Open Carry

[eddd7]

I seen a few people on separate occasions OC holstered handguns in a busy Walmar there in Liberal Hampton Roads, VA, and no one batted an eye. As long as the carrier doesn't appear dodgy, and the gun remains holstered, I don't think that most Americans care... I think the current resistance and negative indication surrounding OC stems from those who carry rifles into these places... If the guy at the restaurant you were at had an AR15 slung around his arm, I'm willing to bet that people would be a little more on edge...

Also, I know many Liberal gun owners who like guns, but not other Conservative causes. At least from my experience, the whole generation that Liberals hate guns is media hype.

You're correct if you really mean "Liberal" in the classic definition, which is "fair, tolerant, open-minded, live and let live." Kind of like Libertarians.

Today, however, Leftists, who match none of the above characteristics, self-label as "Liberal" because that's how they want to be seen. It's another Leftist trick of changing the meaning of words like, say, "tolerant". Are Leftists really tolerant? HA! They're the most lock-step, intolerant bunch since those other big govt national socialists.....the Nazi's.

Yes a true Liberal is as likely as a Conservative to like guns. A Leftist, on the other hand.....not so much. Guns, to a Leftist, represent individual responsibility and control. To a Leftist, only collectivism, not individualism, and the state are to be worshiped.

 

[Malamute]

On February 7, 2008, Charles Lee Thornton shot Officer Thomas Biggs, who was walking away from him, for the purpose of obtaining his S&W . 40 caliber pistol, to increase his firepower.

Didnt the Boston Bomber brothers target and kill a police officer so they could get another weapon?

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Mainsail:

We all recognize that pretty much anything could happen, but is it so possible that one needs to give it prominence in their safety planning over other far more likely threats?

A violent criminal attack requiring the immediate use of deadly force for self defense is one of those things that "could happen", and nothing else. The likelihood is not high, but the potential consequences are severe. Some of us carry concealed weapons because of just such a possibility.

We do so as a last resort; other elements of safety planning take priority.

An attack involving sudden entry into an automobile while the driver is strapped in is something that could happen. It is very unlikely, but some of us keep a firearm accessible to the other hand because of that risk.

An attack on someone who clearly possesses something of high value, monetary or intrinsic or both, is obviously more likely than an attack on someone who does not.

And if that visible item of value happens to be a firearm, it is more likely that an attack, should it happen, will be made in a very violent manner from behind than might an attack on someone carrying, for example, a purse. That; a matter of self-preservation.

I choose to not carry openly for two reasons:

1. The risk managment aspects, as discussed above, and
2. social factors.

On the subject of the latter, I was recently told that I had somehow been "made" by a young employee in a grocery store. The incident caused a terrible stir, even though both CC, and now OC, are lawful here. Whether it resulted from "printing" or incidental exposure, I do not know. I now wear longer shirts with different patterns.

The fact that the older employees knew that I had prevented a robbery in the store a few years ago helped them calm down the employee.

We have had concealed carry here for more than eleven years, and many, if not most, people in the major urban and suburban areas are still strongly opposed to it.

OC was made legal a couple of years ago. I still haven't seen anyone carrying openly, other than a groundskeeper on a Ford tractor in a rural county with a .22-232 Kit Gun on his belt. That was in 1957.

I would notice.

Most carriers I know, and the numbers are growing by the month, do not like the idea of open carry at all, and they do not mind saying so.

Many of them do seem to attribute various motives and levels of intelligence to open carriers that they are not qualified discuss. I am more open minded than that.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Open carry is becoming a normal way to carry. Everyone might as well get used to it because it's here to stay. You may not agree with it, think it unwise or anti social but generally that is just a perception. People that want everyone to conform to CC are trying to put restrictions on RKBA just like the AG crowd.

You should carry however you feel you need to. The main thing is that you are doing it legally and responsibly.

 

[eddd7]

Open carry is becoming a normal way to carry. Everyone might as well get used to it because it's here to stay. You may not agree with it, think it unwise or anti social but generally that is just a perception. People that want everyone to conform to CC are trying to put restrictions on RKBA just like the AG crowd.

You should carry however you feel you need to. The main thing is that you are doing it legally and responsibly.

As a Corpsman with a combat unit in Vietnam, we, as well as officers, were issued a .45. No one carried it exposed as it made us high value targets.

In a civilian or urban scenario, there are still those bent on mayhem. In the game of life....with the stakes being your life, letting someone see your hidden aces by not covering your "cards" makes no sense to me. Why give up the advantage of having the bad guys not know and make yourself a target?

 

[X-Rap]

Quote:
On February 7, 2008, Charles Lee Thornton shot Officer Thomas Biggs, who was walking away from him, for the purpose of obtaining his S&W . 40 caliber pistol, to increase his firepower.
Didnt the Boston Bomber brothers target and kill a police officer so they could get another weapon?

So those thugs wanted guns and took them from cops and that makes OC something that should be banned or greatly restricted.
How many Gun Shops and the millions of weapons they contain are a more attractive target than armed trained officers?
How about vendors At Gun Shows?
FTF Private sales?
Public areas open to hunting and shooting?
Ranges without armed guards?
OC is just one way of many that criminals can be tempted to cause violence against us, should all of them be restricted further or banned outright?

 

[wojownik]

You may not agree with it, think it unwise or anti social but generally that is just a perception.

And conversely, its "just a perception" of those in favor of OC as well. Folks here are just pondering the relative merits. As the OP's original question went, is there a "reasonable" argument ... so the discussion goes. Everyone has an opinion. Some are different.

People that want everyone to conform to CC are trying to put restrictions on RKBA just like the AG crowd.

Again, this thread seems to mainly be a discussion of the relative advantages/disadvantages of OC.

After a cursory re-reading of the thread, I did not see anyone demanding that "everyone conform to CC."

Even if someone was, saying that people should only carry CC is a heck of a lot different than an anti saying nobody should carry at all, or even own firearms.

You should carry however you feel you need to. The main thing is that you are doing it legally and responsibly.

And that seems to pretty much be what most folks are saying anyway.

However, doing it "responsibly" is a large part of what this thread is discussing - whether tactically responsible, socially responsible, or any other type of repsonsible...

 

[Old Dog]

Over the years, I've taken note of the very many robberies (of businesses and individual) or other crimes, that were interrupted, aborted or outright stopped (in most cases, with the bad guy taking rounds) by persons (including off-duty cops) lawfully carrying concealed.

I've yet to hear about a case of an open carrier stopping such crimes.

(Although this is probably where an OC advocate jumps in and states that far more criminals have presumably been stopped cold prior to even beginning their actions due to the sight of an openly-carried firearm.)

The sole tactical advantage an OCer may have is a slightly faster draw (assuming the individual actually practices the draw).

 

[X-Rap]

This very thread had a link to a robbery that was thwarted by an OC carrier of a SA BP (I think) revolver no less.

To make an accurate appraisal of your claim would take more trouble that any of us is willing to take. For one, I have no idea of the ratio of full time OCer's to CCer's but my guess would be a great difference leaning to the CC crowd. Then you'd have to factor what you've already quite conveniently discredited in your post but the fact remains that a CC is of no deterrent in the general population because when done to the letter everyone looks the same while there can be little question with OC. So it comes down to what your gut feeling is and that's basically all the anti's who rail against OC have.
Plus you had to make the all important condescending remark in your final line as if OCer's never practice their draw but those who CC are serious about their business and practice all the time. Good show

 

[wally]

How do you think the Cold War would have gone if the Soviets didn't know we had nukes?

Since we opened the atomic age to defeat Japan, the secret was out. I think the the question needs to be turned around: how would the Cold War have gone if we didn't know the Soviets had nukes?

 

[Malamute]

So those thugs wanted guns and took them from cops and that makes OC something that should be banned or greatly restricted.
How many Gun Shops and the millions of weapons they contain are a more attractive target than armed trained officers?
How about vendors At Gun Shows?
FTF Private sales?
Public areas open to hunting and shooting?
Ranges without armed guards?
OC is just one way of many that criminals can be tempted to cause violence against us, should all of them be restricted further or banned outright?

Straw man.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Old Dog:

I've yet to hear about a case of an open carrier stopping such crimes.

There is at least one that we know of, posted in this thread, and there are probably more.

But even if there have been none, one could not draw any conclusions from that.

Very few people who are carrying openly happen upon crimes in progress at the time that they are occurring. When the conditions that must exist together to bring about a particular outcome or another outcome occur very rarely, one cannot reliably draw any conclusions from statistics, due to the paucity of data.

(Although this is probably where an OC advocate jumps in and states that far more criminals have presumably been stopped cold prior to even beginning their actions due to the sight of an openly-carried firearm.)

It is unwise for anyone who is not familiar with varying criminal mindsets to try to divine what a criminal might do. Those most familiar are probably corrections officers, who get to know real criminals much better than do patrol officers. Several whom I have met and trained with carry concealed and advise against open carry. They have their reasons.

The outcomes will vary for a lot of reasons; do not expect a meth head to react the same way as a more reasonable person.

But among "reasonable" perps, the outcome would be situation-dependent.

• A criminal who has the option to come back later or go somewere else can be reasonably expected, more often than not, to be deterred by the presence of open carrier.
• A couple of perps who happen to need a particular victim's car right then and right there may well be deterred less.
• Should an open carrier walk in on a ctime in progess, the "tail gunner" can reasonably be expected to assume that he has no choice but to open fire.

That last one would also apply should a concealed carrier decide to be a hero and reach for his gun.

The sole tactical advantage an OCer may have is a slightly faster draw...

Rob Pincus assesses the advantage at 0.3 seconds, on average.

We do have a sticky on the subject:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=755015

 

[Lord Teapot]

Maybe........ except for these two posts that are definitely anti OC and condescending to fellow gun owners that do OC.







Sorry, but neither of the above two posts can ever be considered "The High Road". They are nuttin' but a flagrant attack against other law abiding, responsible gun owners, only because the posters themselves have a difference of opinion. They are not debating, but being condescending and derogatory. This is the route that some in a debate take because they have no legitimate evidence to support their claims. Name calling and belittling. Suggesting the only legitimate reason to open carry is to show off with the only intent to impress or intimidate others. Not all OCers are carrying fancy Bar-B-Que rigs to a picnic in Texas or somehow trying to "show off" their firearms. While there may be a small percentage of folks that are OCing for that reason, again, there are probably just as many, if not more folks CWCing for the "cool factor".

OCing takes more awareness and more consideration than CWCing. No one here will debate that. It also is not appropriate, both socially and tactically in certain scenarios. But to many folks, the advantages of OCing in other scenarios outweighs any of the disadvantages stated here. I'm betting most folks so vehemently against OCing here, have never carried openly other than in the woods, if even that. But they know all the reasons of why other folks shouldn't. I wonder how they ever find hats big enough?

they seem to be implying people open carry to look cool, as opposed to advocating that open carry be banned/that they fear open carriers. tbh i was looking forward to open carry in florida, and i'm very sad it did not pass, though we did pass a bill that makes it not illegal for your gun to accidentally become exposed while concealed carrying.

 

[X-Rap]

Straw man.

Bravo Sierra.

 

[Old Dog]

There is at least one that we know of, posted in this thread, and there are probably more.

Well, I missed that one, whoops. Note that those present and those who dissected the incident later decided the perpetrator was heavily under the influence of some substance or intoxicants -- hardly a case of a sober, alert bad guy ...

Yet if the OC proponents desire to use that case of a guy carrying a long-barreled 1858 revolver as their banner case for OC stopping crimes, more power to 'em. My point was, there are far more documented instances of concealed-carriers (both private citizens and LEOS) successfully intervening in bad circumstances, that is all.

It is unwise for anyone who is not familiar with varying criminal mindsets to try to divine what a criminal might do.

It is unwise for anyone, period, to try to divine what a criminal might do. Particularly if the criminal is tweaking or drunk.

Those most familiar are probably corrections officers, who get to know real criminals much better than do patrol officers. Several whom I have met and trained with carry concealed and advise against open carry. They have their reasons.

I've worked both corrections and patrol, and I would agree.

Rob Pincus assesses the advantage at 0.3 seconds, on average.

Yep, Pincus agrees with me.

Comes Mr. X-rap who notes:

Then you'd have to factor what you've already quite conveniently discredited in your post but the fact remains that a CC is of no deterrent in the general population because when done to the letter everyone looks the same while there can be little question with OC. So it comes down to what your gut feeling is and that's basically all the anti's who rail against OC have.
Plus you had to make the all important condescending remark in your final line as if OCer's never practice their draw but those who CC are serious about their business and practice all the time. Good show

Gosh, I don't believe that I stated that CC is a deterrent at all. I don't believe that, myself.

And, I am neither an anti, nor did I rail against OC. I am pretty neutral on OC, and when I'm out in the wild, I always OC. OC is very, very common in my state, and I see an OCer almost everyday where I live.

My apologies if you consider my remark condescending -- I don't know a whole lot of CCers who practice their draw, either. (Except on internet gun forums, apparently every poster practices their draw daily.)

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by X-Rap:

So those thugs wanted guns and took them from cops and that makes OC something that should be banned or greatly restricted.

Has anyone here so suggested?

How many Gun Shops and the millions of weapons they contain are a more attractive target than armed trained officers?
How about vendors At Gun Shows?
FTF Private sales?

Those may provide sources of guns, but that is no relevant here.

Public areas open to hunting and shooting?
Ranges without armed guards?

How do they figure in?

OC is just one way of many that criminals can be tempted to cause violence against us, should all of them be restricted further or banned outright?

No.

That doesn't make it prudent, though.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by X-Rap:

...the fact remains that a CC is of no deterrent in the general population

We don't know that.

I do recall that when the shall-issue CC law was enacted in Florida, and before it had become effective, the incidence of certain violent crimes dropped notably, at least temporarily.

But unless we could have two otherwise identical populations, one with lawful CC and one without, we can conclude nothing from crime stats.

...because when done to the letter everyone looks the same while there can be little question with OC.

The contention that CC does not deter crime does not follow from that.

It may or may not deter crime very much, but the fact that "everyone looks the same" dos not establish that.

 

[X-Rap]

Kleenbore
When some make the case, as they have, that OC gives rise to gun grabs and criminals attacking OCer's to relive them of their guns then all of the other places that guns are available to the public become relevant as they are at least as easy to acquire through those methods once the stigma of violence is cast aside.
No CC/OC debate is complete without at least the veiled insinuation that it shouldn't be allowed.
Right or wrong that is my take away from most of these discussions.
I have previously stated that I'm not a full time practitioner and I'd say I fall closely along your lines of thought but as a personal observation of living in states that allow OC and those that don't I can say that I'm prone to carry a smaller (pocket carry) handgun in the CC mandatory states simply because I don't want to risk the issue of printing or exposing and face brandishing charges. It's a simple issue to me and one I think strikes at the heart of the whole fight in Texas.

 

[Old Dog]

No CC/OC debate is complete without at least the veiled insinuation that it shouldn't be allowed.

I have not gotten that out of this thread.

 

[X-Rap]

This very thread had a link to a robbery that was thwarted by an OC carrier of a SA BP (I think) revolver no less.

To make an accurate appraisal of your claim would take more trouble that any of us is willing to take. For one, I have no idea of the ratio of full time OCer's to CCer's but my guess would be a great difference leaning to the CC crowd. Then you'd have to factor what you've already quite conveniently discredited in your post but the fact remains that a CC is of no deterrent in the general population because when done to the letter everyone looks the same while there can be little question with OC. So it comes down to what your gut feeling is and that's basically all the anti's who rail against OC have.
Plus you had to make the all important condescending remark in your final line as if OCer's never practice their draw but those who CC are serious about their business and practice all the time. Good show

Quote:
...the fact remains that a CC is of no deterrent in the general population
We don't know that.

I do recall that when the shall-issue CC law was enacted in Florida, and before it had become effective, the incidence of certain violent crimes dropped notably, at least temporarily.

But unless we could have two otherwise identical populations, one with lawful CC and one without, we can conclude nothing from crime stats.

Quote:
...because when done to the letter everyone looks the same while there can be little question with OC.
The contention that CC does not deter crime does not follow from that.

It may or may not deter crime very much, but the fact that "everyone looks the same" dos not establish that.

I think you've taken some things out of context in my post.

 

[X-Rap]

I have not gotten that out of this thread.

I won't reread the whole thread but at least consider this in your appraisal, if I were to say CC was detrimental to the cause, dangerous to the carrier and those around him, should require special training and equipment would you assume that I was just a live and let live kind of guy?
This and every other VS thread has the same components and being someone who truly is a live and let live guy on the issue and who carries in both manners I can say it is rare if ever to see OCer's make the same claims against CC. Just seems odd.

 

[Lord Teapot]

I have not gotten that out of this thread.

i haven't either, but i think we need to consider that with all the anti-2nd amendment anti-carry anti-self defense anti-everything gun related BS we are exposed to, people are just reactionary, and not really understanding the point of the posts of people here who are advocating for situational merits of concealed>open carry.

 

[GEM]

My comments have nothing to do with banning OC. Making it legal is fine with me. However, it was not a priority in TX as compared to other things. Thank you that we got campus carry - it was touch and go. However, we lost HR 308 which would have been more useful.

My comments are on the utility of the practice just as we talk about the utility of a gun, tactic, or other equipment.

I made two points which makes some people have a hissy.

1. The statements implying you only OC in an area which has little risk of the OC exposure leading to unpleasant interactions or targeting.

Again, if it is a safe area - why the need for OC vs. CC? What does OC gain you in a 'safe' area? But go ahead if it is legal.

2. The exposition by some that their retention skills are supreme. Thus, I pointed out that 30% of police that were shot - were shot with their own gun. I did not say that they were targeted for their gun. My comment indicates that there is a reasonable probability that in a retention battle you can lose your gun - unless you claim supreme skills. This doesn't take into account that the cop incidents were H2H for the most part. Ninja skills and awareness may be mythical if there is a reasonably thought out surprise attack. If this starts to happen, we will know about it.

However, it probably won't happen if you chose to OC in safe areas, which brings us full circle.

I don't care if you decide to dress up like the Lone Ranger to OC - it should be legal. You can dress like Annie Oakley - not there is anything wrong with that if it's legal. I spoke to a rational look at the utility of when to do it and the risks.

 

[Old Dog]

GEM said

2. The exposition by some that their retention skills are supreme. Thus, I pointed out that 30% of police that were shot - were shot with their own gun. I did not say that they were targeted for their gun. My comment indicates that there is a reasonable probability that in a retention battle you can lose your gun - unless you claim supreme skills. This doesn't take into account that the cop incidents were H2H for the most part. Ninja skills and awareness may be mythical if there is a reasonably thought out surprise attack. If this starts to happen, we will know about it.

Yes, there's always this, and of the dedicated open-carriers I know, few choose to acknowledge this. I go through mandatory weapons-retention training at least twice a year, and I have no illusions about how tough it really is to keep one's handgun away from a dedicated attacker (or two, or three). One suspects that most citizens who carry firearms optionally have little or no weapons-retention training (and that includes concealed carriers).

I also note one poster's implication that it is the CCers who "make claims against the OCers" when stating that he believes it to be rare that OCers make claims against CCers.

One suspects that the OCers are simply talked about more because, well, those are the ones that people know are carrying guns ... and with the proliferation of OCers who seem to be seeking either attention from others or confrontation, particularly with their local gendarmerie (just go on Youtube and search for open carry videos), it just may be possible that most in the gun community seem a bit cynical about the OC crowd.

The reality is that OC has been given a bad name by the extreme appearance of some (we in Washington just got our legislative chambers closed to legal firearms carry, a right we'd had pretty much since statehood (!) due to the ridiculous posturing of only a handful of OCers). Factor in the assclowns carrying long guns in restaurants and posing for stupid selfies ...

I do not consider OC to be an issue of what is, or is not, tactically sound (or tactically better) -- for better or worse, the OC issue has caused many in society to cast a jaundiced eye toward all gun-owners.

 

[Ed Ames]

However, we lost HR 308 which would have been more useful..

TX HR308 2015-2016 84th legislature
Bill Title: Recognizing February 10, 2015, as Howard County Day at the State Capitol.

Umm... Darn?