Concealed vs Open carry
- Thread starter chilipeppernorm
- Start date
chilipeppernorm
New member
Thru, have we met??? I'm new to this forum, and am really enjoying the company and discussion here. Just turned 60 years old today, I'm a Vietnam combat vet (Scout Dogs, 34th Infantry Platoon, 1st Cavalry Division-Airmoble 1972), a husband/father/grandfather, and a retired Critical Care-Truama nurse. I never have been a gun slinging superhero, and it's a virtual certainty that many if not most on this forum are likely to be better marksmen, faster at the draw, and just better all around athletes than me. Fortunately, the only performance I'm interested in beating is my last, nobody else's is even on my radar.
Based on your posts, I believe there may still be time to rehabilitate your image unless you're permanently locked into a pre-adolescent mentality. You're in a 3 stage process, and almost at the end. Stage 1, we're all politely embarrassed for you based on your tin ear in social situations and media by your bragging, posing, and straw man arguments. Stage 2, because you continue without relent, we end up laughing behind your back. This is unkind, but you make it difficult to avoid. Stage 3, you refuse to change and simply become boring, and therefore ignored.
If you've got a quirky sense of humor or just think along different lines then man up and say so. Respond to logic with logic, and a little humility goes a long way. Or you can continue, certain in the knowledge that your lightening fast draw from a concealed position will kill me while I'm trying to access the ankle holster I've never owned.
Based on your posts, I believe there may still be time to rehabilitate your image unless you're permanently locked into a pre-adolescent mentality. You're in a 3 stage process, and almost at the end. Stage 1, we're all politely embarrassed for you based on your tin ear in social situations and media by your bragging, posing, and straw man arguments. Stage 2, because you continue without relent, we end up laughing behind your back. This is unkind, but you make it difficult to avoid. Stage 3, you refuse to change and simply become boring, and therefore ignored.
If you've got a quirky sense of humor or just think along different lines then man up and say so. Respond to logic with logic, and a little humility goes a long way. Or you can continue, certain in the knowledge that your lightening fast draw from a concealed position will kill me while I'm trying to access the ankle holster I've never owned.
redneck050
New member
look at it this way, if i oc the bg is not going to be surprised, he is just going to try and take me first in the commission of his crime, if i cc and he tries to rob,molest, kill someone he will be "surprised" by the flash of bright light he see's. then he wont try to rob,molest, kill anyone ever again. and the taxpayers wont have to pay for his room and board for the next 50 years. "gun control is being able to hit your target"
Or, the criminal could just think, "Why would I want to attack that guy that has the capability to kill me with when I can wait 5 minutes for him to leave, or go down the street one block and choose one of the 99.5% of the remaining population that isn't visibly carrying a gun and appears to be a much easier target?" Criminals are lazy and cowards - not necessarily stupid. I have no desire to save any taxpayers' money by being judge, jury and executioner. My goal is to protect my family, and their best protection is to give the criminal as little reason as possible to choose me as a target. Concealed carry does nothing to dissuade the criminal away from me, it only allows me to defend myself after they have attacked.
I've often wondered if some people who carry concealed have hero fantasies and a latent desire to rid the world of bad guys. I don't wonder so much about that anymore, after reading some of these comments I am sure it is true.
CharlesMorrison
Banned
You should have been there when Hack had people shooting right past each other, for "experience" at such things.Even Ayoob says that if you hit them with a bullet at all, it's best to kill them, altho he words it more tactfully. action does not ALWAYS beat reaction, either. SOME people's reaction is a LOT faster than other people's action.
Link Removed
Sent from behind enemy lines.
B
Bikenut
Guest
Look at it this way.... if your contention that the bad guy would try and take you out first if you open carried is valid then you must have a multitude of real life incidents where this has happened to base that on.... correct? So how about sharing all those incidents that have happened over the past several DECADES! of open carry in just Arizona? Or I'll make it even easier... how about sharing all those factual incidents using the entire United States to draw from? Oh.... and kindly provide cites and/or links so we can research them.
I'm not going to hold my breath because the incidents where an ordinary open carrier was taken out first are so rare you will have a hard time finding them. And if you do find some please be intellectually honest and compare the rarity of those events with the DECADES of uneventful open carry.
Oh...and please scroll up to post #5 for some food for thought about that magical mythical super ninja "concealed carry element of surprise".
After reading many posts from many concealed carriers on several different forums for quite a few years I have no doubt what so ever that there are a multitude of concealed carriers just itching to whip out their "element of surprise" and be the hero by putting some "punk" away.
BluesStringer
Les Brers
Why do we hear about so few gun store robberies? Maybe because nearly everyone behind the counter is open carrying and the BG's know there are much softer targets down the road a piece?
Why do BG's rob the tellers at banks instead of the much more lucrative potential of robbing the armored truck courier as he's transporting cash money to and from the truck and the bank? Maybe because they know that both the courier and the driver are heavily, and openly, armed?
Why, if I have a choice, would I want the BG to "be surprised" to find out that I'm armed and ready to defend myself with deadly force if necessary? Wouldn't it be better if he were surprised to find that his intended victim was armed, and that surprise caused him to find an easier target?
Your theory defies logic. Oh, but wait, you have other reasons for wanting to "surprise" someone:
And because of posturing puffery such as this, all CC'ers who CC without any wish to be judge, jury and executioner, have to defend against assumptions like Navy's and Bikenut's posts above make about "multitudes" of CC'ers. Thanks for nothin', because truly, as one who CC's, I would rather have it taken for granted that I am a political ally of all people who carry, whether open or concealed, than to waste time having to be scrutinized by some of them so they can make sure I'm not like you in your wish for the opportunity to rid the country of the dregs of our society through gunfire. Not that I worry about that with Navy or Bikenut specifically. We've been interacting for quite awhile now, but other OC'ers with whom I don't regularly interact may well associate my history as a CC'er to be indicative of latent violent tendencies because of puffery like that which your post contains, and which both alluded to as contributing to their sense of caution concerning CC'ers who might think like you.
Perhaps a better slogan for you would be, "Gun control is being able to surprise your target." Just a thought.
Blues
telpinaro
New member
Actually, I just heard of an attempted gun store robbery a couple months ago. Guy came in armed with a baseball bat, smashed a case and tried to grab a gun and run. Clearly, this did not work out well for him. I don't think he died, but he's probably not going to be trying that again.
And... I CC because that's how I want to carry. Plus, there's a few cities out here where OC is banned (CC fine with permit). I wouldn't want to forget which ones.
E
ezkl2230
Guest
I choose to CC for one reason: I don't want to attract any more attention to myself than is necessary. I have heard both sides of the argument for years. I recently had a spirited discussion with a customer, an NRA instructor, who was adamant that OC is the only way to go because it serves notice on bad guys and may deter them from trying anything.
I choose to CC because of tactical considerations. If I am a bad guy, before hitting a target the first thing I'm going to do is recon it. I'm going to look for potential defenders. Guess who I am going to take out first? That is exactly what happened in the Kirkwood city council shooting. Armed officers stood guard at the door of the meeting; they were the first to be killed. The shooter then went on to shoot and kill the mayor, two council members, and a reporter, and to injure two others before being killed by other officers responding to the shooting.
While it might be true that the presence of an armed individual may indeed deter a bad guy in some instances, in others openly carrying a firearm marks you for death. The bad guy always has the initiative until someone can find a way to take it back. If I am CC'ing, the chances are good that I will still be alive to take that shot.
I choose to CC because of tactical considerations. If I am a bad guy, before hitting a target the first thing I'm going to do is recon it. I'm going to look for potential defenders. Guess who I am going to take out first? That is exactly what happened in the Kirkwood city council shooting. Armed officers stood guard at the door of the meeting; they were the first to be killed. The shooter then went on to shoot and kill the mayor, two council members, and a reporter, and to injure two others before being killed by other officers responding to the shooting.
While it might be true that the presence of an armed individual may indeed deter a bad guy in some instances, in others openly carrying a firearm marks you for death. The bad guy always has the initiative until someone can find a way to take it back. If I am CC'ing, the chances are good that I will still be alive to take that shot.
B
Bikenut
Guest
Just curious... in as much as you have found one instance where the bad guy took out armed guards who were expected to be there (which isn't exactly the same as taking out a random citizen open carrier who unexpectedly happens to be in a store) have you also researched how many concealed carriers were targeted by bad guys because they appeared unarmed?
The thing is... if we are intellectually honest... we will take both sides of the equation and honestly compare them against each other before making any decisions.
So... how does open carry's supposed being "shot first" compare to concealed carry's "attacked because they appear unarmed" statistics?
Please provide cites and/or links to actual factual incidents/studies/statistics to support your contention.
I'm actually not being a jerk... I just would like actual facts instead of the same old oft repeated myths.
BluesStringer
Les Brers
You'll notice I said "...so few..." when referring to gun store robberies. I probably should have said the same thing about armored truck robberies too because armored truck robberies do happen every once in a great while, but the point is the same - exceedingly few OC'ers are targeted, first or otherwise, just because they are OC'ers. And if the guy you speak of above didn't die, it only goes to prove that even the threat of dying for what you're trying to steal can't fix stupid.
Otherwise, I CC too. I definitely get that trying to navigate the laws that change from jurisdiction to jurisdiction makes it tough to feel like you really have a choice. I didn't have a choice until just a couple of months ago (new, revamped carry laws went into effect here then), and we have a state preemption law which makes it impossible, or at least illegal, for individual cities or counties to make laws that vary with the state laws.
I also get the "I don't want to draw attention to myself" reason for choosing CC over OC. What I don't get, and never have, is the using myths that are so easily debunked as reasons for not OC'ing. I don't get making adversaries of OC'ers because someone perceives some "element of surprise" by CC'ing, and when OC'ers debunk that kind of idiocy, they get accused of nefarious intent, or just looking for confrontations with cops by choosing their method of carry for themselves. I'm not addressing your attitude at all telpinaro, because I don't perceive an attitude from you, but in nearly any one of these threads you can find an adversarial kind of discourse between dedicated OC'ers and committed CC'ers, and my perception is that the overwhelming majority of myths and/or misinformation and/or contentiousness comes from the CC "side" of the equation.
I will definitely at least try OC'ing here in the coming weeks/months. I haven't heard about any trouble or incidents of any kind since the new law allowing it went into effect, but I also haven't heard about anyone starting to do it on a regular basis around here either. Not sure how willing I am to be a "pioneer" who effectively deals with cops on a daily basis. In fact, not drawing attention to myself, for me, would be specifically about cops. I do not want to deal with them any more than absolutely necessary. Whatever I decide to do now that I have a choice, I will never go out of my way to make adversaries out of OC'ers. That's the weirdest thing about this subject to me.
Blues
E
ezkl2230
Guest
I guess you are forgetting the Navy Yard shooting, in which the shooter went after those who were armed first before going after the unarmed, so there is more than one such scenario.
As for concealed carriers who were targeted because they appeared to be unarmed, that cannot be researched, and I am not aware of any mass shooting in which a concealed carrier who was in possession of their firearm at the time was killed. The profile of the typical shooter tells us that they are going to go where they believe there are defenseless victims; those shooters will avoid clearly armed personnel, and there is no way for them to know if someone in the crowd is armed. During the Aurora theater shooting, one or two CPL holders were killed, not because the shooter targeted them because he thought they might be armed, but because the concealed carriers were as defenseless as everyone else because they obeyed the theater's gun free zone signs.
To be honest, though, even though I cite these examples, I take this approach because it makes sense to me from a tactical standpoint, not because there is a preponderance of evidence to support my position. As has been said before, the typical shooter is looking for defenseless victims and will avoid clearly armed individuals. However, there are also outliers - the few shooters who don't fit the profile - who took on targets that they knew to be defended. In those instances, they went after the armed personnel first, and then after the unarmed.
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
You would really risk trying to take out an armed civilian if you were going to commit a crime? Why wouldn't you just wait till they left so you had less risk in your way?
I mean, when I plan on doing anything, if I see an obstacle that I know will be gone in a brief amount of time I'll wait. I would want to say that's common sense, but this viewpoint of taking on armed people first when you wouldn't have to comes up far too regularly...
Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
mappow
New member
I'll say again........Family member was with the DOJ. Actual office was crime statics and under his direction generated the annual report of crime statics. Upon questioning him this exact question, his response after research was NONE reported. Not saying the Gov't has it right and manipulates statics but saying he would have reported if reported to their office.
-
Has anyone Google man killed by open carrying?
-
Has anyone Google man killed by open carrying?
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
Mass shootings on military bases or other places that are protected by armed guards have completely different kinds of evil coming after them. With no recourse to death, it doesn't matter what method of carry against those shooters, they won't be "surprised" by a concealed carrier or deterred by open carriers . If these killers catch up to you before your firearm is drawn you will probably loose against them. Open carrying holds no power in those instances either.
But, when I did what you did and listened to both sides and made my decision, it was on what I felt worked the best the most of the time, as nothing is absolute.
It's quite simple to see the difference between oc and cc being chosen, just go look at thearmedcitizen or any other concealed carrier wins website, the stories far outweigh open carriers win story. That right there tells me, the risk of having my life ruined is much greater if I were to conceal carry.
Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
B
Bikenut
Guest
According to the part of your post I put in bold for emphasis wouldn't those concealed carriers who appear unarmed fit the profile of an unarmed victim the typical shooter would be looking for while the open carrier who is obviously armed would NOT fit the victim profile?
As for the Navy Yard shooter and any number of mass murdering shooters that went where the preponderance of folks would be unarmed and the armed guards would be planned for.... what has that got to do with you and me and Joe everyman open carrying during their daily life being targeted and shot first by a "typical shooter" robbing a convenience store?
Regardless .... you actually gave the best reason that OC's deterrent value outperforms CC's tactical "element of surprise" value when you said:
Ok... about that "tactical" superiority of concealed carry... please refer to post #5 in this discussion.
Edited in the interest of clarity.
whodat2710
New member
I agree with all you posted except the last. For some of us CC is the only legal option for now. Some of us are fighting it but I think the media more than the politicians are defeating us.
http://www.usacarry.com/forums/open-carry-discussion/40390-my-letter-governor.html
At least Piers Morgan is getting fired!
whodat2710
New member
As far as "tactical advantage" goes, how does having a gun that is less accessible and usually has fewer rounds and a shorter (less accurate) barrel give you an advantage unless your goal is to be a hero or a martyr?
telpinaro
New member
I had noticed. And I agree with your reasoning as well (all of it, not just that)... but the story was just too funny not to share!
I did hear one interesting reason for CC... Say someone wants to rob a store, and someone who OC's is there and determines that there is no threat to life (for whatever reason) and decides not to get involved. Possibly there with his kids and has the priority to get out without being noticed. Another customer sees his gun and asks loudly (as he's frightened), "Why don't you DO something?!" The OC'er has now been volunteered to intervene whether he wants to or not, and possibly made the whole situation worse.
Granted, the scenario is rather unlikely, but it is possible. An instructor who has a young son gave that explanation as one of several for why he prefers CC to OC, and that's the one that stuck with me since I'd never heard it before.
