Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: I could use some background on a 2012 OC incident, please

  1. #1
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA

    I could use some background on a 2012 OC incident, please

    Any background would be greatly appreciated.

    The above described incident was one of two cited by the author, a current firearms and defensive training officer for a PD, as reasons he "contemplated" OCing. It's clear that he came to the conclusion that OC is bad!

    Here's a link to Buckeye Firearms Association's Facebook post which links to the article and cites the incident:

    And a link to the article on BFA's website:
    Last edited by BB62; 06-16-2014 at 04:20 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member xmanhockey7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Portage, MI
    Remember reading about it, but didn't hear anything more about it other than maybe a thread here. That's about all the info as far as I know.
    "No state shall convert a liberty to a privilege, license it, and charge a fee therefor.- Murdock vs Pennsylvania 319 US 105

    ...If the state converts a right into a privelege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right... with impunity.
    - Shuttleworth vs City of Birmingham, Alabama 317 US 262

    Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no legislation which would abrogate them.
    - Miranda vs Arizona 384 US 436

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Tempe, Arizona
    I like how the author at BuckeyeFirearms cites the first article, but neglects to mention the parts of the article that note this must be a very unusual occurrence. Basically this is a question of the odds of the gun being taken by a criminal versus its deterrent effect. The extreme rarity of civilian OC'ers having their gun taken suggest deterrence may be the more likely outcome.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    What I don't understand with these 'OC-ers' are the first to get shot posters is they're not really analyzing their postulate or scenario.

    It's like saying in war, soldiers get shot first. In fact more civilians get killed than soldiers in a lot of wars.

    In order for an OC-er to be shot -because- of his firearm you have to have:
    1. Proximity
    2. Unobstructed access (good shot)
    3. Visibility (night, day, weather, contrasting clothing and holster/gun)
    4. Opportunity
    5. Focus (most BGs focus on their crime in progress)
    6. Time and distance
    ...and a few more things.

    We all know that a large percentage of people don't look at your waist or hip. In fact one guy said that people who do notice OCer in well-lighted stores are kids and people driving motorized shopping carts. They are at eye-level to your waist (and a grocery store is lit up to the max).

    So while a BG might 'see' a gun, if the person is walking and a crowd of people are between them, he might lose sight. If he has a good shot, but it's dark or raining, then he can't draw a bead.

    You almost have to have perfect conditions, the BG walks up to someone, sees the gun, has his gun in hand the OC-er is standing still (since, unlike cops we are not rushing to engage).


    IOW they're mostly retards with a hidden agenda who say that.
    Last edited by Maverick9; 06-24-2014 at 10:48 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts