Does it make you fell big?

[sultan62]

Nope. I said if it was asked about we would then talk about it. It usually gets asked atleast once per class when it comes to the hands on portion of the class.





Thats just it, the butt isn't showing. No portion of my Glock is showing when I wear my IWB. If I wanted any part to show then I would just go ahead and OC.



See above.

You are trying to twist the meanings of your statements, as well as others.

You said you harp on concealment pretty hard. That isn't presenting an option. It isn't answering a question. It's harping. Defined by Merriam-Webster as "to dwell on or recur to a subject tiresomely or monotonously —usually used with on." Of course, perhaps you meant the other meaning of harp. "To play on a harp." If that's what you meant, my bad; everything I said has been totally off-base. You still have not addressed this, and as best I can tell, you won't. That's because your own statement, contrasted with your others, is contradictory.

Your response about IWB was based off of a post which specified OC IWB, at which point you stated that IWB is CC with a tucked in shirt. Certainly it can be, but it is not by default.

If you want to argue semantics and change meanings, fine, but I've got no inclination to keep arguing based on such premises.

 

[razor_baghdad]

IWB with a shirt tucked is CC not OC. If I wanted to wear the IWB with the grip of the pistol sticking out then I would just wear my OWB holster and be done with it.

WTFOVER.....so you've been teaching incorrect information in your CC classes.....anyone agree?? WTFOVER.

Great callsign, BTW.

 

[cricketdad]

The Bayless case doesn't count as an "OCer will be the first one attacked" for several reasons.

1) he was NOT the first one attacked--the store owner he was attempting to help was,
2) he inserted himself willfully into a violent situation,
3) he shot first (not the BG)
4) the BG didn't target him because he was OCing, he shot Bayless because Bayless interrupted a crime while defensively armed, in an attempt to bring an end to it. Teh BG shot Bayless because he was a BG in the midst of committing a crime--NOT because Bayless was OCing,
5) Bayless wasn't OCing when he was shot--he had his gun in his hand, in a "ready" position--that doesn't count as OCing in any jurisdiction...

Not discounting the tragedy of this event--it was a senseless crime, and my prayers are with the Bayless family--I've shopped at their establishment many times when I lived in the area. Mr. Bayless was a brave, honorable man who died trying to save another's life, and for that he should be remembered and honored.

But this just doesn't fit the parameters of the discussion...

I figure you wouldn't buy it.
The first person attacked was Randy, just an employee and an OCer. The firearm used in the crime was Randy's. He carried it in a holster on his side. How the bad guy got it is not clear. Randy was the one killed.

Danny recovered but was killed several months later by a man who walked in and shot him.

You said it never has happened. This is two times it has.

Oh wait, I see why it doesn't count. They were OCing while working.

 

[elixin77]

Thats just it, the butt isn't showing. No portion of my Glock is showing when I wear my IWB. If I wanted any part to show then I would just go ahead and OC.


See above.

See below.

I don't know how you set your IWB up, but mine shows just fine:

If you don't see the butt of your gun with your IWB, and tucking your shirt behind it, then your probably doing it wrong.

Oh, and before anyone chimes in and says "your not wearing a belt, your doing it wrong," i just slid my IWB into my shorts, since this is a demonstration pic.

sorry its a bathroom pic - it's the only place bright enough in my apt for a cell phone pic, lol

 

[CarryHard]

I figure you wouldn't buy it.
The first person attacked was Randy, just an employee and an OCer. The firearm used in the crime was Randy's. He carried it in a holster on his side. How the bad guy got it is not clear. Randy was the one killed.

Danny recovered but was killed several months later by a man who walked in and shot him.

You said it never has happened. This is two times it has.

Oh wait, I see why it doesn't count. They were OCing while working.

Ya i knew people wouldn't acknowledge this as a reason to be concerned

Just because you're carrying a gun does not make you invincible or trained in the situation of someone trying to disarm or rob you or any combination of these things

Bottom line is people need to be more prepared and 100.99% more so if you have a gun on you

 

[Aknazer]

http://www.romingerlegal.com/northcarolina/HTML/000198-1.htm

Thought you meant me.

This doesn't state how the bg got the guy's gun. For all we know the person attempted to pull the gun too close to the bg and got disarmed. So while it is possible that it was a gun grab, by following the provided link we can't say. As for the person saying the guy who recovered was later targeted because he OCed, how do you know this. He could have been targeted by someone after revenge unless you know something that you're not sharing.

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?75201-Target-Encounter-Everett-Washington

here is the story

the guy tried to take his gun and also wanted him to shoot him with it...

That wasn't a true gun grab as pointed out. Also if you were to read the thread the bg first argues with the OCer, and then says "what would you do of I did this?" And proceeds to reach for the gun, but he doesn't actually do anything to try and get the gun after the OCer moves. A real gun grab would have made a true effort to get the gun.

All that said, its generally a bad idea to talk in absolutes as there is almost always an exception. So I'm sure that somewhere out there a real gun grab (bg intends to do harm and goes for a HOLSTERED gun) has occurred. But that doesn't change the fact that it is a statistical improbability and that these gun grab fears are completely unfounded (though something one should still watch put for).

 

[CarryHard]

This doesn't state how the bg got the guy's gun. For all we know the person attempted to pull the gun too close to the bg and got disarmed. So while it is possible that it was a gun grab, by following the provided link we can't say. As for the person saying the guy who recovered was later targeted because he OCed, how do you know this. He could have been targeted by someone after revenge unless you know something that you're not sharing.



That wasn't a true gun grab as pointed out. Also if you were to read the thread the bg first argues with the OCer, and then says "what would you do of I did this?" And proceeds to reach for the gun, but he doesn't actually do anything to try and get the gun after the OCer moves. A real gun grab would have made a true effort to get the gun.

All that said, its generally a bad idea to talk in absolutes as there is almost always an exception. So I'm sure that somewhere out there a real gun grab (bg intends to do harm and goes for a HOLSTERED gun) has occurred. But that doesn't change the fact that it is a statistical improbability and that these gun grab fears are completely unfounded (though something one should still watch put for).

This OC'er had his gun stolen from him
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zx_YUO4SzcY

He said he wont open carry anymore because it made him a target
They never mentioned his name but i guess thats out of him being ashamed
I would be to.

Anyways just because you have a gun does not make you invincible
Training + more training + a good holster is going to make all the difference

Otherwise you should just carry the gun unloaded to make a statement

 

[mattwestm]

The only person who would grab a gun is a nut. In fact, the nut would probably harass an unarmed person as well. If you aren't aware of your surroundings, you shouldn't be carrying in the first place (OC or CC). Whether you OC or CC, your gun won't be of much help if you are constantly in code white (like most sheeple).

 

[CarryHard]

The only person who would grab a gun is a nut. In fact, the nut would probably harass an unarmed person as well. If you aren't aware of your surroundings, you shouldn't be carrying in the first place (OC or CC). Whether you OC or CC, your gun won't be of much help if you are constantly in code white (like most sheeple).

I agree but also i see people saying
"training shouldn't be part of a right to carry a gun"
& constitutionally that is correct

But also that is letting people carry guns in code white as you say?
So they could be killed by their own gun or robbed of it just under the disillusion that they are safe by carrying it

& since this site really does not tell you to get any training before OC'ing or to know what to do in specific situations i guess it's up the the end user to make those decisions

More often the advice i see is to carry a recorder and also recite paragraphs of law

Not the other end of the spectrum dealing with bad people out to harm you

2 people within 200 yards of me have been murdered from gunshot wounds
I'm just saying to be safe and be prepared!!!!!!!!

 

[Grapeshot]

IWB with a shirt tucked is CC not OC. If I wanted to wear the IWB with the grip of the pistol sticking out then I would just wear my OWB holster and be done with it.

Beg to differ - IWB with grip and part of gun exposed as is typical is most definitely OC in most states - very much so in Va. and NC.

 

[Grapeshot]

But also that is letting people carry guns in code white as you say?
So they could be killed by their own gun or robbed of it just under the disillusion that they are safe by carrying it

& since this site really does not tell you to get any training before OC'ing or to know what to do in specific situations i guess it's up the the end user to make those decisions

Situational awareness is constantly stressed here. You present the typical anti argument - not fit to the right of self-defense until "X" level of training completed.

This "site" doesn't tell you anything - the collective experience and postings of the members here do and they universally recommend getting as much training as possible.

I don't "guess" it is up to the individual user - I will state positively that it is a personal choice - a responsible one, a good one, but one that should not be mandated.

 

[smlawrence]

"Does that make you feel big"

"You obviously think so or you wouldn't of asked" and keep walking.

As far as the other discussion, one important thing to know is that anything is possible, but not necessarily probable. And you can increase your chances of getting through an event by trying to be prepared for it. I certainly don't feel invicible since I started OC'ing but I most certainly feel safer as does my family, friends, and co-workers when with me. My wife feels more safe as she CC's and thats her preference and completely fine with me. An good instructor teaches both sides of anything. Example: I used to teach kids how to bowl a long time ago, I taught them to throw straight or to hook the ball. They figured out which way worked for them and either way, the ball made it to the end of the lane. Different strokes for different folks. This site is one of the best resources that I have access to for information, experiences, and opinions and alot of these guys/gals on here deserve some credit for what they do.

 

[CarryHard]

"Does that make you feel big"

"You obviously think so or you wouldn't of asked" and keep walking.

As far as the other discussion, one important thing to know is that anything is possible, but not necessarily probable. And you can increase your chances of getting through an event by trying to be prepared for it. I certainly don't feel invicible since I started OC'ing but I most certainly feel safer as does my family, friends, and co-workers when with me. My wife feels more safe as she CC's and thats her preference and completely fine with me. An good instructor teaches both sides of anything. Example: I used to teach kids how to bowl a long time ago, I taught them to throw straight or to hook the ball. They figured out which way worked for them and either way, the ball made it to the end of the lane. Different strokes for different folks. This site is one of the best resources that I have access to for information, experiences, and opinions and alot of these guys/gals on here deserve some credit for what they do.

Haha good points
I'm starting to become a doubting tom the more I read about OC tho

Especially this story about a veteran LEO being killed with his own gun
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...lejandro-alex-valadez-police-training-academy

Sort of makes me wonder if OC'ing actually is more safe
I notice this forum has a section for Real stories of self defense talking about the heros but you dont see much talk of bad storys & how we can prevent those

Edit: And a question i ask myself
If a bad guy wanted to take my gun and do harm with it could I 100% for sure stop him
Lots & lots of questions including when is a bad time to draw you gun

theoretically say a guy is right on top of you trying to harm you
If you drew your gun at that distance he could possibly manipulate it
I'm sure the LEO get training on when to not draw a gun but i dont see that type of resources here

 

[sultan62]

Haha good points
I'm starting to become a doubting tom the more I read about OC tho

Especially this story about a veteran LEO being killed with his own gun
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...lejandro-alex-valadez-police-training-academy

Sort of makes me wonder if OC'ing actually is more safe
I notice this forum has a section for Real stories of self defense talking about the heros but you dont see much talk of bad storys & how we can prevent those

The fact is, they just don't happen very often. IMO, it is exponentially more likely to happen with a LEO than a regular armed citizen. They frequently insert themselves into dangerous situations intentionally, where we try to stay out of such situations, and a firearm is just a backup in case we end up in such a situation. Basically, the big difference is that we don't go looking for trouble, whereas they do. The aforementioned stories show that such an experience has happened. However, they are unlikely.

OC vs. CC is a personal choice; I will continue to OC.

 

[CarryHard]

The fact is, they just don't happen very often. IMO, it is exponentially more likely to happen with a LEO than a regular armed citizen. They frequently insert themselves into dangerous situations intentionally, where we try to stay out of such situations, and a firearm is just a backup in case we end up in such a situation. Basically, the big difference is that we don't go looking for trouble, whereas they do. The aforementioned stories show that such an experience has happened. However, they are unlikely.

OC vs. CC is a personal choice; I will continue to OC.

I agree it's a choice
I know for a fact I'm nowhere near as trained as an LEO
especially not an 11 year veteran

That makes me worry what happens to me if I failed to stop an attack or what happens to other people around me etc etc.

Alot of responsibility & I think over analyzing it is a GOOD thing.

 

[DWCook]

I have had military training too and have taken several classes on my own behalf for tactics use on firearms. I still find classes to take as just a "hey why not" kind of deal. I understand people don't like the idea of OC in a public place, but when they confront to just start a crap conversation that doesn't go anywhere....common folks were only exercising a right that's been given to us from the beginning.

Just because someone is doing something you don't like does not give you the right to confront them in a conflicted matter of anger and start a useless public conflict. Half the time when I had people do that to me...i ask them this simple question....are you trying to get public attention so you seem like a hero?....if not back off and go on your marry way. Sorry but I am straight forward and don't like to cushion certain matters that people can be more adult like to settle the issue.

 

[Grapeshot]

Sort of makes me wonder if OC'ing actually is more safe
I notice this forum has a section for Real stories of self defense talking about the heros but you dont see much talk of bad storys & how we can prevent those

Edit: And a question i ask myself
If a bad guy wanted to take my gun and do harm with it could I 100% for sure stop him
Lots & lots of questions including when is a bad time to draw you gun

theoretically say a guy is right on top of you trying to harm you
If you drew your gun at that distance he could possibly manipulate it
I'm sure the LEO get training on when to not draw a gun but i dont see that type of resources here

Your choice of words detracts sincerely from your credibility.

We do not call those that are forced to defend themselves "heroes" - we do report it for any benefit one might derive from it. We report the negative too -it's just that there are considerably less of them.

"Theoretically, if, possibly" - you stand on the "what if" principle and espouse what? That therefore a person would be better off without the means for defense?

You want what? 100% guarantee? Not in this lifetime, sir.

You see or ignore what you choose - the draw/don't draw scenario has been talked about repeatedly here. Insofar as the average hits to shot ratio, innocents struck, in the comparison of LEO to armed citizen - studies that have been discussed here that the armed citizen is more accurate and does less collateral damage than LEOs in such confrontations. Some agencies have extremely low training recertification standards because of budgetary limitations.

Do you have a clue as to the average distance and duration (time) of the typical self-defense shooting? Suggest that be your homework assignment for tomorrow - you need to learn a few facts.

You could start by reading gunfacts by Guy Smith and digesting the contents thoroughly. Then come back and we'll discuss this some more.

 

[CarryHard]

I have had military training too and have taken several classes on my own behalf for tactics use on firearms. I still find classes to take as just a "hey why not" kind of deal. I understand people don't like the idea of OC in a public place, but when they confront to just start a crap conversation that doesn't go anywhere....common folks were only exercising a right that's been given to us from the beginning.

Just because someone is doing something you don't like does not give you the right to confront them in a conflicted matter of anger and start a useless public conflict. Half the time when I had people do that to me...i ask them this simple question....are you trying to get public attention so you seem like a hero?....if not back off and go on your marry way. Sorry but I am straight forward and don't like to cushion certain matters that people can be more adult like to settle the issue.

like i said meeting people in stores and stuff arguing or debating or any of that does not scare or worry me

It's out in the real world tho where there are real threats
Like i said 2 people have been shot dead within 200 yards of my house

You can OC to make a political statement (and i feel alot of people do)
or you can OC to defend yourself
But if you choose to carry the gun for protection you should also keep in mind you could be killed by your own gun
It's a possibility each of us needs to take into consideration

 

[CarryHard]

Your choice of words detracts sincerely from your credibility.

We do not call those that are forced to defend themselves "heroes" - we do report it for any benefit one might derive from it. We report the negative too -it's just that there are considerably less of them.

"Theoretically, if, possibly" - you stand on the "what if" principle and espouse what? That therefore a person would be better off without the means for defense?

You want what? 100% guarantee? Not in this lifetime, sir.

You see or ignore what you choose - the draw/don't draw scenario has been talked about repeatedly here. Insofar as the average hits to shot ratio, innocents struck, in the comparison of LEO to armed citizen - studies that have been discussed here that the armed citizen is more accurate and does less collateral damage than LEOs in such confrontations. Some agencies have extremely low training recertification standards because of budgetary limitations.

Do you have a clue as to the average distance and duration (time) of the typical self-defense shooting? Suggest that be your homework assignment for tomorrow - you need to learn a few facts.

You could start by reading gunfacts by Guy Smith and digesting the contents thoroughly. Then come back and we'll discuss this some more.

gunfacts seems like a gun selling propaganda site to me:

and as far as the average distance / time / duration of a self defense shooting
I know this

you cant always watch your 6'oclock and 12oclock
& if they are close enough to harm you physically they can also grab your gun and possibly end up killing you with it

if they also have a firearm / projectile weapon then were talking about a firefight & thats totally off topic

I'm not an expert in anything just using common sense

 

[Grapeshot]

You can OC to make a political statement (and i feel alot of people do)
or you can OC to defend yourself
But if you choose to carry the gun for protection you should also keep in mind you could be killed by your own gun
It's a possibility each of us needs to take into consideration

My primary reason is self-protection. A close 2nd place is education and thereby the normalization of the RKBA and OC specifically.

Weapon retention is something we all take seriously. Your "reminder" and the suggestion is far below the standard and except for the inclusion of "possibility" is nearly worthless. Of the number of OCers, CCers, hunters, target shooters that have had there own guns used against them I'lll go out on a limb and suggest that is about .00001% or less. Frankly, I like the figures better from my perspective.

Seriously, do the suggested reading. Your straw man arguments and red herrings have all been seen before.