealed carrier has going for them, it's just not a gamble I am willing to bet my life on...I will play the odds that are in my favor instead, deterrence.

There is no evidence that Joe Citizen has ever been in any more danger during the commission of a crime because of a gun in a holster.

9mmepiphany said:
Being visibly armed makes you a more appealing target because they can already see the reward (your gun) as opposed to a possibly thin wallet.
Click to expand...

Why would the criminal be that interested in getting your gun if they already have one? If the criminal is interested in obtaining a gun, because they don't have one, there are much, much easier, more convenient, and less dangerous ways of getting a gun than taking it from the holster of the person carrying it.

http://www.ammoland.com/2009/07/19/gun-owner-saves-lives-in-the-richmond-va-golden-market-shooting/

Here are my thoughts from watching that tape:

Talk about a cold-blooded, fast attack where an innocent was shot without warning! Unbelievable. Situational awareness is really important. Luck doesn’t hurt, either.

Open carry was an advantage in this case because in the video I saw just how fast the GO managed to draw his gun and begin to return fire. You always hear about how open carry is so bad tactically – you’ll be the first one shot, etc. Oh, yeah? The GO had a HUGE gun in plain sight and he was NOT shot. Who got shot first? An unarmed store owner.
Click to expand...

To each his own...carry how you want to. But al least base your decision on facts, research and statistics rather than unproven theories.
 
Last edited:
I disagree that open carry has no advantages other than speed of presentation. I THINK, that the deterrent effect is at least equal to the possible disadvantage from losing surprise.

I split the difference in reality. When I am out in the wilderness doing pretty much anything, I carry openly. When I am in town, I don't. Now, the vast majority of the time it probably makes no difference either way, but I don't need to walk down 400 South in Salt Lake past the coffee shops full of young, fiery U of U hemp-wearers and give them a reason to care about and protest against something that they previously had no reason to worry about.
 
I'm relating what I have found to be true during my years in LE...YMM indeed V

The element of surprise I refer to is when a crime is not directed toward the gun carrier, when the carrier is simply in the area conducting his normal business and a crime occurs. The BGs don't always "scope out the customers before hand" (gangbangers are seldom that professional). When they rush in to commit whatever they intend to commit, they might easily overlook a CCW who then has the option to engage of remain a passive witness...or remain in the background, until he can gain the advantage of position/cover. Open carry would be more obvious and would allow the carrier less options in choosing his response.

My comment about an Open Carrier being a more attractive target comes from interviews with gangbangers, parolees or wannabes, while assigned to Gang Intel units. They viewed an uniformed officer's gun as a target of opportunity (there are several levels here) if presented with an opening. That is why officers usually respond in, at least, pairs when dealing with gangbangers, the Cover officer watches for attacks on the Primary officer while he is making contact. The lesson in Officer Survival Training was, "There is a gun at every contact, YOU brought it." This was especially applicable to officers responding to incidents in sanitized buildings (metal screening) becoming lax believing that there are no guns present.
 
FL came very close to passing OC only a few weeks ago. It eventually failed. I probably would hav eRARELY if ever done it. Except maybe in instances like hurricane evacuation. BUT it would have been nice to know we could.

OH WELL, better luck next time FL!
 
There are so great points mentioned here promoting concealed carry and I agree with them. Go concealed for its tactical advantages.
 
I can't speak for anyone else, but even given the option I wouldn't OC. I see no potential advantages, and too many potential disadvantages in displaying a firearm in the course of normal activities. I prefer that no one know I'm carrying unless circumstances dictate otherwise. And as far as 'warning off' potential troublemakers, that should IMHO depend on your obvious level of awareness and attitude of readiness, not your visible hardware.

fwiw,

lpl
 
One advantage of open carry is that potential criminals will assume that you are law enforcement. Assault on a police officer is a far more serious offence than assaulting a commoner so a potential mugger will likely pick another target.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

tuj
  • Locked
open carry - not strategic?
Replies
2
Views
228
Al Thompson
A
K
  • Locked
Considerations Regarding the Concealed and Open Carry of Firearms
2 3 4 5
Replies
122
Views
18K
Cattleman45
C
45CalPal
  • Locked
Concealed or Open Carry
2 3
Replies
62
Views
2K
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
P
  • Locked
Concealed Carry Considerations
2 3
Replies
58
Views
2K
easyg
easyg
F
  • Locked
Seeking info on open carry
2 3 4
Replies
92
Views
4K
Fred Fuller
F
Back
Top