Open Carry Concerns

[LongRider]

The best we could do is go to the local prison, request a visitation with some random felon, and ask their thoughts on the matter. We already know that their biggest fear while working in a Shall Issue state is that their intended target may be armed and they will get shot.

Actually I have done something similar and have asked practicing thugs and parolees out of prison. Most all have said their biggest fear is that someone will get killed because that turns their robbery into a capitol crime. That of course goes along the risk of being caught vs the profit, so anyone OC'ing could be a deterrent because their risk of killing someone or getting caught are far greater. Some said they thought only LEO could OC the very last thing they want is to be convicted of killing a cop. They claim they are not so stupid as to overlook anyone OCing and can tell if someone is CCing. I think there is some degree of bravado in that answer. I did get a couple of I'd waste the mother from mouthy young wanna bee punks.

I have been told by many a LEO that even though it is legal, if a bystander sees the OC and "feels" threatened then you are now breaking the law, even though the law is almost clear in layman's terms about what qualifies as "threatening" and it involves more than just carrying. I guess what I am getting at is that you are more likely to be relieved of your weapon by a LEO than a BG.

I have heard several variations of that said by more than a few including LEO. In Washington there is a State Supreme court decision that addresses that. It is very clear that there must be some kind of overt threatening action that can be clearly articulated. The mere presence of a gun is not enough to warrant any brandishing, threatening, disturbing the peace etc charge. Keep in mind that Washington courts and laws are pretty 2A friendly even if the people are not. Which is why that decision is in the Washington OC pamphlet that opencarry.org has for download. Opencarry.org would be a good start point to see what your states laws are. I have heard of people being arrested but never any convictions. The NRA, the Second Amendment Foundation and other Pro Second Amendment Organizations have been known to provide lawyers in those cases

Would it have been the same result if two OCers walked in? That is certainly open to speculation, but my opinion is that it is much more likely that OCers would have been ambushed/killed than CCers, if only for the simple fact that many people assume anyone OCing is a cop. The robbers didn't kill the visually unarmed store clerks, lending more credence to the idea that they were targeting the (armed) threat, not just witnesses or random customers. Just one case, and not entirely applicable, but there it is.!

I can see how you could make a case that is an example of a risk someone OCing may encounter. It would help to know if the officers were in uniform or not. A police uniform of course is a giant flashing neon DANGER sign to a BG. While a civilian OC'ing could also be seen as a danger sign but more like a window sign that they may miss. As Lima stated the BG's are target focused. Anyone entering the store is a threat, one that needs to be dealt with, but not necessarily given their full attention or with extreme prejudice as they are not the same level of threat as a LEO is. Even if the gun is seen the robber may ask are you a LEO rather than just shoot. Remember most BG see civilians and LEO very differently. Completely different threat levels. Still I think you make a good point. At least one worthy of consideration if you are going to OC. But than again I think someone is waiting to kill me every time I walk through a door. My wife thinks thats a bit over the top bordering crazy. I don't, been there done that did not like it.

And for Lima: I know you are an aspiring writer (and a damned good one at that), so please take this as it is intended: constructive criticism to make you better at your craft. In your post, you said "you are a force best not reckoned with." The correct saying is "a force to be reckoned with;" you may have been confusing this with "a force better not messed (or similiar) with." Massive nit-picking, I know, but when you submit for publishing (and you should), I want them to have as little as possible to hit you with!

I did a double take / read when I read that too. On reread I think I got it and it is a well stated play on words IMO
The cliche "a force to be reckoned with" I believe refers to something you must deal with or confront say getting a bear out of your cabin the bear would be a force to be reckoned with. i.e. do not under estimate the bear. Dont mess around that is not a possum in there, that bear is a force to be reckoned with.
My interpretation of Limatunes phrase "a force best not reckoned with." would refer to something you could avoid given a choice. That bee hive in the woods is a force best not reckoned with. In context of Limas post I took it to mean that Lima is someone that is best left alone i.e. not an easy target or victim. Or at least thats my take. Hopefully Lima will correct me if my interpretation is incorrect.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[TN_Mike]

There is a case where two police (yes, I know, not a direct correlation, but hear me out) in (I believe) Puerto Rico came into a convenience store to get some snacks/drinks. They didn't know it, but they had just interrupted an armed robbery. Both were ambushed and killed - not because they were making an arrest or otherwise interfering (neither knew anything was wrong until they were gunned down) but because they presented an obvious threat to the robbers.

Would it have been the same result if two OCers walked in? That is certainly open to speculation, but my opinion is that it is much more likely that OCers would have been ambushed/killed than CCers, if only for the simple fact that many people assume anyone OCing is a cop.

This type of situation is exactly why I do not walk into a convenience store or gas station without watching from outside for a minute or two. OC or CC, I do not want to walk into the middle of an armed robbery.

[QKShooter]

Be extremely careful how you critique lima.
She is a force best not reckoned with.

[ccw9mm]

Be extremely careful how you critique lima.
She is a force best not reckoned with.

Yeah, she's carrying openly, these days. Or ... or, is she? JD?! JD?? Fired up the Jeep, yet?

[OPFOR]

I can see how you could make a case that is an example of a risk someone OCing may encounter. It would help to know if the officers were in uniform or not. A police uniform of course is a giant flashing neon DANGER sign to a BG. While a civilian OC'ing could also be seen as a danger sign but more like a window sign that they may miss. As Lima stated the BG's are target focused. Anyone entering the store is a threat, one that needs to be dealt with, but not necessarily given their full attention or with extreme prejudice as they are not the same level of threat as a LEO is. Even if the gun is seen the robber may ask are you a LEO rather than just shoot. Remember most BG see civilians and LEO very differently. Completely different threat levels. Still I think you make a good point. At least one worthy of consideration if you are going to OC. But than again I think someone is waiting to kill me every time I walk through a door. My wife thinks thats a bit over the top bordering crazy. I don't, been there done that did not like it.

They were in uniform. However, the BGs had taken up concealed positions (IIRC, one was pretending to be a store clerk while the other moved to ambush). A visible gun may have been missed, certainly, but it is more likely that a concealed gun would have gone overlooked.

Doing some research, I found the following on a FOP memo released in support of H.R. 218/S. 253:

Officer Angel Luis Marquez-Rivera of the Puerto Rico Police Department was off-duty and out of uniform when suspects, identifying him as a police officer, shot and killed him during a robbery attempt.

This raises the question How did they know he was a cop? It is possible (though no where near certain) that they saw a firearm. Again, I think it is a fairly common assumption from many non-gun folks that someone with a pistol, in a holster, openly displayed is an LEO. It seems that Officer Marquez-Rivera made no attempt to stop the robbery (there are many cases in this paper of police being killed while trying to intervene and the attempt is clearly articulated; there is no mention of intervention in this case), so we are left to wonder how the robbers IDed him and why they decided to kill him.

The following case is similar:

Sergeant Keith R. Levine, a six-year veteran of the New York City Police Department, was offduty when he observed a suspect robbing a man at an automatic teller machine. He was shot and killed by the suspect.

There is also this case, where the officer was apparently killed by the BG after he was IDed as an LEO. Again, was it a badge or a gun or something else that "made" him as a cop?

Officer Oliver Wendell Smith, Jr., of the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, D.C., was off-duty when he was robbed at gunpoint. Upon discovering the victim was a police officer, the robbers shot and killed him.

Again, none of these directly adresses non-LEO encounters, but they bear some similarities to situations that may arise for armed civilians.

The full memo is here: http://www.grandlodgefop.org/legisla...r218/slain.pdf

[LongRider]

Again, none of these directly adresses non-LEO encounters, but they bear some similarities to situations that may arise for armed civilians.

The full memo is here: http://www.grandlodgefop.org/legisla...r218/slain.pdf

Thanks for the post and link/download. You are right they are not really related to civilian carry but as you said something / scenarios worth consideration for anyone that OC's in that I am sure any BG that sees us as a threat will do whatever they feels they need to do to assure their safety and freedom. Still I do not think they see us the same as they see LEO whose job is to apprehend them. Where as the average just wants to survive

[concealed]

OK..I hate this discussion because it turns too heated. Anyway, while not involving guns, let me give you two personal experiences. While I did not interview the criminals during the crimes, I can only surmise I was considerd the biggest threat to there plan. While not big, I am
6'1" and 250 lbs.
1) Bank robbery- I am in the furthest corner from the entrance at Assistant Manager Desk. Three men with guns and masks run in securing entire branch. Two of them place their guns to my head. After everyone was placed on the ground, one of them still kept his gun to my head. This was not a routine robbery as they strong armed the branch and forced all into vault in rear. At no time was a gun removed from my head. No one else had this done to them. I had no weapon at this time. Compliance worked and no one was injured.

2) Mugging attempt - while on vacation and in a small group, we had an attempted mugging on us. In this case we were run at, and two of them knocked me to the ground while the others were mugged. Fortunately there was such a commotion and confusion, they BG's ran away with nothing and I was uninjured.

What does all this say? Criminals WILL deal with the obvious threat first. I do not think we need newstories or statistics to verify this simple human trait.

OC comes down to speed of draw being best, and some feeling that the view of the weapon is a deterrent to BG's. All of this must be wayed against the obvious and oft mentioned harassment. My wife is in LE, and if there is open carry in this area, the police will get called without a doubt. She has the call reports to back this up.

To avoid arguing, I will not go over CC!

[LongRider]

OK..I hate this discussion because it turns too heated. Anyway, while not involving guns, let me give you two personal experiences.

Not sure what there is to hate here, or get hot about. My question was

Does the person open carrying often get shot first? Do they often get their gun taken away? Anyone have links to stories or personal accounts where these things happen. Or are these just possibilities that might happen some day to some one? I don't know so I am asking.

We either have verifiable evidence be it police reports, links to news stories or personal experience. Or we don't have any verifiable evidence that those things do occur. Not much to debate. Even less to get hot about.

As stated in the forum header and by the moderators

This is not a place to debate the virtues of open vs concealed carry.

So that is not even an issue

While your stories are interesting they do not really address the question. I do think as in OPFOR's last post it does point out that the BG may very well deal with anyone he perceives as a threat. Something that all of us whether we carry concealed, open carry or do not carry at all should be aware of. As you pointed out you do not need to be packing to get a gun stuck in your face or get shot for that matter.

As far as the potential for harassment and that is the appropriate term. I personally know that it happens but have found that varies from one jurisdiction to the next. In my area most departments do not tolerate abuse under color of law and most of the Officers are pretty stand up. Respectful of citizens and the law even if they do not necessarily agree with it. IMO those officers that do harass citizens need to be taught to respect the law and that it is not OK to abuse their authority but that is a whole different topic than the one being discussed here. Though it is something anyone that OC's should consider. While the questions I brought up do not seem to be something that need be a major concern. As there appears to be little evidence that either actually happens. Which is not to say it cant.

[concealed]

Not sure what there is to hate here, or get hot about.

As with your tone, people seem to get a little testy around this subject. Not trying to be argumentative with you, just showing you some actual events, not stories.

While your stories are interesting they do not really address the question.

Not directly, but you yourself said BG's remove a perceived threat, which was the point to my actual events. Open carry would defintely be a perceived threat! In light of the lack of information on this subject, you have to take what you can get. Happy Hoildays!

As far as the potential for harassment and that is the appropriate term.

I did not that to be derogatory to LE. My wife is in LE, and all officers must respond to calls by citizens. Maybe "inconvenience" would have been a better term.

[Miggy]

I am going to add my 2 dinars here. I think the reason we don't have more BG targeting OCers is because OCers are still a small minority and they are pretty mobile.
Other than gunshops, it is rare to see a store where the owners & employees OC. A BG may decide that the risk of hitting a particular OC business is acceptable if the payoff is great. If that condition is satisfied, I am sure that the BG will come in and take out the OCers same way they take out Armored Trucks guards doing their money deliveries or pick ups.

As with everything, you take the responsibility of OCing also knowing the potential risks you may face.

[Bumper]

AS LongRider said, this forum is not for members to tell what they don't like about OC, obviously. It would be better placed in the concealed forum regarding why you do prefer concealed....

[charliegiv]

Two instances during the same shooting. Granted, both victims were police officers, but the principle is the same: the shooter knew the officers were armed, and he shot them first before he started shooting unarmed people.

1. The shooter approaches a police officer. They know each other because the shooter has had issues with the city before. The shooter kills the officer who is open carrying. Other news accounts state the shooter took the officer's gun and may have used it in the shootings that followed.

2. The shooter enters a city hall meeting and immediately shoots and kills a second police officer, who was the only armed person in the room.

The shooter then proceeds to shoot and kill others until other officers arrive and kill the shooter.

Maybe not exact examples of what you are looking for since they were police officers open carrying, but some of the principle is the same.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/08/us...=1&oref=slogin

The following is only a short excerpt from a longer article:

In situation 1 is it possible the officer was taken out first because he was known? Plus wasn't he the obstacle that had to be removed for entry to the main target area?

In situation 2 is it possible the officer was taken out first, because he was the first to react? If someone else had made a grab for the shooter wouldn't he have been shot first?

It's pretty hard to lay any course of action to one specific reason, without knowing every variable.

[grady]

In situation 1 is it possible the officer was taken out first because he was known? Plus wasn't he the obstacle that had to be removed for entry to the main target area?

Yes, the officer may have been sought out because the shooter knew him, or perhaps the shooter just happened upon the officer as the shooter was headed for the assembly. Either way, the shooter seemed to have determined he was "going all the way" with whomever he encountered.

In situation 2 is it possible the officer was taken out first, because he was the first to react?

Yes.

If someone else had made a grab for the shooter wouldn't he have been shot first?

Probably.

It's pretty hard to lay any course of action to one specific reason, without knowing every variable.

Yes, and many of the details of this particular shooting will never be known. The update is the mayor finally passed away a few weeks back, but he had been making some progress at recovery. At least his family was able to spend some more time with him before he passed.


Again, I realize my example doesn't quite fit the criteria LongRider was asking about since this exampled involved LEOs.

[Fenris]

Could anyone please provide any documentation or evidence of someone being targeted by BG, because they were CC'ing and therefore did not present a visible sign being armed?

The corollary to what Ronald Reagan said "Peace through Strength" is "Weakness (or the appearance of weakness) invites attack."

My point is that asking for evidence of OC'ing leading to an attack, ignores the non-measurable issue of OC'ing deterring an attack in the first place, and CC'ing not deterring at all.

That having been said, although I live in Virginia I am not quite comfortable OC'ing as it is still relatively uncommon. Hoping more of you start OC'ing in VA. There is safety in numbers, and I like to follow rather than lead. :)

On a related note:
OC being legal protects the CC'er from charges if the gun is accidentally flashed.
CC being legal protects the OC'er from charges if the gun is accidentally covered.

CC and OC are two sides of the same coin (right). Without either one, the right to bear arms is significantly diminished.

[LongRider]

As with everything, you take the responsibility of OCing also knowing the potential risks you may face.

Which is the whole purpose of the thread to help determine which risks are real and which are just unwarranted or exaggerated fears.

I am sure that the BG will come in and take out the OCers same way they take out Armored Trucks guards doing their money deliveries or pick ups.

True but as Fenris said OC may also cause the BG reconsider his target. After all they are looking for victims not armed opponents. Which is why stop and robs are hit far more often than armored trucks. Even though the sentence is the same and armored trucks have way more money

My point is that asking for evidence of OC'ing leading to an attack, ignores the non-measurable issue of OC'ing deterring an attack in the first place, and CC'ing not deterring at all.

No it does not. Not trying to cover every aspect of OC'ing. That is an unrelated question about another part of the OC'ing question. This thread is specifically about if there is any evidence that OC'ing somehow makes you a target. Based on what we have been able to discover here It does not appear that there is any evidence of civilians being targeted because they OC. Which tells me that it IS NOT something to be overly concerned about, as it is very unlikely. Though I would not discount that it could happen.

Some have provided verifiable evidence that LEO have been targeted. Which may show that it might happen to a civilian or it may have been more because of the fact that they were LEO and nothing to do with their OC'ing. There is not real way of knowing though I tend to think it was because they were LEO or again we would have more evidence of it happening to civilian. Others have presented unrelated stories that have no connection to the question but on a whole the responses have been insightful and helpful to me and hopefully others in assessing the risks OC'ing.

While your comment that OC'ing may act as a deterrent is valid if unrelated to this topic. Maybe worthy of its own thread. Unlike this topic it is one that I think we will be unable to prove one way or the other. Because it is practically impossible to prove a negative. Unless someone does a study of known felons who have not committed a crime because they saw someone OC. Even than that study by definition would be tainted as it would have to rely on the word of known convicted liars and thieves. Still might be an interesting thread