• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Open carry makes you a target????

BobR

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
391
Location
West Plains, ,
imported post

It seems that a lot of boards I go to there are people (most of them) who think open carry makes you the first one to be shot.

I don't think so, I like to think open carry make the person who was planning on doing something to just move on.

Your thoughts?



bob
 

FogRider

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
1,412
Location
Centennial, Colorado, USA
imported post

BobR wrote:
It seems that a lot of boards I go to there are people (most of them) who think open carry makes you the first one to be shot.

I don't think so, I like to think open carry make the person who was planning on doing something to just move on.

Your thoughts?



bob

I'd say that most if not all of the people on this board would agree with you. When challenged to show any evidence of the claim that OC makes you a target you will get nothing but that one tired story about the security guard taking a guys sidearm (assuming you get anything at all). I'm not entirely sure what the story is supposed to prove as he would have been in as much trouble CCing if confronted by a mugger.
 

longwatch

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
4,327
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

Moved to open carry questions.

As for the topic at hand I'd say when I see an open carrier shot first, we will know for sure. I think its one of these things that might happen but really isn't a primary concern for me.
 

Aran

Banned
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
674
Location
Indiana, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

The only thing open carry has made me a target for since I started doing it in November is entirely too much hassling by the police and WalMart managers.

Beyond that, not a word.

Though you have to add the open carrying to the fact that I'm 6'3", 330lbs and not a friendly looking guy most of the time. (Too much effort to smile :p) That may also add into it, compared to a smaller, friendlier looking person.
 

WARCHILD

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
1,768
Location
Corunna, Michigan, USA
imported post

Aran wrote:
The only thing open carry has made me a target for since I started doing it in November is entirely too much hassling by the police and WalMart managers.

Beyond that, not a word.

Though you have to add the open carrying to the fact that I'm 6'3", 330lbs and not a friendly looking guy most of the time. (Too much effort to smile :p) That may also add into it, compared to a smaller, friendlier looking person.
Aran: Go to the Mich posts and look for the thread Kmart/Sears. I have posted the emails I recieved from them regarding the company policy of carrying firearms on their property. It also includes the response from Walmart. In short, Walmarts policy is whatever Mich state law allows. Copy the email and use it to challenge the managers who seem to want to challenge you all the time.
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

Most of the time..... criminals use a gun as a tool to get what they want. It is a leverage bar that gets people motivated and make them turn over the cash.

Most petty criminals do NOT want to shoot someone. Robbery and Murder are two different crimes and one can carry life in prison or the death penalty.

So I submit that a criminal walking in to commit a robbery that seems someone is armed will walk right back out and find some other place.

The criminal is not going to want to get into a shoot match with another armed citizen. And where there is one armed citizen.... there could be more.
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

Given that a majority of us have CC permits/license and are active on an OC forum, I think it safe to say that most of us see value in both types of carry. Furthermore, many who object to CC here object to the license/permit process/requirements rather than the manner of carry.

I think that both types of carry are valid and the choice depends on the situation. I think that there is some deterrence effect from OC although I don't think it is a huge effect because I don't think that most street criminals, the type we are most likely to encounter, are going notice. The ones who do I think it will genearlly deter. The ones who do and are all hyped up on drugs it will likely have little or no effect and may even slightly increase your likelihood of being shot first. Given the small likelihood any of us will actually ever be in a situation where we need our sidearms, I think that which type of criminal you come up against, be it the one with whom you would be better either OC or CC is simply a crap shoot. That being my opinion, I carry as is most comfortable, appropriate and practical for me.
 

OldShooter

New member
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
4
Location
, ,
imported post

I suspect that the theory that OC will get you shot first, stems from situations more applicable to professional kidnappings, military or quasi-military settings (for example in Iraq), or to situations in which the perpetrator has already decided to shoot people beforehand. Seems to me, that most criminals would rather avoid the whole entanglement if they realized you were carrying, as there is too much risk for the possible payoff. Some research has shown that, for the basic mugger or robber, they tend to pick their victims intentionally and are pretty risk-averse.However, in something like the campus shootout scenario, if the assailant shows up with a gun, and notices you are carrying, I think the risk increases of moving to the head of his line. There was a fairly recent incident at a city council meeting, in which someone who apparently had a long-standing grudge with city hall, came prepared (perhaps intending all along) to shoot the place up. He took his first shot at the chief of police who was, as always, in attendance, and then went on to shoot several others after killing him first. I'd say that if you are going to OC, you need to practice your high speed presentation from the holster, til it's pretty quick! Also if someone gets all macho on you, you can't really back down easily if you're carrying openly. I'm 62 and if I'm carrying concealed, Ican usually rely on the old, "Look son, I'm twice your age, half your size, and have a bad back, but if you really think you have to prove you can whip me..." trick, and the macho blowhards typically "declare victory" and leave me alone. That would be harder to pull off if they knew I was carrying, and would be more likely to escalate beyond my control. It is also good to keep in mind that just because they decide to shoot you first doesn't mean they will succeed, and you can draw a tad quicker from OC. I think however, that the most cogent argument for OC is the fact that all forms of self-defense carry are regularly under attack by the media and the PC society generally, so there is an urgent need for the public to start seeing guns in the hands of safe, good guys, in public places, to desensitize them to the effects of hollywood and the mainstream media. The public needs to relearn (we all knew this intuitively 40 years ago) that there is nothing inherently dangerous about having armed people in your vicinity, if anything just the opposite is the case.
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

Shotgun49 wrote:
I suspect that the theory that OC will get you shot first, stems from situations more applicable to professional kidnappings, military or quasi-military settings (for example in Iraq), or to situations in which the perpetrator has already decided to shoot people beforehand. Seems to me, that most criminals would rather avoid the whole entanglement if they realized you were carrying, as there is too much risk for the possible payoff. Some research has shown that, for the basic mugger or robber, they tend to pick their victims intentionally and are pretty risk-averse.However, in something like the campus shootout scenario, if the assailant shows up with a gun, and notices you are carrying, I think the risk increases of moving to the head of his line. There was a fairly recent incident at a city council meeting, in which someone who apparently had a long-standing grudge with city hall, came prepared (perhaps intending all along) to shoot the place up. He took his first shot at the chief of police who was, as always, in attendance, and then went on to shoot several others after killing him first. I'd say that if you are going to OC, you need to practice your high speed presentation from the holster, til it's pretty quick!

Excellent points and good analysis of possible scenarios.

Also if someone gets all macho on you, you can't really back down easily if you're carrying openly. I'm 62 and if I'm carrying concealed, Ican usually rely on the old, "Look son, I'm twice your age, half your size, and have a bad back, but if you really think you have to prove you can whip me..." trick, and the macho blowhards typically "declare victory" and leave me alone. That would be harder to pull off if they knew I was carrying, and would be more likely to escalate beyond my control.

I have to disagree with you here. I have seen this argument before and have thought about it and don't think OC precludes walking away and may make it easier.

It is also good to keep in mind that just because they decide to shoot you first doesn't mean they will succeed, and you can draw a tad quicker from OC. I think however, that the most cogent argument for OC is the fact that all forms of self-defense carry are regularly under attack by the media and the PC society generally, so there is an urgent need for the public to start seeing guns in the hands of safe, good guys, in public places, to desensitize them to the effects of hollywood and the mainstream media. The public needs to relearn (we all knew this intuitively 40 years ago) that there is nothing inherently dangerous about having armed people in your vicinity, if anything just the opposite is the case.

More good points. Welcome to the forum!
 

Overtaxed

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
221
Location
, ,
imported post

I think an important distinction has been drawn between petty criminals who use the advantage of being armed against unarmed and cooperative victims and determined criminals who have decided ahead of time that they will meet their objectives utilizing a broad range of force options, including pre-empting resistance with gunfire.

Thankfully, criminals are a cowardly bunch and mostly fall into the former category.

Awareness, and willingness/ability to resist promptly and fiercely are the only options against bad guys falling into the second category.


Too many people allow themselves a false sense of security. Examples: People who live in a gated community or "secure" building with a security guard at the desk. People who patronize a bank and assume that the cameras, bulletproof windows and bank guard will prevent a robbery attempt. People who carry firearms without the physical and mental preparation needed to identify, assess and act on a dangerous situation.
(Not an attack on open or concealed carriers... some people think all they need to do is purchase, load and carry and they're automatically safe).

I've seen countless movie/TV show scenes in which a determined assailant scales an electric gate or walks right into a reception area and immediately kills the guard at the desk. Next, the victim is easily tricked into opening their door - after all, why would there be an intruder there - the building/community is "secure" right?

And as for banks, well there was a particularly vicious bunch in recent memory that immediately started blasting upon entering the branch, killing tellers and customers.
That certainly wasn't a safe place.

This goes right back to one of our bedrock ideas (or what I believe to be a bedrock idea) - that carrying doesn't inherently create or solve a problem. It gives an option to the person carrying; the option to confront an aggressor with something other than bare hands. Without a firearm, the only option is to submit to the assailant's demands and hope for the best. (Leaving aside, of course, advanced disarming techniques and lucky malfunctions of a bad guy's weapon)

Yes, there are a minority of assailants who will use fast and overwhelming force against both unarmed and armed "threats" to get what they want. Some will succeed, but their chances of success can be greatly minimized by having more decent, armed (both concealed and openly) and prepared people to stand against them.
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

Overtaxed wrote:
This goes right back to one of our bedrock ideas (or what I believe to be a bedrock idea) - that carrying doesn't inherently create or solve a problem. It gives an option to the person carrying
+1
 

Sitrep

Regular Member
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
150
Location
Here and There, Washington, USA
imported post

I would suggest that CC is more likely to get you shot. If you are CCing you are a lot more likely to get into a dangerous situation than if you are OCing, because of the deterrent effect of OC. So for every incident where someone who is OCing is confronted by a BG, there are most likely dozens of incidents where someone CCing will be confronted because the BG just assumes their target is unarmed.

This also brings up in my mind the point that if you are CCing, you are a lot more likely to need to draw/use your weapon, because of the lack of deterrence. So it is CCers who are actually more "Dirty Harry" (maybe Death Wish is a more appropriate term) than OCers.
 

imperialism2024

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
3,047
Location
Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

Sitrep wrote:
I would suggest that CC is more likely to get you shot. If you are CCing you are a lot more likely to get into a dangerous situation than if you are OCing, because of the deterrent effect of OC. So for every incident where someone who is OCing is confronted by a BG, there are most likely dozens of incidents where someone CCing will be confronted because the BG just assumes their target is unarmed.

This also brings up in my mind the point that if you are CCing, you are a lot more likely to need to draw/use your weapon, because of the lack of deterrence. So it is CCers who are actually more "Dirty Harry" (maybe Death Wish is a more appropriate term) than OCers.
I also like how anti-OCers think that BGs will notice an openly carried gun, but won't notice someone reaching into their pants, ankle, purse, or other "concealed" compartment...
 
Top