Has anyone disarmed you?

[Venator]

imported post

Anti OCers useLEO's as examples for average citizens. YOU CAN"T do that logically, they are two very different animals. LEO's have a duty to face and apprehend criminals, they face criminals on a daily basis, the odds show that they are more likely to be attacked and possibly disarmed while carrying out these duties.

The average guy isn't going to have as many interactions with criminals (the odds are almost never), so comparing them to LEO's is incorrect.

What the data does show is that a crime is more likely to be deterred when you OC than when you CC. Two examples:

One: Walking through a parking lot while CCing, a guy approaches you and shows a gun and asks for money. Are you going to draw a gun and shoot him? Or are you going to comply and give him your wallet? Then when he turns and walks away do you shot him in the back?? Decisions!!!

Two: You are walking through a parking lot and OCing a bad guy sees your gun and decides to pick a softer target. You avoid the criminal activity altogether and you get to keep your wallet, he then moves on to the guy CCing and well...you know what happens then. I would rather deter the interaction altogether.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

Aran wrote:

50BMG wrote: And, she's lucky that trouble came in the form of "legal trouble" via an LEO arresting her

You might want to re-check your facts there, bud.

She wasn't arrested, nor prosecuted, nor any other words you want to come up with. She had her license revoked, appealed, and had it returned to her, and now SHE is suing THEM over it.

As in "the plaintiff" in the case.

Don't confuse him with facts!

Yata hey

 

[Miracle]

imported post

This is actually an interesting topic. I was wondering if anyone had reports of OC'rs being the victim of theft or harassment.

I got into a discussion yesterday with one of my brothers who is decidedly anti -OC. He thinks someone is going to come and knock me over to steal my gun.

 

[SlackwareRobert]

imported post

Theft by non-leo... I think is '1', happened in VA.
Now theft while in the home, car, and other 'gov' sanctioned places where no supervision
is allowed..... much higher. :banghead::banghead:

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

Lets clarify things a bit here.

We are not talking about "theft" from your home, car etc. What we are discussing is the probability of a snatch or gun grab from your holster - that is IMO urban legend. Possible sure but you're more likely to be struck by lightning - especially so if you use a good retention holster and maintain a high level of tactical awareness.

Yata hey

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

SlackwareRobert wrote:

Theft by non-leo... I think is '1', happened in VA.

Cite?

Yata hey

 

[Doug Huffman]

imported post

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/19360.html

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

Definitely no cigar, Doug. The request for a cite was for a non-LEO.

Yata hey

 

[protector84]

imported post

Someone would be real stupid to try to snatch my pistol out of my holster while I'm in public. Something worse would happen to them than being shot because instead they would be stabbed. While I would be struggling with them over the gun likely causing the magazine to be ejected and perhaps the gun getting dropped, my other hand would be pulling a concealed switchblade and sticking it in their throat. Not to gross anyone out but I consider such action to be a deadly attack on my person which would result in me using deadly force to stop such attack.

As said before, I agree that it is very rare for someone to do a gun grab but in this day and age even that doesn't surprise me. Most criminals don't want to get killed and therefore wouldn't try to get your gun. Therefore, it isn't the criminals you have to be concerned about here. Instead it is the returning war veteran diagnosed with PTSD on 15 different prescription medicationson a day where he forgot to take his pills and the rent is late.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

It is generally good advice to not make statements graphically describing how one might defend oneself - wouldn't want premeditation to be added/piled on to other potential unpleasantries if the SHTF.

A good retention holster + tactical awareness + training in weapon retention and + take-downs should about cover it. Can a person use deadly force if properly indicated - yes; is that response always needed - decidedly no.

As to the latter, I do not object being quoted if it happens.

I think a larger percentage of veterans than fellow civilians would come to your aid than would attack you. While I understand you're reference to those on drugs, I am not particularly fond of the pointed inclusion of service personnel.

Yata hey

 

[HighNoon]

imported post

protector84 wrote:

While I would be struggling with them over the gun likely causing the magazine to be ejected and perhaps the gun getting dropped, my other hand would be pulling a concealed switchblade and sticking it in their throat.

lol

 

[Venator]

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Definitely no cigar, Doug. The request for a cite was for a non-LEO.

Yata hey

Well a non-LEO did try to have his gun snatched, it was just tried by a sneaky LEO, though the LEO couldn't snatch it as it was a great retention holster.

 

[compmanio365]

imported post

I've never been disarmed or had anyone try to do so. Anyone who tried would be viewed as a deadly threat and would be reacted to accordingly. The law backs me up in that belief, at least in WA.

I did have one stupid friend tug on my gun when I first started OCing. That friend ended up on the hood of my car and was told that if he ever did something that stupid again he may not survive it. Hasn't been a problem since.

 

[50BMG]

imported post

Sorry it took me a while to get back here all... Things are tough in MI. for people in construction related industries (as well as any other for that matter)...

Protector84 wrote: The fault with BMG's logic here is that OC makes you a target by a BG which is unlikely the case. In fact, it has actually become the opposite with me where it actually caused me to NOT be a target. The example of getting hit over the head with a tire iron or champaigne bottle only makes sense if either oftwo things are valid: a) that you are oblivious to your surroundings allowing someone to sneak up on youor b) the BG would have attacked you regardless of whether you were carrying and/or alert. If someone is determined to attack you chances are they will. Most criminals "size up" strangers before attacking. Anybody who is carrying a gun and especially if the gun is visible should be VERY aware of their surroundings.This would mean you have already had the opportunity to size up the criminal before he sizes you up already giving you the situational awareness advantage.


Protektor, "Unlikely the case"? Oh, that's also highly scientific.... On your "a" point; IF I WAS a BG and I wanted your gun that you had swinging in the breeze (OC), I am certainly not going to alert you that I want your gun OR am I going to act aggressive/suspicious toward you in any way until I see the right opportunity. At THAT point, your head will be busted and I WILL get your gun... The champagne bottle at the grocery store is a PERFECT example again... You are shopping for groceries, this isn't a dangerous alley, it's you local corner store...I see your OC gun and I want it! I simply put a few food items and a big champagne bottle in my cart, wait for you to get into a aisle with not a lot of traffic, and while you are perusing what Twinkies to buy, I make my way toward you with my cart... Youmay even take a look at me as I approach, but I play "grocery shopping" too, maybe even smile at you when you check me out , then as I walk past you BAM, you get the bottle upside the head, and I'll using my F'ing KNIFE on you and your belt if I have to get that F'ing gun off of you.... YOU have become my victim of opportunity, simply becauseYOU chose to act like a "Protector" and OCed that day and I happened to see you... If you fail to understand what I am talking about here, then don't even bother to reply to this... It IS that simple, and you won't notice it until you are in a life and death struggle with me (mostly death: YOURS!)! ALL because you decide to play "Protector"... On your "b" comment and the rest of your reply... NO, the OC gun MADE you my target... I am not just an everyday "thug" who needs money... I am a drug dealer who has $10,000 in CASH in my pocket! I don't need to "mug" anybody... Muggers are low-life Pu$$ies when compared to me... I ama business man, who has to pay BIG BUCKS on the streets for a really "nice" gun like the one you were so nice to show me that you were carrying OC that day.... Don't you get it? On the part where you stopped an attack on yourself, I am glad that this worked out for you, but you negated your own arguement for OC there!!! Even you said ".. I was carrying concealed but in an OC holster".... Don't you think I would have done the very same thing in your situation with my concealed carry holster??? Your OC carry offered you NOTHING that I didn't also have by carrying concealed (which even YOU were doing until you needed it)! AND, if you were carrying OC in the same situation, it IS a very distinct possibility that those 3 thugs would have acted WAY less threatening so that THEY COULD get your gun at THEIR time of choosing.... You see????? Target of opportunity..... Simple....


Then Protector said "My goal for carrying a gun is not to shoot someone. I treat it as a tool that is designed to enhance safety both for me as well as the surrounding public. A CC gun does nothing to deter crime whereas an OC gun deters most crime. An OC gun won't deter all crime as nothing is foolproof. However, I would rather deter a criminal from coming in a place to rob and kill someone by simply having it visible and demonstrating readiness and situational awareness causing the would-becrook to turn around and go hit some other place than carry CC and spend the rest of my life remembering images of ending someone's life not to mention the many other consequences of using deadly force. Last but not least I do believe that OC does carry a bit more responsibility than CC which probably causes a lot of CCers to not be interested in OCing. The two main challengeswith OC that don't come up as much with CC is a) weapon retention and b) readiness to deal with an emergency. Both of these increased challenges can be easily overcome with proper holsters and goodpractice.


Excuse me Protector, YOU are NOT MY "protector", and I don't want you "playing" such a role around me!!!! This isn't a flippin' game! This is MY life, and my life may be taken by YOUR weapon because you chose to OC in the above grocery store!!! CCW IS a deterrent. When many of us do it, there will be more dead thugs reported in the newsapapers. On your point about being a deterrent and preventing a BG from entering and robbing a place/killing people... NO, wrong again! YOU just became the first victim, that's all!!! If I am violent criminal/crackhead who is also armed (as you yourself inferred) and I am determined to rob a place and I see you in there with your nice gun on your hip, YOU are the first dead man in the store!

It may be sick, but one of my favorite things to do in a jewelry store with an armed guard (like the Jared stores which do not recognize my concealed carry rights nation wide!) is to remind the guard that he is "Target #1" because that store doesn't allow citizens to be his "backup by default"... Literally, I have walked through the Jared door and made my finger into a makeshift pistol and jokingly shot the armed guard in the head! Then I look at the sales person (hopefully a manager) and say "Now What!?!" Why dont; you try and exercise your OC rights and walk into a Jared store some day... Tell us all how that one goes will you please!?!

Protector, I am not intentionally beating up on you personally, I am just trying to show you that your points for OC when CC is legal are as rediculous as anything I can say regarding the opposite! In fact, your very arguement supports my claims in many a way! On your last points, weapon retention IS one of the major flaws with OC. But, your point about being prepared/readiness in dealing with an emergency is something that ALL carriers of deadly weapons need to be intimately familiar with. You OCers, just decide that you need to do EVEN MORE in the preparedness department because you make yourself "targets" for BG's EVERY time you OC.....

I will say one thing, with a handle like "Protector" and with what you have written here, there may be some personal issues that you carry with you to this OC issue... Also, IF you are unfortunate enough to have to shoot/kill somebody with your weapon one day (even legitimately), the Jeffrey Figers (read: a$$hole attorneys) of the world will probably have a field day with that handle and the postings that you have made! It wouldn't be terribly difficult to show that "maybe" you were out LOOKING for trouble with your OC/"Protector" attitude that you posted here.... Ever thought of that?????

Unfortunately, WE ALL need to consider BS like this anymore, whether we OC or CC!

I'd hate to see you get into trouble either way Protector....

 

[50BMG]

imported post

Venator wrote: Two: You are walking through a parking lot and OCing a bad guy sees your gun and decides to pick a softer target. You avoid the criminal activity altogether and you get to keep your wallet, he then moves on to the guy CCing and well...you know what happens then. I would rather deter the interaction altogether.


Or Venator, the BG decides to just blow your a$$ away, take you expesive/nice gun AND your wallet.....

Your first example is of the standard "situational awareness" that Protector attempted to school me on... OC doesn't work because IF I cannot flee that situation while CC'ing(as we ALL should try to do really!), I ALWAYS have the option of flashing my weapon or drawing, just like Protector did in his situation...

Bzzzzzzz.... Sorry, doesn't cut the mustard to justify OC....

Next....

 

[compmanio365]

imported post

50BMG wrote:

Venator wrote: Two: You are walking through a parking lot and OCing a bad guy sees your gun and decides to pick a softer target. You avoid the criminal activity altogether and you get to keep your wallet, he then moves on to the guy CCing and well...you know what happens then. I would rather deter the interaction altogether.


Or Venator, the BG decides to just blow your a$$ away, take you expesive/nice gun AND your wallet.....

And you still haven't shown anyone here any proof that HAS EVER HAPPENED. NOT ONCE. Because it just doesn't happen. On the other hand, we have several accounts from OCers, myself included, that show that OC DOES deter crime and keeps you from becoming a victim. It doesn't make you invincible, and I don't think anyone here thinks that, but it DOES make you a less appealing target.

But you can't seem to get any ideas that you don't already agree with through your brain, so I honestly don't know why we're wasting time on you.....if you're truly here because you want to understand why people OC, great, fine. But it seems to me you're just here to stir the pot and cause trouble, so why don't you run home and stroke your permission slip from the gubmint to conceal your precious gun, while the rest of us actually work on preserving freedom, democracy, and the American way.


PS - I don't know where you get off with this need to "justify" OC. It's a right enumerated in the US Constitution and is regarded as a basic human right. It's as if you asked us to "justify" our need to practice our choice of religion, or to practice free speech. What's the justification for that? You can't pick and choose only the rights you agree with. They're a package deal, and the 2nd Amendment means how I carry my gun is my business and you don't get to tell me how I should or shouldn't do it.

 

[50BMG]

imported post

Grapeshot wroteon't confuse him with facts!

Yata hey


Facts Grapeshot?

Was that lady NOT detained and did she NOT have to go through all of the legal hassle she did (right OR wrong) simple because she decided to make some STUPID point about OC to people who could really care less (other soccer mom's)...???

Grapeshot wrote: A bit grandiose perhaps, but we are emissaries of the 2nd Amendment. Deterrent? Stopping something before it starts? Convenience, easier to draw? Education?


Oh Lord! Grapeshot, I don't want YOU being my teacher/emissary on my Constitutional right to arm and defend defend myself OK...!?! I don't need any helpfrom any of you future "statistics" that will be used by Handgun Inc. to squelch my rights... Deterrent, how about CATALYST to START someting that never would have happened if you didn't OC???? Conveinience, you obviously aren't training enough if you cannot draw you weapon efficiently... Maybe "Grapeshot" would be an affective tool for you afterall??? LOL... I preferr "precision" over "Grapeshot", that's how I can put 5 rounds into a sub-8" circle at the distance of 2/3 of a mile with my .50 rilfes....

Miracle, it won't take too long to prove your brother correct... The sad part is that it might be one of the very members on this board who makes that statistic for all of us.... Then what???

There is NO tactical advantage to OC vs. CC... I actually think it is quite the reverse... Many of the very statements made here by "pro-OC" types have proven this...

Next.....

 

[zigziggityzoo]

imported post

50BMG wrote:

There is NO tactical advantage to OC vs. CC... I actually think it is quite the reverse... Many of the very statements made here by "pro-OC" types have proven this...

Next.....

The only time (in my opinion) CC has a "tactical advantage" over OC is when you are presented with an active shooter who is out to kill, as in, violent bank robbers, school shootings, random public shootings (at malls, etc).

In my state, CC isn't legal in places like Banks, Schools, etc. where one's tactical advantage would be most necessary.

In practically every other environment (crimes of convenience, non-violent prone criminals), OC has a huge deterrent factor, which makes up for any lack of "tactical advantage", because in these situations, you don't need tactical advantage, they won't be attacking you.

 

[marshaul]

imported post

50BMG wrote:

Maybe "Grapeshot" would be an affective tool for you afterall??? LOL... I preferr "precision" over "Grapeshot", that's how I can put 5 rounds into a sub-8" circle at the distance of 2/3 of a mile with my .50 rilfes....

Says the troll who thinks its more likely that he'll get to snipe BGs with his .50 from 2/3 of a mile than an OCer will experience tactical advantage. Now who's the one engaging in wishful thinking?

 

[deepdiver]

imported post

Why is it so hard for some people to acknowledge that sometimes OC is better, sometimes CC is better and sometimes it just doesn't matter. I'm not aware of anyone who has a crystal ball to predict which situation one may find oneself.

I don't think any active member of the forum wants to eliminate CC (most of us have a CCW and do CC as time, place and law make it required, practical or reasonable) and obviously we support OC. We also know that even in states where both OC and CC are legal and accepted, even in VT and AK where anyone who can legally own a sidearm can OC or CC without any license, that a minority of citizens will do so, and that a smaller minority will OC than CC.

I see the two types of carry reinforcing themselves. As Lott has already studied, CC certainly makes society safer. I would argue that OC does as well if in no other manner than reminding the bad people among us that citizens do carry guns and the BGs probably realize that for every OC sidearm he sees that there are an unknown number of CC guns keeping the risk in the forefront of the BGs' minds.

While certainly a BG might target an OCer for his firearm, a BG might also target a CCer because s/he looks like a softer target than the OCer. The end result of a mugged citizen and very possibly a further armed BG is the same.