Just know this, you CANNOT leave out LEO encounters where the firearm was taken from the Officer or where a LEO was shot by said BG. They open carry every day, their info matters. The difference is the uniform of authority that can attract the problem. So that means it's impossible to illustrate a relationship and that the data is sure to be skewed on this particular subject.
The LEO factor alone should present the skew illustrating that someone who OC's stands a greater potential for being attacked, disarmed, or shot than someone who CC's. But like I said, that's because of the Uniform of Authority issue that can draw a criminal element AND because they respond to those kinds of calls.
The "LEO Factor" should not even enter into the discussion of Citizens OCing. That is comparing apples and oranges.
LEOs who get their guns grabbed by BGs have it happen--in EVERY INSTANCE--during a situation where they inserted themselves into a volatile situation, attepting to apprehend a suspect who was known to be dangerous, desperate, and willing to do ANYTHING to avoid apprehension.
Citizens, it is safe to say, should NEVER find themselves in this situation. Any citizen who DOES attempt to apprehend a dangerous suspect needs to have his head examined.
LEOs who are shot with their own guns are--in almost every instance--grappling, wrestling, or otherwise physically engaged with a suspect.
Again, this is a situation that an armed citizen should NEVER allow themselves to be in. IF you are threatened with bodily harm by a BG, you are within your rights (in most jurisdictions) to use appropriate force.
When cops have their guns grabbed it's NOT because some BG sneaked up on them and grabbed their gun from the holster--it's because the COP initiated the situation, and it degenerated into a physical tussle.
The chances of a OCing citizen getting his gun grabbed by a BG is actually FAR LESS than your chances of:
--winning the lottery
--having your house hit by a meteor
--being killed in a terrorist attack
--being killed by a drunk driver
--being sexually assaulted in your own home
--being struck by lightning
--being attacked by a Great White Shark
--being falsely arrested by the police
--being a victim of police brutality
--being bit by a poisonous snake
--dying from anaphylactic shock from a bee sting
--being kidnapped
--drowning in a swimming pool
--being killed in an accidental fall in your bathroom
There is, to my knowledge, ONE incident in the last 20 years--in the ENTIRE COUNTRY--of an OCing LAC having his gun stolen by a BG, and that happened last year in WI.
As for OCers being "shot first by the BG because he is OCing", from my research that would be a BIG FAT ZERO. Never happened. In fact, the ONLY people who routinely harass, molest, assault, or otherwise violate law-abiding citizens who are OCing are LEOs--NOT "Bad Guys"...
In fact, most studies show that hardened violent criminals are actually MUCH MORE afraid of armed citizens than they are of the police, and therefore try to avoid people who they know to be armed, and target people who appear to be UNARMED instead.
And as we all know, the whole purpose of CC is to appear unarmed...
So if you follow this logic (based on the actual research with criminals) you actually have a MUCH greater chance of being attacked by a BG if you are CCing, because you look like all the other unarmed, defenseless sheeple.
With an OCer, the BG's know EXACTLY where they stand.
End of discussion...
CCers have a LOT invested in their little cards. Lots of money. Lots of time (taking tests, filling out forms, etc). In some states, they ALSO need to be VERY politically connected, or contribute lots of money to the right political figures to get their "permission slips". So you need to understand, they have a LOT of ego riding on their "special privilege".
OC presents a SERIOUS threat to their self-esteem, because it shows that you don't need to be rich, or politically connected to be able to carry. That is a HUGE bit of cognitive dissonance to throw in the face of someone who has spent a lot of time and money to get a perk (carrying a firearm for self defense) that is ACTUALLY a Fundamental Human Right that we ALL can exercise without fees, permissions, or political connections (in most states, anyway...)
CCers who are vehemently against OC are not basing their arguments on logic, statistics, facts, history, the Constitution or any sort of understanding of Fundamental Human Rights. They are arguing from their ego.
It's sad, really...
Don't get me wrong. I have SEVERAL permits (NC, UT, PA). And I occasionally CC (when weather or clothing style dictate). But I prefer OC for MANY reasons--comfort, speed, overt deterrence, activism, not to mention that it can be a GREAT conversation-starter.
Plus, I have some VERY nice guns and holsters, and damn it, I DO like to wear them out in public--just like people enjoy wearing a fine suit, or nice jewelry, or driving an expensive car in public.
I don't OC to get attention. But unlike CCers, I don't feel the need to hide my rights under a bushel like they are something dirty, offensive, or socially unacceptable, any more than I would hide a religious pendant on a necklace...
I like having the OPTION of CC. But I don't prefer it as a mode of daily carry, and I take offense--from a personal stance, a legal stance, and an historical stance--when anyone says it is somehow "wrong". In fact, historically, CC has been seen as a CRIME for the majority of our nation's existence, whereas OC was seen as honorable, legal, and in fact, the DUTY of a Free Citizen.
It's only in the last 30 years or so that CC has become acceptable. CC was a crime for over 150 years in the US. OC has been legal since the beginning--and has only been regulated in some states in the last 30 or 40 years.
I would suggest that all those CCers who are anti-OC can stick the HISTORICAL TRUTH about OC in their ill-advised pipes and smoke it...
