I was surprised at first that some many of the 4-digit worth of posts members were being so quite about this story. There are many here who don't seem to have a problem giving their opinions on any and every subject, yet they remain strangely quiet on this.
Originally, Eye95 posted on this story. I believed his post was simply the result of just skimming the article not actually reading the facts as presented. He deleted the post and stated it had been a mistake. He gave no other opinion on this subject. I thought it strange that he didn't seem to have an opinion on this, but knowing that he and I have had rather heated debates, I assumed that he simply didn't want to discuss this since I had posted it. Imagine my shock when I find in a posting today Eye95 stating that there is a "lack of reports to date" to support this happening.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?87667-LEOs-Super-Human-think-not!
So, is that how the "majority" are going to deal with this? Instead of actually acknowledging it simply say these kinds of things "almost never" happen. Remain silent and ignore that it has? When we get into debates with those that oppose OC how will our creditability suffer for this?
I believe this was an isolated incident that is not indicative of normal events for someone who choses to OC. If I, like some here seem to be want to do, remain silent and don't admit that, it has in fact happened then all my arguments in favor of OC will come off as hollow and false. I won't do that as I think it hurts us more than it helps. I hope there are a few others out there that feel the same.
Any computer security expert will tell you that there is no way to eliminate risk. A tightening in one area creates a relative loosening in another.
The way to approach security is with what is known as a
threat model.
Simply put, what is your threat model?
While there are recorded instances of criminals targeting people they suspect to be armed (doesn't seem like a career with a long future), and there is this crazy guy who, well, I don't know exactly
what he was trying to do... statistically, most crime is at neither extreme: it is rarely schizophrenically spontaneous
nor calculatedly well-planned and executed.
My threat model is this: At some random time, some random criminal or criminals of average or above-average capability want to take someone's, potentially my, wallet, or break into my house and take my stuff. It's pretty clear that, for the run-of-the-mill, average criminal who wants a wallet, open carry will serve as a deterrent and, if it fails to do so, provides readier deployment. (For the home scenario it seems to make less tactical difference, and comfort factors into it more.)
While its conceivable some other, harder criminal might be partly incentivized by the presence of a gun, he still has a very serious consideration to make with regard to a cocked and locked 1911 in a quick-draw level II+ retention holster. A criminal who
isn't afraid of that won't go long before learning why he ought to be, the hard way. Is it safe to bet that guy doesn't practice ultra-fast point shooting after a quick-draw? Or that he isn't a pro who can make aimed fire just as fast as the point shooter? Those are crappy bets to make, considering the stakes. Criminals are opportunists, not heroes of arch-villianry.
If you're a spy, or your heroic tacticool fantasy revolves around obscure and unlikely contingencies, well, then you may decide otherwise.
Edit: By the way, this is eye95 you're talking about. I would venture that he has, in general, less rather than more respect amongst the rest of the "four digit post counters". I consider him a sophist of the highest order, and say so freely.
