Handgun Open Carry. Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should…

[gryphon]

http://www.recoilweb.com/to-open-carry-or-use-your-head-27357.html

[TexasSupporter]

Interesting article, and as usual I have to listen to so many of the so-called "experts" tell me why open carry isn't as good as their concealed carry method.  I really have zero interest in their philosophy, their preference, or their style of carry.  The Constitution of these United States of America protects the right to possess and carry firearms.  Nowhere did the Founders, nor the states that ratified this right into this supreme law, ever give directives about their "oh-so-enlightened vision" of which way is best.  Yet all these modern day "experts" all have the golden answer, on why their way is best.   So the men who emblazoned this right into law stayed silent on preference, allowing all types of carry, while today we get reason after reason why this way is better than that (and most of it is nothing but a bunch of baloney).  Like the Founders, I too choose to remain silent on the issue.  I will not tell anyone to choose my way, nor that my way is better than theirs, nor give phony info to promote myself as the expert above all experts.  I appreciate all who carry - be it open, concealed, or a combination of the two.   

[abrknight]

Interesting article, and as usual I have to listen to so many of the so-called "experts" tell me why open carry isn't as good as their concealed carry method.  I really have zero interest in their philosophy, their preference, or their style of carry.  The Constitution of these United States of America protects the right to possess and carry firearms.  Nowhere did the Founders, nor the states that ratified this right into this supreme law, ever give directives about their "oh-so-enlightened vision" of which way is best.  Yet all these modern day "experts" all have the golden answer, on why their way is best.   So the men who emblazoned this right into law stayed silent on preference, allowing all types of carry, while today we get reason after reason why this way is better than that (and most of it is nothing but a bunch of baloney).  Like the Founders, I too choose to remain silent on the issue.  I will not tell anyone to choose my way, nor that my way is better than theirs, nor give phony info to promote myself as the expert above all experts.  I appreciate all who carry - be it open, concealed, or a combination of the two.

Many of them agreed with you and said as much regarding the founders and the legal/constitutional right to open carry. Many of the people quoted support open carry, but emphasize the added responsibility...what's wrong with that exactly? Also, I open carry and support other's right to do so, however from a tactical standpoint they make important points.

For example, if you KNEW for a fact that at some point tomorrow you were going to have to engage a criminal with your weapon, but didn't know when or where would you carry open or concealed? For me, as much as I open carry...if it were strcitly a tactical argument, I would agree that the benefits of carrying concealed outweigh those of OC. However, on a normal day OC isn't so much about tactical advantage as it is about deterrence, exercising rights, and of course protection.

But either way, it's an important conversation to have, especially as OC gains in popularity.

I especially appreciate the points about dressing appropriately for carrying in public. I see some of these people on youtube wearing dirty sweat pants, and cut shirts with a flimsy rig holding their gun on and they wonder why people call the police... Heck, they might have called the police if they  weren't armed, just for looking like a loitering deadbeat. As representatives of OC and to many people "the gun culture" in general (yeah it's ridiculous phrase but you know what I mean), we should dress as respectable as possible while OC'ing. The last thing I want to be associated with is the guy walking through a crowded store in sweat pants and ratty hair, with a raging bull on his hip just begging for attention. If you don't believe it happens all the time, youtube open carry videos and you'll come across plenty. If we can stay away from that, it will further the cause of organizations like MOC, and promote a better sense of gun owners and enthusiasts to the public who isn't so inclined.

[gryphon]

Finally, some conversation about this! 

Many of them agreed with you and said as much regarding the founders and the legal/constitutional right to open carry. Many of the people quoted support open carry, but emphasize the added responsibility...what's wrong with that exactly?

Nothing.

fom a tactical standpoint they make important points. For example, if you KNEW for a fact that at some point tomorrow you were going to have to engage a criminal with your weapon, but didn't know when or where would you carry open or concealed? For me, as much as I open carry...if it were strcitly a tactical argument, I would agree that the benefits of carrying concealed outweigh those of OC.

Um, no, it is exactly the opposite.  The arguments most use against open carry are that you will be the first one shot when someone comes to rob a 7-11. Never mind that that has never, and probably will never, happen.

The most likely place you will need your gun is when you are personally attacked, whether it be in your car, in a shopping mall parking lot, at home, or otherwise out in public (walking on the street).  Concealing your gun has two distinct and very detrimental disadvantages.  First, you appear as a soft target.  You are just another unarmed potential victim.  Sure you can use situational awareness and try to appear to be a hard target, but if you are carrying at least you appear to have the ability to defend yourself with deadly force.  Second, concealment is only a tactical advantage when you are the aggressor.  If you are in a defensive position, you have more obstacles to overcome, namely clearing your cover to reveal your defensive weapon, draw, and fire.  Why hobble yourself unnecessarily? 

On the other hand, open carry allows one unfettered access to their sidearm as well as offering a deterrent to potential attackers.

on a normal day OC isn't so much about tactical advantage as it is about deterrence, exercising rights, and of course protection.

You never know when you will need your sidearm, therefore one should always carry it with them and therefore it is always about a tactical advantage.

[jgillmanjr]

I suppose I could throw my pocket change in...

I used to be that guy claiming "you're going to be a target if you're open carrying and someone decides to knock over a 7-11". It made sense to me at the time (the Combat Arms mentality still lingers from my enlisted days): You do a threat analysis, and take out the ones you know are armed first.

Then I thought about things some more...

To me, the people that are just going to rush into a 7-11 (or any place else) that's occupied to engage in some nefarious activity probably aren't going to be the ones smart enough to perform a threat analysis.

If you wanted to rob a place, why not wait until it's closed? After all, then you don't have to worry about "managing" the people inside. I would argue that people who would actually be smart enough to go after known threats first (open carriers), would also be smart enough to realize this.

On the other hand, if the goal is to just cause a bunch of havok/take people out, I would argue that individuals who know what they are doing (I couldn't think of a better way to describe it), would probably realize that there are better ways - ways which involve a bit more.. stand off distance as not to make a defensive attack very practical by those who might be carrying, concealed or otherwise.

But, that's just my take.

[bigt8261]

I forgot where I read this, but one source said based on happenings the writer could find, you were far (on the order of 10 times) more likely to shoot an attacker with their gun, than an attacker is to shoot you with your gun. The writer didn't speak to OC v CC, just in general.

My opinion, based on my own research and where I live/carry, if I OC, I am less likely to have to use my firearm. I sometimes tell people in essence I OC so that I don't have to shoot someone.

There are times when I'm in a hurry, tired, or in an area where I do not believe my level of SA will be sufficient. That's usually when I conceal.

[abrknight]

Finally, some conversation about this! 
Nothing.

Um, no, it is exactly the opposite.  The arguments most use against open carry are that you will be the first one shot when someone comes to rob a 7-11. Never mind that that has never, and probably will never, happen.

The most likely place you will need your gun is when you are personally attacked, whether it be in your car, in a shopping mall parking lot, at home, or otherwise out in public (walking on the street).  Concealing your gun has two distinct and very detrimental disadvantages.  First, you appear as a soft target.  You are just another unarmed potential victim.  Sure you can use situational awareness and try to appear to be a hard target, but if you are carrying at least you appear to have the ability to defend yourself with deadly force.  Second, concealment is only a tactical advantage when you are the aggressor.  If you are in a defensive position, you have more obstacles to overcome, namely clearing your cover to reveal your defensive weapon, draw, and fire.  Why hobble yourself unnecessarily? 

On the other hand, open carry allows one unfettered access to their sidearm as well as offering a deterrent to potential attackers.

You never know when you will need your sidearm, therefore one should always carry it with them and therefore it is always about a tactical advantage.

I agree with almost everything you said, except that I think that there is a difference between  tactics and strategy As open carriers we're employing a different strategy than those who choose to conceal, i.e. deterrence. The tactical advantage would be quicker access to you firearm which you said and again I think everyone would agree with that.

The one thing that really drew me to OC is that it has a much more expansive purpose than carrying concealed. Not only can it be a deterrent to criminal activity at any specific point in time, but I think the effect of seeing a citizen carrying their own pistol has on a potential criminal could deter him from future crimes.

I look at it like this, if I were thinking of committing a robbery/burglary, but about my daily business saw a person whom I wouldn't otherwise suspect of having a lawfully carried firearm....I'm going to think twice about robbing a store/breaking into a home for a looong time. Obviously that won't be the case in every scenario, but I think it's an often overlooked point.

The other advantages of OCing are very familiar to us here, exercising our 1st and 4th amendment rights ( as opposed to just the second with CC). Actually an argument can be made that you restrict your privacy rights more while CC'ing and that's something I prefer not to do.

[FASBOLD]

I think we should be sure to emphasize Situational Awareness (SA) more in our public presentations. Not only should we encourage people to review the law for themselves, but go beyond suggesting a good retention holster and discuss the issues of (SA) and how to avoid situations where a retention holster is the only thing keeping your gun in your holster.

I suggest we also add something to our beginners topic about SA. It has been a while since I reviewed it, but equipment (good belt and retention holster) and SA should be mentioned in there too. Maybe a line or two on the tri-fold?

Are there any good YouTube videos or websites that go into SA that we can suggest? (I can google for information, but I want to know if I have good information. Some information that is presented well online, can still be bad info/advice.)

Reading the article opened my eyes more about SA. For example, cops always using the stall in the public restroom.

I agree that when tired, ill, etc. one should probably opt to CC to avoid problems. We should be honest with ourselves and know when we are not truly in a frame of mind to responsibly OC, which should be part of SA.

In addition, I agree that we should encourage all OCers to be good ambassadors to dress neatly and use their manners. There is nothing wrong with jeans or shorts and a t-shirt, however, holes and stains give a bad impression.

[gryphon]

Then I thought about things some more...To me, the people that are just going to rush into a 7-11 (or any place else) that's occupied to engage in some nefarious activity probably aren't going to be the ones smart enough to perform a threat analysis.

My understanding of many crimes like this is the criminal has tunnel vision.  They are only focused on one thing, the cash register and guy behind the counter.  They often have blinders on when it comes to other things around them. 

There are a number of surveillance videos on youtube that show criminals robbing convenience stores that have cops in them.  One I remember the cop was standing at the counter in full uniform and the criminal didn't even notice him!  Easy bag for the cop.

[TexasSupporter]

I ended up posting the link to the above article in "TOC: The Official Texas Open Carry" facebook site.  Afterwards, someone kept the conversation going by posting this video:



I replied to the video on TOC with the following:

"Horrible video. Anyone who tries to tell me his list of places where it's not "appropriate" to Openly Carry gets a big ZERO with me. And that's exactly what his video was all about. Again, I go back to Michigan Open Carry, where members gathered together at local and statewide events to OC their handguns. Instead of injury to the right, as this guy says will happen, they greatly expanded the right for the people of Michigan - to the point that the Michigan State Police issued "Legal Update 86" on October 26, 2010, which educates officers on the rights of the people to be free to openly carry. Anyways, the benchmark on authority regarding the carry of firearms is the Constitution - NOT this yahoo. The Constitution (which includes the 2nd Amendment as ratified by the states in 1791) was written by the Founders, many of whom had sacrificed greatly in the pursuit of the freedoms we now enjoy here in America. These Founders made clear that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". No mention whatsoever on what type of carry was "appropriate", for they deemed both concealed AND open carry appropriate. So I have ZERO appreciation for this yahoo's stupid video, and THOUSANDS for my Founders..."

[gryphon]

Some here may remember that Recoil magazine is the same one that, referencing a new HK firearm, published "that’s technology no civvies should ever get to lay their hands on. This is a purpose-built weapon with no sporting applications"

Many gun manufacturers and sponsors pulled their advertising, and the editor had to resign.

http://forums.michiganopencarry.org/index.php/topic,2122.0.html

[jgillmanjr]

I ended up posting the link to the above article in "TOC: The Official Texas Open Carry" facebook site.  Afterwards, someone kept the conversation going by posting this video:



I replied to the video on TOC with the following:

"Horrible video. Anyone who tries to tell me his list of places where it's not "appropriate" to Openly Carry gets a big ZERO with me. And that's exactly what his video was all about. Again, I go back to Michigan Open Carry, where members gathered together at local and statewide events to OC their handguns. Instead of injury to the right, as this guy says will happen, they greatly expanded the right for the people of Michigan - to the point that the Michigan State Police issued "Legal Update 86" on October 26, 2010, which educates officers on the rights of the people to be free to openly carry. Anyways, the benchmark on authority regarding the carry of firearms is the Constitution - NOT this yahoo. The Constitution (which includes the 2nd Amendment as ratified by the states in 1791) was written by the Founders, many of whom had sacrificed greatly in the pursuit of the freedoms we now enjoy here in America. These Founders made clear that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". No mention whatsoever on what type of carry was "appropriate", for they deemed both concealed AND open carry appropriate. So I have ZERO appreciation for this yahoo's stupid video, and THOUSANDS for my Founders..."

The thing that really stood out at me was earlier in the video where he essentially states that "If it's already legal, it's silly to do it for a political statement".

Right..

And then what happens? "Oh, no body open carries, so it will be ok to ban it".

[TexasSupporter]

Exactly Jason!  It's the work of MOC - and exercising the right to OC - that has strengthened the right, and kept it alive in the national conscience.   Without exercising the right, the right can get banned.

[Bronson]

For example, if you KNEW for a fact that at some point tomorrow you were going to have to engage a criminal with your weapon, but didn't know when or where would you carry open or concealed?

So since they can't come up with good arguments they have to make up highly unlikely fantasies?

Define "criminal."  Some kid who steals bikes?  Is it a mugger?  Maybe a robber?  Or a home invader?  How about a rapist?  A car jacker?  Ooh ooh, I know, a SERIAL KILLER!

The percentage of the population involved in criminal behavior that directly targets another person is very small and the percentage of THOSE people that would see a visible firearm as an INCENTIVE rather than a DETERRENT is even smaller.  So given the choice in your implausible fantasy scenario I'd consider OC to be superior.

Don't forget that "the element of surprise" is an OFFENSIVE tactic, not a defensive one.  Once you're in the middle of the crap sandwich surprise doesn't help you.  I know I know, you're going to say "but when I pull my concealed pistol they'll see it and run away."  Thanks, you just proved my point.  If the mere PRESENCE of the firearm was enough to deter the criminal then let him know it's present before he attacks and you and deter the attack altogether.

I don't want to be someone that successfully defends himself with a pistol.  I want to be someone that never has to defend himself with a pistol.

Bronson

[bigt8261]

I don't want to be someone that successfully defends himself with a pistol.  I want to be someone that never has to defend himself with a pistol.

+1 !!!

[abrknight]

So since they can't come up with good arguments they have to make up highly unlikely fantasies?

Define "criminal."  Some kid who steals bikes?  Is it a mugger?  Maybe a robber?  Or a home invader?  How about a rapist?  A car jacker?  Ooh ooh, I know, a SERIAL KILLER!

The percentage of the population involved in criminal behavior that directly targets another person is very small and the percentage of THOSE people that would see a visible firearm as an INCENTIVE rather than a DETERRENT is even smaller.  So given the choice in your implausible fantasy scenario I'd consider OC to be superior.

Don't forget that "the element of surprise" is an OFFENSIVE tactic, not a defensive one.  Once you're in the middle of the crap sandwich surprise doesn't help you.  I know I know, you're going to say "but when I pull my concealed pistol they'll see it and run away."  Thanks, you just proved my point.  If the mere PRESENCE of the firearm was enough to deter the criminal then let him know it's present before he attacks and you and deter the attack altogether.

I don't want to be someone that successfully defends himself with a pistol.  I want to be someone that never has to defend himself with a pistol.

Bronson

I don't think you even tried to put what I was saying into context...If you had, you'd realize it doesn't matter that I don't specifically define criminal in more detail...the scenario is one with a few assumptions: you're going to be attacked and you have to defend yourself with a weapon. It's that simple...what I was getting to is that in the scenario deterrence didn't work.

You stated what I already said before...as open carriers our strategy is deterrence, which is preferable, it wasn't supposed to be a debate about deterrence versus surprise.

It's hard to have a meaningful dialogue about anything these days, everyone gets defensive and doesn't want to even consider that another point of view has any merit at all. Seriously, I open carry 75% of the time (95% the last 6 months) but I can acknowledge that there are certain scenarios, however unlikely, in which it would be advantageous to conceal. Can we really not acknowledge that here?

Knight

[Bronson]

but I can acknowledge that there are certain scenarios, however unlikely, in which it would be advantageous to conceal. Can we really not acknowledge that here?

Knight

Sure I can, and do, acknowledge that there are scenarios where CC is the best option.  The difference is I see those scenarios as not usually being about tactics or strategy but about comfort (yours or other people's).  In my eyes OC wins the tactics debate far more often than it loses it.  I do recognize that some people are just not comfortable with either carrying or seeing an OCed firearm, my step mother for example, so when I'm at her place I CC.  I also often CC when it's very hot out....due to my comfort of not wanting to tuck in my shirt.

Truth is due to my comfort I'm normally CCing.  In winter I wear coats to be warm so the gun is covered.  When it's hot I don't like tucking my shirts in so the gun is covered.  But this has nothing to do with tactics or strategy it is simply a decision based on physical comfort.

Bronson

[TheQ]

I have found one tactical advantage to CC, namely pocket carry. With pocket carry I can grip my gun without visibly threatening anyone.

Suspicious guy approaches you on the street? Stick your hand in your pocket as you create some distance...

[autosurgeon]

That's one reason I like to pocket carry my bug.

Sent from my Optimus G using Tapatalk 2

[TexasSupporter]

True Q, pocket carry is great for that and it works great with my Ruger LCP in my Sticky pocket holster.  Pocket holster stays stationary - it's not going anywhere - and meanwhile I can easily get a hold of the gun without anyone knowing.  Raise it up a bit out of the holster and set it right back in there, and if needed I have it available to me in the blink of an eye.  Nevertheless, I would still want ability to OC here in Texas as the Constitution documents and protects. 

[linux203]

I pocket or ankle carry an LCP when I OC. So far, I haven't OC'd anywhere I can't CC.

[gryphon]

OPEN CARRIERS RESPOND

excerpts:

There won’t be a retraction and I won’t be apologizing. I don’t think I was wrong.

That doesn’t mean there isn’t more to the story, however. Shortly after the article went live I was chastised by Doug Holloway of ATEi, a staunch open carrier, for not providing a pro-open carry viewpoint.  Doug put me in touch with Mr. Rick Ector and Mr. John Pierce of Legally Armed in Detroit and OpenCarry.org, respectively. A short time later I became aware of a damning video and accompanying article by “Hoss USMC” on YouTube. He wasn’t gentle in his response.

...

Mr. Ector had already correctly pointed out how negative the original URL would be interpreted (the initial title was To Open Carry or Use Your Head which remained as the hyperlink even when the title was changed). Mr. Pierce then graciously spent over an hour talking with me and discussing the sociopolitical reasons for open carry vs. the tactical ones I and the instructors had considered.

...

Hypocrisy often comes with big name trainers. They say don’t open carry but when they teach they’re largely teaching from open carry…it’s really the paradox of the day. They are pro- concealed carry for the average citizen, but when they teach their tactical classes, they are pulling from an exposed holster.

The most serious issue is that some people are afraid they’re going to offend people. That is entirely in the mind of the person making the argument. There is no negative impact on the community from someone carrying openly, minding their own business, obeying the law, and engaging in commerce.

In carrying a firearm openly, not only is someone demonstrating their Second Amendment right, they’re supporting their First Amendment right. I’m open carrying, I am making a statement, and it’s my right to do.”

Rick Ector, Legally Armed in Detroit

...

…we want not just owning a gun but carrying it to be an accepted, ordinary part of daily personhood. We want it to be seen as part of Americana. The Concealed Carry movement has been tremendously successful, but it doesn’t move the sociological bar forward. You can stand up and be counted, and one of the ways to do that is to be a good open carry ambassador.  If people come to me and say, ‘John, what can we do as individuals?’, I’m going to say, ‘First, talk to your legislators and second, open carry…let people know their friends, their neighbors, their loved ones, open carry.  After all, prejudice thrives on ignorance.’

John Pierce, OpenCarry.org, author of Open Carry: a Place of Honor.

In the end I still don’t believe open carry is the wisest move, though henceforth I will strive to avoid looking at someone doing so in a condemning light.

http://www.recoilweb.com/handgun-open-carry-proponents-respond-27619.html