A Fool Killed First?

[Otaku201]

imported post

Against normal street urchins I can say from experience that open carryis a great deterrent.The only instance in which I see it as a negative iswhen facing a truly insaneadversary.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

Otaku201 wrote:

Against normal street urchins I can say from experience that open carryis a great deterrent.The only instance in which I see it as a negative iswhen facing a truly insaneadversary.

I don't see how CCing would be better.

Yata hey

 

[Otaku201]

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Otaku201 wrote:

Against normal street urchins I can say from experience that open carryis a great deterrent.The only instance in which I see it as a negative iswhen facing a truly insaneadversary.

I don't see how CCing would be better.

Yata hey

You wouldn't be the 1st target in that case.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

Otaku201 wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Otaku201 wrote:

Against normal street urchins I can say from experience that open carryis a great deterrent.The only instance in which I see it as a negative iswhen facing a truly insaneadversary.

I don't see how CCing would be better.

Yata hey

You wouldn't be the 1st target in that case.

Hasn't happened, honcho.

Old challenge, still stands:

Show me one (1) verifiable/cite of an OCer (no-LEO or military or BG) ever being preemptively shot anywhere in modern times in these United States.

The real ace-in-the-hole is that if one day this does occur, the resultant decimal value will look something like .000001% As I've said before, those are odds with which I can live.

Yata hey

Edited for spelling.

 

[ixtow]

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Otaku201 wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Otaku201 wrote:

Against normal street urchins I can say from experience that open carryis a great deterrent.The only instance in which I see it as a negative iswhen facing a truly insaneadversary.

I don't see how CCing would be better.

Yata hey

You wouldn't be the 1st target in that case.

Hasn't happened, honco.

Old challenge, still stands:

Show me one (1) verifiable/cite of an OCer (no-LEO or military or BG) ever being preemptively shot anywhere in modern times in these United States.

The real ace-in-the-hole is that if one day this does occur, the resultant decimal value will look something like .000001% As I've said before, those are odds with which I can live.

Yata hey

Sure beats the odds the unarmed/CCers play.

 

[Tomahawk]

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Otaku201 wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Otaku201 wrote:

Against normal street urchins I can say from experience that open carryis a great deterrent.The only instance in which I see it as a negative iswhen facing a truly insaneadversary.

I don't see how CCing would be better.

Yata hey

You wouldn't be the 1st target in that case.

Hasn't happened, honcho.

I have problems with that attitude. Before the Challenger blew up, space shuttle accidents "hadn't happened", either. So the NASA managers all said, "What, me worry?"

I once warned a guy that telling everyone people with CHPs never do anything wrong was going to backfire someday, statistically it's only a matter of time before a CHP-holder commits a felony with a gun. Years later, of course, there have been a handful of cases, as predicted.

So our good record as OC'rs is only of limited value. It's only a matter of time before something bad happens. Some knucklehead out there will do something stupid sooner or later. Learn that phrases like "never happens" won't last forever.

Be prepared to explain our way out of it when it happens.

 

[Task Force 16]

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Otaku201 wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Otaku201 wrote:

Against normal street urchins I can say from experience that open carryis a great deterrent.The only instance in which I see it as a negative iswhen facing a truly insaneadversary.

I don't see how CCing would be better.

Yata hey

You wouldn't be the 1st target in that case.

Hasn't happened, honcho.

I have problems with that attitude. Before the Challenger blew up, space shuttle accidents "hadn't happened", either. So the NASA managers all said, "What, me worry?"

I once warned a guy that telling everyone people with CHPs never do anything wrong was going to backfire someday, statistically it's only a matter of time before a CHP-holder commits a felony with a gun. Years later, of course, there have been a handful of cases, as predicted.

So our good record as OC'rs is only of limited value. It's only a matter of time before something bad happens. Some knucklehead out there will do something stupid sooner or later. Learn that phrases like "never happens" won't last forever.

Be prepared to explain our way out of it when it happens.

I agree, the "Never say Never" policy is a good one.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Otaku201 wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Otaku201 wrote:

Against normal street urchins I can say from experience that open carryis a great deterrent.The only instance in which I see it as a negative iswhen facing a truly insaneadversary.

I don't see how CCing would be better.

Yata hey

You wouldn't be the 1st target in that case.

Hasn't happened, honcho.

I have problems with that attitude. Before the Challenger blew up, space shuttle accidents "hadn't happened", either. So the NASA managers all said, "What, me worry?"

I once warned a guy that telling everyone people with CHPs never do anything wrong was going to backfire someday, statistically it's only a matter of time before a CHP-holder commits a felony with a gun. Years later, of course, there have been a handful of cases, as predicted.

So our good record as OC'rs is only of limited value. It's only a matter of time before something bad happens. Some knucklehead out there will do something stupid sooner or later. Learn that phrases like "never happens" won't last forever.

Be prepared to explain our way out of it when it happens.

Ah, but there was more to the tale than that.

My response was directed at the tired cliche/warning that the OCer would be the first one shot. Will it happen one day - statistically, I have no doubt. Nonetheless, IMHO it is less likely to happen than those opposed predict. Particularly if you factor in other common sense methodology which must become part of who you are.

Yata hey

 

[Huck]

imported post

Francis Marion wrote:

BTW, I chose Francis Marion as my online persona in honor of Americas first unconventional warrior.

Actually, America's first unconventional warrior was Robert Rogers during the French and Indian war and Pontiac's war. His unit, Roger's Rangers is,I understand, recognized as the world's first Special Forces unit.

Dont forget that there were at least 2 more excellentPartisan leaders in the Carolinas during the Revolutionary war besides Marion. Andrew Pickens and Tom Sumter. Add to them Samual Brady,the leader ofBrady's Rangers who operated with great sucessin the upper Ohio valley during and after the Revolutionary war.

There were manyother excellent partisanleaders during that time as well but those mentioned are the best known.

 

[Francis Marion]

imported post

The premise of the article was to show the OCer shot first argument as invalid based on a lack of any verifiable incident. It does not make the claim that it will not or cannot happen. I have also not seen anyone else make the claim. What I have seen discussed is that if/when it does happen the odds will be so low that the original argument would still be invalid because the crime stopped and lives saved by a visible gun would dwarf the statistical anomaly.

 

[Task Force 16]

imported post

Francis Marion wrote:

The premise of the article was to show the OCer shot first argument as invalid based on a lack of any verifiable incident. It does not make the claim that it will not or cannot happen. I have also not seen anyone else make the claim. What I have seen discussed is that if/when it does happen the odds will be so low that the original argument would still be invalid because the crime stopped and lives saved by a visible gun would dwarf the statistical anomaly.

Long ago, I came to the conclusion that there are no absolutegarauntees in life.....except death. Everything else is a crap game.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

imported post

ixtow wrote:

I live in a State that requires CC only. I've had to draw my weapon in a threatening situation 4 times.

The mere sight of it sent the Bag Guy away.



The element of surprise is a strictly OFFENSIVE tactic. Citing it in the realm of DEFENSIVE carry makes me wonder if gun-controllers are right, maybe some people shouldn't have guns...

He offered paper when you wanted plastic? LOL....I couldn't resist.

I agree definately with the other statement and the whole point of the OP posting.

It frustrates me when I see or hear folks from so called pro-gun groups like SAF, say they want the "tactical" advantage of CC. Its almost like they are hoping or looking for a chance to use it and I would have to question their position on why they carry a gun. I have had this discussion with other so called "pro-gun" folks it makes no sense at all.

I always ask does the wolf go after the buck with antlers or weak younger dear? Because criminals are predators and predators typically look for easy prey.

 

[ixtow]

imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:

ixtow wrote:

I live in a State that requires CC only. I've had to draw my weapon in a threatening situation 4 times.

The mere sight of it sent the Bag Guy away.

The element of surprise is a strictly OFFENSIVE tactic. Citing it in the realm of DEFENSIVE carry makes me wonder if gun-controllers are right, maybe some people shouldn't have guns...

He offered paper when you wanted plastic? LOL....I couldn't resist.

I agree definately with the other statement and the whole point of the OP posting.

It frustrates me when I see or hear folks from so called pro-gun groups like SAF, say they want the "tactical" advantage of CC. Its almost like they are hoping or looking for a chance to use it and I would have to question their position on why they carry a gun. I have had this discussion with other so called "pro-gun" folks it makes no sense at all.

I always ask does the wolf go after the buck with antlers or weak younger dear? Because criminals are predators and predators typically look for easy prey.

I mean, really. 'Paper or Plastic?' Would I like to kill trees of clog landfills? What kind of damn arrogant, sarcastic question is that? Yeah, I shot the bastard....

;-)

 

[Task Force 16]

imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:

ixtow wrote:

I live in a State that requires CC only. I've had to draw my weapon in a threatening situation 4 times.

The mere sight of it sent the Bag Guy away.



The element of surprise is a strictly OFFENSIVE tactic. Citing it in the realm of DEFENSIVE carry makes me wonder if gun-controllers are right, maybe some people shouldn't have guns...

It frustrates me when I see or hear folks from so called pro-gun groups like SAF, say they want the "tactical" advantage of CC. Its almost like they are hoping or looking for a chance to use it and I would have to question their position on why they carry a gun. I have had this discussion with other so called "pro-gun" folks it makes no sense at all.

I always ask does the wolf go after the buck with antlers or weak younger dear? Because criminals are predators and predators typically look for easy prey.

I have been suspecious of that line of thinking myself. It makes me want to ask, "Are they wanting to bait the BG's into illegal activity, so they can take them down?"

I understand that in Florida and Texas citizens don't have the option of OC. I don't question their motives. But in the rest of the states where OC is optional, I do.

There's another angle to this as well. I think some CCfolks use the "tactical advantage" argument to cover upasense ofembarrasment or shame that they may havein carrying a gun in public. The anti-gun groups have stigmatized firearms to the point that much of the public associates handgun carrying with "evilness". By OCing, we can disprove that charactorization, and have in many parts of the country.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

Task Force 16 wrote:

sudden valley gunner wrote:
There's another angle to this as well. I think some CCfolks use the "tactical advantage" argument to cover upasense ofembarrasment or shame that they may havein carrying a gun in public. The anti-gun groups have stigmatized firearms to the point that much of the public associates handgun carrying with "evilness". By OCing, we can disprove that charactorization, and have in many parts of the country.

+1

Yata hey

 

[ixtow]

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Task Force 16 wrote:

sudden valley gunner wrote:
There's another angle to this as well. I think some CCfolks use the "tactical advantage" argument to cover upasense ofembarrasment or shame that they may havein carrying a gun in public. The anti-gun groups have stigmatized firearms to the point that much of the public associates handgun carrying with "evilness". By OCing, we can disprove that charactorization, and have in many parts of the country.

+1

Yata hey

+2

This is the most concise description of 'why open carry?' that there is, from my perspective.

I used to say the same thing, then I turned on my brain and thought about it.

 

[Gator5713]

imported post

I believe that there is ONE 'tactical advantage' to CC... If its cold outside, I want to be comfortable and not worry about if my gun is open or concealed!!! My coat covers my gun, at that point it is advantageous to CC as I would be less comfortable if I were trying to keep my gun visible!

 

[ixtow]

imported post

At the root of the whole mess is the simple fact that we have a Bill of Rights that says we can both keep and bear arms, yet are being restricted in all of these ridiculous details that make life difficult when it shouldn't have to be.

 

[Sonora Rebel]

imported post

ixtow wrote:

At the root of the whole mess is the simple fact that we have a Bill of Rights that says we can both keep and bear arms, yet are being restricted in all of these ridiculous details that make life difficult when it shouldn't have to be.

Legal 'clutter'... which is what fuels legislators... 'n many 'people'. Wanna see 'clutter' in action... go check the California forum.

 

[Task Force 16]

imported post

Gator5713 wrote:

I believe that there is ONE 'tactical advantage' to CC... If its cold outside, I want to be comfortable and not worry about if my gun is open or concealed!!! My coat covers my gun, at that point it is advantageous to CC as I would be less comfortable if I were trying to keep my gun visible!

Not sure if this would necessarily be a "tactical advantage" or not, but I see your point. It can also be reversed for warm weather, which I know you have in Texas. Wouldn't it be more confortable to NOT have to dress to conceal a sidearm in 90+ degree weather?

YOu also ahve to consider that it would more difficult to get at and draw your weapon when your firearm is under your coat, especially if it is a button up type. You can get rigs to carry a handgun over your winter coats, too.