The precise manner in which a particular person happens to be wearing their handgun, and their demeanor are both important ingredients within the context of an envisioned, contemplated, or actually acted upon gun-grab attempt - and the operative word here I believe - is ATTEMPT.
Any relatively rational person would comprehend that a FAILED gun-grab could conceivably result in either a lethal bullet wound, or other serious bodily injury as the logical consequence of a failed effort.
My antagonist in the Pit Bull/condo episode a few years back had exhibited verbally menacing behavior directed at me personally in the presence of witnesses a total of 3 times during about a 5 minute time period.
I was confronted by this individual upon walking out my front door as he cruised by in search of his loose dog. He called out to me "Have you seen my dog ?" To which I replied that I hadn't. At which point he issued the first verbal threat as he turned onto a side street. ( " If you hurt my dog I'm gonna MESS YOU UP !) I was a bit taken back needless to say, and immediately concerned that the small children playing in the interior courtyard might be in harms way. I ran into the rear courtyard and began to warn nearby residents to get their children in doors, while the owner tried to locate his loose Pit Bull.
My holstered HG was somewhat covered by my jacket ,but I'm sure this guy had
previously observed the fact that I regularly open carried. This knowledge obviously led him to believe that given the right circumstances I could, and might in fact harm his dog.
I figure that his stressed out concern for his dog's life led him to conclude that it was necessary to threaten me. During this whole episode the dog owner was positioned behind the wheel of his vehicle while driving around the North-Eastern corner of the complex looking for his loose dog and issuing this threat on three occasions.
After advising other residents of the loose dog situation, I was conversing with a couple of the residents near the street when he drove up and once again delivered the same verbal threat for the 2nd time directed at me personally - word for word -in front of two witnesses. Having had all I intended to tolerate of this unnecessary ranting I respectfully approached his vehicle, placed both of my palms on top of his rolled down passenger-side window, and replied with " I beg your pardon ? "- upon which he repeated the threat - word for word - a 3rd time. Rather calmly, but sternly I then responded with... " I'm only trying to help you find your dog. As long as you keep your dog in the house, or on a leash I'm not a threat to either you, or your dog."
In my posture at that moment I was aware that my unzipped jacket allowed the unobstructed display of my holstered Glock. I did not intentionally "engineer" this display, touch my weapon, or refer him to its presence in any fashion. He already knew I was probably armed, but now the HG was "at hand" so to speak. It was at this point that this stressed out dog owner eased into "calm, cool, & collected" mode, disengaged from our encounter in passing, and idled down the street in search of his missing dog. I never crossed paths with him again. He shortly thereafter moved out of the condo.
I think my experience may be relevant to the current discussion regarding the pros/cons of OC, as well as the unique social dynamics of HOA town home/ condo living.
The point that COULD BE made - I suppose - would be that had I NOT previously engaged in open carry between my front door, the cluster mailbox, the dumpster, and other common areas of the condo - this individual would not have been on notice that I was likely armed thereby prompting him to fear for the life of his notoriously loose, and potentially very dangerous dog.
My question would be - Which scenario is more socially desirable - Should individuals predisposed to engage in menacing conduct, habitual negligence placing other members of the community at risk, and perhaps even acting out actual physical violence towards others - NOT be on put on notice that others living in the community are in fact armed - or to operate under the simple assumption that others are not armed ?
OC vs CC should not be an either/or issue. I believe there are occasions more appropriate for CC, and other occasions worthy of consideration for opting to OC . As far as we know Zimmerman wasn't OC'ing, but had he been doing so it is conceivable, and not unreasonable to suppose that given adequate ambient lighting Martin might have noticed Zimmerman's armed condition at some point prior to the physical confrontation - thereby improving the odds that he would still be alive, and we wouldn't even be talking about him and Zimmerman.