Open Carry VS Concealed Carry Why?

It depends on the situation.

Ok, I will be the Mediator

I understand what the new forum cop is saying. If you are open carrying a hangun and a bunch of crooks attempt to rob the place, then yes I agree it could make you a target. Im not disagreeing with him on that at all.
Now, I have never heard or seen this happen either. I looked for examples of OCers getting shot because they were at the wrong place at the wrong time and never found such and example. Since im a logical person I do understand how the threat of it happening is present, but it just doesnt.
We have seen examples where OC has detered a crime, but none that have made a crime more violent.
Everyone on this board understands this issue and accepts the risk.
One thing we ALL have in common is open carry should be OUR decission and WE should not be harassed for it...
Nobody here is forced to do anything and we damn sure shouldnt be either.
Lets remember the most important thing, we all want to have the ability to exercise our rights without harassment from anyone.
Never forget the most important thing about self defense is Situational Awareness. Before those crooks can react, SHOOT EM!!!

slowfiveoh said:

What is missing in every argument that OC will not "act or serve as a meaningful deterrent", is the fact that we are trying to normalize the carry.

CC is such a terrible tool. I realize that we are all "in the same boat", and I would lobby just as hard for the right to CC as I do for OC. Frankly however, CC-only proponents are typically prima donnas who typically only care whether their ability to pack a snubnose .38 in their fanny pack is protected by state and federal law.

The tactical decision to counter-ambush an ambush is completely and laughably stupid. Were I of the criminal mindset and committed to putting myself and others in mortal harm to get money or goods illegally, I would shoot the first clown who tried to go "ninja-mcsneaky", fiddle-farting with his shirt, waistband, or legs.

Click to expand...

You know, I had not considered it in this light. I think your comments are very apropos and I'll be strongly thinking over your comments. Thanks a lot for posting this. It was NOT a rant but a very cogent argument for OC or normal carry. Loved the 'Prima donnas' (too true!) and the Ninja-McSneaky aphorism.

Three thumbs up!

Badger Johnson said:

You know, I had not considered it in this light. I think your comments are very apropos and I'll be strongly thinking over your comments. Thanks a lot for posting this. It was NOT a rant but a very cogent argument for OC or normal carry. Loved the 'Prima donnas' (too true!) and the Ninja-McSneaky aphorism.

Three thumbs up!

Click to expand...

I have another way to look at it.


Let us pretend that the presence of regularly carrying citizens is represented by the number 1, while non-carrying citizens is represented by a 0.

The following is a representation of where we are.

"00000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000100000000000000000000000000"

The following is a representation of where we would like to be.

"00100100010010000100001000010000100010001000001000010010010001000001000100"



Now for appearances sake, let us pretend that concealed carriers are likewise represented by 0, as their outward appearance has 0 deterrence factor.

"00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000"


Thus is concealed carries affect on the populace.

0 Normalization
0 Deterrence



Also, I am forced to recall a store video where a concealed carrying store owner was attacked by a group of men robbing him, and as soon as he goes for his firearm, he is shot dead. (wow who'd have thunk it?)

So much for "surprise".

To those CCers who object to OC under the premise that they will the first to be targeted, BE GLAD. While they are being shot it gives you (the CCer) more time and a greater opportunity to dig your firearm out of concealment and shoot the bad guy or gal. Thank the OCer for the contribution of his or her life, that gave you greater opportunity to save yours and others.

I prefer OC.

But, in Cumming Georgia, a armed security guard on duty was killed in Ingles super market on September 10th, 2010, by group of armed robber.

They shot and killed him at first before they robbed the store.

Khondker said:

I prefer OC.

But, in Cumming Georgia, a armed security guard on duty was killed in Ingles super market on September 10th, 2010, by group of armed robber.

They shot and killed him at first before they robbed the store.

Click to expand...

If I were looking for a place to target, I would take out the security as well.
If the place I targeted had several armed citizens with guns on their hips and a mean redneck with a 12 gauge, then I just might have to go find me some place else to rob.
The presence of more armed citizens will deter crime. Unfortunately armed cititens with exposed weapons seems to make Criminals and LEO feel unsafe! " BUT I DONT CARE HOW THEY FEEL"!!!

The event that Khondker mentioned in Cumming, Ga has no relevance in this discussion.

The store was robbed after it had closed. There were no customers in the store.

Author: Nick Smith (gogodawgs)
I would appreciate if you weren't 'opposed' to open carry, but rather indifferent to the practice. Because a practice is not customary does not make it wrong. I believe, in the sense open carry has become less customary, it has been gun owners who have capitulated to the anti gun movement. We have been asked to hide our firearms. We have been asked to behave as criminals have behaved in the concealed carry of our firearms.

"It does scare some people"
Everyday I get up and drive in Seattle-Tacoma traffic and there are times it scares me and other drivers. However, it is not the vehiclethat scares me or others it is the behavior of the driver of that vehicle. I think you will find that it is the behavior of an individual that chooses to open carry that scares others not the firearm. I have met some who concealed carry whose behavior scares me and others. I am sure that you have met people whose behavior scares you on a regular basis. In the state of Washington approximately 1 in 20 are carrying a concealed firearm. Wouldn't you rather see the firearm on a person whose behavior is poor and inappropriate then guess which of those 20 people is the one?

For the last couple of years I have carried openly and I will say that 95% of the people in public do not see my firearm. Why? Because I am polite, courteous, and professional. Furthermore, my behavior invokes trust, not fear in others. I go about my business as though I was concealed. I carry openly for that small percent that do ask and are genuinely curious about the practice and then I am willing to educate and be a positive face to gun owners.

I have chosen to come out of the closet and be transparent in my behavior and actions. I cannot be a jerk to the clerk at the grocery store. I cannot be inconsiderate to the next person getting on the bus or elevator. I have chosen to be open and honest by carrying my firearm openly. I have chosen to engage in a movement to normalize the practice. I have chosen to educate others and also to correct the behavior of others who open carry whose behavior is not polite, courteous, professional and kind. It is a burden that I actively engage.

Is it possible that a bad guy will be deterred from doing evil based on the way a CC'er is dressed. Yes.

Is it possible that an OC'er will be targeted by a bad guy? Yes.

Is it possible that a bad guy will simply wait until an OC'er leaves a store before robbing it? Yes.

Now the real question is: Which scenario is more likely?

---

In my own twisted little world (shut up, I like it here!), I classify bad guys as "I gotta's", I wanna's" and "fupper's".

The "I gotta" is doing evil to survive. I believe these are the easiest to deter. They want to survive, so getting shot is not high on their to-do list.

The "fupper" (short for f***ed-up'er) is either high or otherwise mentally altered. These are the bad guys that will attack without regard for anyone or anything. They probably won't notice an OC'ers weapon. They'll already be attacking people. These are also the bad guys that may take numerous shots to take them down.

The one's that really scare me are the "I wanna's". These are the ones who WANT to do evil. They may or may not be high or sane. They are often the 'smart' criminals. They are the ones that might lead the gang. They may avoid an OC'er or they may plan an ambush. These are the ones who do home invasions and other structured attacks.

These differences in criminal personality types are simply MY opinion of what's out there, but it supports the idea of saying, "It depends."

Will I get shot first if I OC when a store gets robbed? It depends. Did they see me? Do they care? Do they want my gun? Etcetera. Etcetera.

---

To Mr. Fisher who said to thank the OC'er for drawing fire so the CC'ers can take out the bad guy...you're welcome.

Of course, if I'm ahead of you in line and the bad guy waits until I'm gone before robbing the store, thank YOU for cleaning up the mess that I avoided by OC'ing.

MyWifeSaidYes said:

The event that Khondker mentioned in Cumming, Ga has no relevance in this discussion.

The store was robbed after it had closed. There were no customers in the store.

Click to expand...

It shows that he was visibly armed and that the robbers took out that which they knew to be armed (aka the criminals knowing he was armed didn't deter them). Which means that if one were inclined they could try to spin it that since they knew he was armed they simply killed him, while if he had CCed the criminals might not have killed him and simply tied him up or an opportunity might have presented itself for him to have drawn as they would have been unaware of him being armed and might have let their guard down somehow.

Now I'm not about to waste my time tearing down this arguement, but it is the type of arguement I would expect a pro-CC person to use when citing the incident. The fact that the store was closed doesn't really matter when discussing why he was killed (though one could argue that they waited until then since they planned to kill him from the start and the fewer people around to potentially see it or interfere the better), the point of the arguement when citing the case is to try and say that they killed him because they knew he was armed as opposed to simply taking him hostage until they finished robbing the store; and as such it would have been better if he was CCing as they wouldn't of known and potentially wouldn't of killed him.

Aknazer said:

It shows that he was visibly armed and that the robbers took out that which they knew to be armed (aka the criminals knowing he was armed didn't deter them). Which means that if one were inclined they could try to spin it that since they knew he was armed they simply killed him, while if he had CCed the criminals might not have killed him and simply tied him up or an opportunity might have presented itself for him to have drawn as they would have been unaware of him being armed and might have let their guard down somehow.

Now I'm not about to waste my time tearing down this arguement, but it is the type of arguement I would expect a pro-CC person to use when citing the incident. The fact that the store was closed doesn't really matter when discussing why he was killed (though one could argue that they waited until then since they planned to kill him from the start and the fewer people around to potentially see it or interfere the better), the point of the arguement when citing the case is to try and say that they killed him because they knew he was armed as opposed to simply taking him hostage until they finished robbing the store; and as such it would have been better if he was CCing as they wouldn't of known and potentially wouldn't of killed him.

Click to expand...

Encountering an armed security guard during a planned robbery of a closed business isn't even close to applicable to the argument of "cc is better than oc." It simply isn't anywhere near similar enough to draw a comparison.

MyWifeSaidYes said:

To Mr. Fisher who said to thank the OC'er for drawing fire so the CC'ers can take out the bad guy...you're welcome.

Of course, if I'm ahead of you in line and the bad guy waits until I'm gone before robbing the store, thank YOU for cleaning up the mess that I avoided by OC'ing.

Click to expand...

Sounds like the makings of a mighty fine T-shirt!

wrightme said:

Encountering an armed security guard during a planned robbery of a closed business isn't even close to applicable to the argument of "cc is better than oc." It simply isn't anywhere near similar enough to draw a comparison.

Click to expand...

I never said that that was my arguement. I said to expect that to be the arguement of CC proponents when using that example. And right or wrong one can make the arguement that they planned to kill him because he OCed as opposed to simply planning on tying him up.

Aknazer said:

I never said that that was my arguement. I said to expect that to be the arguement of CC proponents when using that example. And right or wrong one can make the arguement that they planned to kill him because he OCed as opposed to simply planning on tying him up.

Click to expand...

It is not applicable to this discussion because the guard was disarmed and killed AFTER they tied up the other employees. They did not shoot him on sight. They did not target him because he was open carrying.

Being new to OC

As I have just started OC'ing, and to my understanding, in the state of Georgia, a GWCL allows you to OC or CC, my initially opinion, is that I would rather carry OC in the belief that, if a BG see's that I'm carrying, he would hopefully choose another target. I understand the hypothetical.....if you're in a gas station and a couple armed thugs walk in hell bent on robbing the place......I would hope that I see them coming and either happen to be CC'ing at the time or be able to move myself to a location within the store where I could try to conceal that fact that I'm OC'ing. That being said, I believe in carrying at all times, but hope that I never have to use my weapon. There's a lot to be said for both cases, OC and CC, but for now, as I'm just beginning to OC, I feel more comfortable in the thought that a BG would not target me seeing that I'm armed.

PX4Storm40 said:

As I have just started OC'ing, and to my understanding, in the state of Georgia, a GWCL allows you to OC or CC, my initially opinion, is that I would rather carry OC in the belief that, if a BG see's that I'm carrying, he would hopefully choose another target. I understand the hypothetical.....if you're in a gas station and a couple armed thugs walk in hell bent on robbing the place......I would hope that I see them coming and either happen to be CC'ing at the time or be able to move myself to a location within the store where I could try to conceal that fact that I'm OC'ing. That being said, I believe in carrying at all times, but hope that I never have to use my weapon. There's a lot to be said for both cases, OC and CC, but for now, as I'm just beginning to OC, I feel more comfortable in the thought that a BG would not target me seeing that I'm armed.

Click to expand...

If you are aware enough of your surroundings and saw the BGs coming to rob the store, you would have already taken some sort of appropriate actions for your self protection whether you are carrying openly or concealed.

QilvinLEO said:

To defend my fellow LEO eariler reguarding the the comments about CC compared to OC. Obvioulsy, it is your right to OC. Alot of individuals that OC also have a CCW because of their interest in firearms. My only problem with OC is if you can CCW, why not do it? My reasons for such are because of weapon retention. I know when I am carrying my offduty weapon it is a single retention holster (and most holsters that I have read on here that people carry and encountered on the street). Just pull and fire. Whereas, my duty holster is a triple retention holster, that requires certain movements in order to remove it and those movements should remain a secret to the general public. (Yeah, because that happens)

So, not only do I have training in weapon retention, but also have an extremely safe holster that most individuals do not know how to draw the weapon, and even if they do, it is hard to do it if the firearm is not on your waste, why would you place yourself into the slightly more risky situation of being disarmed?

I'm just being honest and would like to know some responses of WHY not just CC if you can. I dont want to hear "cause its my right". It wont be your right anymore if it results in your death via being disarmed.

I wont respond to flamers or people that just say "Its my right".


Thanks and hope to have honest opinions,
Qilvin-LEO

Click to expand...

I also recommend a level II or Level III retention holster for OC. I have 4 OC holsters, and one shoulder rig. I prefer my Level III holsters to the Level two and I know I will never unintentionally loose/drop the weapon, or have it taken from me.

I prefer to OC because if I do, I do not need to "dress" for my carry, it is much more comfortable, and I can educate the public that OC is perfectly legal here in WA, no license/permit necessary.

Over 40 years ago (1970), I had just become a US citizen, and I attended a celebration in Sedro-Woolley that had as one of it's attaractions a "quick draw" compitition (old SA Colts, shooting ballons with unburned powder). After the compitition there were litterally hundreds of people OCing. I stopped one of the participants and asked if you needed a permit to walk around with that OC. He said, no, in WA OC is perfectly legal without a permit....I have OC'd since.

It took me quite a few years before I bothered to get my CPL, and then the only reasons were, so I did not have to unload when I got in my car, so I did not have to wait when I wanted to purchase another pistol, and so I did not have to worry about my coat covering my carry in winter. I see no advantages to CC other than in winter.

I also know for a fact, that for me, in my experience, I have had one incidence where my OC stopped a bad situation, before it became worse. I pulled over to let an idiot driver by (2 lane road) and he pulled in behind me. He jumped out of his Jeep yelling and screamng how he was going to beat the stuffing out of me, opened my door and reached in to pull me from my car. All of a sudden he decided he had better things to do, ran back to his Jeep and drove off as fast as he could. Why? The only thing I can think of was he saw my Colt, still in it's holster. Worked for me.

What would have happened if I was concealed? I would have had to pull the gun on him (I am old, I cannot fight anyone any more), and as a LEO you already know, it is never good to have to pull your weapon if there is another way to handle the situation. As long as the weapon is safely retained in it's holster, it can hurt no-one. When it comes out, it can be very dangerous.

QilvinLEO
I understand that you dont see alot of open carriers that were "Shot first". But let me answer you with a situation. I'm dirtbag again. I just shot an open carrier. O wow, lookie here, a 600-1000 dollar <Insert Gun Make/Model> and WOW a really nice holster to go with it. I think i'll take that along with his wallet.

Sounds like a normal homicide to me where the fact that the victim was OCing would be left out:


So cops never get shot first and get their guns badges radios taken?

I would like the option to OC in the hot summer, and CC in the cold winter under my heavy coat, etc. I see no real hard and fast degree of difference between the means.