Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals.....Now there is a response. What does this have to do with the thread of Open Carry?
Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals is the textbook for leftists who engage in ridicule without having the integrity to provide facts to back up their statements. So folks who make statements about open carry but are unwilling to provide facts to back up their statements share something in common with old Saul's teachings.
I am far more inclined to accept a 23 year State LEO's opinion on this subject. He carries open everyday of work. A weapon in plain view has never made his job more safe. The real bad guy could care less.
So you would take an "opinion" to have more veracity than "facts"? How about providing some "facts" that open carry makes an ordinary person more vulnerable to bad guys? Again... open carry has been practiced by folks in Arizona for decades so you should have no problem providing a plethora of actual factual incidents where "The real bad guy could care less." So... do you, or your cop friend, have actual factual researchable incidents to provide? Or is all you got is "I said so!".
Not to mention that your cop friend should be able to provide actual case numbers that are public record to prove his "opinion" is backed up by actual "fact".
You seem to be the one that needs "incontrovertible proof" to make you comfortable in your position. I would suggest that you research this subject and then post your findings.
Yes, I need "incontrovertible proof" because I don't just accept "opinions" as being "fact". Only a fool accepts an opinion instead of facts.
Attempting to deflect the spotlight from you proving what you say is fact by wanting me to prove your statements aren't factual just doesn't work. You said it.. the onus of proof is upon you. If you can't prove what you say is true then you got nothing.. including no credibility.
Man up and stand behind your statements with proof. If you can't well.... why should I or anyone else pay any attention to what you have to say?
Open carry advocates are kidding themselves if they think the bad guy will treat them any different than law enforcement. It is internet hyperbole that spreads the notion "a bad guy is intimidated by your visible weapon". I am completely comfortable with this quote.