We do know it but that's not what I asked. What's the relevance of that accurate observation to this discussion?
Gun grabs during an arrest or other activity initiated by LEOs as part of their duty are quite different from what a private citizen openly carrying would expect to encounter. In terms of other gun grabs (those not occuring as a result of LEO initiated activity), I think we all agree that an LEO is generally a far less attractive target than a private citizen OC'er due to the additional "attention" such an attack is likely to focus on the attacker, the additional training an LEO has to prevent such attacks, the additional protective equipment LEOs wear, etc. And yet it still happens.I would also like to preemptively point out that LEO's suffering gun grabs are generally quite a bit different than than private citizens who openly carry.
Whenever you pull a weapon in defense you lose.
In a way, this has always been a primary reason I choose CC over OC. Not necessarily because I "want it to be a surprise," but for the same reason I would rather listen to people talk, than do the talking myself, when I'm around people I don't know well. I would rather get to know them and get an idea of what they're about, before putting my cards out in the open, so to speak. Similarly, if I know I'm going to be in an expectedly isolated environment (like a fishing or hunting trip, or isolated hiking/camping), I'll probably be more open to the idea of OC. OTOH, if I'm going shopping or church or a generally populated area, I'll most definitely CC.I guess I just want my being armed to be a horrible surprise to any bad guy, something I know that he doesn't.
Knowledge = power.
Can we agree on the following?
- The firearm is a desirable item for a criminal to acquire, if he can do so, and more so than jewelry, for example.
- The deterrent effect exists only when the perp believes that he is visible to or detectable by the armed citizen, and not when the perp is behind the citizen, absent mirrors.
- A desperate criminal may not be deterred by the point of a gun, much less by the sight of one.
- In the unlikely event that desperate criminals might undertake an armed criminal action, the realization that there is an armed citizen present, should it materialize after the event is already under way, would (1) negate any deterrent effect, and (2) put that citizen at great risk.
Everything I deleted from this quoted post rests on the shoulders of these two remaining sentences. Without them, your entire point here is essentially lost. Each of the points you made in disagreeing are still perfectly valid, but there's no longer a firm, ever-present reason to choose OC over CC.Open carry has the advantage of much less movement required to draw and fire. I have one less step to accomplish, I don't have to remove the cover garment from my gun.
Each of the points you made in disagreeing are still perfectly valid, but there's no longer a firm, ever-present reason to choose OC over CC.
But of the initial stages of the attack are under way, the attack has not been deterred. It has become a matter of self defense. We were speaking of deterrence.Posted by NavyLCDR: I will not agree that the deterrent affect of the firearm only exists when the criminal is within sight of the subject. There is also the possibility that the criminal will be detected during the initial stages of the attack by the subject or bystanders and be thwarted in their attempt before they can accomplish their goal.
I also desagree with "in the unlikely event that desperate criminals might undertake an armed criminal action, the realization that there is an armed citizen present, should it materialize after the event is already under way, would (1) negate any deterrent effect, and (2) put that citizen at great risk." given the following examples:
http://www.ammoland.com/2009/07/gun-owner-saves-lives-in-the-richmond-va-golden-market-shooting/#axzz2d4d3aZu6
http://www.examiner.com/article/open-carry-deters-armed-robbery-kennesaw
The scout saw that two of the customers were wearing holstered 1911 Springfield Mil-Spec .45 pistols, and he immediately turned and left the store.
Common sense also tells one that rational criminals do not want to face armed citizens if they can reasonably avoid doing so. The questions are, (1) what if they are not rational, (2) what if they "have to" because of a desperate need, the fulfillment of which cannot be postponed or met differently, and/or (3) what if it is too late to change plans, as in the case of the man facing the citizen with the 1875 Remington?Several different surveys and historical data indicates that a criminal has no desire to face an armed citizen if they don't have to.
I'm afraid that that obvious statement in reply to Bobson's balanced and very informative post about the speed of the draw gives the impression that you are simply trying to argue for the sake of argument.Nor is there a firm, ever-present reason to choose CC over OC.
*Sigh* Snobbery is evidently not limited to the CC crowd...
I was at a local Starbucks the other night, and noticed another customer OC'ing. Not a problem, he was quietly minding his own affairs. Hopefully, he was maintaining his situational awareness, because he was carrying his Glock in an open-topped Kydex holster. I wondered how easy it would have been to snatch the pistol; at one point it was in easy reach. Should I carry openly, I will have at least a thumbstrap on the holster.
A great advantage of pocket carry (for me, anyway) is that by simply sliding my hand into the pocket, I can get a firm grip on my gun without giving away the fact that I'm armed and the actual draw is as quick as from an open holster.
I wish there was a way for you open carry guys to test your retention methods safely in real life. You can take a class sure, but in that class you know it is going to happen, so you're always ready. I'd bet you anything that out in the real world you could easily be disarmed. I'm not saying you don't have situational awareness, I am just saying action is always faster than reaction.