Open Carry vs Concealed Carry - a comprehensive response

Primus · Oct 31, 2013

Disclaimer: I'm a CCer, due to my state.

Does anyone actually have any concrete evidence or proof about OC vs. CC? I see alot of guys on here feel that OC is better better because it makes you a "hard target" and I even saw someone post on this thread that CC is "grossly tactically inferior". Can someone show me some evidence to back any of this up?

I openly admit that I think CC offers tactical advantage. While I can list numerous reasons, I cannot list proof or evidence. Just like OC guys can't list evidence either.

For example.... The presumption that a person OCing deters crime against themselves. How do you know that? Has a bad guy ever walked up to you and said "Hey I was going to rob you with this knife/gun, but I decided not to because of that gun. Have a good day".

Sure I assume depending on the rig you wear it may be faster to draw and reload with a OC rig. I obviously use a OC rig when I compete in pistol matches. But other then speed of draw, what other advantage?

Speed , surprise, violence of action...... that's how you win a fight. You may have speed with an OC (MAYBE), but you certainly lose any surprise.3

Again, these are merely opinions. Not trying to post my thoughts as "obvious facts".

I am very curious to see if anyone does have concrete data one way or to the other to support their position.

Finally, I get it. This is an OC site. I'm NOT bashing anyone. I think it's great we are all gun guys, period.

marshaul · Oct 31, 2013

It's impossible to have an "element of surprise" with CC. The bad guy has that, by definition. "Surprise" only applies to the aggressor, who can choose when and where to initiate hostilities. If you're in a position when the only option you have left is to draw your firearm, you've already lost the "element of surprise" (and just about every other "tactical advantage" except being armed itself).

Real self-defense is fast, brutal, and does't provide opportunities to spring traps on your aggressor. The fantasy of jumping into action and heroically saving the day at just the right moment, is just that. (And, if you really do have that time, then the odds are the aggressor wouldn't have noticed OC anyway.)

We constantly hear stories about CCers whose "tactical advantage" left them painted in a corner, with no recourse but to shoot.

My favorite is the CCer who shot some kid who robbed him with an airsoft gun. What are the chances his life is better after shooting a minor? What are the odds OC would not have deterred this kid from thinking he'd have the upper hand?

MAC702 · Oct 31, 2013

Primus said:
...I openly admit that I think CC offers [a] tactical advantage...

It does.

It has the tactical advantage of surprise in your defensive capability, assuming you have time to implement it and the willingness to deal with the consequences.

Open carry has the tactical advantage of being left alone.

Which advantage you want is up to you.

...Speed , surprise, violence of action...... that's how you win a fight...

I'd rather not be in a fight than win one.

Grapeshot · Oct 31, 2013

Primus said:
Disclaimer: I'm a CCer, due to my state.

Does anyone actually have any concrete evidence or proof about OC vs. CC? I see alot of guys on here feel that OC is better better because it makes you a "hard target" and I even saw someone post on this thread that CC is "grossly tactically inferior". Can someone show me some evidence to back any of this up?

I openly admit that I think CC offers tactical advantage. While I can list numerous reasons, I cannot list proof or evidence. Just like OC guys can't list evidence either.

For example.... The presumption that a person OCing deters crime against themselves. How do you know that? Has a bad guy ever walked up to you and said "Hey I was going to rob you with this knife/gun, but I decided not to because of that gun. Have a good day".

Sure I assume depending on the rig you wear it may be faster to draw and reload with a OC rig. I obviously use a OC rig when I compete in pistol matches. But other then speed of draw, what other advantage?

Speed , surprise, violence of action...... that's how you win a fight. You may have speed with an OC (MAYBE), but you certainly lose any surprise.3

Again, these are merely opinions. Not trying to post my thoughts as "obvious facts".

I am very curious to see if anyone does have concrete data one way or to the other to support their position.

Finally, I get it. This is an OC site. I'm NOT bashing anyone. I think it's great we are all gun guys, period.

OC as practiced by LAC is a defensive condition; therefore we are in a reactive position.

Surprise for an OCer is only a factor in that the BG did not expect resistance at that level. Surprise is generally considered an offensive tactic.

Situational awareness, speed of response, and accuracy are together your friends - the latter being paramount, but not worth much w/o the others.

Proof? Most "evidence" is allegorical, but there is a volume of that from credible sources.

There was a study done some number of years ago, that went straight to the source(s) to get some answers.

[SIZE=+1]"FEAR [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]of the armed citizen and the threat of tough punishment for using a gun (or other weapons) in committing a violent crime are significant factors in both reducing and deterring crime, according to the results of a survey of imprisoned felons conducted by Professors James D. Wright and Peter H. Rossi."[/SIZE]

"[SIZE=-1]Through in-depth interviews with 1,874 imprisoned felons conducted between August, 1982, and January, 1983, the government-funded researchers delved into the deep-seated attitudes of criminals on the questions of weapons choice, deterrence, attitudes toward "gun control," criminal history, and firearms acquisition. The prisoners, studied under a grant from the National Institute of Justice of the U.S. Justice Department, were incarcerated in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada and Oklahoma."[/SIZE]

http://www.readytodefend.com/index.php?main_page=page&id=11

EMNofSeattle · Oct 31, 2013

marshaul said:
It's impossible to have an "element of surprise" with CC. The bad guy has that, by definition. "Surprise" only applies to the aggressor, who can choose when and where to initiate hostilities. If you're in a position when the only option you have left is to draw your firearm, you've already lost the "element of surprise" (and just about every other "tactical advantage" except being armed itself).

Real self-defense is fast, brutal, and does't provide opportunities to spring traps on your aggressor. The fantasy of jumping into action and heroically saving the day at just the right moment, is just that. (And, if you really do have that time, then the odds are the aggressor wouldn't have noticed OC anyway.)

We constantly hear stories about CCers whose "tactical advantage" left them painted in a corner, with no recourse but to shoot.

My favorite is the CCer who shot some kid who robbed him with an airsoft gun. What are the chances his life is better after shooting a minor? What are the odds OC would not have deterred this kid from thinking he'd have the upper hand?

It's a coulda woulda shoulda type of proposition.

I carry concealed most of the time at the moment due to the weather, I'm not concerned about someone attacking me for OCing... however a minor concern is a criminal seeing me walk into my abode or my car openly armed and that will trigger an attempt to hit that property later while I'm not there to watch it. criminals who attack people (especially armed people) are either very brazen or not too bright.... and they're not as common as someone who'd rather steal a 600 dollar handgun when no one is there to watch it.

marshaul · Oct 31, 2013

EMNofSeattle said:
It's a coulda woulda shoulda type of proposition.

I carry concealed most of the time at the moment due to the weather, I'm not concerned about someone attacking me for OCing... however a minor concern is a criminal seeing me walk into my abode or my car openly armed and that will trigger an attempt to hit that property later while I'm not there to watch it. criminals who attack people (especially armed people) are either very brazen or not too bright.... and they're not as common as someone who'd rather steal a 600 dollar handgun when no one is there to watch it.

That's probably the closest thing I've heard for a valid reason to prefer the "advantages" of CC, so props to you for that.

Doesn't apply to me, however. Where I live, you could pick a house at random and find guns (even my landlady, a middle-aged liberal college professor type, has a .45), and yet, some say for that very reason, home invasions are low.

If I lived in the city in a low-income neighborhood, I'd want it to be like The Wingnut, where every roommate is regularly seen OC by the entire neighborhood.

EMNofSeattle · Oct 31, 2013

marshaul said:
That's probably the closest thing I've heard for a valid reason to prefer the "advantages" of CC, so props to you for that.

Doesn't apply to me, however. Where I live, you could pick a house at random and find guns (even my landlady, a middle-aged liberal college professor type, has a .45), and yet, some say for that very reason, home invasions are low.

If I lived in the city in a low-income neighborhood, I'd want it to be like The Wingnut, where every roommate is regularly seen OC by the entire neighborhood.

It just depends, low government regulation on guns is a double edge sword, on one hand when a relative of mine died last week and I was allowed to get one of his revolvers, I was able to take possession of it immediately with no paperwork,

on the other hand it's a burglars wet dream since handguns are small, light, worth several C-notes in cash and can be sold quickly without a fence needed. think about it, there is very few other household items of value such as jewelry and electronics, cell phones and smart tablets these days can have their internal number shut off, so they're useless once reported stolen, jewelry is nearly always investigated by pawn shops and jewelers since they have to report to the state if they buy jewels and they're out the money if the cops come by and determine the diamond ring they bought was stolen. so those need to be fenced and the fence wants a cut of the proceeds for his troubles.

handguns on the other hand, can be sold privately with no papers required...

not saying I support registration or mandatory record keeping, just saying it leads me to be careful about making sure people aren't marking me for property crime

eye95 · Oct 31, 2013

MAC702 said:
It does.

It has the tactical advantage of surprise in your defensive capability, assuming you have time to implement it and the willingness to deal with the consequences.

Open carry has the tactical advantage of being left alone.

Which advantage you want is up to you.

I'd rather not be in a fight than win one.

I would say that surprise is a tactical advantage. Being left alone is a strategic goal.

Nukes are a perfect example. Tactical nukes were designed to be used after we were already in a conflict. Strategic nukes were designed not to be used, but instead to result in our being left alone, due to the known threat that we meant business.

I strategically carry my firearm in a way that hopefully obviates the need for a tactical advantage.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Primus · Nov 1, 2013

Grapeshot said:
OC as practiced by LAC is a defensive condition; therefore we are in a reactive position.

Surprise for an OCer is only a factor in that the BG did not expect resistance at that level. Surprise is generally considered an offensive tactic.

Situational awareness, speed of response, and accuracy are together your friends - the latter being paramount, but not worth much w/o the others.

Proof? Most "evidence" is allegorical, but there is a volume of that from credible sources.

There was a study done some number of years ago, that went straight to the source(s) to get some answers.

[SIZE=+1]"FEAR [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]of the armed citizen and the threat of tough punishment for using a gun (or other weapons) in committing a violent crime are significant factors in both reducing and deterring crime, according to the results of a survey of imprisoned felons conducted by Professors James D. Wright and Peter H. Rossi."[/SIZE]

"[SIZE=-1]Through in-depth interviews with 1,874 imprisoned felons conducted between August, 1982, and January, 1983, the government-funded researchers delved into the deep-seated attitudes of criminals on the questions of weapons choice, deterrence, attitudes toward "gun control," criminal history, and firearms acquisition. The prisoners, studied under a grant from the National Institute of Justice of the U.S. Justice Department, were incarcerated in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada and Oklahoma."[/SIZE]

http://www.readytodefend.com/index.php?main_page=page&id=11

Sir, this webpage says only 37% of the criminals said they were deterred by OCers...........

Primus · Nov 1, 2013

Shot in Foot

So the person opening this thread said multiple times that OCers avoid thousands and thousands of conflicts and stop crime from happening to them...

http://www.readytodefend.com/index.php?main_page=page&id=11

Study in the 80s of 1,900 prisoners...

Go to the chart that says....

HAVE YOU EVER BEEN SCARED OFF, SHOT AT, WOUNDED, OR CAPTURED BY AN ARMED CITIZEN?

37% said yes..... so 63% were NOT scared off? Those aren't good numbers.....

marshaul · Nov 1, 2013

Primus said:
So the person opening this thread said multiple times that OCers avoid thousands and thousands of conflicts and stop crime from happening to them...

http://www.readytodefend.com/index.php?main_page=page&id=11

Study in the 80s of 1,900 prisoners...

Go to the chart that says....

HAVE YOU EVER BEEN SCARED OFF, SHOT AT, WOUNDED, OR CAPTURED BY AN ARMED CITIZEN?

37% said yes..... so 63% were NOT scared off? Those aren't good numbers.....

Um, that doesn't mean 63% of respondents actually encountered an armed citizen, but were not scared off etc. by him (or her).

Primus · Nov 1, 2013

marshaul said:
It's impossible to have an "element of surprise" with CC. The bad guy has that, by definition. "Surprise" only applies to the aggressor, who can choose when and where to initiate hostilities. If you're in a position when the only option you have left is to draw your firearm, you've already lost the "element of surprise" (and just about every other "tactical advantage" except being armed itself).

Real self-defense is fast, brutal, and does't provide opportunities to spring traps on your aggressor. The fantasy of jumping into action and heroically saving the day at just the right moment, is just that. (And, if you really do have that time, then the odds are the aggressor wouldn't have noticed OC anyway.)

We constantly hear stories about CCers whose "tactical advantage" left them painted in a corner, with no recourse but to shoot.

My favorite is the CCer who shot some kid who robbed him with an airsoft gun. What are the chances his life is better after shooting a minor? What are the odds OC would not have deterred this kid from thinking he'd have the upper hand?

Element of surprise as in "I'm going to pull a knife on this guy and get his wallet" He stops you, you pull firearm. Tuller drill says you need 21 feet to not get stabbed. But that's when they KNOW you have a gun and INTEND to stab you. If they think you are unarmed, then you have the ADVANTAGE of the gun. If they know you are armed then they can game plan how to attack or mug you.

Again.. I'm not remotely pretending my word is better then anyone... this is a just an opinion based subject. No one in here can show concrete proof of what works and how. The closest numbers someone has to proof was that study of criminals and it shows a deterrence of 37%. Not trying to change opinions, I commend you guys for carrying and on a occasion I like to too. Just talking general opinion... take it with a grain of sand.

Primus · Nov 1, 2013

marshaul said:
Um, that doesn't mean 63% of respondents actually encountered an armed citizen, but were not scared off etc. by him (or her).

I agree.... so the paragraph above says when asked only 34% were ever worried about getting shot by police or a citizen.

Primus · Nov 1, 2013

Maybe it's just me but the numbers in this study suck for us....

79% of them said they don't carry guns because they fear stiffer penalties.... so much for gun laws don't work...

Has anyone else seen this study? How legit is it?

marshaul · Nov 1, 2013

Primus said:
I agree.... so the paragraph above says when asked only 34% were ever worried about getting shot by police or a citizen.

Also wrong. All that says is only 34% of respondents have encountered armed resistance as far as they are aware.

Primus · Nov 1, 2013

marshaul said:
Also wrong. All that says is only 34% of respondents have encountered armed resistance as far as they are aware.

A 57% majority agreed that "Most criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police." In asking felons what they personally thought about while committing crimes, 34% indicated that they thought about getting "shot at by police" or "shot by victim."

marshaul · Nov 1, 2013

Primus said:
A 57% majority agreed that "Most criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police." In asking felons what they personally thought about while committing crimes, 34% indicated that they thought about getting "shot at by police" or "shot by victim."

Sorry, I was referring to the 37%.

As for that question, so what? The deterrence of a hypothetical (you might get shot by the cops) is different from the deterrence of a known quantity (that guy has a gun).

Grapeshot · Nov 1, 2013

Primus said:
--snipped--
HAVE YOU EVER BEEN SCARED OFF, SHOT AT, WOUNDED, OR CAPTURED BY AN ARMED CITIZEN?

37% said yes..... so 63% were NOT scared off? Those aren't good numbers.....

marshaul said:
Um, that doesn't mean 63% of respondents actually encountered an armed citizen, but were not scared off etc. by him (or her).

Primus said:
Element of surprise as in "I'm going to pull a knife on this guy and get his wallet" He stops you, you pull firearm. Tuller drill says you need 21 feet to not get stabbed. But that's when they KNOW you have a gun and INTEND to stab you. If they think you are unarmed, then you have the ADVANTAGE of the gun. If they know you are armed then they can game plan how to attack or mug you.

Again.. I'm not remotely pretending my word is better then anyone... this is a just an opinion based subject. No one in here can show concrete proof of what works and how. The closest numbers someone has to proof was that study of criminals and it shows a deterrence of 37%. Not trying to change opinions, I commend you guys for carrying and on a occasion I like to too. Just talking general opinion... take it with a grain of sand.

Primus said:
Maybe it's just me but the numbers in this study suck for us....
--snipped--

You are beating a dead horse when you continue to ask for concrete evidence or a study that proves beyond your apparently self-imposed doubts - you say "general opinion". It is not our general opinion, so it must be yours.

There is no "concrete proof" via a definitive study. Proving a negative is rather difficult, don't you think? Have already said that a majority of the evidence is allegorical, but the fact remains that there are no large numbers (non-existent) to the contrary. OCers are not routinely targeted, taken out, robbed, relieved of their gun, etc. OC has demonstratively been shown over the years to be an exceptionally safe, effective and good way to carry w/o any meaningful evidence to the contrary. We daily, repetitively make the case for OC.

We each make our own individual choices. Let's not belabor this point further - it just isn't necessary and is somewhat tiresome.

Red Dawg · Nov 1, 2013

Like GRape said, there is no concrete proof, but how many OCers have been someplace and shady charators pulled into Apu's mart,a nd saw an ope carrier, and drove away? No stats, to back it up, but I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts, it happens DAILY. A CCer wouldn't be noticed....Does that make sense? AS stated EVERYWHERE, crimanls prefer an easy target, in, and out...

sudden valley gunner · Nov 1, 2013

eye95 said:
I would say that surprise is a tactical advantage. Being left alone is a strategic goal.

Nukes are a perfect example. Tactical nukes were designed to be used after we were already in a conflict. Strategic nukes were designed not to be used, but instead to result in our being left alone, due to the known threat that we meant business.

I strategically carry my firearm in a way that hopefully obviates the need for a tactical advantage.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

I don't have any guns that were designed not to be used.......

Open Carry vs Concealed Carry - a comprehensive response

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Campaign Veteran

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member