imported post
TheSzerdi wrote:
True enough. Freeman actually offered to come to an MOC event and speak about the advantages of CC'ing over OC'ing.
I'd disagree with many so-called "advantages" of CC over OC.
From a TACTICAL perspective, I don't think there is any argument that OC is advantageous over CC. It is easier, safer, and faster to draw your firearm from an OC position than a CC position. This is why officers openly carry.
From a STRATEGIC perspective, advantages and disadvantages of OC vs CC depends on the circumstances. For instance, if you're walking down the street and an unarmed thug is thinking about trying to rob you, he may change his mind if he sees an open pistol. On the other hand, if the thug has a gun himself, he may just pop a bullet in your head and take your wallet (and gun) before you ever know he is there.
However, in the latter scenario, it is my opinion that you run the risk of being killed by a criminal who is A) carrying an illegal weapon, and B) predisposed to using it, whether you are open carrying or not.
The bigger strategic advantage to OC is that it creates awareness. Someone PMed me recently and asked my view on open carry. This is an excerpt from my response:
I believe in civil liberties. As this pertains to firearms, I am a strong 2A supporter. I'm aware that some people probably open carry because it's their way of bucking the status quo. But for me, it's much more practical than that. If you compare States with stringent gun laws to those that are more free, you tend to see a correlation between higher crime and increased gun law legislation. Washington DC and Chicago, for instance. In any given city across the State of Michigan, there are probably somewhere in the ballpark for 1,000 citizens for every one law enforcement officer. And unfortunately, we live in an age where the role of LEO has morphed from "protecting and serving" to "collecting revenue and looking for reasons to arrest". I am NOT anti LEO. I firmly believe that MOST LEO's are stand-up folks who fulfil their sworn duties to the best of their abilities. I believe it's a minority number of LEO's who paint a negative picture for the rest of them. Nonetheless, I do not have faith that an LEO, whether stand-up or not, has the ability to prevent most crimes.
Let me put it to you differently: An LEO carries a gun... and for what? For his/her protection. Why should a citizen not do the same? One can argue that an LEO is more likely to face dangerous or life-threatening situations than the average citizen; but I will vehemently disagree. What kind of fool would you have to be to walk up to a uniformed officer and try to rob him/her or commit a violent act against him/her? The average citizen is heads and tails more likely to be such a victim. And by the time the police get wind of the incident and respond to the scene, the perpetrator is usually gone; and unfortunately, the citizen has already become a victim. I'm going from memory here, but the City of Detroit has lost 10 officers over the last decade on the job. Truly unfortunate. But how many citizens were murdered in that same decade? I don't have the figures, but I can assure you it is WELL in excess of 10.
Armed citizens increase awareness amongst the crminal community and instills the fear into their minds that THEY might end up injured or dead if they attempt a violent crime on the wrong person. Armed citizens do not just protect the one carrying... it also protects those that choose not to. If I'm having dinner in a restaraunt and someone starts to shoot up the place, you can bet that I will make an attempt to put a stop to it. Some people think, "Oh the chances of that happening are very slim." Perhaps, but the CHANCE still exists. For me, I'd rather be armed and never need to draw my pistol, then to need to draw a pistol and not be armed. Nevermind the fact that the new fad amongst crazy fools in this country is to walk into a school, restaurant, or shopping mall and just start shooting. Not on my watch. Above all, I firmly believe that a right that is not enforced eventually loses luster and is legislated away.
The only real strategic disadvantage to OC bs CC is that you give the would-be criminal a heads up... thus making you the first person they will probably try to take out if they are hell-bent on committing a crime. But overall, I believe the strategic advantage of awareness will do far more good than harm.
Again; if the strategic and tactical advantages of open carry did not outweigh those of concealed carry, then you'd see law enforcement shoving their pistols into their waistbands. With the exception of some investigave units (like the FBI or police detectives), most LEO's are still wearing their pistols on their hips in the open. If it's good enough and safe enough for them, then it's good enough and safe enough for us.
Oh yeah... the other argument against OC that I hear sometimes: If a criminal wants your gun, they're going to take it. You become a target and another gun ends up on the street. I call BS there. I mean, sure it can happen. But what kind of brass jewels do you have to have to walk up to someone with a gun and try to take it? Again, I'm sure it happens... but the potential benefits of wearing it open outweigh these slim-to-none "What If" scenarios. Once again, this is a risk that LEO's run and they still open carry.
The most likely "What If" scenario that ANYONE (law enforcement or otherwise) is going to run into is "What if I need to draw my gun in a hurry?" I'd rather be openly carrying for that scenario.
