Why Open Carry is a bad Strategy


If I still had it, I'd OC the Ruger Redhawk .44 magnum I used to own, but I sold that many years ago.

The nice thing about OC, you don't have to worry about being able to hide something.

OC'ing a Ruger Redhawk would be excellent! A friend of mine has a rig for his Redhawk that looks just like the one Tom Selleck wore in "Quigley Down Under". There would be no mistaking that rig as concealed. :)

My friend is an Army sniper. Snipers love that Quigley movie.
 

OC'ing a Ruger Redhawk would be excellent! A friend of mine has a rig for his Redhawk that looks just like the one Tom Selleck wore in "Quigley Down Under". There would be no mistaking that rig as concealed. :)

My friend is an Army sniper. Snipers love that Quigley movie.
Well, when I was in, I was a tanker, but I still love that Quigley movie too. :smile:

Tom Selleck was great as Magnum, but I tend to agree with some movie critics, he was born to play westerns.
 
Yoicks! There is a "picture" to bring fear into your heart! An Octogenarian with a semi automatic weapon!

"... and everyone knew
ya didn't give no lip
to the aged geezer
with the 'big iron'
on her hip!"

Refrain (chorus): "Big iron on her hip!"

LOL!

GG
 
At the very least, open carry seems a better plan than not being able to carry at all. Current Supreme Court interest in very narrow definitions of exactly what the 2nd Amendment is all about seems a whole lot more scary than the difference between open and concealed carry.
 
Spent a wonderful vacation in Sedona, AZ open carry nobody not even the visitors said a word. As far as open vs concealed we have beat this horse to death, dead horse remove saddle find new horse and move on.
 
I agree with the surprise aspect of going concealed instead of open carry. It seems the open carry person would be the first one taken out and probably in the back.
 
Sandrakay:225961 said:
I agree with the surprise aspect of going concealed instead of open carry. It seems the open carry person would be the first one taken out and probably in the back.

Food for thought.

The chances of a gun being involved in the death of a child is much higher in houses that have guns than those that do not. While its sad, the argument against it is that the amount of times those guns have stopped a crime overwhelms the death of a family member.

The chances of getting in a car crash increase if you drive a car, compared to if you don't.

The chances of getting your gun grabbed OC is greater than those that cc. What are those chances, well there has only been one reported indecent in the past decade among the hundred thousands open carriers. If we are losing a big advantage with those chances, people who use guns for home defense are really screwed.
 
People who have swiming pools in their backyard are more likely to have family members drown. In fact it has been shown that swiming pools are more likely to kill people than guns. We need to ban swiming pools obviously.
I recall reading somewhere, that at one time, the CDC (or some gov't agency) said your toddler was more likely to drown in a bucket of water, than almost any other method. I guess we need to ban buckets too. :wink:
 
I recall reading somewhere, that at one time, the CDC (or some gov't agency) said your toddler was more likely to drown in a bucket of water, than almost any other method. I guess we need to ban buckets too. :wink:

They can have my HoDePo buckets when they pry....oh never mind. :biggrin:
 
People who have swiming pools in their backyard are more likely to have family members drown. In fact it has been shown that swiming pools are more likely to kill people than guns. We need to ban swiming pools obviously.

I recall reading somewhere, that at one time, the CDC (or some gov't agency) said your toddler was more likely to drown in a bucket of water, than almost any other method. I guess we need to ban buckets too. :wink:

You both are wrong. It's not the pools and it's not the buckets. Water is THE leading cause of drowning. We must ban the water!
 
You both are wrong. It's not the pools and it's not the buckets. Water is THE leading cause of drowning. We must ban the water!
And we must ban my mother too -- she will kill me if she knows I am carrying:hang3:...I must get a restraining order against her...:angry: Oooooooh...nevermind:fie:
 
Police open carry because they have BADGES pinned on their shirt... (Not CCW badges.)

I like the availability to open carry, just in case my shirt gets hung up covering my weapon. I would rather CC, as noted, just for the surprise factor. Although, OC is probably a little quicker on the draw.

Just stirring the popcorn! :sarcastic:
We don't need no stinking badges. Sorry, I couldn't pass it up.
 
Cops walk beats alone and drive in a cruiser alone most often in most towns and cities. Cops call for backup when something bad happens just like a citizen calls 911 (which usually goes to the same dispatch).

Again, why do cops open carry?

The word 'cops' cover a wide family of law enforcement officers. The group of LEO's that open carry most are the partol officers, so I assume you are speaking of patrol officers.

Patrol Officers carry openly for the obvious reasons. 1) as a show of force and the authority to use that force. 2) fast draw in panic situations. Note here that police are thrust into panic situations far more that any civilian ever will be and rely heavily on speedy aquisition. 3) have you seen all the crap they have to carry on their person/belt? 4) quic re-holstering so they can safely manipulate the other tools on their tool belt

Compairing LEO reasoning for open carry against civilian decision to open carry is not a valid comparison. I don't believe "because cops do!" is a valid reasoning for open carry unles your intent is to identify yourself as a cop wanna be, and that reasoning alone is a good enough reason for you to NOT carry at all.

The decision to either OC or CC is a personal one, just like my decision of what type of car I buy. All the expanation in the world why YOU (OCer) bought what you bought is not going to convince me (CCer) that I bought the wrong car. Simply stated "it fits my needs". And we need to recognize this argument goes both ways. I don't care if you legally OC. I may not agree with the decision but it is not my decision to make for you (only your state legislature can make decisions for you without your consent)

I conceal carry for one reason alone. For concealment. I don't want anyone to know I have a gun. It's none of their business. Personnaly I think Open carry will draw more attention to myself and that's not why I carry. I want to be mistaken for a wall flower and ignored by everyone. I don't carry to stand out in a crowd. The element of suprise is a most powerful weapon.
 
Food for thought.

The chances of a gun being involved in the death of a child is much higher in houses that have guns than those that do not. While its sad, the argument against it is that the amount of times those guns have stopped a crime overwhelms the death of a family member.

Don't have children! :sarcastic:
 
Where do you live, Mayberry Lane?

In my area, police even wait for helicopter backup prior to contacting suspects!

And that has nothing to do with the lone victim, who is dead meat if he/she doesn't know the rules of street fighting!


But again, it's your choice.

I am indifferent as to whether you survive or not!

You're not my student, so do what you want!

If everyone open carries, my students all get a bigger advantage, the element of surprise, because the BG's will assume they are unarmed!

Great for us.

You keep talking about the "rules of the street" Rules of a street fight" etc.. Not sure what kind of street fights you have been in? The number one rule in a street fight is there is no rules he/she who fights the best/dirtier then the other guy wins.

You get all the arm chair Rambo's on here who think that just because they stand in front of a mirror and work on their draw, that some how makes them an expert on tactics. What works best for you does not always work for someone else.

Not sure what city you live in(from the sounds of it, it sounds like IRAQ?) As an above poster has already stated police in many states/towns/cites work alone while out on patrol. Back up is sometimes seconds away and other times it's hours away.

But that's cool, you use what works for you and go watch "Road House" a few more times. The rest of us will carry in a manner that best fits our needs.
 
walt629:226752 said:
The word 'cops' cover a wide family of law enforcement officers. The group of LEO's that open carry most are the partol officers, so I assume you are speaking of patrol officers.

Patrol Officers carry openly for the obvious reasons. 1) as a show of force and the authority to use that force. 2) fast draw in panic situations. Note here that police are thrust into panic situations far more that any civilian ever will be and rely heavily on speedy aquisition. 3) have you seen all the crap they have to carry on their person/belt? 4) quic re-holstering so they can safely manipulate the other tools on their tool belt

Compairing LEO reasoning for open carry against civilian decision to open carry is not a valid comparison. I don't believe "because cops do!" is a valid reasoning for open carry unles your intent is to identify yourself as a cop wanna be, and that reasoning alone is a good enough reason for you to NOT carry at all.

The decision to either OC or CC is a personal one, just like my decision of what type of car I buy. All the expanation in the world why YOU (OCer) bought what you bought is not going to convince me (CCer) that I bought the wrong car. Simply stated "it fits my needs". And we need to recognize this argument goes both ways. I don't care if you legally OC. I may not agree with the decision but it is not my decision to make for you (only your state legislature can make decisions for you without your consent)

I conceal carry for one reason alone. For concealment. I don't want anyone to know I have a gun. It's none of their business. Personnaly I think Open carry will draw more attention to myself and that's not why I carry. I want to be mistaken for a wall flower and ignored by everyone. I don't carry to stand out in a crowd. The element of suprise is a most powerful weapon.

I agree police shouldn't be used for either case on either method of carry.

in the end it is a personal choice, and both sides have said that repeatedly. We question the reasoning, not the choice. The fact that the end conclusion is you decided to arm yourself means you are correct.

I open carry for many reasons, reasons I came to after studying both methods and self defense strategy. The main reason I carry at all is to not be a victim. The element of deterrence is a more powerful weapon to me, that will fulfill my reason more times than I will know. It will also minimize the amount of loss sustained should I be targeted by keeping my defense unobstructed and faster to draw to become offensive.
 
The word 'cops' cover a wide family of law enforcement officers. The group of LEO's that open carry most are the partol officers, so I assume you are speaking of patrol officers.

Patrol Officers carry openly for the obvious reasons. 1) as a show of force and the authority to use that force. 2) fast draw in panic situations. Note here that police are thrust into panic situations far more that any civilian ever will be and rely heavily on speedy aquisition. 3) have you seen all the crap they have to carry on their person/belt? 4) quic re-holstering so they can safely manipulate the other tools on their tool belt

Compairing LEO reasoning for open carry against civilian decision to open carry is not a valid comparison. I don't believe "because cops do!" is a valid reasoning for open carry unles your intent is to identify yourself as a cop wanna be, and that reasoning alone is a good enough reason for you to NOT carry at all.

The decision to either OC or CC is a personal one, just like my decision of what type of car I buy. All the expanation in the world why YOU (OCer) bought what you bought is not going to convince me (CCer) that I bought the wrong car. Simply stated "it fits my needs". And we need to recognize this argument goes both ways. I don't care if you legally OC. I may not agree with the decision but it is not my decision to make for you (only your state legislature can make decisions for you without your consent)

I conceal carry for one reason alone. For concealment. I don't want anyone to know I have a gun. It's none of their business. Personnaly I think Open carry will draw more attention to myself and that's not why I carry. I want to be mistaken for a wall flower and ignored by everyone. I don't carry to stand out in a crowd. The element of suprise is a most powerful weapon.

A good post Walt except for the last sentence. I was completely with you up to that point. Especially, when you give the only "REAL" and "LEGITIMENT" reason a person carries the way the do.
"The decision to either OC or CC is a personal one," .... "it fits my needs" .... "I conceal carry for one reason alone. For concealment. I don't want anyone to know I have a gun."
^^^ALL very legit reasons not to OC^^^^

IMHO;
Every other thing you said was right on point.

You hit the nail on the head about OC & CC being a personal choice. I also give you big props for recognizing both methods are "valid"; and different situations may call for different methods.

BUT!

If you're chosen to be a victim by a BG, you have already given up the element of surprise. It has been said many, many times in these discussions; and it is still as TRUE now as ever:

"Surprise" is an "OFFENSIVE" tactic!

As an honest, law-abiding citizen, we will most likely ALWAYS enter a confrontation from a "DEFENSIVE" position. This simply means that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a CCer or OCer to have the "element of surprise" on their side; PERIOD!

-----------

I'm sorry and I mean no offense!

But, instructors that teach the "element of surprise" is a "DEFENSIVE" tactic just do not know what they are talking about. IMHO; they are running a real risk of instilling a false sense of security in their students.

-------------

Now for the caveat;

If you CC, you can argue that the "surprise" comes into play when you choose fight back "AFTER" an altercation is imminent, or has already begun. But, this is a false argument from a "tactical" standpoint.

The above being said;
The very first objective to surviving ANY fight should be to turn the tables on your opponent by putting them on the "defensive".

(The ONLY choice that any CCer or UN-armed victim has if a BG picks them as a victim is to go on the "DEFENSIVE" and fight; or a CCer can simply give up.)

Theabove is NOT true when you OC!

Where CC can be looked at as "ONLY" a defensive stategy, OC on the other hand can also be seen as an "OFFENSIVE" stategy. (A PRE-emptive tactic; an preventative measure if you will)

What OC tells a BG is that if he does choose "YOU" or any other people around you to be their victims, they will most likely face a REAL THREAT to their own life. This allows a BG to make a better "educated" decision.

A bg ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS choose their victims on the "Risk-vs-Reward" principal. This means that BGs are ALWAYS looking for the easiest target (Lowest Risk target) for any "REWARD" they are seeking.


AVOIDING a confrontation with a BG should be the PRIMARY goal of anyone who carries. IMHO; this is where OC outperforms CC.

Now for another caveat;
Depending on "WHAT" reward a BG is looking to get from a victim, and "HOW BAD" he wants what a victim can offer, dictates the DANGER of any encounter.

For instance:
  • If the BG is a terrorist that is willing to die during their crime, ANYONE and EVERYONE is in grave danger irregargless of there SD training & techniques.
  • Likewise, if you are in the vicinity of a DBS, your firearm is not likely to help you at all because "drive-bys" usually happen to fast.
  • If you are in a place that an "armed" thug chooses to rob, you may be in EXTREME danger, but not in IMMINENT danger. (Other variables will come into play)
  • IF a BG is a normal street bum who will resort to assault if you refuse his desire for a handout, the danger can still be EXTREME. But, this type of criminal if far more likely to go elsewhere if he knows his victim is very likely to fight back.
---------

Itis with the last TWO examples where OC has been REAL-LIFE tested to actually deter crime.

As far as I know, there are no statistics where a BG chose not to rob a business of choose a victim because he "KNEW" a CC'er was armed.

(Remember: a BG "thinking" you may be armed is NOT the same thing as a BG "KNOWING" you are armed.)

Peace!

-
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,542
Messages
611,255
Members
74,961
Latest member
Shodan
Back
Top