Is this just a tale or what?

[DoubleTap45]

I was listening to Dennis Miller and he talked about the open carry laws in some states. He was supportive but mentioned a strange statement from a CCW "instructor" he claimed to know. The guy warned that if you DO carry open and a stickup starts you are likely to be taken out with no warning to create an opening for the other perps. On the surface it sounds good but if you are in an area where open carry is legal and COMMON isn't that almost a moot point? :confused:


-Ray

[ditto_95]

There is that potential.
Two reasons to open carry in my opinion.
1. Education and devillivication (I am guessing that is a word) to let people know there are people that carry firearms. Exposure to items that may seem out of the norm become normal when they are continuosly seen and no negitive effects are noted.

2. Comfort - I open carry around the farm when doing chores because it is easier. I am not constantly reminded that I am carrying by having the grip poke me in the ribs.

IMHO, open carry has it's uses. The more people understand that there is little risk in the average Joe carrying a gun, the more likely it is that others will find it acceptable or even veture to obtain a gun and hoster to carry themselves. Although I have never been approached, I have noted several people looking at my pistol.

[azreb]

Might be true in a small number of cases. I expect most crooks would be inclined to go elsewhere if they spotted someone carrying where they were planning a holdup.

Are there many places where open carry is really common? It is legal here, but I can remember seeing only a couple of people carrying in several years. I carry my pistol in the open in warm weather when travelling, but during daylight hours I usually leave it in my car. I also carry when walking my dog, but this is a very small town and I usually walk into the forest.

[d90king]

I was listening to Dennis Miller and he talked about the open carry laws in some states. He was supportive but mentioned a strange statement from a CCW "instructor" he claimed to know. The guy warned that if you DO carry open and a stickup starts you are likely to be taken out with no warning to create an opening for the other perps. On the surface it sounds good but if you are in an area where open carry is legal and COMMON isn't that almost a moot point? :confused:


-Ray
Its IMHO one of the risk that comes with OC. If a guy has the jump on you and see's that you are armed, I think it is safe to assume that you would be his first target. Situational awareness is vital when open carrying... Think about how many times LEO's are "ambushed"...

[DoubleTap45]

What about those poor guys just eating at a donut shop and working on their laptops. Some creting walked in and killed all four cops.


-Ray

[brolin1911a1]

I was listening to Dennis Miller and he talked about the open carry laws in some states. He was supportive but mentioned a strange statement from a CCW "instructor" he claimed to know. The guy warned that if you DO carry open and a stickup starts you are likely to be taken out with no warning to create an opening for the other perps. On the surface it sounds good but if you are in an area where open carry is legal and COMMON isn't that almost a moot point?

While this sounds logical facts don't seem to bear it out. I've not heard of any cases but one where the perpetrator shot the openly armed person first before committing a crime. That one instance was the courthouse shooting in Georgia where the police officer was shot before the criminal went on to shoot the judge and others. But in a "normal" situation, the crook is looking to commit a robbery. To do that, he needs to control the situation. If he starts by shooting an armed bystander, the rest of the situation is going to go to pieces in a hurry with people panicking, screaming, etc. That will make it difficult to accomplish the primary goal of robbing the place. So it's still more likely that the sight of your openly carried gun will mean that the bad guy will simply move on to somewhere less protected.

As for those cops in Washington state, well, that killer was hunting cops so it didn't matter if they were openly armed or not.

[Aguila Blanca]

I doubt there are any statistics to prove one position or the other. There is the theory that if a would-be robber sees you carrying, he'll "take you out first." But let's be realistic -- how many robbers, even those who carry guns, really WANT to start off the operation by shooting somebody? Maybe if you are alone in a big parking garage late at night and YOU are the target, but if that's the case and you aren't aware of the robber's presence, he's going to shoot you whether you are open carrying or not.

The flip side is the robber of a bank or a convenience store. They want to get in, grab the money, and disappear into the surroundings. If they see a guy (or a gal) wearing a pistol in the lobby or in the store, my guess is they'll quietly move on to the next bank branch or convenience store in the hope of finding one where there isn't a customer with a gun.

To put it another way -- if open carry were legal here, I would do so, and often.

[Tedzo]

To quote brolin1911a1,

"...in a "normal" situation, the crook is looking to commit a robbery. To do that, he needs to control the situation. If he starts by shooting an armed bystander, the rest of the situation is going to go to pieces in a hurry with people panicking, screaming, etc. That will make it difficult to accomplish the primary goal of robbing the place."

Do you think most of the idiots that commit crimes like this are actually thinking it through and considering the consequences of any of their actions? With concealed carry at least you have an element of surprise. Now, if EVERYONE who had a permit carried openly, THAT would have more of a deterrent effect, IMHO.

[brolin1911a1]

To quote brolin1911a1,

"...in a "normal" situation, the crook is looking to commit a robbery. To do that, he needs to control the situation. If he starts by shooting an armed bystander, the rest of the situation is going to go to pieces in a hurry with people panicking, screaming, etc. That will make it difficult to accomplish the primary goal of robbing the place."

Do you think most of the idiots that commit crimes like this are actually thinking it through and considering the consequences of any of their actions? With concealed carry at least you have an element of surprise. Now, if EVERYONE who had a permit carried openly, THAT would have more of a deterrent effect, IMHO.

Yes, I do think that. One of the first studies I came across on the subject, back when I was in college, involved two researchers interviewing prison inmates. IIRC, these thirty years later, nearly 80% of the respondents said that they'd aborted an intended crime because they knew or suspected that the prospective victim was armed.

Criminals, whether "idiots" or not, are feral predators. And one characteristic of any predator is the instinctive desire to obtain its prey with minimal danger to itself. Whether it takes days or only seconds, these predators do size up, "case" their prey before striking. They instinctively want to get in, commit the crime, and get out quickly and most importantly with a minimum of personal risk. And seeing at least one armed "victim" in the area adds to that risk. So they are more likely to abort this attempt and to elsewhere that's safer. After all, it's not like there is any shortage of potential, unarmed victims walking around in condition white for these criminals to choose from.

[DoubleTap45]

I have heard that there are attempts to determine if thugs relocate across a state line to where the "pickings" are better and safer. An example would be NJ. In PA CCW is not too hard for a law-abiding citizen to attain. I'm sure the word has gotten out that in PA you can't be SURE of helpless victims so the "smarter" thugs will no doubt concentrate on Bergen Country NJ which is a bedroom community for people who work and make big bucks in NYC. Being relocated NYC libs it's unlikely they'll be armed. :geek:

The part I want to know about is whether there ARE reliable stats of this sort. If so that would support the cause of CCW if the crooks ARE running from CCW states looking for easy targets. :scared:
-Ray

[John]

I can't provide any reliable stats, but some years ago, I was in Lowell, MA for work. I had a friend, who was working for the same company, with whom we shared the same love for guns and fast cars (yeah, I liked fast cars when I was young). When he asked me to his house, I noticed it was in NH. So I asked him why he choose to live to the next State instead of closer to his house. The answer was (a) because gun laws are much simpler in NH and (b) that because of (a) the criminals preferred to hit homes in MA than in NH, so overall he was feeling safer leaving there.

That was about 20 years ago, but judging from what I hear about MA, it should still be a valid reason for opting to live in NH.

[Dial 1911 for Help]

Unfortunately, many MA residents do decide to live in NH because of the collectivist hellhole their [mis]representation has turned MA into, but they think they're still allowed to vote the straight statist ticket, thus turning their hosts' home into that from which they've sought refuge.

[DoubleTap45]

I hear that as more suburbanites from NY, MA and other lib Meccas buy second homes in VT they start trying to overturn the most sensible gun laws in the Union and make them "more like home". Huh?!! This is the lament I hear from folk in the Mountain States when CA, OR and WA people start moving in. That's where the term "Californication" came from.


Ray

[Dial 1911 for Help]

Exactly. Not sure why people from collectivist states aren't quarantined in the infected states except for those who can prove they're free from infection (they certainly deserve our help in escaping), but if we are going to let them out, what the **** makes them think they're allowed to vote?

[DoubleTap45]

In NC they have allowed Yankees to settle in the "research triangle". They all live in a town called Cary. The locals claim it stands for "Containment Area for Relocated Yankees"! :lh:

Ray

[Rich-D]

Us Yankee's in PA have less restrictive laws then our Southern neighbors. Open Carry, no restrictions on taverns & restaurants, a gun locker system for government buildings, a $19 fee for a 5 year must issue carry concealed license. no mandated training course. And the Yankees in Vermont have the best, no license necessary!

[DoubleTap45]

He's on a jihad to roll BACK all those reforms and wants to exempt Philly from the STATE laws. He cares less about his Hip Hop Generation thug wannabe constituents carrying ILLEGALLY than YOU carrying legally. Might result in fewer voters I guess. I AM seriously thinking about busting out to PA for THOSE reasons. :lh:

Read Glenn Beck's book "Arguing With Idiots" or at least page 48 to SEE what you go through in NY City to get a HOME/Target license!!! It USED to be a little easier under Koch but Nanny Bloomberg is afraid we'll shoot our eye out. :butthead:

Ray

[John]

Read Glenn Beck's book "Arguing With Idiots" or at least page 48 to SEE what you go through in NY City to get a HOME/Target license!!! It USED to be a little easier under Koch but Nanny Bloomberg is afraid we'll shoot our eye out.

You mean you can still get pistols in NYC?? I read somewhere that toy guns are not allowed in the shops any more, so I thought (by extrapolation) that real guns are definitely no-no!

Just joking, and apologies for throwing salt in the wound!!!

[Rich-D]

The State legislature has stopped Philly's Mayor Nutter and those before him with preemptive State Laws.

[Dial 1911 for Help]

It USED to be a little easier under Koch but Nanny Bloomberg is afraid we'll shoot our eye out.

If he has any smarts, he's afraid you'll shoot HIS eye out.

[DoubleTap45]

TRY living under a socialist/Progressive/Liberal who's also the 27th richest man in the world an a wannabe nanny!!!! :butthead:



-Ray

[RIAnthesprings]

several years ago while living in AZ i open carried all the time. i went into my bank on a friday afternoon in june and the guy standing in front of me was wearing a trench coat and large hat. he stepped up to the teller and said something and i saw her eyes and they were scared. the guy next to me was also openly carying. he and i glanced at each other nodded and drew on the perp. i grabbed the back of his coat while the other gent moved to the side and yelled at him not to move.
we ordered the guy to get on his knees with his hands up. He hat a little ity bitty 22 revolver in his hand. i took it away and placed it in my back pocket for the police and we did a cursory search and proned him out. when the cops arrived they took control of the perp and his weapon. the thing that sticks with me is one of the officers asked him "what were you thinking didnt you look around you" the perp said "na man and i want them arrested for illegal carry" the cop looks at him ands says you must be from california and the perp says yeah and guns are illegal so arrest them at which point the cops laugh and say "Toto you aint in cali no more this is AZ we like our guns and our armed citizens they make our job easier" i am still friends with those officers to this day

[John]

Great story, some of the anti-gunners should read this.

[Rick McC.]

That's great!

The moron was definitely from the shallow end of the gene pool.

On the original issue; down here open carry isn't allowed, even for CCW holders.

There was a push during the last legislative session to get an open carry bill passed; but it devolved into basically making the inadvertent display of a concealed weapon by a CCW holder a non-issue. Prior to that; it was a violation to display a concealed weapon, even accidently.

I personally wouldn't routinely carry openly if it were legal. I value the tactical advantage of concealed carry over that of making a political statement.

Take care,

Rick