Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 42

Thread: Open carry unwise

  1. #1
    Regular Member Bill45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    160

    Post imported post

    Ok I caught your attention.

    First let me state that I am glad perhaps proud that this state allows open carry and I have no problem if a person wants to do so. In fact I would like things to be as they, perhaps, once were and open carry is the normal expected thing.

    90 % of my friends carry guns, all concealed and all think it is unwise if not foolish to open carry in an urban area. I agree with this entirely for the reason that it broadcasts your defensive abilities to the bad guys. Who then, if so inclined can plan their approch to you differently than if they assumed you were unarmed. In other words bushwack you. Perhapes if for no other reason than that you have a $600 gun on.

    As I have no one in my circle of aquaintence than thinks differently than me, I ask you folks to tell me what is wrong with this argument against open carry.

    I will enjoy reading your comments.

    Bill



  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238

    Post imported post

    Bill45 wrote:
    Ok I caught your attention.

    First let me state that I am glad perhaps proud that this state allows open carry and I have no problem if a person wants to do so. In fact I would like things to be as they, perhaps, once were and open carry is the normal expected thing.

    90 % of my friends carry guns, all concealed and all think it is unwise if not foolish to open carry in an urban area. I agree with this entirely for the reason that it broadcasts your defensive abilities to the bad guys. Who then, if so inclined can plan their approch to you differently than if they assumed you were unarmed. In other words bushwack you. Perhapes if for no other reason than that you have a $600 gun on.

    As I have no one in my circle of aquaintence than thinks differently than me, I ask you folks to tell me what is wrong with this argument against open carry.

    I will enjoy reading your comments.

    Bill

    Bill, welcome to opencarry.org. These are really good questions, and a lot of good things to think about.

    Speaking as the one who started the educational campaign of the police departments on this subject, I think all of us realize the risks.

    Open carriers must excercise responsibility to have better retention holsters than your typical CCW belt carry rig.

    I've open carried in many urban environments, including downtown Seattle in Pike Place Market, at Seattle Pridefest in Seattle Center in a very crowded environment. Both of which are very crowded environments.

    When I open carry I'm generally in a constant state of condition yellow and orange, and I don't know of any other open carrier who is not the same way.

    As for criminals getting a new 600 dollar "piece" from an open carrier, unlikely.

    First, the holster and the awareness makes the most difference.

    Second, retention training matters somewhat but the retention training that's geared toward law enforcement is made with a different purpose in mind: Making sure that the LEO doesn't go "too far" in securing their weapon. Civilians are not under such a restriction.

    Third, criminals don't seek hard targets.

    Personally I'm looking forward to a potential civilian retention class that may be offered in the future.

    The open carrier movement in the Northwest (and especially Washington) are aware of the risks of urban open carry.

    We still take those risks now because if we had waited until the mid 2010's to "do it completely right", we would have eventually lost in a war of attrition. This state is not like California where they are too far gone save federal court intervention. We have a state constitution which protects RKBA, too.

    Will it ever be "accepted?". I don't know, and to be perfectly honest, I don't care. As a gay man, I realize what it means to seek "acceptance", which means fundamentally changing who I am as a person (now, I'm not talking about changing the orientation itself, I'm talking more playing the pronoun game). Down south, and even up here, I'd say "That ain't gunna happen".

    I do things generally would be considered "unwise". I hold hands with my boyfriend in public when it isn't the smartest idea in certain areas of the state, but do you think that stops me?

    I'm sure some people won't like what I said above. Oh well. Tough. The first and second amendments, the 14th amendment, and the state constitution protects me doing what I do.

    The gun is there for private actors who decide that they are going to play "sadist" decide to "curbstomp some ******". They usually attack in packs and though many here attests to my height and build, I cannot take on a half a dozen men for myself, much less for two people.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Centennial, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,412

    Post imported post

    I keep using this argument, and will do so until it is refuted: Have you or any of you friends ever actually heard of someone getting their gun taken? Oh sure, it happens, but so rarely as to be a non-event. Lots of people seem to think that criminals realy want to (and are willing to try) to to take your gun. But statistics keep telling me that it just isn't going to happen.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Monroe, Washington, USA
    Posts
    356

    Post imported post


    Over the past five years I have been in this conversation on several different forums so I'll go ahead and toss in my tuppence early, before this turns into the typical urinals at twenty paces contest.

    The vast majority of those opposed to open carryalways spout the same old tired excuses as to why it's not a good idea.You'd think after all of these years they would come up with something reality based oir at least original. Their cookie-cutter opinions are based upon untold minutes of sitting on their assets conjuring up all sorts of dime-novel scenarios as to why it shouldn't be done. The truth be told they really don't want honesty they just want reinforcement of their lopsided outlook. Hmmm... sound familiar?

    Well I'll stop now before I get into deeper trouble, but a
    wise man on another forum once said it very well,
    It would appear that for some, no explanation is required... for others, no explanation will do.




  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Superstition Mountain, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    424

    Post imported post

    I would think that all one has to do is read the police section of the local paper to refute those arguments against open carrying.

    The vast majority of crimes are committed by whom? Lazy opportunists who think they see an easy target. Purse snatchings, thefts from open garages, car thefts, etc. How often do you EVER read about a crime against a "hardened target?" Almost never. This is because most crimes are crimes of opportunity.

    In Arizona, a young woman was recently accosted while walking home from a late shift as a waitress at Applebee's. (I posted about this in the "Open carrying a full-size gun a deterrent?" thread.) She happened to be armed with a knife and fended off her attackers, but the interesting point of the story was that the attackers had driven around for 20 minutes looking for a suitable target. She was picked because she appeared to be an easy mark.

    Tell me those same men would have risked approaching a person who was obviously carrying a pistol. No way - they would have kept on driving.

    I guess if your objective is to keep the gun a secret until circustances allow you to legally use it, concealed carry is an advantage. If, on the other hand, you'd rather the criminals avoid you altogether, I would have to vote for open carry.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    , Washington, USA
    Posts
    570

    Post imported post

    I think open carry has the opposite effect on criminals. rather than encourage them to "attack that guy and take his gun" the open carrier through his day to day actions silently educates the observant criminal to the fact that he never knows if the next person he attacks is going to have a gun or will there be someone nearby with a gun who will stop him. When everyone conceal carries criminals and people in general fool themselves into thinking that nobody carries A criminal may think the odds of his victim having a gun so remote that he will accept the small risk and commit a crime against the individual. On the other hand themere presence of visual guns within society even if only on 1% of the population may put the idea of an armed victim to the forefront of a criminals head and it can preempt an attack altogether.

  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Just a "wannabe" in Mtn. Top, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,441

    Post imported post

    Yup, they simplest way to put it is that those arguments against OC completely ignore the deterrent aspect of OC which is, IMO, many times more likely than the opposite.

    IOW, they will not "re-think how they approach you" they will go elsewhere.


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    There are some that think that OC is absolutely the only way and some that think the same about CC. Mosty have their reasons and due to state laws I have to CC however there are many times that I would much prefer to OC or at least not have to worry about my gun being concealed.

    Neither OC or CC proponents bother me in the least but I do have concerns, and is strictly my opinion, about some that seem to love to open carry and wave it in everyone's face to point out the fact that they have a gun. Maybe they believe that they are changing people's minds about it but when someone asks them, especially a LEO all they do is start spouting off that it is their right to do so and refuse to be either courteous or cooperative.

    As the saying in sports goes, "Act like you been there before", when carrying act as if it is a non-issue and no big deal. Whether you are more likely to be attacked while OC or CC is really inconclusive but you can be assured that no matter what you post on this board there is someone ready to argue about it and point out that you are wrong.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    134

    Post imported post

    I think there is a time and place for both open carry and concealed carry. I choose to carry concealed in most any urban population center, (in fact in most any situation), but having said that, I fully support the rights of those who want to OC in any situation.

    I also believe the risk to someone carrying openly is no different, in fact, is even greater, than that of the street cop, (who by defination, is an open carrier). Having been a cop for about 30 years now, and a police firearms trainer for about 25 of those years, I have studied and kept abreast of the developments in security holsters, and have taught weapons retention for close to 20 of those years.

    In assessing the risk of OC v. CC, just look at those who have a long history of OC, the cops. The last 3 cops shot in WA state have been shot with thier own gun, after a struggle. This concerns me greatly for the OC crowd, especially given the fact that most cops are likely better trained in weapons retention than most non-cops.

    If you choose to OC, I would recommend a security holster much like the cops use, and train in weapons retention techniques until they come to you second nature. At that point, you have at least a chance to come out alive in an attack.

    Marty Hayes, Director

    The Firearms Academy of Seattle, Inc.

  10. #10
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Just a "wannabe" in Mtn. Top, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,441

    Post imported post

    Marty Hayes wrote:
    ...I also believe the risk to someone carrying openly is no different, in fact, is even greater, than that of the street cop, (who by defination, is an open carrier).

    I couldn't disagree more. You are comparing apples to oranges. Or maybe watermellons to grapes.

    Civilians do NOT put themselves in the path of criminals on a daily basis, in fact they purposely avoid criminals and likely crime areas.

    Comparing an LEO that responds to a crime, daily, in great haste, to a civie that avoids crime defeats the entire point your making.

    Having been involved in many years of training and also law enforcement schooling myself I have to say conclusively that the dangers to the civie OC'er are real. Just not nearly as comon as same to an LEO.

    If you choose to OC, I would recommend a security holster much like the cops use, and train in weapons retention techniques until they come to you second nature. At that point, you have at least a chance to come out alive in an attack.
    Obviously this is wise advice. Preparation is key and carrying a gun, whether OC or CC, can never be taken too seriously.


  11. #11
    Regular Member Ajetpilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,410

    Post imported post

    Excellent analysis, Marty. Do you have any recommendation for 1911 pistols? I'm currently using a Galco paddle holster with a retention strap. I'm sure that a belt loop holster would be more secure, and I will look into getting one. What is your opinion of the Blackhawk SERPA holsters?

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,762

    Post imported post

    The last 3 cops shot in WA state have been shot with thier own gun, after a struggle.
    12-2-06: KCSO Deputy Steve Cox. Not shot with his gun.
    6-28-06: Trooper Kelly Kalmbach. Not shot with her gun.
    1-8-06: Renton PD Officer Larry Strauss. Not shot with his gun.
    8-2-03: Federal Way PD Officer Patrick Maher. Shot with his gun.
    6-26-03: Chelan County SO Deputy Saul Gallegos. Shot with his gun.
    12-22-02: KCSO Deputy Richard Herzog. Shot with his gun.
    3-7-01: Des Moines PD MPO Steve Underwood. Not shot with his gun.
    8-5-00: Clallam County SO Deputy Ed Davis. Not shot with his gun.
    10-7-99: Trooper James Saunders. Not shot with his gun.

    Please fill in the blanks if I missed anyone.


  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,487

    Post imported post

    Open carry deters crime. I've never been threatened by a non-leo when I was open carrying.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    The last 3 cops shot in WA state have been shot with thier own gun, after a struggle.
    12-2-06: KCSO Deputy Steve Cox. Not shot with his gun.
    6-28-06: Trooper Kelly Kalmbach. Not shot with her gun.
    1-8-06: Renton PD Officer Larry Strauss. Not shot with his gun.
    8-2-03: Federal Way PD Officer Patrick Maher. Shot with his gun.
    6-26-03: Chelan County SO Deputy Saul Gallegos. Shot with his gun.
    12-22-02: KCSO Deputy Richard Herzog. Shot with his gun.
    3-7-01: Des Moines PD MPO Steve Underwood. Not shot with his gun.
    8-5-00: Clallam County SO Deputy Ed Davis. Not shot with his gun.
    10-7-99: Trooper James Saunders. Not shot with his gun.

    Please fill in the blanks if I missed anyone.
    Yep, The cops are the guys I want to pattern my actions after. First off cops are required to chase after and capture thebad guys. I am not only not gonna do that I never will. All the citizen shoulddo is run the low life lazy coward off. Not run him to ground and retain the crud ball. When the rat has nowhere else to run he will turn and fight and that's when the cop looses his gun. The bad guy won't get close enough to me to have a chance for my gun, holstered or not. If my gun leave the holster the bad guy will be there waiting for the cops, because I don't draw and not shoot in a threat situation. BTW, My threat radius is 7 yards, yeah the old 21 foot combat shooting range, I know I won't miss that close.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Skagit County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    87

    Post imported post

    From personal experience, I was a drug dealer for a long time and dealt with carreer criminals all day, every day, for a long time. I never robbed people or anything of that nature, but I feel I have a good grasp on how "the criminal mind" works. Sure, criminals want to make money, or get things that are worth money, but none of them want to take unnecesary risks. Think of it this way: The anti-theft device "the club" can be easily circumvented, but why would a criminal decide to steal a car with the 'club' on it when they can steal a different car down the street, and not have to deal with all the hassel, and increased risk of being caught.

    So, in other words, sure, a criminal could see someone open-carrying, and then change their tactics to rob them. But why would they? This would increase their chances that something significantly wrong will happen in the robbery. The person could draw their gun and either shoot the robber, or the robber will be forced to murder the innocent person. Either scenario is very bad for the robber. Murdering someone would draw a lot of attention to them, and maybe cause them to go to prison for a long time. Not worth the petty cash they are trying to get. Criminals are preditors: they will go for the easiest prey. A lion might be able to take down a crocodile, but why would they when a pack of zebras is close by? By open carrying, we let ourselves be known as crocodiles, while you "concealers" are simply zebras with a crocodile's teeth, inviting an attack.

    I would rather just advertise my advantage, and not deal with any drama.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bellingham, ,
    Posts
    608

    Post imported post

    cops are generally targets because they are between the criminal and the criminals way out.

    I figure my opinion about someone with a gun on their side is the same as mine (bet he has a better idea how to use that thing than i do).

    same for the biker dude with the switchblade in his back pocket, or anyone with any tool (i wasn't going to argue the finer points of the rules of billards with him)... the carpenter with a hammer.

    if they keep it with them at their side, they probably know how to use it pretty decently. and i think anyone with an iq high enough to walk on their own could make the same judgment.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    , Washington, USA
    Posts
    570

    Post imported post

    cut_cutta wrote:
    From personal experience, I was a drug dealer for a long time and dealt with carreer criminals all day, every day, for a long time. I never robbed people or anything of that nature, but I feel I have a good grasp on how "the criminal mind" works. Sure, criminals want to make money, or get things that are worth money, but none of them want to take unnecesary risks. Think of it this way: The anti-theft device "the club" can be easily circumvented, but why would a criminal decide to steal a car with the 'club' on it when they can steal a different car down the street, and not have to deal with all the hassel, and increased risk of being caught.

    So, in other words, sure, a criminal could see someone open-carrying, and then change their tactics to rob them. But why would they? This would increase their chances that something significantly wrong will happen in the robbery. The person could draw their gun and either shoot the robber, or the robber will be forced to murder the innocent person. Either scenario is very bad for the robber. Murdering someone would draw a lot of attention to them, and maybe cause them to go to prison for a long time. Not worth the petty cash they are trying to get. Criminals are preditors: they will go for the easiest prey. A lion might be able to take down a crocodile, but why would they when a pack of zebras is close by? By open carrying, we let ourselves be known as crocodiles, while you "concealers" are simply zebras with a crocodile's teeth, inviting an attack.

    I would rather just advertise my advantage, and not deal with any drama.
    Verry well said.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    134

    Post imported post

    Deanf:

    I stand corrected. I should have said the last 3 cops killed were killed with thier own gun, after a struggle. Of couse, that would still not have been correct, as Deputy Cox was not shot with his own gun, so, what I REALLY should have said, is that three of the last four cops killed in WA state were killed with their own guns, after a sgtruggle, There, WHEW!

    The point I was trying to make, (albiet not very well) was that cops face the same exact criminals that anyone else might face at any given time. These criminals do not seem too reticient in attempting to disarm the cops, so there is no reason to believe these same criminals would not attempt the same with someone carrying unconcealed. Open carrying in an urban environment is a very new phenomenon. It is much too soon to draw any conclusions as to whether or not open carry reduces crime, or exposes the individual to a greater risk.

    What I do know, is that concealed carry does not expose the individual to that risk.

    Marty

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bellingham, ,
    Posts
    608

    Post imported post

    Marty Hayes wrote:
    Deanf:

    I stand corrected. I should have said the last 3 cops killed were killed with thier own gun, after a struggle. Of couse, that would still not have been correct, as Deputy Cox was not shot with his own gun, so, what I REALLY should have said, is that three of the last four cops killed in WA state were killed with their own guns, after a sgtruggle, There, WHEW!

    The point I was trying to make, (albiet not very well) was that cops face the same exact criminals that anyone else might face at any given time. These criminals do not seem too reticient in attempting to disarm the cops, so there is no reason to believe these same criminals would not attempt the same with someone carrying unconcealed. Open carrying in an urban environment is a very new phenomenon. It is much too soon to draw any conclusions as to whether or not open carry reduces crime, or exposes the individual to a greater risk.

    What I do know, is that concealed carry does not expose the individual to that risk.

    Marty
    again though the cops are a threat to the crimal (who doesn't want to go to jail, also one of the greatest reason i will respect any cop good/bad inbetween... including the one that cuffed me and beat the tar out of me for being a mouthy drunk 17 y/o), and this i'm guessing is a cause in the struggle over the firearm. where as a guy on the street isn't a threat, and isn't a great target.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,327

    Post imported post

    It's nice to see Marty Hayes here. Though he refers to his experience teaching retention, he's too discreet to mention that FAS teaches this course (quite rightly, we don't want to commercialize this place.)

    But I trust it's ok for somebody else to mention it! :-) I am a very satisfied customer of their Defensive Handgun course, and while I haven't taken the retention class, I was just talking this morning to someone who had and who highly recommended it.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Centennial, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,412

    Post imported post

    uncoolperson wrote:
    Marty Hayes wrote:
    Deanf:

    I stand corrected. I should have said the last 3 cops killed were killed with thier own gun, after a struggle. Of couse, that would still not have been correct, as Deputy Cox was not shot with his own gun, so, what I REALLY should have said, is that three of the last four cops killed in WA state were killed with their own guns, after a sgtruggle, There, WHEW!

    The point I was trying to make, (albiet not very well) was that cops face the same exact criminals that anyone else might face at any given time. These criminals do not seem too reticient in attempting to disarm the cops, so there is no reason to believe these same criminals would not attempt the same with someone carrying unconcealed. Open carrying in an urban environment is a very new phenomenon. It is much too soon to draw any conclusions as to whether or not open carry reduces crime, or exposes the individual to a greater risk.

    What I do know, is that concealed carry does not expose the individual to that risk.

    Marty
    again though the cops are a threat to the crimal (who doesn't want to go to jail, also one of the greatest reason i will respect any cop good/bad inbetween... including the one that cuffed me and beat the tar out of me for being a mouthy drunk 17 y/o), and this i'm guessing is a cause in the struggle over the firearm. where as a guy on the street isn't a threat, and isn't a great target.
    Another angle to consider is when did the criminal make the effort to take the gun? Did he just run up to the cop and take it, or (and this is more likely) was the attempt made while the cop was struggling to subdue the guy?

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    Marty Hayes wrote:
    Deanf:

    I stand corrected. I should have said the last 3 cops killed were killed with thier own gun, after a struggle. Of couse, that would still not have been correct, as Deputy Cox was not shot with his own gun, so, what I REALLY should have said, is that three of the last four cops killed in WA state were killed with their own guns, after a sgtruggle, There, WHEW!

    The point I was trying to make, (albiet not very well) was that cops face the same exact criminals that anyone else might face at any given time. These criminals do not seem too reticient in attempting to disarm the cops, so there is no reason to believe these same criminals would not attempt the same with someone carrying unconcealed. Open carrying in an urban environment is a very new phenomenon. It is much too soon to draw any conclusions as to whether or not open carry reduces crime, or exposes the individual to a greater risk.

    What I do know, is that concealed carry does not expose the individual to that risk.

    Marty
    But you assume open carry exposes one to a higher risk than concealed carry does without any proof.You said so yourself. Open carry seems to work in Arizona just fine. Besides concealed carry has risk also, such as snagging clothes as you draw from under them and the delay indrawing because of the clothes over your weapon. Most bad guys are not just bad, but lazy too and will leave a known armed citizen along and pursue an easier target.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Monroe, Washington, USA
    Posts
    356

    Post imported post

    First of all let me say Welcome ABoardâ„¢ to Marty Hayes. It's nice to have someone of his qualifications here.

    However it is a shame that I have to disagree so strongly with his very first post. Marty you are a renowned trainer, but you simply cannot compare the "daily lifestyle" of a uniformed police officer with those of a civilianopenly carrying a firearm. It's not even apples and oranges. It's more like apples andcornbread.

    Clint Smith described it better that I can. so I'll just use his words;
    So you know, the issue is not whether or not you have a gun. Every police officer I know of who was killed in the line of duty had a gun with them.
    One of the things first FTO taught me on my very first day was that, "EVERY damntime you make contact with the public there will be a weapon present... YOURS !" And the "code" said it was an unforgivable sin to lose control of your weapon.

    He also said our job was to make as few arrests as possible. Now this took me by complete surprise until he explained further. he said, 'Arrests are dangerous so we only arrest the ones we have to. Never arrest anyone by yourself unless you absolutely have to. No one everwants to get arrested,' he said. 'Some may fight it and some may accept it. Some may be okay with it andsome may be okay with it at first and then change their mind half way through. Every time you arrest someone there is the possibility for it to get ugly.'

    No in my current life as a civilianI am no longer required to make contact with criminals. I am no long put in the position of having to make physical contact with people who don't want to be restrained. If you read the "Armed Citizen" columnin each month's American Rifleman or First Freedom you'll see how often criminals RUN away at the mere sight of a firearm. Often times even after they have been so bold as to break into someone's occupied house.

    By nature I am a very outgoing individual. I smile, I laugh, I tip my hat and I say Hello to people who pass close by me, I look AT people. I am exactly the type of person criminals avoid. And if I just so happen to be carrying openly that day then I am damndefinately the type that criminals avoid. And if a person is so situationally unaware (clueless) so that some one can sneak up and grab their gun then perhaps they shouldn't be carrying a gun in the first place.

    Now we're not saying that carrying openly is a walk in the park (even though it's lawful anda good place to do it). There are extra responsibilities that go along with it. But then there are alreadyadded responsibilities for all of us every time wecarry. But I really don't believe there are any added dangers.

    One more thing. I carry a half size "trucker's wallet". You know the kind with a chain that goes to your belt? I have carried them on and off for 40 years. I currently carry one because if I were to drop it I cannot physically bend over to pick it up without extreme discomfort. I cannot count the number of times in my life whensomeone (usually astranger) has toldme, "Oh... you know... a mugger... could just grab that chain... and yank it real hard... and he'd have your wallet in no time." Care to guess how many times anyone hasactually tried that?



  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    134

    Post imported post

    Well folks, we are just going to have to agree to disagree, as I am going to be absent for the next week. Carry on,

    Marty

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    BluesBear wrote:
    First of all let me say Welcome ABoardâ„¢ to Marty Hayes. It's nice to have someone of his qualifications here.

    However it is a shame that I have to disagree so strongly with his very first post. Marty you are a renowned trainer, but you simply cannot compare the "daily lifestyle" of a uniformed police officer with those of a civilianopenly carrying a firearm. It's not even apples and oranges. It's more like apples andcornbread.

    Clint Smith described it better that I can. so I'll just use his words;
    So you know, the issue is not whether or not you have a gun. Every police officer I know of who was killed in the line of duty had a gun with them.
    One of the things first FTO taught me on my very first day was that, "EVERY damntime you make contact with the public there will be a weapon present... YOURS !" And the "code" said it was an unforgivable sin to lose control of your weapon.

    He also said our job was to make as few arrests as possible. Now this took me by complete surprise until he explained further. he said, 'Arrests are dangerous so we only arrest the ones we have to. Never arrest anyone by yourself unless you absolutely have to. No one everwants to get arrested,' he said. 'Some may fight it and some may accept it. Some may be okay with it andsome may be okay with it at first and then change their mind half way through. Every time you arrest someone there is the possibility for it to get ugly.'

    No in my current life as a civilianI am no longer required to make contact with criminals. I am no long put in the position of having to make physical contact with people who don't want to be restrained. If you read the "Armed Citizen" columnin each month's American Rifleman or First Freedom you'll see how often criminals RUN away at the mere sight of a firearm. Often times even after they have been so bold as to break into someone's occupied house.

    By nature I am a very outgoing individual. I smile, I laugh, I tip my hat and I say Hello to people who pass close by me, I look AT people. I am exactly the type of person criminals avoid. And if I just so happen to be carrying openly that day then I am damndefinately the type that criminals avoid. And if a person is so situationally unaware (clueless) so that some one can sneak up and grab their gun then perhaps they shouldn't be carrying a gun in the first place.

    Now we're not saying that carrying openly is a walk in the park (even though it's lawful anda good place to do it). There are extra responsibilities that go along with it. But then there are alreadyadded responsibilities for all of us every time wecarry. But I really don't believe there are any added dangers.

    One more thing. I carry a half size "trucker's wallet". You know the kind with a chain that goes to your belt? I have carried them on and off for 40 years. I currently carry one because if I were to drop it I cannot physically bend over to pick it up without extreme discomfort. I cannot count the number of times in my life whensomeone (usually astranger) has toldme, "Oh... you know... a mugger... could just grab that chain... and yank it real hard... and he'd have your wallet in no time." Care to guess how many times anyone hasactually tried that?

    I agree with that very much. Also you have the upperhand on a mugger, you carry a whipping stick as far as they are concerned.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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