How to assess danger of open-carriers?

In response to the comments one often sees on other discussion fora like "I can't tell whether this person carrying a gun is a good guy or a bad guy, so I'm frightened", what do people here think are effective methods to suggest to people they could use to make such assessment ?

Serious question as it would be nice to be able to tell people - do you check the following things?

That is simple, their behavior, and or actions. If a person is being aggressive either verbally or physically with a gun they are a danger. Carrying a gun is a right that has responsibilities. One cannot wear a gun and do anything they please to scare others, just wearing the gun does not count. But making accusations or screaming at another person certainly does.

Leave the anger at home!

Is every person with a male appendage a rapist? Absolutely not! The same applies to the one carrying a weapon, be it a gun openly or concealed, or a knife, or a club, or even one dressing in a uniform with handcuffs. Just because one has a tool does not make them dangerous! It is what they are doing with said tool!

Nightmare said:

First establish a correlation between observables and subsequent acts.

I'm up to my azz in Bayesian Inference and its interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, in particular QBism, q.v.

Click to expand...

Exactly on the money. What do people think are the observable a people should look for? Thanks WalkingWolf for mentioning a few.

It's not a valid question. Our government brainwashes their educatees to squeal fear of any non-pig that has a gun.
The only method to tell if it's a good guy or bad guy is the uniform and badge

Unless they have a uniform, if they are openly carrying, my threat assessment gets to start near zero, as opposed to someone walking around without any visible means of being armed.

Do you drive down a two-lane road and freak-out about the intentions of the car coming head on toward you at a closure of 150 MPH with only a yellow stripe and two feet of air between you? Statistically, you are far more likely to need to fear that.

MAC702 said:

Unless they have a uniform, if they are openly carrying, my threat assessment gets to start near zero, as opposed to someone walking around without any visible means of being armed.

Do you drive down a two-lane road and freak-out about the intentions of the car coming head on toward you at a closure of 150 MPH with only a yellow stripe and two feet of air between you? Statistically, you are far more likely to need to fear that.

Click to expand...

I do if the other car is driving erratically and running other cars off the road. Or if the driver is flashing the finger at others while screaming like raving lunatic. If a person acts like a lunatic, it is a pretty good guess they may be a lunatic. This goes for armed and unarmed, as a person that appears to be unarmed just may be armed.

It is a matter of actions and behavior that determine danger. If a person armed acts normal, I assume they are normal.

How to reduce fears.

MAC702 said:

Unless they have a uniform, if they are openly carrying, my threat assessment gets to start near zero, as opposed to someone walking around without any visible means of being armed.

Click to expand...

I'm certainly in agreement on that one, but my question is what sort of questions can one ask the scared people to think about that will help them understand that an OC'er acting peacefully is not a threat. In other words, what questions are good in a Socratic approach to help reduce their fears :question:

In exactly the same manner you'd assess the danger of anyone else. Just point to the nearest "other person" and ask the questioner to assess the danger of the person. The possession of a properly holstered handgun isn't a reason to consider a person more or less dangerous, rationally and generally speaking.

PeterNSteinmetz said:

I'm certainly in agreement on that one, but my question is what sort of questions can one ask the scared people to think about that will help them understand that an OC'er acting peacefully is not a threat. In other words, what questions are good in a Socratic approach to help reduce their fears :question:

Click to expand...

unless they (scared people) bring the subject up directly to you, ignore them and just go about your business. it is suppose to be their problem remember not yours.

apparently in 12 posts you have changed the parameters of your initial query from SA perception to now discerning how your mind reading skills can be directed at those scared people so you can solve their non-articulated concerns about the good guy OC'g in front of them?

naw'llll y'al have fun with this confusion.

ipse

solus said:

unless they (scared people) bring the subject up directly to you, ignore them and just go about your business. it is suppose to be their problem remember not yours.
ipse

Click to expand...

Yes, I am interested in what to ask scared people to help them when the subject comes up. Otherwise, I'm quite happy to ignore them if they haven't expressed any concern.

PeterNSteinmetz said:

Yes, I am interested in what to ask scared people to help them when the subject comes up. Otherwise, I'm quite happy to ignore them if they haven't expressed any concern.

Click to expand...

For the male--- "I fear you are a rapist as you have a penis?"
For the female----"I fear you are a prostitute as you have a vagina?"

For starters, I'd suggest 'assessing the danger' the exact same way you'd do with someone carrying concealed. Although in actuality it's a far greater chance that someone meaning harm is going to conceal a weapon rather than wear one openly and honestly.

JoeSparky said:

For the male--- "I fear you are a rapist as you have a penis?"
For the female----"I fear you are a prostitute as you have a vagina?"

Click to expand...

One of those is consensual... Just saying...

PeterNSteinmetz said:

I'm certainly in agreement on that one, but my question is what sort of questions can one ask the scared people to think about that will help them understand that an OC'er acting peacefully is not a threat. In other words, what questions are good in a Socratic approach to help reduce their fears :question:

Click to expand...

Probably the only thing that can make them less fearful (if they have the mental capacity to overcome anti-2A propaganda) is the repeated experience of noticing a person OCing that acts normally and doesn't hurt them. Though it's not a reason I OC I do hope it is a fortunate byproduct. I'm naturally a polite and helpful person so hopefully incidental associations are being made in people's perceptions.

PeterNSteinmetz said:

In response to the comments one often sees on other discussion fora like "I can't tell whether this person carrying a gun is a good guy or a bad guy, so I'm frightened", what do people here think are effective methods to suggest to people they could use to make such assessment ?

Serious question as it would be nice to be able to tell people - do you check the following things?

Click to expand...

Are we talking about cops, citizens, or both?

WalkingWolf said:

That is simple, their behavior, and or actions. If a person is being aggressive either verbally or physically with a gun they are a danger. Carrying a gun is a right that has responsibilities. One cannot wear a gun and do anything they please to scare others, just wearing the gun does not count. But making accusations or screaming at another person certainly does.

Leave the anger at home!

Click to expand...

Right.

Just act normal (read that as pleasant, civilized, friendly, etc.) and you'll most always be treated accordingly... whether you are armed or not.

Gah! All those electrons wasted trying to discuss reasonably and rationally a way to get someone operating on an emotional level to think reasonably and rationally!

Folks operating on an emotional level who actually want to think, let alone operate, on a reasonable and rational level pay to spend "quality" time with a therapist who, as long as the copays and insurance reimbursements keep coming, have the patience to go over the same conversation which confirms to the person acting on an emotional level that 1) yes, they are acting on an emotional level, 2) yes, they "state" that they would like to operate on a reasonable and rational level, and 3) that for all the talk and dollars that have been exchanged not much has changed.

I've spent 45 minutes standing next to a blue-haired old lady who professed to be so afraid of the mere sight of a gun that she broke out in a cold sweat and felt as if her heart were racing "a mile a minute". We talked about the art fair we were both at, the wonderful weather, the way youngsters these days dress and act in public, and her grandchildren. And about her being afraid of guns - even the ones cops had. All with me OCing and moving around so that she was put in positions to observe that I did in fact have a honking big old gun strapped to my hip. At the end of our conversation I brought up the fact that we had been talking for 45 minutes and that I had been wearing a gun all that time. Her response? "But you were so nice and polite* from the very beginning that the thought of your gun never entered my mind."

(* - for those that do not know me, "nice and polite" are terms usually not associated with me. But I can play the part when it is advantageous. )

It can be done on a 1-on-1 situation, but expecting carryover from that to the rest of life is like believing in the Tooth Fairy - a nice dream but not something you expect folks much past kindergarten to hold as unquestionably true.

stay safe.

twoskinsonemanns said:

It's not a valid question. Our government brainwashes their educatees to squeal fear of any non-pig that has a gun.
The only method to tell if it's a good guy or bad guy is the uniform and badge

Click to expand...

If the open carrier is wearing a uniform and badge my perceived threat level is on high until I can move away from the possible danger.

If the open carrier is not wearing a uniform or badge my threat level of this person is very low.

The person nonchalantly open carrying has nothing to hide.

The criminal, or one is intent on causing harm, most likely will not open carry. Their actions require concealment.