Poll: Do you carry concealed in urban areas? Has your gun ever been snatched?

[Novus Collectus]

BTW, according to FBI stats, there are approximately 800,000 cops in the USA.

Millions worldwide carry openly everyday.

Ayoob has documented over a thousand attempted snatches of cops' guns that were thwarted by retention training and equipment. (Cops have to write reports when they experience a snatch or snatch attempt.)

I missed that. Is it possible that included snatch attempts during arrests and were not the initial attack?

But I have also shown where cops do get their guns snatched. If you read through this thread you will find references and links. It doesn't happen too often, but it happens.

Yes it happens, but it is rare.
Concealed carry may be more ideal way to carry, but to say it is a bad idea to OC because of rare events that can mostly be thwarted with some practice and awareness is wrong IMO.
Just like the antis tried to claim for years shall issue laws will lead to anger shootings and the wild west type of enviroment, that did not happen. How many open carry states have a plague of gun snatches? I wonder how many there are in Virginia or Vermont where open carry is regularly done. Funny how I don't read about it in the papers.

They are correctly percieved as hard tarets. Most have retention holsters. They have backup available on short notice. And BG's know that if you whack a cop, hundreds of other cops will make it their top priority to bring you to justice. And they won't be "gentle" about it either.

Yes, yes, yes, that was my point too you see.
In the urban areas in this country where open and concealed carry are both observed and it is not uncommon, a criminal will have to worry about more than just the victim shooting him in such an event because the person behind him could be carrying too.
Also if you think someone carrying a gun is not a hard target, then your perception is skewed. While some criminals will still be bold enough to try to do a snatch, the vast majority know if they screw it up they are getting shot. Criminals fear an armed victim more than they fear the cops and tough sentences.

As for CC'ers getting "made" and hence being potential "snatchees", I'm sure that some are made. But however many are, it is certainly less than 100%, and in all likelyhood much less. With OC, one should assume that one is "made" since no effort is made to hide the gun at all. So the exposure is certainly greater with OC, much greater.

See, this is where things start to get interesting and in the realm of lives saved. While there possibly may be more people OC with snatch attempts than CC, there are also many more people CC that are shot during a robbery attempt because the criminal was not aware they had a gun and were not warded off because of it. So it would be an interesting study to discover the difference in the number of shot CCers compared to the number of OCers shot with their own gun. In 2006 in MD something like four cops were shot. Two were off duty and concealed carrying (one died).
Two more officers in Baltimore were robbed while concealed carrying (one got off shots and neither officer was injured). No officer in Baltimore was robbed while open carrying as far as I know.
I bet there is a nice trade off, but I would not be surprised if the crime prevention of OC has actually saved more lives.
For this reason I am all for OC in urban areas. An armed society is a polite society, but an openly armed society is a safe society.

1) Cops are trained to back each other up. Armed citizens are not. And you can't assume that an armed citizen would make a quick judgement to shoot or try to stop/detain a BG who snatched another armed citizen's gun and was running away.

Yeah, but you missed the point entirely. You see, the average criminal does not think know this or think this. All they are thinking is that they don't know who to worry about that is armed. Think about it, if there are two people OCing in a store and there is a criminal, would they take the chance of getting shot by the one that is still armed, or would they think the person doesn't have the balls? I will bet they are afraid of getting shot and don't know most people would not shoot them in the back while running away.

2) Show me an urban area where more than one person is likely to be present that is OC'ing. I've been around the block a few times and I've only seen 2 people OC'ing in my life (except for cops). One was in Phoenix and one was in Brattleboro, VT.

YOur personal observation does not say much. This country is big with many different urban areas where OC is allowe.
But once again you missed the point. In those areas that has OC, they also have CC. In those areas with shall issue, the criminals will not know who behind them is CCing. In the areas where they know people regularly carry they are less likely to try crimes because they do not know who is armed, but when people carry openly they know a good portion of people are.

Here in MD we have more people (non-LEO) with carry licenses that the entire state of California, yet we have high violent crime. Most criminals aren't aware there are armed citizens. I wish more of those people OCed so that criminals will know some citizens can carry and think twice about robbing, carjacking or raping someone.

You can assume that 100% of OC'ers are "made", since the gun is not concealed. Likewise, we can assume that less than 100% of CC'ers are made, since they have at least made an attempt to conceal their guns. Some of these attempts will be successful, right? So all OC'ers are potential targets for a snatch or snatch attempt while only some CC'ers are.

Obviously it follows that more OC'ers will be at risk of a snatch.

And on that note, it is also probably people who CC are more likely to get robbed because there was no visible deterrent.
So one can say almost 100% of all CCers are potential robbery victims.

 

[frankie_the_yankee]

Novus,

Most of the issues you raised have been addressed earlier in this thread. I urge you to read it through. If there are any new points you would like to discuss, feel free.

 

[Novus Collectus]

Do you agree or disagree that open carry discourages some crimes? If you agree, then do you think it offsets the rare cases of snatch attempts?
Do you agrree or disagree that more people who carry concealed get robbed than people who open carry?
I am curious to see a fresh answer from you. An answer to the way I phrased the questions.

 

[Novus Collectus]

OC's got advantages, so does CC.

I agree.

 

[mpmarty]

In my limited experience over the past six plus decades, I'm inclined to favor cc over oc for the following reasons:

1. With cc you have a choice to resort to lethal force or not and the agressor/bad guy never needs to know you are armed unless you choose to make it known.
2. With oc the perp knows you're armed and can simply hang back until you enter an appropriate area, then either knife you in the back or smash your skull and he has your gun; you see, displaying the firearm makes you a target.

I'll keep my ccw concealed thank you.

 

[Novus Collectus]

Fifty-six percent of the felons surveyed agreed that "A criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun;" 74% agreed that "One reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot."

A 57% majority agreed that "Most criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police." In asking felons what they personally thought about while committing crimes, 34% indicated that they thought about getting "shot at by police" or "shot by victim."

The data suggest that criminals may be a little more concerned about being caught by police and imprisoned than about being shot, but meeting the armed citizen clearly elicited fears of being shot. That deterrent effect of citizen gun ownership appeared in their responses to questions about actual encounters. Although 37% of those surveyed admitted that they personally had "run into a victim who was armed with a gun," that figure surpassed the 50% mark for armed criminals, an experience shared by 57% of the active gun predators. And 34% of the sample admitted to having been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim."

Significantly, almost 40% said there was at least one time when the criminal "decided not to do a crime because [he] knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun." Clearly, armed citizens represent a real threat to criminals, a threat with which large numbers are personally familiar, or familiar with through the shared experiences of their fellow outlaws.

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?ID=117

Most violent criminals avoid encounters with guns. OC and them knowing one has a gun has probably prevented more attacks than CC has been used defending against one.

 

[frankie_the_yankee]

Novus Collectus writes: Do you agree or disagree that open carry discourages some crimes? If you agree, then do you think it offsets the rare cases of snatch attempts?

I think it may discourage some crimes. But I think that the risk of a snatch or snatch attempt in an urban environment is greater.

The question is unanswerable though, because we can never know how many crimes are discouraged if any.

I am aware that around 40% of criminals say that they have refrained from doing a crime because they thought the victim might be armed. But that means that around 60% were not deterred by the possibility that a victim might be armed.

Novus Collectus wrires: Do you agrree or disagree that more people who carry concealed get robbed than people who open carry?

I really have no idea.

But common sense tells me that if someone is OC'ing, the criminal knows exactly what he is going up against. This means that he can plan an ambush, taking the OC'd gun into account. In an urban environment it is sometimes quite difficult and/or awkward to maintain distance from any and all comers. So the criminal can easily get close enough to pull off an ambush if he wants to. Depending on circumstances, the criminal may be larger, stronger and/or younger than the OC'er, leading him to believe with a high confidence level that he can successfully take the gun.

If someone is CC'ing, the criminal's plans will not take the fact of his being armed into account, leaving open the possibility of taking him by surprise.

We see cases of this happening almost every day. (It's pretty common in newspapers here in TX, and in "Armed Citizen" accounts in the NRA magazines.)

Tactical surprise is a very big deal. If you don't believe me, ask Tojo, or Osama bin Ladan.

 

[Novus Collectus]

I am aware that around 40% of criminals say that they have refrained from doing a crime because they thought the victim might be armed. But that means that around 60% were not deterred by the possibility that a victim might be armed.

No, you misread it. 40% had an encounter where they were deterred because they either knew or thought the victim had a gun. That does not mean 60% wouldn't be deterred by any interpretation. You greatly misunderstood the quote.

But common sense tells me that if someone is OC'ing, the criminal knows exactly what he is going up against. This means that he can plan an ambush, taking the OC'd gun into account.

....which studies suggest is incredibly rare to have a criminal take the chance such as that. The rare criminal as such may never be encountered in one's lifetime of carrying. One seems much more likely to be robbed by surprise by a criminal that did not know they were CCing and taking their gun as a result of the robbery because most violent criminals would be deterred by a person they knew to be armed.

In an urban environment it is sometimes quite difficult and/or awkward to maintain distance from any and all comers. So the criminal can easily get close enough to pull off an ambush if he wants to. Depending on circumstances, the criminal may be larger, stronger and/or younger than the OC'er, leading him to believe with a high confidence level that he can successfully take the gun.

If someone is CC'ing, the criminal's plans will not take the fact of his being armed into account, leaving open the possibility of taking him by surprise.

Once again we are back to why this doesn't happen to officers. YOur dismissal that cops are better trained means little when you start talking about ambushes and criminals crazy and bold enough to take on an armed victim. If the rare crazy criminal will do it to a civillian, they are just as likely to do it to a lone cop.

We see cases of this happening almost every day. (It's pretty common in newspapers here in TX, and in "Armed Citizen" accounts in the NRA magazines.)

I thought there was no open carry in Texas for anyone other than police and security guards. Can you find a few for us?

Do a lot of bank guards (which are not often trained as well as police) get their guns taken from them and banks robbed with it when it is crowded? I wonder why not if the way you put it is such a grave danger in the urban enviroment.

 

[frankie_the_yankee]

Novus,

Novus Collectus writes: .....because most violent criminals would be deterred by a person they knew to be armed.

Your arguments are circular.

Referring to citizens acting in self defense here in TX, I was talking about people who were CC'ing, not OC'ing which is, as you point out, illegal.

Novus Collectus writes: Once again we are back to why this doesn't happen to officers. YOur dismissal that cops are better trained means little when you start talking about ambushes and criminals crazy and bold enough to take on an armed victim. If the rare crazy criminal will do it to a civillian, they are just as likely to do it to a lone cop.

Nope. Not all criminals, nor even most of them are crazy. When someone decides whether or not to do something, they make a risk vs. reward calculation (whether consciously or unconsciously). The easier something looks to do, the more likely the chances of success, the greater the "reward", the greater the chance that they will try it.

A cop presents a much harder target than most armed citizens that are OC'ing, for many reasons that have been previously discussed. It follows that in most cases the citizen is more likely to be attacked.

Again, this has already been discussed in this thread. More than once.

 

[frankie_the_yankee]

What? Only 6 hard core OC'ers willing to mess up the poll by voting that they had their concealed guns snatched? You guys disappoint me.

 

[Novus Collectus]

Nope. Not all criminals, nor even most of them are crazy. When someone decides whether or not to do something, they make a risk vs. reward calculation (whether consciously or unconsciously). The easier something looks to do, the more likely the chances of success, the greater the "reward", the greater the chance that they will try it.

A cop presents a much harder target than most armed citizens that are OC'ing, for many reasons that have been previously discussed. It follows that in most cases the citizen is more likely to be attacked.

Again, this has already been discussed in this thread. More than once.

You seem to conveiently ignore some important points.

One point is that how would a criminal know an open carry victim is any less trained that a police officer? They would not know, and they would not know they were even off duty police officers which are likely to be trained and have people willing to take revenge for them.

The second flaw in your logic is that there are plenty of police officers that are smaller women, short men or near retirement age older officers which can be overpowered like a smaller citizen open carrying. If the smaller and sometimes seemingly weaker officers are not targeted, then your prevalence theory starts to fall apart.

If a criminal thinks they may get shot and lose their life, obviously common sense says that the vast majority of them would not take such a chance with such an ultimate loss. Most would not want to take a chance getting shot by an armed victim any more than they would with an armed cop.

Sure, some of them are stupid enough and/or crazy to attack a cop as well as an knowingly armed victim, but it is rare and if one is stupid or crazy enough to try it on one, the are crazy and/or stupid enough to try it on either.

Since I think open carry by police officers is a good idea, I state it is a good idea for people to open carry in urban areas for the reasons I have already stated as well.

 

[frankie_the_yankee]

Novus Collectus writes: One point is that how would a criminal know an open carry victim is any less trained that a police officer? They would not know,....

They won't know. But it would certainly be reasonable for them to assume so.

Novus Collectus writes: The second flaw in your logic is that there are plenty of police officers that are smaller women, short men or near retirement age older officers which can be overpowered like a smaller citizen open carrying. If the smaller and sometimes seemingly weaker officers are not targeted, then your prevalence theory starts to fall apart.

Like I said, read the whole thread. I posted links to several stories where female and/or smaller officers had their guns snatched by larger, stronger criminals. It happens.

Novus Collectus writes: If a criminal thinks they may get shot and lose their life, obviously common sense says that the vast majority of them would not take such a chance with such an ultimate loss. Most would not want to take a chance getting shot by an armed victim any more than they would with an armed cop.

Who cares what the "vast majority" or "most" of them would do? If even a few of them are willing to attempt a snatch it is a big problem for the person targetted.

Novus Collectus writes: Sure, some of them are stupid enough and/or crazy to attack a cop as well as an knowingly armed victim, but it is rare and if one is stupid or crazy enough to try it on one, the are crazy and/or stupid enough to try it on either.

Cops and armed citizens are not the same thing and do not present the same elements of deterrence.

Novus Collectus writes: Since I think open carry by police officers is a good idea, I state it is a good idea for people to open carry in urban areas for the reasons I have already stated as well.

Cops and armed citizens are not the same thing and do not present the same elements of deterrence.

Please read through the thread before re-hashing stuff that has already been discussed.

 

[Flintknapper]

Evening Novus,

Here is the chronology of this discussion:

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasC...postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=open+carry

http://www.texasshooting.com/TexasCHL_Forum/viewtopic.php?t=10360

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=4983&forum_id=7

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=307098

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=306730

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=307470

And here is the Crux of it:

Frankie Wrote:

What I want people to do is to acknowledge reality instead of passing along bad tactical advice just because it fits their gun rights world view.

As it happens, I am right, I know I am right, and I make no apologies for it.

 

[frankie_the_yankee]

Actually, I would sum it up more like this:

frankie_the_yankee wrote: I am simply trying to explain and make the argument that OC in urban areas has tactical drawbacks and that I would not recommend it for most people. What amazes me is the continued spurious arguments that OC advocates continue to put forth.

So I say if you want to OC in urban areas to carve out the right to do it, go for it. If you want to raise peoples' consciousness, go for it. If you want to crusade for OC, go for it.

Just don't try to tell me that it is tactically superior to CC in urban environments.

Because that is just nonsense.

 

[Jeff White]

What? Only 6 hard core OC'ers willing to mess up the poll by voting that they had their concealed guns snatched? You guys disappoint me.

When you take the fact that for the most part we live in one of the safest countries there is into account, it's not surprising at all. I hate to be the one who bursts the bubble, but outside of some inner city areas, the USA is relatively safe. Where do all the assaults, muggings, strong armed robberies happen? For the most part they happen in those areas. If you don't go in those areas, your chances of being mugged, robbed, battered or otherwise attacked are pretty slim.

Don't live a criminal lifestyle, don't hang with people who do, don't go the places where people who live a criminal lifestyle hang out and you really don't need to worry too much about being attacked. Can it happen, yes, but is it likely to, NO!

I would imagine that answers the question as to why only 6 people responded to your poll question. I'm surprised that it's that many.

Jeff

 

[fearless leader]

Never snatch attempt while concealed.

I carry in urban areas, stores, malls, hospitals, job interviews, at work, Disney and even before I was aware it was illegal (Truely, at the time it may not have been illegal in that year), I sat through court and a ball game with an equalizer. I carry in places they don't welcome CCWs. I figure as long as I don't have a shirt on that says, "Hi, I'm carrying a gun," nobody is really going to look. I tried on some pants at the Evil Wal-Mart and hung my S&W 1076 on the wall. They aren't supposed to be looking in the try-on booths with cameras, but I was followed everywhere I went the rest of my visit. Somewhere exists a picture of Mickey Mouse with his arm around me and I'm wearing a Glock 20 in Thunderwear. It appears I'm really glad to see Mickey, but other than that, no one noticed.
I had my gun fall out of one of those crappy "Badger" holsters once during a job interview in a bank. It got pretty exciting. I heard a 'clack' and I looked down to see my brand new Sig 226 on the deck. If you think I was surprised, you should have seen the examiner!
I figure every time I was nearly shot and needed a gun, I didn't have it on me, so now I carry so I won't need it, but to carry it for self defense (which could happen anytime/anywhere) if you don't have it on you, you're wasting your time. As long a I'm in a place they can't actually put me in jail for carrying, I usually carry.
God bless America!