General Categories > Carry Issues
Open Carry...*gasp*
FarmerRick:
--- Quote from: MissMichella on June 04, 2013, 12:08:44 PM ---
~~ snip ~~
One last thing...yes, I'm long-winded...A lot of you mentioned the element of surprise that CC gives. I don't see surprise as a defensive tactic. It seems to be more of an offensive move. Honestly, the last thing I would ever want to do is use my weapon on another human being. For that reason, I do not want surprise on my side after a crime is in progress, I'd rather stop it from happening in the first place. If the knowledge that I am armed and aware doesn't deter a criminal from acting, then I have already lost. The only thing I can do at that point is mitigate further harm and end the encounter as swiftly as possible. That's why I want quick and unobstructed access to my firearm. That all being said...I have no problem with those who choose to CC. I think the best option is whatever you are most comfortable with.
--- End quote ---
I think that part in bold is very true, and probably the reason most(99% maybe?) Law Enforcement OPEN CARRIES their primary weapons.
I fully support you in open carrying, and wish more people would. It is YOUR RIGHT, exercise it!!
JTH:
--- Quote from: FarmerRick on June 04, 2013, 05:40:57 PM ---I think that part in bold is very true, and probably the reason most(99% maybe?) Law Enforcement OPEN CARRIES their primary weapons.
--- End quote ---
I'm think they open carry because since they are a uniformed cop, it doesn't help them at all to carry concealed. It isn't like people won't be able to tell they are a cop...
I also note here that law enforcement types tend to have to fight over their weapons a lot.
My comment about there being no data on the deterrence effect of OC, is that there IS data on the deterrence effect of CC. And if we are able to get data on one, we are able to get data on the other. More precisely, if you accept the research that says that increased CC can have a deterrence effect, then you have to accept that OC can be researched in a similar fashion.
--- Quote from: MissMichella --- I don't see surprise as a defensive tactic. It seems to be more of an offensive move. Honestly, the last thing I would ever want to do is use my weapon on another human being. For that reason, I do not want surprise on my side after a crime is in progress, I'd rather stop it from happening in the first place. If the knowledge that I am armed and aware doesn't deter a criminal from acting, then I have already lost. The only thing I can do at that point is mitigate further harm and end the encounter as swiftly as possible. That's why I want quick and unobstructed access to my firearm.
--- End quote ---
Surprise is an offensive move. But then again, no matter what anyone says, a handgun is not a defensive weapon (it has no defensive capabilities--it does not block, shield, or protect against a physical attack) it is an offensive weapon. If you ever have to use it for your defense, you will have to use it in an offensive fashion---and having surprise on your side will be a significant helpful factor.
Here's something to think about. You say "For that reason, I do not want surprise on my side after a crime is in progress, I'd rather stop it from happening in the first place. If the knowledge that I am armed and aware doesn't deter a criminal from acting, then I have already lost. "
If a criminal acts and you think you've lost---then your mental outlook is going to hinder your effective action.
You say: "The only thing I can do at that point is mitigate further harm and end the encounter as swiftly as possible. That's why I want quick and unobstructed access to my firearm. "
And that makes perfect sense. An important thing to remember, however, is that the criminal knows you are carrying, and that is not sufficient to stop them---which means that he believes that either you cannot threaten him for some situational reason, or that he will take care of you first. Hence my earlier comment about empty-hand training and retention holsters (quality ones).
This phrase: "For that reason, I do not want surprise on my side after a crime is in progress, I'd rather stop it from happening in the first place." ---seems to assume that it is an either/or situation. And it also seems to assume that having the gun in the open will stop it from happening. (We can indeed assume that a concealed weapon will give you the help of "surprise" as long as you can react in time. The "reacting in time" part is just like it is for OC, so in the case of CC, you'll have surprise on your side assuming all else is equal.)
I just haven't read any information about OC actually being a deterrence, other than when it is on a police officer's hip. I'm sure that there have been cases in which it was---but I just don't know how often it makes a difference.
It would be nice to have some research on it.
I also would be happy if OC was more common, and commonly accepted. It currently isn't, though, which is too bad.
I will note that I'm pretty much in agreement with this statement:
--- Quote ---As for deterring crime, one person open carrying makes you the person they eliminate first, and makes you a suspect with the general public and the police. 20 people open carrying is a visual deterrent.
--- End quote ---
...none of which changes the fact that if you are comfortable carrying OC, and prefer to do so, then it is most certainly your choice, and you should do what you want. :)
Dan W:
I think the real advantage of CCW over Open Carry is that even if only 1-2% of the population ever actually carry concealed, the criminal element does not know who is armed and therefore forced to change tactics or locations to find easier targets.
So, the effective crime deterrent for CCW is much higher than the real number of permit holders, while Open Carry is limited the actual number of visibly armed persons and locations
GreyGeek:
--- Quote from: jthhapkido on June 04, 2013, 07:11:51 PM ---I also note here that law enforcement types tend to have to fight over their weapons a lot.
--- End quote ---
I'm going to rely on my memory for this but, IIRC, over the 10 years between 1999 and 2010 about 51 officers were killed with their own weapons, and 104 officers had their weapons stolen.
MissMichella:
Well, I don't know about all of you, but I'm enjoying all the different perspectives and experiences on this subject. There's obviously a lot of thought put into what particular method of carry you've all chosen, which I think is important.
--- Quote from: jthhapkido on June 04, 2013, 07:11:51 PM ---My comment about there being no data on the deterrence effect of OC, is that there IS data on the deterrence effect of CC. And if we are able to get data on one, we are able to get data on the other. More precisely, if you accept the research that says that increased CC can have a deterrence effect, then you have to accept that OC can be researched in a similar fashion.
--- End quote ---
Do you happen to know where I could find this data? I'd be interested in checking it out! :) Personally, I have a hard time seeing statistics as being purely black and white. There's so many variables that can't or aren't factored into the outcome of studies. I'm curious how they collected the information on CC deterrence.
As far as OC deterrence data goes, I still feel like this would be pretty hard to track as most criminals aren't going to admit to a crime they haven't committed...but if they can track CC deterrence, it seems logical they could do the same for OC.
--- Quote from: jthhapkido on June 04, 2013, 07:11:51 PM ---Surprise is an offensive move. But then again, no matter what anyone says, a handgun is not a defensive weapon (it has no defensive capabilities--it does not block, shield, or protect against a physical attack) it is an offensive weapon. If you ever have to use it for your defense, you will have to use it in an offensive fashion---and having surprise on your side will be a significant helpful factor.
--- End quote ---
I think you're right...if someone has to use their weapon, it would be in an offensive manner. I'm still mulling over whether gaining the element of surprise is worth the loss of the crime/attack never happening because the offender saw you were armed. I suppose I should do some more reading on the subject because a lot of my opinion stems from what I think is logical, but from my experience, most criminals planning to commit a crime would rather have an easy target. If they can see I'm armed, the risk starts to outweigh the benefit. It seems that OC would be a big deterrence for the types of crimes I am most likely to face...but I don't (always) think like a criminal. :) Robbers, rapists, or carjackers might be dumb and opportunistic, but they have the same instinctual sense of self preservation we all have. If the potential criminal has seen that I'm open carrying, and decides to go for it anyways, then I think I personally would at least have a faster draw if I wasn't concealing. I hope I never have to test my theory.
--- Quote from: jthhapkido on June 04, 2013, 07:11:51 PM ---If a criminal acts and you think you've lost---then your mental outlook is going to hinder your effective action.
--- End quote ---
I don't think I put this quite right...it made better sense in my head! Let me explain what I meant...
Every time I wear my weapon out and about, I feel like I'm taking on a huge responsibility. I never want to have to use my weapon against another person, but I'm making the decision each time I carry that if deadly force was required, I would act. I think that anytime a person is placed in a defensive position they lose, it's only the amount of loss that varies. It could be as little as being shaken up by the situation or as big as losing their life, but in the end there is an impact on someone when they must defend themselves.
If you'll excuse my ignorance, what is empty-hand training?
I guess I feel that carrying concealed makes you more likely to need to use a firearm since your attacker doesn't know if you can defend yourself or not...and I would prefer to not have to get this far into a situation. But, like I said before, I'm not thoroughly educated on the subject.
Anyways, you all make some really good points. Definitely food for thought. You all have given me lots to think about.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version