First, welcome to the forum, Lawdog! I hope your stay here is more informative than my visit to officer.com.
...every time I have encountered OC citizen I have asked the same question, but never gotten what I thought was a straightforward answer. My question is simple, Why open Carry? I know it is your right, that I get, but besides you wanting to exercise your right, why?
I open carry for much the same reason most law enforcement officers open carry: Deterrence and rapid access.
Does carrying an unloaded firearm in a holster somehow make you feel safer, because it shouldn't.
Did you come here to ask us why we open carry or to tell us why we shouldn't?
I know that you are not looking for a confrontation, but honestly speaking, just advertising that you have a gun is an invitation for someone to either take you on, or make you do something that you possibly should not.
FBI crime statistics do not support your assertions. By the way, your argument has been around for decades, and has never stood up under scrutiny. It appears to be the product of someone kicking around ways to discourage citizens from OCing. For the vast majority of law-abiding citizens going about their lawful behavior, the idea has not merit.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for citizens being able to legally carry a loaded and concealed firearm.
You lost me there, as restricting our rights to "concealed" puts you on the wrong side of the Constitution each and every time.
I think the hole CCW process in most departments is a joke, because they choose not to issue concealed weapons permits to citizens who have valid reasons for having them.
My experience as a resident in six states over a 26-year period strongly indicates otherwise.
Believe me I have looked at this issue from both sides, both as being a officer who would receive calls regarding people who were legally OC...
You do investigate calls about citizens walking their dogs? Using a shovel in their front yards? How about brandishing an ice pick while chopping away at the block of ice they're using for home-made ice cream on a Saturday afternoon? All can be used as deadly weapons, yet I'll bet you haven't received any calls about them, any more than you receive calls about someone driving a Yukon down the highway below the speed limit. Yet the Yukon can be just as deadly as a man with a firearm. More deadly, should the driver be of the Jared or Cho mentality near a crowd.
Its a crying shame that we as americans have to worry about protecting ourselves with deadly force, but that is the world we live it.
As you said, it's the "world" we live in. It's hardly limited to the fact we're Americans.
How are OC going to defend them selves by bringing a pretty paper weight to a gun fight?
Are you saying my firearm, of the same type and caliber used by many law enforcement agencies throughout the U.S. and around the world, is a "paperweight?"
It just seems to me that with all the organization that this movement has, and with all it's members that you could not or would not band together to get some of the laws of the states that do not have a rational concealed weapons permitting changed.
There are forums whose goal is precisely that, and I applaud their efforts. This forum's focus is on Open Carry, not concealed carry, and I applaud its efforts, as well. Some forums focus on eradicating all infringements on the right to keep and bear arms, and I applaud their efforts, too.
I understand that as Police officers we can not be everywhere, and sometimes...
"Sometimes?" During the minutes until you actually arrive, that should read "always."
...we have to depend upon the citizens to protect and defend themselves, But honestly how are you going to protect yourselves or your loved ones with an unloaded firearm?
Who said my firearm is unloaded? I carry 16+1, commonly known as Condition 2 (round chambered, safety off, hammer down). If needed, my response is draw, aim, and fire.
As for those who're unfortunately enough to be in California, they're at a 1-second disadvantage as compared to the rest of us.
Do you think that the mere sight of a gun is going to have a criminal think twice or quake in their shoes?
According to interviews conducted with actual criminals, yes. Not for all criminals, to be sure. But many will avoid targeting an individual whom they know is armed.
I can only speak from my experience, but I am certain that criminals don't care if you have a gun and order them to stop.
That's what the bullets are for.
As a mater of fact in the last couple of years prior to retiring, I found that some criminals are getting hip to the open carry movement.
That's why I train half a day, four times a year.
In the city I worked for, one OC citizen was actually robbed at gunpoint by a suspect who's sole intent was to steal his firearm.
That's why my training includes retention.
After the suspects arrest, he made a comment to the effect that he had seen the OC stuff on T.V. and felt that if he carried his loaded firearm, he could certainly steal more firearms from people who carried them unloaded.
"Suspect's arrest," huh? Apparently, the criminal's approach didn't work very well.
I hated getting calls of citizens who were OC and then have to do a 12031(e) check...
Ok, so you're from California.
...just to determine that they were in fact OC citizens and not some suspect out there waiting for the opportunity to commit a crime.
A 12031(e) check
does not determine whether they're OC citizens or potential criminal. Who fed you this line of bull? Desk sergeant? Departmental memo? The
only thing the e-check does is determine whether or not the OCer is in full compliance with 12031. If they're not, it could be do to a number of different reasons, including being ignorant of the law or habitually loading before holstering (say, if you come from Colorado).
But remember you pay all officers to be suspicious.
Would you care to make a wager? I don't pay LE to be suspicious. I expect LE to follow and enforce the law. I expect them to use standard practices to stop crimes in progress when able, and find the perpetrators after the fact when they're not.
I neither expect nor desire law enforcement to stereotype, profile, or jump to conclusions, particularly when the individual they're stereotyping, profiling, and about whom they're jumping to conclusions is a law-abiding citizen who has been stereotyped, profiled, and about whom conclusions have been jumped simply because they choose to arm themselves in defense of themselves, friends, family, and property against the real criminals.
I really don't expect (and most certainly despise) law enforcement who categorize law-abiding OCers as potential criminals until proven innocent. Those folks are Constitutionally illiterate and need to go back to high school to learn what it means to be "innocent until proven guilty."
In the purest of forms OC citizens are not criminals...
The "purest of forms?" Boy, this has preconceived notion written all over it, and says you believe most OCers are far from pure. Forget the backstroke. Try backpeddling your way out of this one. In the meantime, try this fact on for size: The vast majority of OCers are not criminals. In fact, exceedingly few, as in way less than 1% of all criminals open carry.
...but all it takes is some smart criminals and then we have a problem. I can show you video after video of criminals either in jail or in prison going over laws and loopholes, techniques and tactics to use the law to their advantage and to lie, cheat, steal and murder their way to where they want to be. No not all criminals are smart, but I hate to say it, if they stay in their business of being criminals long enough, a majority of them learn how to work the system.
Sure they do. As a law enforcement officer, please keep in mind the law itself forbids you to conduct random vehicle stops to attempt to filter known criminals from the law-abiding citizens of our society. It's not for the protection of the criminals, which comprise a very small percentage of our population. It's out of respect for the rights of honest, law-abiding citizens, allowing the vast majority of us who are not criminals to go about our honest, law-abiding lives without being hassled at every turn by a gestapo-like police state asking us for our "papers," some proof that we're actually allowed to breath American air.
Like it or not, that's our system of law. I like it very much! It's called freedom, and it tastes very good. Personally, I think you're trying to sell safety, but no individual is ever safe. Given that 95% of all humans are law-abiding citizens, however, when you allow those 10% of us who're willing to defend ourselves and others to do so uninfringed, you wind up with a situation where the 30 Million armed citizens outnumber 890 Thousand policeman by 30 to 1. However, there's still federal, state, and county/sheriff law enforcement, so let's say, at the most, it's 15 to 1.
Ok, let's go one more and say just 1% of Americans carry. We'd still outnumber all law enforcement by 1.5 to 1. Keep in mind these are the law-abiding citizens, not criminals.
To discount our numbers or our ability to deter crime, or respond to it appropriately when it rears its ugly head would be to make a grave error in judgement. No, we're not law enforcement. When some jerk engaged in road rage this afternoon, I did not chase him down and arrest him at gunpoint. What I did was call 911, report his behavior, the location, and a complete description of the driver and his vehicle.
The other problem that I had with quite a few but not all OC is their attitude towards LEO's.
Has it ever occurred to you that most of our attitudes are formed by observing the comments of people like you? When you post your comments, largely errant and heavily laced with preconceived notions, you do a poor job of conveying that you approach the idea of an armed citizenry with an open mind. Here's another news flash: Armed citizens pre-date law enforcement in this country by a few hundred years.
Weather it is not wanting to submit to a 12031(e) check, or the barbs, jabs, and pokes about "rights" and how as LEO's we violated their rights.... Bottom line I hope OC citizens are carrying not just for show.
As a 20+ year veteran of the armed forces, who's qualified expert every time, on three types (.38, 9mm, M-16), and who's taken additional training in retention, take-down, and law, I can assure you I'm not carrying "just for show." We OCers come from a wide variety of backgrounds. Some are more capable than I am. Some are less. I've met many. None of those I've met are carrying "just for show."
What I mean by this is if you are going to carry a firearm, weather it be loaded or unloaded, you better have the intent and skill to use it if your life depends on it.
We agree.
Tying up Police resources by debating weather or not LEO's have the right to conduct 12031(e) checks...
The only ones who would be tying up Police resources in a debate would be the police. You're free to leave at any time.
...and field interviews (not detentions!)...
Yeah, right. If you really believe that, how about leading off with, "Sir, we'd like to conduct a field interview. This is not a detention, as you're free not to answer any questions and may leave at any time." Otherwise, by intent or virtue of positional authority (your uniform) it's a detention.
...what I hope OC citizens stand for, protection of life and liberty.
Hope confirmed.
I guess I will get off my soap box by concluding by saying as OC citizens, you should organize, lobby, protest, hell do what ever it legally takes to get your rights expanded so you can carry concealed or for that mater openly loaded.
Now you're talking! Personally, I thought that's what "...the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" meant, but apparently, some lawmakers and members of our judicial system either can't read English, or they're willing to subvert our Constitution into something of their own making in violation of their roles in the judiciary (not legislation).
Let me know what you think. I might not have the right answer, but I can at least i admit that while I might not have the right answer, I am sure it is not the only answer to deal with this issue so that your rights are protected, and LEO's can breath just a little easier. Thanks for your time and I look forward to hearing from you. - Lawdog
The best way to protect our rights is to observe those police agencies around the country who do it right. No agency is perfect, but some get very close, while others are far off the mark. All my encounters with the Colorado Springs Police Department have been non-events, simply nods of understanding and mutual respect. I'm not law-enforcement. They are. They're not privately-armed citizen (while on duty). I am. We each have our roles and responsibilities. Mine is to carry and respond appropriately. Theirs is to carry and respond appropriately.
How each of us respond is generally different. They're expected to actively confront criminal behavior, whereas I'll do so only if there's either no avenue of retreat, or for the immediate protection of life and limb of self and others in my immediate vicinity.