Titan6
member
I answered your question.
If you don't like the answer you are welcome to refute it.
Or just whine. It is up to you.
If you don't like the answer you are welcome to refute it.
Or just whine. It is up to you.
Deterring effect from open carrying?
- Thread starter Timradcliffe345
- Start date
- Status
model of 1905
member
I can see where this is headed.:banghead:
Lone_Gunman
Member
Titan6, you did answer my question. Why would a criminal not be able to see someone open carrying? I would think that a criminal would try not to be completely oblivious to his surroundings while committing a crime.
FoMoGo
Member
:banghead:
Jim
Jim
Lone_Gunman
Member
:banghead:
Google is your friend here. I can think of a couple of cases in Portland,OR alone where the headlines read "Armed man shot by police." In one case oit was a woman carrying her sons cap pistol in downtown Portland. OC seems to attract a LOT of attention, at least my experience in Portland and Seattle. I was told by a Police Officer that while OC may be technically legal in Washington, it leaves you open to all sorts of misdemeanor and (sometimes) felony charges ranging from "Brandishing" (which can happen to CCW if your coat comes open) au pt "Threatening" which is classed with "Assault." OC is a two edged sword.
No, criminals forego any logic whilst committing their crime...however, they remain very predictable to forum-dwellers. and if you open carry you get a +5 to predicting the actions of illogical criminals. They would never notice an open carried full-size pistol, and if they did it wouldn't occur to them to shoot you! Geez.
FoMoGo
Member
Not here, the officers in my town encourage it.
And yet again, to the people saying that criminals shoot OC citizens... proof please.
Jim
Mainsail
Member
Poppycock! I openly carry a Sig GSR in downtown Tacoma and Seattle without drama. There is no such thing as a brandishing law in WA.
ShooterMcGavin
Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2007
- Messages
- 629
Considering different scenarios, I would agree that OC would make you a target in a bank robbery (or similar style theft) situation. On the other hand, I think in most situations, it has the opposite effect. I don't think a broad statement can be made regarding all situations.
Here is my reasoning... A bank robbery is much different than an alley mugging. The bank robber has a goal on his mind, with a lot of zeroes at the end of it (i.e. money). If he will get rid of guards, then he will get rid of all other gun carriers as well. I think the OCer is a smaller target than the guard, because the guard is seen as an authority figure, with gun training and a radio to call for other help. The OCer is a target, but after the guard. Once the bank robbers are in the bank, they have limited time to make their move.
The guy scanning victims on the sidewalk can let a dozen opportunities pass and he will still see a dozen more victims come by him. That type of criminal is really looking for a quick and easy victim, not one who will fight back. Anyone with a gun is seen as someone who will fight back. Also, the bank robber(s) have a plan (accomplices, driver/car, timing, escape route, etc.). They think they will get away if they stick to the plan, and that will often include getting rid of certain people (guards, OCers, resistence, etc.). The mugger doesn't always plan on shooting the gun. He wants a quick, easy, and quiet victim.
Why do I OC (sometimes)? Mainly because I want to go through my life WITHOUT ever having to use my gun to defend myself.
Those are just some of my thoughts. Maybe your reasoning contradicts the outcome of the scenarios I have drawn up.
I OC often in the summer. Jackets don't allow me to OC in the winter, but I would if I didn't feel like I was flaunting my gun by tucking my jacket behind it.
Here is my reasoning... A bank robbery is much different than an alley mugging. The bank robber has a goal on his mind, with a lot of zeroes at the end of it (i.e. money). If he will get rid of guards, then he will get rid of all other gun carriers as well. I think the OCer is a smaller target than the guard, because the guard is seen as an authority figure, with gun training and a radio to call for other help. The OCer is a target, but after the guard. Once the bank robbers are in the bank, they have limited time to make their move.
The guy scanning victims on the sidewalk can let a dozen opportunities pass and he will still see a dozen more victims come by him. That type of criminal is really looking for a quick and easy victim, not one who will fight back. Anyone with a gun is seen as someone who will fight back. Also, the bank robber(s) have a plan (accomplices, driver/car, timing, escape route, etc.). They think they will get away if they stick to the plan, and that will often include getting rid of certain people (guards, OCers, resistence, etc.). The mugger doesn't always plan on shooting the gun. He wants a quick, easy, and quiet victim.
Why do I OC (sometimes)? Mainly because I want to go through my life WITHOUT ever having to use my gun to defend myself.
Those are just some of my thoughts. Maybe your reasoning contradicts the outcome of the scenarios I have drawn up.
I OC often in the summer. Jackets don't allow me to OC in the winter, but I would if I didn't feel like I was flaunting my gun by tucking my jacket behind it.
wyocarp
Member
We don't hear of many armed robberies where there is any type of armed personel present at the beginning of the robbery. That might be a clue as to how to approach this topic. It is the specific reason that stores or malls might employ an armed guard. It scares off criminals because they don't want a gun fight, they want easy money.
NavyLCDR
member
Don't know, there are no published statistics. However, if I was your general, run of the mill petty criminal, which probably 95% are, I would pick the easy target - someone who wasn't obviously carrying a gun whom I could see plainly was likely to shoot me in self defense.
Not that I know of.
+ Visible deterrent which is a widely accepted defensive tactic. The "element of surprise" is an offensive tactic, not a defensive tactic.
+ Public example and education that it is perfectly acceptable and legal for an American citizen to have the means available to protect themselves.
+ Less concern about whether my gun is visible or not, I don't have to adjust my wardrobe to fit my gun.
- My gun tends to get wetter when it rains.
My experience, as a daily OC'er, has been positive. I get the occasional "are you a cop, why do you carry a gun?" which I take as an invitation to converse about all of our rights to protect ourselves. I also emphasize that I am hoping to never have to use it. I am not a vigilante nor law enforcement. The only negative reactions I have had have been from staunch CC'ers looking down their noses at me and telling me it should be concealed.
Nope. Concealed carry neither.
See the negative above... my gun gets wet when it rains.
Thank you for asking intelligent questions and being open to receiving intelligent answers. God Bless you too.
Kind of Blued
Member
This is somewhat applicable. It is a study about how incarcerated criminals view the idea of "shall-issue" concealed carry. While it isn't open carry, the criminals are interviewed under the premise that someone around them, presumably while they're committing a crime, may be carrying a gun.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=404865
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=404865
chris in va
Member
I can vouch for one event that possibly thwarted a bank robbery.
Guy walks in to a Suntrust with a ski mask on (warmer day) and looks around. Regular customer is standing at a teller talking with the lady, ski mask guy sees his holstered 1911, starts wringing his hands and runs out.
Guy walks in to a Suntrust with a ski mask on (warmer day) and looks around. Regular customer is standing at a teller talking with the lady, ski mask guy sees his holstered 1911, starts wringing his hands and runs out.
NavyLCDR
member
You know, I just looked up something like carrying handgun thwarted on Google. All the hits that I looked at said that would be criminals ran away when they were "presented" with the presence of a gun - as in the gun was drawn and made visible. Funny, the possibility of a concealed handgun did not deter them. So, I would say that leads credibility that the visible presence of a handgun deters criminals.
BTW, chris in va, where did you get your ski mask?
BTW, chris in va, where did you get your ski mask?
I don't think you are going to get many examples of it being a deterrent, because if nothing happens...nothing happens. The OC'er most likely would not be aware that anything was deterred.
As for "being shot first," the only time I have heard of that is in nearly every open carry thread where someone says it will happen, without an example of it actually happening.
A big part of open carry to me is the education piece. So many people are uneducated about their rights, and brainwashed into thinking that only criminals and cops carry guns that seeing some average Joe minding his own business, peacefully carrying is a good thing.
It also makes me feel like a free man who doesn't have to hide something that is perfectly legal, and one of our basic and most important rights.
As for "being shot first," the only time I have heard of that is in nearly every open carry thread where someone says it will happen, without an example of it actually happening.
A big part of open carry to me is the education piece. So many people are uneducated about their rights, and brainwashed into thinking that only criminals and cops carry guns that seeing some average Joe minding his own business, peacefully carrying is a good thing.
It also makes me feel like a free man who doesn't have to hide something that is perfectly legal, and one of our basic and most important rights.
NavyLCDR
member
Very good point! You know, those guys in the mall carrying around the clipboards should really start surveying the gang bangers, drug dealers and petty criminals hanging out there about this.
Unless they point out that cops and security guards get shot first in major crimes, which, while true, is completely not applicable to the average, not in uniform, citizen OC guns.
Lets agree there is no hard data either way and everyone do what suits them and end this. This falls into the "which handgun is best" thread category. It will only make people defensive about their choice and in the end the answer depends a lot of variables.
Titan6
member
Yes, yes the world is just full of LOGICAL criminals who are NOT high on drugs, NOT pumped up on adrenalin, NOT focused on getting what they want and running away. They are cautious college graduates with MBAs who always travel in condition yellow or higher, searching and scanning for threats.
The problem is all those criminals worked for/on MCI, Enron, Wallstreet and the Federal Reserve and never held up liquor stores or the Stop & Go.
Since you didn't provide a single example of an OC person (a true open carry not a toy) being shot by a criminal (unless you are calling the police criminals... a THR favorite) then the only place it exists is between your ears. Even with just one example you could at least (in the fashion of the other side) could say ''see there was crime with a .50cal, they need to be banned, it is for the children....'' or words to that effect.
The problem is all those criminals worked for/on MCI, Enron, Wallstreet and the Federal Reserve and never held up liquor stores or the Stop & Go.
Since you didn't provide a single example of an OC person (a true open carry not a toy) being shot by a criminal (unless you are calling the police criminals... a THR favorite) then the only place it exists is between your ears. Even with just one example you could at least (in the fashion of the other side) could say ''see there was crime with a .50cal, they need to be banned, it is for the children....'' or words to that effect.
Deanimator
Member
1. Then why don't they just shoot every uniformed cop they see?
2. Other than targetted gang shootings, criminals tend to shoot relatively little. Shooting firearms in public creates loud noises which attract unwanted attention... from people with guns. What do you think is easier: taking the wallet from a live person's hand, or rifling through the pockets of a corpse AFTER you've alerted everyone in the neighborhood that there's a violent crime in progress?
3. Shooting somebody who's open carrying seems like a good way to find out who's carrying concealed... when they shoot you in the back of the head.
Deanimator
Member
Makes too much sense, although it's what I do.
I don't open carry. I don't berate people who do.
The people whom I DO see berating people for open carrying seem to have an agenda, especially when they berate a woman for open carrying. Having a woman not do what they tell her appears to be the REAL issue for them.
Lone_Gunman
Member
My opinion is that it is because shooting a cop is considered a more serious crime than just shooting a regular citizen. Punishment are harsher, and they are more likely to get the **** beat of them or killed by police when they are captured.
Thats is why I would advocate concealed carry over open carry. In the scenario you described, the only survivor is the guy who was concealed carrying.
Can any of the pro-Open Carry people provide any statistical data that Open Carry actually deters crime more than concealed carry? You are accusing those of us opposed to open carry about having no data to back our opinions up, but where is yours??
A robber isn't going to waste a second looking to see if anyone in the vicinity is open carrying. I read stories all the time about criminals who rob people on the street or stores when there is a police officer a block away. The robber picks his target and moves quickly and isn't looking around at others in the area.
Titan6
member
Lone Gunman- If you go back and read my first post I never said it deterred crime and said there was no research I knew of on the subject.
Without any evidence these type blanket statements are simply opinions based upon personal judgment and nothing else. Sadly these are the same type of opinion that result in bad laws.
Without any evidence these type blanket statements are simply opinions based upon personal judgment and nothing else. Sadly these are the same type of opinion that result in bad laws.
poor_richard
Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2006
- Messages
- 466
Actually, I'm pretty sure we are all aware of the study done with inmates who consistently said that they would not attack an armed person. The firearms community has even used that to bolster the argument that CC will have an adverse effect on crime.Titan6 said:
I also don't buy the line that, "If I was a criminal, I'd attack an armed person, rather than wait for an unarmed person.". Instead, it's always, "If I was a criminal, the OC'er would be the first one to be shot.". I think ShoterMcGavin had it right. There are some times when it will prove to be an advantage, and sometimes when it will be a disadvantage.
I also agree with the poster that some people just are so anti-OC in their agenda. Neither the OC'er, or the CC'er, or even the anti-OC'er, and anti-CC'er have any effect on my confidence in my choice to carry in any way I may choose. I could care less if people choose to CC or OC. The more the merrier, as far as I'm concerned. I find it sad and pathetic when someone feels they must belittle another person's choice, in an effort to bolster their own and believing that theirs is the "be-all-end-all" best method.
- Status
