Concealed Carry Arguments and Assumptions

[SFCRetired]

I'm engaged in some interesting discussions on another, non-firearm only, forum about open vs concealed carry. I keep getting the same old, tired arguments that I think all of us have heard at least a thousand times:

1. You will be the first one shot. (To my knowledge, this has never happened. Anyone know different?)

2. Combined with #1 is the argument that you are making yourself a target (in general) by open carry.

3. You are giving up the "element of surprise". (Much more important, to me, is the element of deterrence. If I want to surprise him, I'll jump out and yell BOO! at him)

4. Open carry is for show offs. Quote (I presume this poster is LE): "I will open carry on duty, but only concealed off duty."

Now for the $64,000 Question (If you remember the source of that, you, like me, are older than dirt!): Where do the "concealed carry only" advocates come up with these "facts"? Are these more emotionally based than fact based?

The folks I am talking to are, IMNSHO, reasonably intelligent, but I feel like I am butting my head against a granite wall. Any suggestions for counter points will be much appreciated.

 

[Lthrnck]

Pretty simple...

Just ask them the source of their information..

 

[color of law]

I'm engaged in some interesting discussions on another, non-firearm only, forum about open vs concealed carry. I keep getting the same old, tired arguments that I think all of us have heard at least a thousand times:

1. You will be the first one shot. (To my knowledge, this has never happened. Anyone know different?)

2. Combined with #1 is the argument that you are making yourself a target (in general) by open carry.

3. You are giving up the "element of surprise". (Much more important, to me, is the element of deterrence. If I want to surprise him, I'll jump out and yell BOO! at him)

4. Open carry is for show offs. Quote (I presume this poster is LE): "I will open carry on duty, but only concealed off duty."

Now for the $64,000 Question (If you remember the source of that, you, like me, are older than dirt!): Where do the "concealed carry only" advocates come up with these "facts"? Are these more emotionally based than fact based?

The folks I am talking to are, IMNSHO, reasonably intelligent, but I feel like I am butting my head against a granite wall. Any suggestions for counter points will be much appreciated.

Apparently, being older than dirt like me, you are admitting that you are not a miracle worker, either am I. Look, I know a few that hold masters degree; they cannot tie their shoes. You usually cannot convince, otherwise, those that want to believe in falsehoods. Sometimes you just have to walk away.

 

[SFCRetired]

Just ask them the source of their information..

When I ask, I pretty much get the same answers, "So-and-so (usually a noted concealed carry advocate) said it in such-and-such an article, YouTube video, or interview on television. Funny thing is, I consider myself a reasonably decent researcher, but I'm not finding any of that, with the exception of those who stand to profit from concealed carry only.

Understand this; I am not knocking concealed carry as there are occasions when, for personal reasons, I do carry concealed. I am trying to understand the rationale of those who advocate concealed carry as the only acceptable means of carry.

 

[OC Freedom]

My thoughts are it comes from instructors of concealed carry classes and then spreads from the indoctrinated to friends, family, and the internet.

I myself will ask the question to these folks "Why do people after having an alarm system installed put out warning signs in the front yard and on their home windows". Wouldn't it be better and give the home invader the "element of surprise" that he broke into an alarmed house instead of him passing it up and moving on to one without an alarm. I find it to work well and at that point you can lead them down the trail as to why open carry works.

 

[Va_Nemo]

Tell them they are wrong. Simply put, OC is an acceptable method.

Advise them you have gone with CC on many occasions and although acceptable it is less effective. Dare them to try OC for a month.

Also tell them if they go places where it is reasonably likely they will need their weapon and concealed is the only reasonable method they need to start going different places.

Nemo

 

[color of law]

When I ask, I pretty much get the same answers, "So-and-so (usually a noted concealed carry advocate) said it in such-and-such an article, YouTube video, or interview on television. Funny thing is, I consider myself a reasonably decent researcher, but I'm not finding any of that, with the exception of those who stand to profit from concealed carry only.

Understand this; I am not knocking concealed carry as there are occasions when, for personal reasons, I do carry concealed. I am trying to understand the rationale of those who advocate concealed carry as the only acceptable means of carry.

Some just can't function in life without being given permission to do whatever they would like to do. Exercising a right that is frowned upon requires sacrifice and sacrifice is painful. So, fabricating excuses is easier than standing up bullies. That is rationale in their minds.

 

[OC for ME]

Missouri now has permit-less CC. Permits remain available when traveling out of state. OC has never required a permit, though, RSMo 21.750 remains on the books where a political subdivision may require a permit to OC. I make it a habit to not engage those of the CC Industrial Complex who, like liberals, are dead set that their way is the only way. Carry as you see fit within the confines of the law.

 

[WalkingWolf]

IMO it is getting better, closet OCers are starting to speak out instead of just taking it. Of course someone has to stand up to get the others to admit they OC, and confront the OC haters. I have all of you to thank for that because you step up.

If all else fails I tell them it is none of their business. This usually results in some exploding heads.

 

[Tess]

I always tell them that bad guys prey on the weak and unprotected. When they see my sidearm, they know I'm neither.

After that, I've had people tell me I should conceal anyway, that I shouldn't make myself a target, etc... the tired lines, but none have been able to rebut that simple statement.

No, I've never seen any sources that would support their assertions.

 

[SFCRetired]

I always tell them that bad guys prey on the weak and unprotected. When they see my sidearm, they know I'm neither.

After that, I've had people tell me I should conceal anyway, that I shouldn't make myself a target, etc... the tired lines, but none have been able to rebut that simple statement.

No, I've never seen any sources that would support their assertions.

In our last exchange on that other forum, I was given so many off-the-wall scenarios and told how many ways I was wrong, that I finally exhausted all the patience I had, told them that if they couldn't furnish cites as to when and where those events happened, they needed to shut up and sit down.

I won't offend the tender sensibilities of the OCDO members by reproducing the angry Platoon Sergeant language I actually used. Must have worked, though, as I've heard no more from them.

 

[mnrobitaille]

Concealed Carry & Open Carry, why not do both?

I'm engaged in some interesting discussions on another, non-firearm only, forum about open vs concealed carry. I keep getting the same old, tired arguments that I think all of us have heard at least a thousand times:

1. You will be the first one shot. (To my knowledge, this has never happened. Anyone know different?)

2. Combined with #1 is the argument that you are making yourself a target (in general) by open carry.

3. You are giving up the "element of surprise". (Much more important, to me, is the element of deterrence. If I want to surprise him, I'll jump out and yell BOO! at him)

4. Open carry is for show offs. Quote (I presume this poster is LE): "I will open carry on duty, but only concealed off duty."

Now for the $64,000 Question (If you remember the source of that, you, like me, are older than dirt!): Where do the "concealed carry only" advocates come up with these "facts"? Are these more emotionally based than fact based?

The folks I am talking to are, IMNSHO, reasonably intelligent, but I feel like I am butting my head against a granite wall. Any suggestions for counter points will be much appreciated.

As evidenced by some of my postings, I do both concealed carry & open carry. It just depends on where I plan on going.

There have been a few times, where I may start concealed carrying, but then switch to open carry & vice versa.

I've only had one real negative reaction to open carrying & that was with the Washington State Department of Social & Health Services back in July 2015. Most of the time, all I get, for reactions, is odd looks/glances & people keeping a bit more distance. I have gotten a few asking questions but that is few & far between. Generally, it seems that most of the people where I go are paying too much attention to their phones.

To your $64,000 question, those "facts" seem to come from flights of fancy, &/or an emotional basis that those who OC are more likely to be targeted.

 

[Bikenut]

A bit long and I've posted it before but perhaps this will be of some use:

About that "element of surprise" thing..........

CC and OC have the very same "element of surprise" because the "element of surprise" is really nothing more than the bad guy being "surprised" to discover his intended victim ..... has a gun.

With CC the bad guy is "surprised" to see his intended victim has a gun to defend himself with after the bad guy has already chosen his victim and the attack is already in progress and at that point seeing the gun can make the bad guy decide to stop the attack.

With OC the bad guy is "surprised" to see his intended victim has a gun to defend himself with during the bad guy's choosing a victim process and at that point seeing the gun can make the bad guy decide not to attack at all.

But either way... it was the bad guy being "surprised" to see a gun that was the actual "element of surprise".

Quite frankly... I'd prefer the bad guy be "surprised" to see my openly carried gun and decide not to attack me so I can go home and watch the 6 o'clock news coverage .... from the comfort of my easy chair..... about the CC'er who had to pull his gun and "surprise" the bad guy who attacked him.

Does OC's "element of surprise" really work? Well.... there have been thousands of folks open carrying in many States (Like Arizona) for decades! and yet accounts of folks OC'ing being attacked are rare. And you know with the anti gun media any incident involving an open carrier being attacked would be covered over and over and over yet such has not been the case in the past nor is it now.

And, in my not so humble opinion, because CC's use of the "element of surprise" is only effective after the attack has begun but OC's use of the "element of surprise" can prevent an attack from happening............. OC's use of the "element of surprise" is far superior to CC's because....

I'd much rather watch the 6 o'clock news than to BE the news.


Now... about an OC'er being "targeted" or "shot first" by the bad guys...

OC has been practiced for DECADES in Arizona (just one State out of all the States where open carry is/has been done)... yet the incidents where an OC'er was "targeted" or "shot first" are so rare it is difficult to find any reputable incidents that can be backed up with cites and/or links to put any validity to those claims. If there were any truth to those claims shouldn't it be easy to find actual incidents especially considering there are DECADES!! of open carry to choose from?

 

[Firearms Iinstuctor]

Now that the weather is getting warm enough in the north land to go with out a outer covering most of the time OCing is back in.

Went to a out side HS graduation party last weekend when I walked into the party their was a fellow that. I have known since grade school and at one time I would have called him a personal friend.

But as the years went by we went different directions, But still say hi and talk a bit when we see each other.

He was the first person to notice me and my full size stainless SR1911 I had a in a nice leather pancake holster with matching mag holder.

He said hi and I said how is it going Ken.

He then said why are you carrying a gun in a kind of condemning voice.

I told him I like to spread the idea of our second amendment rights.

He said "OH what ever" in kind of a huff and turned away.

I then went and talked to rest of the people with out another comment one way or the other.

The father, mother and grand parents of the grad are pro.

Yesterday I went to a birthday party with the same rig and not a word said.

Just goes to show one never knows how some people well react.

 

[since9]

Does OC's "element of surprise" really work? Well.... there have been thousands of folks open carrying in many States (Like Arizona) for decades! and yet accounts of folks OC'ing being attacked are rare. And you know with the anti gun media any incident involving an open carrier being attacked would be covered over and over and over yet such has not been the case in the past nor is it now.

Without the deterrent effect of OC, a criminal's first move may very well be to put you down, and you may never see it coming. If that's the case, your OC firearm is rendered useless.

OC at least gives a criminal pause for thought, and during that time, they usually behave differently than the rest of the crowd, a difference which is not very difficult to spot.

At worst, they think for a few moments, then proceed to kill you, or at least attempt to do so. If you've been vigilant, you might spot the wonkiness of their behavior and get the heck out of there before they act.

At best, they simply pull themselves out of the equation, and you've avoided the situation altogether.

In both cases, you're better off than if you'd CC'd.

 

[countryclubjoe]

For me it is simply abiding by my state law, therefore in NJ, I cc however when in PA and or Delaware, I both OC and CC.

When I OC, I somehow feel, more confident and more in control. When I CC, I sometimes feel as if, I am some sort of " scoundrel" or "rogue".

Regards
CCJ

 

[WalkingWolf]

Without the deterrent effect of OC, a criminal's first move may very well be to put you down, and you may never see it coming. If that's the case, your OC firearm is rendered useless.

OC at least gives a criminal pause for thought, and during that time, they usually behave differently than the rest of the crowd, a difference which is not very difficult to spot.

At worst, they think for a few moments, then proceed to kill you, or at least attempt to do so. If you've been vigilant, you might spot the wonkiness of their behavior and get the heck out of there before they act.

At best, they simply pull themselves out of the equation, and you've avoided the situation altogether.

In both cases, you're better off than if you'd CC'd.

Here is the thing, there are killers, and there are criminals. All killers are criminals, but not all criminals are killers. Killers have proven over, and over again that they use every advantage to kill, and surprise is probably on the top of the list.

Now the garden variety criminal just wants to get their prize, and move on. They know if they kill someone the police will work harder to catch them. This where OC shines, they just do not want the hassle, or danger. They look for an unarmed victim, and sometimes that victim is armed. Fortunately most criminals while getting the jump hesitate, or make mistakes. This gives the CC the chance to win, but still will be strain on their lives in most cases. The problem both OC, and CC have we don't know which criminal is willing to kill. And ambush killers it makes little difference.

 

[bc.cruiser]

Something I keep on the side: http://www.virginiaopencarry.org/

 

[Va_Nemo]

He was the first person to notice me and my full size stainless SR1911 I had a in a nice leather pancake holster with matching mag holder.

He said hi and I said how is it going Ken.

He then said why are you carrying a gun in a kind of condemning voice.

[video=youtube;IYHarHGILC4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYHarHGILC4[/video]


I have seen worse.

Nemo

 

[357SigFan]

With regards to #1, while as far as I know, it hasn't happened with 'average citizens' OCing, here in Missouri a number of years ago (It's been quite a while), there was a shooting where the perp targeted the uniformed police officers first - one outside in the parking lot and the next inside the building, before he started shooting others. So technically, that argument *could* be valid, in a case like that, we're talking about a hardcore or totally bats**t crazy and there will be no deterrence. But then you have the 'softcore' perps that the sight of someone carrying a firearm WILL deter them.

I'm engaged in some interesting discussions on another, non-firearm only, forum about open vs concealed carry. I keep getting the same old, tired arguments that I think all of us have heard at least a thousand times:

1. You will be the first one shot. (To my knowledge, this has never happened. Anyone know different?)

2. Combined with #1 is the argument that you are making yourself a target (in general) by open carry.

3. You are giving up the "element of surprise". (Much more important, to me, is the element of deterrence. If I want to surprise him, I'll jump out and yell BOO! at him)

4. Open carry is for show offs. Quote (I presume this poster is LE): "I will open carry on duty, but only concealed off duty."

Now for the $64,000 Question (If you remember the source of that, you, like me, are older than dirt!): Where do the "concealed carry only" advocates come up with these "facts"? Are these more emotionally based than fact based?

The folks I am talking to are, IMNSHO, reasonably intelligent, but I feel like I am butting my head against a granite wall. Any suggestions for counter points will be much appreciated.