imported post
custom.45acp wrote:
My profession for the past 12 years is Quality Assurance, overQuality Control which generates numbers with certain measured products referring to them as SPC (Statistical Process Control.) My thread here was merely to gain statistical advantageon certain locations that I may travel or avoid. I am here to learn from other's mistakes.
My Response:
Being the "statistician" you claim to be, you would know that a few incidents (even 20) anywhere would not rise to the level of "statistical significance". If you base your behavior on hearsay or weak and very limited information, although quite natural, a statistician would find your behavior(s) questionable at best. Not to say such behavior isn't prudent, just that, from a statistical standpoint, such limited, biased information proves nothing.
You will find that oftentimes OCers believe that a crime was prevented because someone wishing them ill-will noticed their firearm and just kept walking. However, the particular aspects of the event are difficult, if not impossible to measure. A person's thoughts and beliefs, in this case the supposed criminal's, are private events. I really don't think that, when someone we believe to be a potential criminal turns the other way that we are going to run up to them to determine why they did what they did.
However, there has been research which shows that, when a criminal (defined here as an incarcerated felon) believes that his victim is armed, he/she simply chooses another victim.
See: James D. Wright and Peter H. Rossi, "The Armed Criminal in
America: A Survey of Incarcerated Felons", (US Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, 1985); and, James D. Wright
and Peter H. Rossi, "Armed and Considered Dangerous, (NY: Aldin
de Gruyler, 1986)
custom.45acp wrote:
I would think a large part of this forum is to educate people on their right to OC, but OC properly. Bank robbery at your bank. There are7 aggressiveof thugs enteringthe bank from three different locations for one thing in mind - MONEY. By previously casing the bank, they are aware of the two armed guards and you (OCing) between them and what they want. Statistically do you or the armed guards have a chance? (Please don't jump all over me because I used a bank as an example.) Wrong time, wrong place with your gun OC and he/she may be history or a statistic.
My response:
As a person with no knowledge of "Bank robber behavior patterns when presented with armed, uniformed security personnel and armed citizens" I can only guess that, based upon my understanding of human behavior, armed individuals would have a deterrent effect (admittedly, my hypothesis with the specific variables you have indicated has, to my knowledge, never been tested) Perhaps we could just pull up data on the number of bank robberies where armed bystanders/ security is present compared to those where they are absent or concealed? Once again, there has been research that showed that, when a criminal believes that his victim is armed, they simply choose another victim. (See above) Perhaps criminals would also choose another bank. I would not use the aforementioned research to answer your question, though. You have inserted many variables (armed individuals, security, 7 people, 3 entrances) which may or may not affect the data. Interesting research if someone is thinking of thesis or dissertation topics.
custom.45acp wrote:
I do find it humorous that people will go in great lengths to give only (two cents) on topics that they have not one piece of vital information regarding to the thread. At the same time, Ihave no OCers withinstances. One good referral andI'm not sure what to say aboutthe rest.
It is sort of scary. I ask relatively simple question and it gets blown out of proportion. Ifsome of the people on this forum are so trigger happy, (take the finger out of the trigger guard until you're ready) meeting them elsewhere can't be much more pleasant.
Thank you for all the good advice and to the rest find a hobby like writing a book! Either way, it's been a real learning experience. Thanks to all.
My response:
Based upon this part of your post, I can only come to one conclusion: you are a person who believes that OC is NOT something that should be practiced by most here. That is your belief and obviously, we are not going to change that. However, to pretend that you are just asking “simple questions”, as if objectively following the truth wherever it leads you is deceptive and disingenuous. You obviously have an agenda . Now that your agenda is, IMHO, more clear, let me ask you a question: “Please provide instances where a bank has been robbed specifically because anyone inside the bank (customers or security) was visibly armed.” Hmmm, seems like a fairly simple question. But, I’ll even be a little nicer than you were—I’ll give you a week to answer the question before I declare that you have “blown things out of proportion”, that “meeting you elsewhere can’t be much more pleasant”, or that you should “find a hobby like writing a book” Actually, I would never actually write such a response; just too angry and doesn't lend itself to reasoned discussion.
I stand up for your right to believe what you believe. However, I do find issue with your arrogant attitude and belittlement of those whose beliefs apparently differ from your own. If you wish to discuss the issue of OC with the goal of ascertaining truth, then I welcome you. If, however, you wish to arrogantly bully people, then I ask you kindly to refrain from posting. I do earnestly hope you ARE honorable and that I am mistaken in my quick and limited assessment of your post. Feel free to PM me if you wish…
