Would OC deterred Travon's attack?

Packer fan · Jul 24, 2013

So, since this thread has died a natural death and nobody answered the second question it is safe to say that CC really doesn't have a tactical advantage over OC?

The next time someone asks me why I open carry I'll tell them, "I like the tactical advantage, they'll leave me alone and attack you."

MamabearCali · Jul 31, 2013

I think both have advantages and disadvantages. I think it is more of a political statement to open carry...tell the statist protectionist what the can go and do with themselves, but it does attract attention. CC you have the benefit of anonymity, but you also have to detriment of it. In this case I don't know if it would have mattered much. I could have been a deterrent, but I think TM was impaired by drank use and was paranoid. Crazy people do crazy stuff including attack people they know to be armed.

marshaul · Jul 31, 2013

MamabearCali said:
It could have been a deterrent, but I think TM was impaired by drank use and was paranoid. Crazy people do crazy stuff including attack people they know to be armed.

I still don't think so.

Now that we know Trayvon was just "gonna do a little whup ass", you're talking about a 17 year old who likes to act tough by beating people up knowingly putting himself into a kill-or-be-killed situation. I maintain that the whole problem here is that the macho "urban" subculture can't recognize that "a little whup ass" is a kill-or-be-kill situation when their victim isn't an experienced hand-to-hand fighter.

My money: M sees Z OC, swallows his pride, forgets his ego and sends more thug life texts to Jabba.

eye95 · Aug 1, 2013

Packer fan said:
So, since this thread has died a natural death and nobody answered the second question it is safe to say that CC really doesn't have a tactical advantage over OC?

The next time someone asks me why I open carry I'll tell them, "I like the tactical advantage, they'll leave me alone and attack you."

Wouldn't that technically be a strategic advantage?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

marshaul · Aug 1, 2013

eye95 said:
Wouldn't that technically be a strategic advantage?

No.

KYGlockster · Aug 5, 2013

It is obvious Zimmerman had already pissed Tray off before Tray attacked. Being as this is the case, I believe it would have been worse for Zimmerman if he had been openly carrying and Tray saw it. I believe Tray would have called in a FALSE report claiming that Zimmerman brandished his firearm at him or used it while threatening to kill him or something. We know that Tray was a no-good thug, and lying to get the man that was following him into serious trouble wouldn't have bothered him one bit.

There are perks to both forms of carry, but there are also problems with both forms. One MAJOR problem of OC is that people who may have a problem with the individual who openly carries can falsely claim he did something illegal with his firearm when they can visibly see that he is armed. All one has to do is say, "This individual did this with a gun that looked like this." When the individual is found with a firearm that the complainant just identified to police as a firearm they allegedly used in a crime, then it will probably not turn out well for the carrier.

This of course is pure speculation, but it is a theory.

marshaul · Aug 5, 2013

KYGlockster said:
It is obvious Zimmerman had already pissed Tray off before Tray attacked. Being as this is the case, I believe it would have been worse for Zimmerman if he had been openly carrying and Tray saw it. I believe Tray would have called in a FALSE report claiming that Zimmerman brandished his firearm at him or used it while threatening to kill him or something. We know that Tray was a no-good thug, and lying to get the man that was following him into serious trouble wouldn't have bothered him one bit.

There are perks to both forms of carry, but there are also problems with both forms. One MAJOR problem of OC is that people who may have a problem with the individual who openly carries can falsely claim he did something illegal with his firearm when they can visibly see that he is armed. All one has to do is say, "This individual did this with a gun that looked like this." When the individual is found with a firearm that the complainant just identified to police as a firearm they allegedly used in a crime, then it will probably not turn out well for the carrier.

This of course is pure speculation, but it is a theory.

OCers record everything. derp.

Packer fan · Aug 5, 2013

eye95 said:
Wouldn't that technically be a strategic advantage?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

I think it would or could be both. Strategic in that it is in the right position to be easily deployed and tactical in that it hopefully deters an attack and doesn't need to be deployed.

WalkingWolf · Aug 5, 2013

One thing that puzzled/bothered me about the case from the beginning. Zimmerman had stated as TM approached him GZ reached for his cell phone in his pocket. Now assuming that GZ is right handed, his phone was probably on the same side, and GZ could have exposed the firearm. I don't have a problem with this as RJ had already told that TM may have thought GZ was a cop or security guard, he still had no reason to attack.

It also bothers me that GZ, or I would not have had my radio or cell phone in my holder or pocket. I would have still had it in my hand in case I needed to contact dispatch. If you want me to be truly honest I think GZ was reaching for his gun. I have never posted this until now because somebody on the prosecution side may have picked up on it. Actually considering that TM was on GZ's chest above the waist GZ could not get to his gun, unless he was able to push TM off momentarily. I believe GZ had the gun in his hand, but did not fire until he felt he had to. Due to the darkness, the rain, and the gun being black TM probably did not even see the gun in his hand until that last moment.

marshaul · Aug 5, 2013

WalkingWolf said:
Now assuming that GZ is right handed, his phone was probably on the same side...

???

I'm right handed and my cell phone has always gone on the left. (No choice since I started carrying my wallet in my front right pocket, but even before then I carried cell phone in the left.)

I don't hold it with my right hand, although sometimes I push the buttons with it.

marshaul · Aug 5, 2013

WalkingWolf said:
I don't have a problem with this as RJ had already told that TM may have thought GZ was a cop or security guard, he still had no reason to attack.

Dude, she never said that.

What she said is that "cracker" is slang for someone who is acting like a cop or security, which is her way of lying/twisting the fact that it's actually slang for "a white guy".

Right after that she talked about how they were talking about Z possibly being a rapist, not a cop or security guard.

WalkingWolf · Aug 5, 2013

marshaul said:
???

I'm right handed and my cell phone has always gone on the left. (No choice since I started carrying my wallet in my front right pocket, but even before then I carried cell phone in the left.)

I don't hold it with my right hand, although sometimes I push the buttons with it.

He could have had it in his left hand. But I would not have had it in my pocket, especially considering that he was in contact with the police, was waiting for the police. I think he was more than likely, again IMO, putting the cell phone in his pocket to make ready. Not saying that is wrong, but from his description of the fight, it would have been difficult for him to draw. I think the gun was already in his hand, or he had a hand on it when he was struck. But again just my opinion.

marshaul · Aug 5, 2013

WalkingWolf said:
He could have had it in his left hand. But I would not have had it in my pocket, especially considering that he was in contact with the police, was waiting for the police. I think he was more than likely, again IMO, putting the cell phone in his pocket to make ready. Not saying that is wrong, but from his description of the fight, it would have been difficult for him to draw. I think the gun was already in his hand, or he had a hand on it when he was struck. But again just my opinion.

I still think you're assuming to much.

I end the call, the phone goes back in my pocket. Force of habit.

WalkingWolf · Aug 5, 2013

marshaul said:
I still think you're assuming to much.

I end the call, the phone goes back in my pocket. Force of habit.

I am assuming, whether it is too much or not, I don't know. It has been pointed out in a reenactment that GZ could not have reached his gun if TM was on his chest. And John Good testified that TM was on his chest. TM's legs would have been above GZ's gun and holster blocking access to the gun. Neither party would have been able to get the gun at this position. I believe GZ had his hand on the gun at the time the fight broke out, which he was entitled to do, as long as he did not draw until he was attacked. It was dark I doubt though TM saw the gun, and would not have seen it open carried.

FreeInAZ · Aug 5, 2013

WalkingWolf said:
I am assuming, whether it is too much or not, I don't know. It has been pointed out in a reenactment that GZ could not have reached his gun if TM was on his chest. And John Good testified that TM was on his chest. TM's legs would have been above GZ's gun and holster blocking access to the gun. Neither party would have been able to get the gun at this position. I believe GZ had his hand on the gun at the time the fight broke out, which he was entitled to do, as long as he did not draw until he was attacked. It was dark I doubt though TM saw the gun, and would not have seen it open carried.

THIS^^^ +1! The PF9 is a very, very small pistol. The vast majority in black finishes. So unless, GZ was sporting a hot pink OWB holster with flashing "gun" LED's on it, I'm pretty sure TM would have missed it.

marshaul · Aug 5, 2013

WalkingWolf said:
I am assuming, whether it is too much or not, I don't know. It has been pointed out in a reenactment that GZ could not have reached his gun if TM was on his chest. And John Good testified that TM was on his chest. TM's legs would have been above GZ's gun and holster blocking access to the gun. Neither party would have been able to get the gun at this position. I believe GZ had his hand on the gun at the time the fight broke out, which he was entitled to do, as long as he did not draw until he was attacked. It was dark I doubt though TM saw the gun, and would not have seen it open carried.

A "reenactment"? Good grief. There are so many possible explanations it seems like a waste of time to name one. Zimmerman said after the fact, "I couldn't see, I couldn't breathe." Among a million possibilities, Martin having one or both knees on Z would account for all of the above.

FreeInAZ said:
THIS^^^ +1! The PF9 is a very, very small pistol. The vast majority in black finishes. So unless, GZ was sporting a hot pink OWB holster with flashing "gun" LED's on it, I'm pretty sure TM would have missed it.

Who OCs an PF9?

WalkingWolf · Aug 5, 2013

marshaul said:
A "reenactment"? Good grief. There are so many possible explanations it seems like a waste of time to name one. Zimmerman said after the fact, "I couldn't see, I couldn't breathe." Among a million possibilities, Martin having one or both knees on Z would account for all of the above.

Who OCs an PF9?

Having a broken nose and being on his back with blood draining in his throat would account for not being able to breath. As well as Martin on top of his chest as both he and Good described. That is the point, with Martin sitting on his chest with both knees on his side and his legs along GZ's gun, he could not have drawn it in that position. Especially while someone was raining down punches on him, it makes sense that his gun was already in his hand. And at the point when he was attacked there is nothing wrong with that. Again I doubt that TM saw the gun, even if it was in his hand, it was dark. Even if he had a 1911 open carried, I doubt TM would have seen it in the dark.

marshaul · Aug 5, 2013

WalkingWolf said:
That is the point, with Martin sitting on his chest with both knees on his side and his legs along GZ's gun

So that's how it was, huh? You're sure?

I submit that Martin would have never managed to get so far as straddling Z and bashing his head into concrete had Z already had gun in hand. Would you wait?

WalkingWolf · Aug 5, 2013

marshaul said:
So that's how it was, huh? You're sure?

I submit that Martin would have never managed to get so far as straddling Z and bashing his head into concrete had Z already had gun in hand. Would you wait?

It depends on GZ's ability to focus at the time. I would not have waited no, but from the sounds of both Zimmerman and Good's testimony would indicate some confusion by the blows. Plus getting the gun into firing position. Remember this altercation only lasted a short period of time. Delayed reaction time while being repeatedly struck in the face makes sense.

sudden valley gunner · Aug 5, 2013

This is an intriguing discussion. Just like I think the proper verdict of Z not being guilty. If M was on trial because Z died and his testimony was Z was trying to grab a gun so I jumped on him and hit him till he stopped.....I would say a not guilty verdict would be appropriate too.

Would OC deterred Travon's attack?

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Well-known member

Campaign Veteran

Activist Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member