Do you care if you "print"?

[dovedescending]

Pretty much every one of my in-laws are uncomfortable with the fact that I CCW, with the exception of two brothers-in-law, one who owns a Glock (but doesn't CCW), and one who frankly doesn't give a crap about much of anything.

I have to be very careful about printing when I'm around them, just so I don't have to go through the same conversation over and over again.

 

[wow6599]

Now that the poll is closed, I'll say that it's a lot closer than I expected it to be.........almost down the middle.

 

[DHart]

I make reasonable attempts to minimize printing when I can. A little printing, after all, doesn't necessarily clearly indicate that there is a gun under there... perhaps it's a pager, cell phone, whatever. As long as it's not clear that there is a firearm under there... I'm not too concerned with a little printing now and then in places and circumstances which are not highly sensitive. In situations or locations which might be more sensitive, I will dress/arm to pretty much prevent printing.

I prefer to carry at least a G19, if not a G17 or G22. These are not small weapons, but I carry IWB, usually appendix. They tend to pretty much disappear under a sweatshirt, sweater, or jacket, but sometimes may print a little when there is just a t-shirt over them.

Depending on what I'm wearing and what my body position is, there may be a little printing, or none. I'm pretty much OK with all of it, but I don't want to overtly print such that it is OBVIOUS to all around me that I am concealing a GUN. Unless printing is illegal in your area, I think if you minimize printing and leave plenty of room for reasonable uncertainty about what's under the garment... you'll probably never have a problem.

 

[Killermonkey21]

I carry a Government model 1911 in .45ACP either OWB with a button down shirt over it or in a shoulder holster with a heavy jacket...but I live in Alaska...soooo, not a whole lot, what with constitutional carry and all that.

My shirt accidentally got hung up behind it today while I was washing my buddies Jeep and I saw a guy "notice" it (stared a bit) but nothing was said and I left. I love this state.

 

[KJS]

and frankly, I don't care who knows I'm armed.

I thought the main point of concealed carry was the secrecy of it. Mr. Bad Guy and his bad buddies don't know who has a gun. Thus, they don't know who to sneak up behind, whack upon the head, and steal a gun from. Isn't this one reason relatively few would engage in open carry that screams "I have a gun! Wanna try taking it from me?"

Or having a visible gun could have the effect of Mr. Bad Guy waiting till you and your obvious gun leave the area before comitting their crimes. If guns are hidden, this game of crime gets far more dangerous for Mr. Bad Guy. The only way he can find out who has a hidden gun could well end up with him getting shot, which might make he consider a different career path that doesn't risk severe injury or death.

 

[Nushif]

Isn't this one reason relatively few would engage in open carry that screams "I have a gun! Wanna try taking it from me?"

I keep seeing this argument thrown around, but I just don't really think it holds water. Let's continue the rationale here ...

Using the exact same logic means ...
wearing an Armani suit is asking to be hired. Or robbed. Or taken on a date.
owning a car is asking to get into an accident and being asked for rides.
walking into a restaurant that serves booze is asking to get hammered.
owning a house or apartment is asking to be robbed.
living in a nice neighborhood is the same as presenting an easy target.

The list goes on and on. I stand by what I said earlier. A lot of how you carry a gun is also how you carry yourself. There's some of us who simply never get hassled about it even if we print sometimes. there's some of us who carry openly and never, ever get robbed, there's some of us who never carry and get robbed ten times!

Correlation is not the same as causation.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Isn't this one reason relatively few would engage in open carry that screams "I have a gun! Wanna try taking it from me?"

In reality open carry whispers, "I have the means to kill you in self defense available to me at hand. It would be a much wiser and easier choice for you to wait two minutes for me to leave, or go down the street one block. There you will find plenty of victims who appear to be defenseless."

 

[Revolver218]

I cc but am very discrete about it. I understand there are many people who would feel uncomfortable if I open carried. So, in deference to them, I don't. I live in a very gun friendly state, no permits for cc, etc. Yet it's almost unheard of to see people open carry. At the same time I know many people who cc and think nothing about it. I can think of many advantages of cc but not for open carry. Just because you can doesn't mean it's a good idea and you ought to do it.

 

[NavyLCDR]

I cc but am very discrete about it. I understand there are many people who would feel uncomfortable if I open carried.

Why do you think those people are uncomfortable? Probably because the only image of handguns they have ever seen have been given to them by the Brady Bunch, other anti-gun groups, and the anti-gun media. How do we ever expect that attitude to change if that is the only image that they ever see, over and over again?

I can think of many advantages of cc but not for open carry.

Deterrence.

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-atlanta/open-carry-deters-armed-robbery-kennesaw

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

Captain Jerry Quan, the Commander for Precinct One, where the Wafflehouse is located, confirmed Matt Brannan's story as one in which the open display of a pistol deterred a well armed robbery crew.

Page 12:

Fact: 60% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they knew the victim was armed. 40% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they thought the victim might be armed.

Fact: Felons report that they avoid entering houses where people are at home because they fear being shot.

Fact: A survey of felons revealed the following:
• 74% of felons agreed that, "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime."
• 57% of felons polled agreed, "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."

Ease and speed of access.

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:

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.

The ability to carry a larger caliber gun with higher capacity.


Positive image.

It shows the American public the image of a normal American going about normal every day business with a firearm which it should be normal for an American to carry in normal every day life for self protection. If we don't provide this image to counter the image forced on the public by the anti-gun groups, than who is going to? I have had many more positive comments/discussions with people than I have had negative.

 

[WinThePennant]

I keep seeing this argument thrown around, but I just don't really think it holds water. Let's continue the rationale here ...

Using the exact same logic means ...
wearing an Armani suit is asking to be hired. Or robbed. Or taken on a date.
owning a car is asking to get into an accident and being asked for rides.
walking into a restaurant that serves booze is asking to get hammered.
owning a house or apartment is asking to be robbed.
living in a nice neighborhood is the same as presenting an easy target.

The list goes on and on. I stand by what I said earlier. A lot of how you carry a gun is also how you carry yourself. There's some of us who simply never get hassled about it even if we print sometimes. there's some of us who carry openly and never, ever get robbed, there's some of us who never carry and get robbed ten times!

Correlation is not the same as causation.

None of these are relative between cause and effect.

If you want to get hired, then you must have the qualifications.
Driving in an unsafe manner is asking to get into an accident.
etc...etc...etc...

The reality is that you should avoid printing because there are criminals who will target you because you have a gun. The details as to why are unimportant. All that is important is that you have a gun, and it furthers their goals to target you.

This is essentially a logic game. Using a game theory matrix, you can quickly determine that the best course of action is to carry a gun and minimize printing.

Assuming a bad guy has made the determination to commit a crime, then it basically fits into a game theory matrix. The bad guy either cares that you have a gun, or he does not. You either have an observable gun, or you do not.

Scenario 1: Bad Guy would act on knowledge that you have a gun. You have an observable gun.
Result: Bad Guy targets you.

Scenario 2: Bad Guy would act on knowledge that you have a gun. Your gun is concealed (or you don't have one).
Result: Bad Guy targeting you is subject to random choices.

Scenario 3. Bad Guy would not act on knowledge that you have a gun. You have an observable gun.
Result: Bad Guy targeting you is subject to random choices.

Scenario 4: Bad Guy would not act on knowledge that you have a gun. Your gun is concealed (or you don't have one).
Result: Bad Guy targeting you is subject to random choices.

If you have an observable gun, and the criminal will act on that information, then your odds of being targeted are 100%. You can also see that of the four scenarios, the only one that you can influence is whether or not you conceal your gun (if the Bad Guy doesn't care, or does care but doesn't see your gun, then you are as likely as the next person to be targeted). Choosing to conceal maximizes your survivability.

 

[NavyLCDR]

The reality is that you should avoid printing because there are criminals who will target you because you have a gun. The details as to why are unimportant. All that is important is that you have a gun, and it furthers their goals to target you.

If it is such a reality than it will be easy for you to provide examples in real life where it has actually happened, right?

What do the criminals say their goals are? Have you asked them?

Read the post immediately prior to yours. The criminals goals are to not get shot and not get caught. Attacking a person that they know or highly suspect to be armed does NOT further ANY of the criminal's goals. Why attack the person that appears to be armed, when 99.5% of the population does not appear to be armed? Why try to take a gun from an armed person when they can steal an unattended gun or steal $300 or $400 and buy a gun? It just does not pass the common sense check. Just because a person is a criminal doesn't mean all of their common sense has leaked out from between their ears.

 

[WinThePennant]

If it is such a reality than it will be easy for you to provide examples in real life where it has actually happened, right?

What do the criminals say their goals are? Have you asked them?

Read the post immediately prior to yours. The criminals goals are to not get shot and not get caught. Attacking a person that they know or highly suspect to be armed does NOT further ANY of the criminal's goals. Why attack the person that appears to be armed, when 99.5% of the population does not appear to be armed? Why try to take a gun from an armed person when they can steal an unattended gun or steal $300 or $400 and buy a gun? It just does not pass the common sense check. Just because a person is a criminal doesn't mean all of their common sense has leaked out from between their ears.

The logic is based on once a criminal decides to use the gun. Your basing your logic on what happens prior to the criminal using a gun.

I agree that deterrence is important, but it is not always helpful. We have pretty severe penalties for murder, yet it happens every day.

Deterrence is also more powerful if the use of force is unknown (concealed). If very high levels of the population are armed, and concealed, then the criminal has no idea where and when he is likely to encounter armed resistance. This will increase compliance with the law. There's a reason why the IRS doesn't identify a year in advance who they will audit. The unknown audit ensures higher compliance rates.

If open carry deterred gun violence against individuals, then the police would never get shot at, right?

 

[NavyLCDR]

If open carry deterred gun violence against individuals, then the police would never get shot at, right?

Why is it that police open carry? EH?

If the "element of surprise" is so superior than everyday at muster let's arm a random portion of the police with concealed firearms and leave the remainder of the police unarmed. That way they can benefit from the "element of surprise." That should reduce the incidents of firearms being stolen from police vehicles because the criminals won't know which cop cars have guns in them and which don't. It should reduce the incidents of police officers getting shot because the criminals won't know which are armed and which aren't.

And if a criminal does happen to attack one of the random officers carrying a concealed firearm the cop can just yell, "Surprise!" and pull his gun from concealment and defend himself, right?

Deterrence is only effective IF the enemy KNOWS and can VERIFY that the consequences of their actions have a high probability of inflicting damage that far outweighs any benefit they may gain from a successful attack.

 

[Rail Driver]

Police open carry because everyone knows cops have guns. Ease of access trumps concealment for police simply because it's not concealed if everyone knows you have it. That extra .2 seconds it takes to draw from concealment vs. from an OWB holster could mean the difference between life and death for the officer or a crime victim.

 

[WinThePennant]

Why is it that police open carry? EH?

If the "element of surprise" is so superior than everyday at muster let's arm a random portion of the police with concealed firearms and leave the remainder of the police unarmed. That way they can benefit from the "element of surprise." That should reduce the incidents of firearms being stolen from police vehicles because the criminals won't know which cop cars have guns in them and which don't. It should reduce the incidents of police officers getting shot because the criminals won't know which are armed and which aren't.

And if a criminal does happen to attack one of the random officers carrying a concealed firearm the cop can just yell, "Surprise!" and pull his gun from concealment and defend himself, right?

Deterrence is only effective IF the enemy KNOWS and can VERIFY that the consequences of their actions have a high probability of inflicting damage that far outweighs any benefit they may gain from a successful attack.

Rail Driver touched on it.

But, another reason is that the police are public servants and as such are uniformed and identifiable. Unless, of course, they are doing undercover work. And, probably 99% of the time they are carrying concealed while undercover.

 

[herkyguy]

back to the original question.....If my state respects my right to CCW, then the responsibility falls on me to uphold the spirit of CCW which, in my humble opinion, equates to putting a little effort into avoiding printing. it's called 'concealed' for a reason. If someone knows what to look for, they'll more than likely figure it out. But if jon doe who knows nothing about guns can easily discern that the guy in the checkout line in front of him has a gun on his hip, I consider that irresponsible.

 

[NavyLCDR]

back to the original question.....If my state respects my right to CCW, then the responsibility falls on me to uphold the spirit of CCW which, in my humble opinion, equates to putting a little effort into avoiding printing. it's called 'concealed' for a reason.

So, what would you do in my state, Washington? Washington respects the right to open carry, which any person legal to possess the firearm can do without any permission or permit. Concealed carry is a privilege extended to those who pay the state for it. So, in Washington, would you respect the right to open carry and feel the responsible on yourself to uphold the spirit of the right to open carry by not concealing your firearm in Washington?

 

[Warp]

Yes, I care if I print. I believe in carrying concealed such that nobody knows it is there. I also open carry. I say pick one and do it right.

 

[Mainsail]

If open carry deterred gun violence against individuals, then the police would never get shot at, right?

That's a false and somewhat silly argument. The police are already 'never shot at' for open carry. They get shot at for a lot of other reasons, but I challenge you to find even a single case where a shooter shot at a police offer solely because they were displaying a handgun.

 

[WinThePennant]

That's a false and somewhat silly argument. The police are already 'never shot at' for open carry. They get shot at for a lot of other reasons, but I challenge you to find even a single case where a shooter shot at a police offer solely because they were displaying a handgun.

What? You think I'm made of money?

How about you loan a few hundred thousand dollars so I can commission the Gallup Survey Company to arrange such a study?!?!!?

 

[Warp]

If open carry deterred gun violence against individuals, then the police would never get shot at, right?

This is one of the silliest statements I have seen today.

 

[WinThePennant]

This is one of the silliest statements I have seen today.

Just below the notion that open carry doesn't make you #1 on the hit list when a criminal decides to use a gun.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Just below the notion that open carry doesn't make you #1 on the hit list when a criminal decides to use a gun.

I'll believe what the felons themselves have said in interviews and live in reality instead of theory based upon fabricated myth, thank you.

 

[Danb1215]

The idea that police get shot at because they are carrying a gun is...well....stupid. Generally when police get into a shootout the root cause is the shooter not wanting to be forced into a small cage for a long period of time.

As for open carriers being robbed of their gun or immediately targeted during a crime, can you cite some/any examples of this? Since it happens so often and is such a worry you must be able to come up with some documentation of it happening.

As for concealed carrying because the public at large is afraid of/not used to seeing guns, how do you think that happened? I swear some gun owners seem to think gun ownership is tantamount to having bodies under the floorboards. Guns are tools, are you ashamed of the cordless drill in your garage?

To answer the OP I suppose if you're concealing intentionally (and not because of stupid laws that prevent OC) that printing isn't something you want.

 

[Ben86]

I care to a certain degree. I'd prefer to not print at all, but if I do print a little I don't care. I don't however want to look like I've got some monstrous growth jetting out of my abdomen.

As long as I've got the right holster, belt and reasonably loose fitting clothing this isn't going to happen even with a full size gun.

As far as the theory that open carry people get shot first, I believe that flies in the face of most criminal/predatory instinct; which is to prey on the defenseless and avoid unnecessary danger. They look for the easiest way to get what they want. This won't hold true for assassins and die hard bank robbers though.