While so many love to point out the (relatively) few instances where open-carriers have been relieved of their handguns -- and really, if you read the new stories that contain accurate information, you'll note that (1) there's ample evidence to suggest that most gun-carriers who have their firearms "grabbed" or taken at gunpoint are concealed carriers demonstrating ineffective concealment (i.e., printing or inadvertent exposure) and (2) law enforcement officers.
The concept of the open-carrier being the guy who is targeted because he's identified as a man with a gun and gets shot first by bad guys in any robbery or bad situation is almost amusing, as many propose this as a major disadvantage to open-carry, yet it's never documented to have happened (other than say, some armored-car robberies, some responding cops and bank security guards, never to a bystander citizen who just happens to be O/Cing. If someone can link to such a case, kindly do so, as long as it's only about a private O/Cing citizen, not a cop, security guard or armored car guard.
The negative image of the stereotypical open-carrying big-bellied slob sporting a plumber's crack, wandering the aisles of the local Wal-Mart with a cheap pistol in a floppy Uncle Mike's nylon holster dangling from a thin cheap belt is where everyone's minds seem to go when they think of open carry, and no, that image doesn't inspire confidence. And any one of us can list a myriad of perceived tactical disadvantages for the practice.
Yet, open carry is NOT stupid. To suggest that one mode of carrying a firearm (concealed) is "correct" and the "right way" to carry a firearm, while stating that the other mode -- unconcealed -- is "stupid" is all part of that slippery slope. You want to send the message to the anti-gun factions, the gun controllers and those one the fence that our own community has tiers of how to correctly exercise our Constitutional right?
If open carry is done right, it sends a message to the general public that we're a country built on firearms ownership. It's a symbolic gesture that encourages conversation about gun rights and the Second Amendment
The more open carriers go forth responsibly practicing open carry -- where legal -- with good equipment (retention holsters) and training (weapons retention), the more some (will never be all) civilians and law enforcement could come to see this as a normal practice instead of something creepy, weird or dangerous.
There's a time and place for open carry, even in public. My opinion on this has definitely evolved, even since I've been a member of this forum over the last twenty years or so. O/C is not uncommon up here, even on the wet (liberal) side of this state, and I've seen it practiced in manners which I considered responsible. I say, have at it, wherever legal. This whole idea that most in our own (the RKBA supporters) community have accepted -- that we must hide and/or cover up the fact that we own firearms and may carry them, is starting to seem really antithetical to the concept of promoting and exercising a right.
But yeah, I'd agree that if one is worried about the response from one's local soccer moms, you shouldn't be open-carrying. Or be caught driving a motor vehicle powered by fossil fuels. Or wear your red MAGA cap in public. Or make your opinion heard at your local school board meeting. Or be seen buying steaks and domestic beer in the Safeway check-out line. Or let anyone ever outside your circle of trust find out that you own -- gasp! -- guns, and actually like shooting them.