Wow do we really look like that from the outside?

[Nightmare45]

Surprise means no prior knowledge or warning, if you fail to watch your 6, keep your head on a swivel or go condition yellow, you can be taken by surprise. OC or CC, I open carry in AZ, NM and where allowed and CC in Texas and I try not to be surprised anywhere. Knockout game relies on surprise, note to Knockout guys, SUPRISE.

 

[Gatherer]

That's why most people here asked for explanation instead of simply assuming the worst and taking offense like you did.

I guess that fits your comment on education instead of guns etc. Uncalled for,just as the little boy, school ground hyperbull. Your correct about the computer. It's also a place where one can get away with your "normal statement" from behind a monitor. It fits in the sick pup category. But this has taken away from the original thread. Let's hope comments can be better phrased in the future.

 

[Gatherer]

Also my post was, "what the heck is that about?" Nothing more. Someone agreed with me and then YOU took to defensive and offensive comments. Check out the posts. + everyone here that agrees with that lame hyperbull you posted. Like I stated, you could have found a better way to express yourself. Your comfy with it and I guess everyone else here is too.

 

[Rhino]

I wasn't the one who said it. But like you said, we're getting away from the original thread, and I think we've beaten this horse enough.

 

[Gatherer]

I wasn't the one who said it. But like you said, we're getting away from the original thread, and I think we've beaten this horse enough.

Agreed!

 

[gundaddypv]

Agreed. Open carry of pistols can be argued as being practical. However, open carry of an AK or AR isn't practical except at time of war, rioting or other high-threat situations. Just marching down the street prepared for a long, running gun-fight. Seeing the open carry of battle-rifles makes people wonder if something is going on that they just don't know about. It makes people nervous. Heck, I carry a pistol every single day and I'd wonder what the heck was going on. When I see the open carry of a pistol, I first decide whether the person just likes to carry open because of personal preference or if they are OC because they have a beautiful gun. Usually, it's a chrome 1911 or Colt Python. With those two, of course you'd OC. They're just too pretty to hide.

 

[gundaddypv]

Without any attempt to be a jerk let me address that oft repeated and so very misunderstood "element of surprise" thing...

CC and OC have the very same "element of surprise" because the "element of surprise" is really nothing more than the bad guy being "surprised" to discover his intended victim ..... has a gun.

With CC the bad guy is "surprised" to see his intended victim has a gun to defend himself with after the bad guy has already chosen his victim and the attack is already in progress and at that point seeing the gun can make the bad guy decide to stop the attack.

With OC the bad guy is "surprised" to see his intended victim has a gun to defend himself with during the bad guy's choosing a victim process and at that point seeing the gun can make the bad guy decide not to attack at all.

But either way... it was the bad guy being "surprised" to see a gun that was the actual "element of surprise".

Quite frankly... I'd prefer the bad guy be "surprised" to see my openly carried gun and decide not to attack me so I can go home and watch the 6 o'clock news coverage .... from the comfort of my easy chair..... about the CC'er who had to pull his gun and "surprise" the bad guy who attacked him.

Does OC's "element of surprise" really work? Well.... there have been thousands of folks open carrying in many States (Like Arizona) for decades! and yet accounts of folks OC'ing being attacked are rare. And you know with the anti gun media any incident involving an open carrier being attacked would be covered over and over and over yet such has not been the case in the past nor is it now.

And, in my not so humble opinion, because CC's use of the "element of surprise" is only effective after the attack has begun but OC's use of the "element of surprise" can prevent an attack from happening............. OC's use of the "element of surprise" is far superior to CC's because....

I'd much rather watch the 6 o'clock news than to BE the news.

Now... about an OC'er being "targeted" or "shot first" by the bad guys...

OC has been practiced for DECADES in Arizona (just one State out of all the States where open carry is/has been done)... yet the incidents where an OC'er was "targeted" or "shot first" are so rare it is difficult to find any reputable incidents that can be backed up with cites and/or links to put any validity to those claims. If there were any truth to those claims shouldn't it be easy to find actual incidents especially considering there are DECADES!! of open carry to choose from?

I don't care how folks decide to carry but I do care if there is any validity to the reasons folks use to make their decisions... and I personally am very tired of the oft repeated myth of some magical mystical super duper Ninja stealth "element of surprise" making concealed carry better than open carry. And I wish folks would make their decisions based on facts and not oft repeated myths.

Sometimes I wonder if folks hide their fear of "offending", or their fear of "looking different", or their fear of actually having to stand up for the right to bear arms by explaining and/or answering questions, behind the "element of surprise" stupid fish (dum bass) myth.

And yet.... no matter what a person's reasons are for carrying concealed I will fight for your right (not for a "permit" but for the "right"... BIG DIFFERENCE!) to carry concealed.

Very good points. However, I think some badguys who are determined, regardless of the threat, to do harm to others would just shoot the OC guys first. That way the perceptible threat is gone. After the OCers get shot, the CCers jump into action.

 

[Gatherer]

I tend to agree. We have concealed carry here in SC. and I've had mine since the beginning. Even if we could open carry, I wouldn't. To obvious of a target. Just my opinion.

 

[Bikenut]

Very good points. However, I think some badguys who are determined, regardless of the threat, to do harm to others would just shoot the OC guys first. That way the perceptible threat is gone. After the OCers get shot, the CCers jump into action.

I tend to agree. We have concealed carry here in SC. and I've had mine since the beginning. Even if we could open carry, I wouldn't. To obvious of a target. Just my opinion.

Ummm.... Did you guys miss this part of my post above?

Originally posted by Bikenut
Now... about an OC'er being "targeted" or "shot first" by the bad guys...

OC has been practiced for DECADES in Arizona (just one State out of all the States where open carry is/has been done)... yet the incidents where an OC'er was "targeted" or "shot first" are so rare it is difficult to find any reputable incidents that can be backed up with cites and/or links to put any validity to those claims. If there were any truth to those claims shouldn't it be easy to find actual incidents especially considering there are DECADES!! of open carry to choose from?

Again... without trying to be a jerk.... could you guys cite and/or link to incidents where the open carrier was "targeted" or was "shot first"? I mean... if that is actually the case... if bad guys are actually targeting OC'ers and/or shooting them first shouldn't the internet and the media be awash with a plethora of incidents where this has happened?

The actual truth is quite simple... while it is possible for an OC'er to be targeted or shot first the rarity of these things happening is quite startling and remarkable. But you guys can feel free to search for actual factual incidents to cite and/or link to (the old "I heard from my uncle's cousin who talked to the girlfriend of an ex cop 20 years ago isn't good enough... please provide actual factual incidents) to support your contention that OC'ers are/will be "targeted" and/or "shot first".

And I'll quote myself yet again:

Originally posted by Bikenut
And I wish folks would make their decisions based on facts and not oft repeated myths.

 

[Mainsail]

Very good points. However, I think some badguys who are determined, regardless of the threat, to do harm to others would just shoot the OC guys first. That way the perceptible threat is gone. After the OCers get shot, the CCers jump into action.

Your argument fails because you mistakenly believe that the bad guy that would shoot an open carrier is somehow unaware of concealed carry- as though it's a concept he never heard of. While CC *might* surprise a bad guy in NYC or Boston, it is most certainly on the mind of a bad guy in most other places.

A bad guy that would coldly shoot an open carrier would just as easily and just as likely shoot you while you're compliantly reaching for your wallet. Your personal safety plan, as you presented above, is absolutely ridiculous if you really believe it.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

Seeing the open carry of battle-rifles makes people wonder if something is going on that they just don't know about. It makes people nervous.

Battle Rifles?!
I think you mean....
Single shot rifles of similar Appearance to Rifles that are used by some in the military but who's appearance is the only thing that the two share as their functions differ In the rate of fire, one capable of full automatic fire (military) versus one round fired for each pull of the trigger (civilian) such as the Ruger Mini 14.
Am I close or is it that you don't seem to know your terms and classifications of a civilian rifles versus a military rifle?
Or it could be that you do know but believe that "We, the people" should not be allowed to carry and or own civilian versions of rifles that LOOK scary and similar to the military ones but DO NOT FUNCTION like the military ones that allow for full automatic fire?
You already strike me as a compromising individual. The kinda guy that's OK with "a little bit" of restriction on my Second Amendment Rights...I mean after all... We don't want to frighten the masses now do we?



Sent from behind enemy lines.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

Very good points. However, I think some badguys who are determined, regardless of the threat, to do harm to others would just shoot the OC guys first. That way the perceptible threat is gone. After the OCers get shot, the CCers jump into action.

It's official...
You sir are uninformed and ignorant.
I had been on the fence about you.... Ahhhh.... Not really. You are trolling as far as I am concerned and I think your posts prove that. You are either TROLLING or severely and incredibly uninformed.


Sent from behind enemy lines.

 

[WHSmithIV]

Most of the rest of the world see us who have guns as being children playing at cops and robbers or cowboys and indians. This is only because of what Hollywood has sent around the world. The reality is that America is a rich land. The hunters of three states only that went hunting this season alone are the largest standing army on Earth. Add to that the hunters in the other 47 states and it is a formidable number indeed. All of us who hunt are expert shots and can take out a target for 100 yards or more with one shot. I know guys who have made one mile shots with an old Mosin Nagant.

Our country does believe in being armed. The right to be armed is written into our Constitution. The rest of the world wants us to disarm because they have forcefully disarmed their citizens. Doing so hasn't decreased gun crimes - it has increased them. We only have to look at the draconian anti gun laws in Chicago to see that ourselves.

Admiral Yamamoto told Emperor Hirohito before the attack on Pearl Harbor "We can never invade America because behind every blade of grass will be a gun" Yamamoto studied at the University of California in Los Angelos. He learned enough of US culture to be able to tell his Emperor that, and he was right.

I do not know ANYBODY in this valley who doesn't have guns. Everybody has guns. Strange isn't it that there is no gun crime here? I fix everybody's computers here and I make a lot of house calls. Every one of my customers have multiple guns. Some of them strap a pistol on in the morning when they get up - just as I do when I go out to tend my livestock. I always carry my leatherman and my 1911 .45 pistol openly. This is not to intimidate people, this is because they are tools and we do have 4 legged predators around here in the mountains. I also have a flock of sheep to protect. My wife and I raise lambs for meat. Wolves getting into our flock would cause great damage and severe financial hardship.

Idaho recommends that if you go into the mountains you take a gun with you. This is a state almost the size of the country of Finland with 1/5th of the Finnish population. Our area has 1.2 people per square mile in a 2,200 square mile county - mostly mountains. We have one Sheriff and 3 depties as our police force. We have almost no crime. So, we should be disarmed?

 

[Johnny Dollar]

Battle Rifles?!
I think you mean....
Single shot rifles of similar Appearance to Rifles that are used by some in the military but who's appearance is the only thing that the two share as their functions differ In the rate of fire, one capable of full automatic fire (military) versus one round fired for each pull of the trigger (civilian) such as the Ruger Mini 14.
Am I close or is it that you don't seem to know your terms and classifications of a civilian rifles versus a military rifle?
Or it could be that you do know but believe that "We, the people" should not be allowed to carry and or own civilian versions of rifles that LOOK scary and similar to the military ones but DO NOT FUNCTION like the military ones that allow for full automatic fire?
You already strike me as a compromising individual. The kinda guy that's OK with "a little bit" of restriction on my Second Amendment Rights...I mean after all... We don't want to frighten the masses now do we?



Sent from behind enemy lines.

What if I'm carrying an M1 Garand?

 

[vernsimpson]

I prefer CC. If anyone wants to OC then I have no problem with that at all. But we should not hammer on each other just because they do not believe or carry the same way. The same goes for guns. We each have and prefer different guns. Some like Glocks and some do not. I have a Glock so does that mean that I believe everyone who does not have or like Glocks are bad? No it does not. We tell anyone who asks what kind of gun they should carry to go to a range that rents guns and try them out and chose which gun you like and feel good with. The same goes for CC and OC. The main thing is to CARRY! How each chooses to carry is what feels right for them.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Very good points. However, I think some badguys who are determined, regardless of the threat, to do harm to others would just shoot the OC guys first. That way the perceptible threat is gone. After the OCers get shot, the CCers jump into action.

I tend to agree. We have concealed carry here in SC. and I've had mine since the beginning. Even if we could open carry, I wouldn't. To obvious of a target. Just my opinion.

And we are all still waiting of just one example of these theories happening in real life... as we have been for years.

 

[Gatherer]

Hey, like I stated bikenut...it's just 'my' opinion. To each their own. I just wouldn't open carry.

 

[Bikenut]

Hey, like I stated bikenut...it's just 'my' opinion. To each their own. I just wouldn't open carry.

I understand that it is "your opinion" and you are entitled to your opinion... I just want folks who read your and my postings to see that an "opinion" may not be based in actual "fact" because all too often people read an "opinion" and do not bother to question whether there is any factual basis for it.

As far as how you, or anyone else, carries..... I honestly don't much care since it truly is a personal decision that should be made based on facts/circumstances/factors each person has to deal with in their own lives. And I replied to your and gundaddypv's posts because I really hope folks have facts, not myths or opinions about being targeted or shot first, from which to base their decisions on.

I apologize if my quest to counter myths and opinions with appeals for folks to provide actual facts has offended you.

 

[dogshawred]

It seems to me that most if not all anti OC posters think that those who would OC are ballsy or crazy for putting themselves in that situation on purpose.
~
With those thoughts in mind and the generally accepted fact that most if not all criminals would if given a choice would prefer to assault/accost an UNARMED individual. Would just not play with anyone's theory that a criminal would attack an OC first in a robbery to eliminate their threat. They would be more likely than not to avoid contact and look for someone else that was not armed or appear not to be armed. After all the criminal is going to think as well that someone OCing is just a little to ballsy or crazy to confront. They just want you belongings, they don't want to die or get hurt in the process.
~
This has been pointed out before numerous time in the past and yet anti OCers simply ignore the logic and continue to attack those who have made a conscious choice to exercise their right to OC.
~
I am sorry I can not site any statistics regarding the phenomenon, but criminals just won't speak up when they have decided to move on to a more obviously easier target.
~
So keep in mind the next time you see one of us open carrying, were crazy, don't ya know. :sarcastic: :dance3: :lol:

 

[Mainsail]

After I wrote The Open Carry Argument I've had a few people privately admit that their rationale for disliking open carry was primarily due to being uncomfortable with it. They said it was because they wanted the 'element of surprise' or because they feared being shot first, but they were just too ashamed (for lack of a better word) to admit it was because they just flat-out weren't comfortable.

So now, whenever someone proclaims an irrational reason, like surprise or shot first- but cannot support it, I have to suspect they aren't being honest. But isn't that true for any subject? Whenever someone dislikes something (or someone) but cannot generate a rational explanation for it, and resort to irrational fear, they are hiding something.