"Officer 1: That's going to stay in its holster, right?
Me: It typically does unless I tell it otherwise."

Alternative reply: No, it typically gets out and does a buck-and-wing across the floor in front of me.

What a lousy exchange between officer and OC'er. Both could have been more professional.

 

Exactly.

 

Details!! Manufacturer, caliber, rig, etc....

 

Your lucky the one walking past you, that stopped and looked at youfor 5 sec didn't try to take it away from you, if their intent was to rob the store. He might have taught you were LE.

 

Your lucky the one walking past you, that stopped and looked at youfor 5 sec didn't try to take it away from you, if their intent was to rob the store. He might have taught you were LE.

How many accounts of this happening can you document? It's reached mythical porportions.

 

Another OC acknowledged as a deterrent.
The police in Ohio even acknowledged it. Openly carried firearms do deter crime. What would have happened if he had been concealed?

Good story. Maybe the OC thing worked here. Maybe it could have turned out much differently.
I guess the deterrent value of OC as well as the tactical pros and cons can always be argued either way. I have to do what makes tactical sense to me and that means that the only time the bad guy is likely to know I'm armed is just before the lights go out for him.

 

I have 0 issue with the conversation between the officer and OC'r. Whats wrong with it?

 

I don't see anything wrong either. The cop just doesn't want the citizen to be handling the firearm while he is there. Not to say that the cop felt that the citizen was going to start shooting somebody. Look at it this way, some cops may be quite a lot worse and demand to take possession of the citizen's firearm until the ordeal is over.

 

To be honest, no one really knows if his OC deterred a robbery or not. The only thing we know for a fact is that criminals fear coming up against an armed victim. This has been documented many times from interviews with convicted criminals. Carry however you feel comfortable with and is legal in your state.

 

Here is my take, from my understanding how the criminal element thinks.

It was not the gun itself that thwarted the possible crime about to take place. It was the perception that the only people who carry guns are BG's and cops. I'd wager that the thugettes saw the holstered gun and assumed the guy was a cop. These types do not care of even think about confrontation while carrying out these types of crimes. They only care about getting caught.

 

If thug comes at me while i'm pumping gas,he will get doused,if he is dumb enough to discharge a gun while in a gassy environment I hope I can dive for cover as he shoots before his street name gets changed to flambo

 

My take is the guy OC'ing went home to his loved one's.

 

Similar thing happened to a friend of mine at a convenience store in Meridian Idaho last summer.

Not sayin it was, but, very similar.

 

Personally, I have no problem with this guy’s reply to the officer. It was a ridiculous question to ask in the first place; just as ridiculous as if any one of us would say such a thing to a LEO who we approached, or approached us. The foolish statement illustrates the attitude that some LEO’s have towards civilians being armed, that simply because you’re not in uniform, a member of the brotherhood, that because of that, you are in some way not qualified, or to be trusted with a firearm and the same level of defense as they are.

That being said, IMHO, I feel that simple common sense answers the question as to whether OC has a deterrent effect. I don’t feel you can say in ALL cases, but I feel it is safe to say in MOST cases, the presence of an individual who is OCing at a location that is at the same time, being visited by a person or persons who intend to commit a crime, that those who intend on committing the crime will either delay their activity or forgo it all together and seek a venue that offers less risk to themselves. I think that is just common sense reasoning.

In the example presented here, it really doesn’t matter what the group of thugs thought the open carrier was i.e. plain clothes LEO, or civilian with a gun, the fact is that the group noticed that an individual with a sidearm was present and aware of his surroundings, and that seems to have had the direct result of them quickly leaving the area. Had the open-carrier been carrying concealed, the apparent planned robbery would most likely have taken place.

 

I've read that one before. And I have gotten the "don't touch yours and I won't touch mine" response from LE. That was while CC'ing too. I had a LEO behind me as I bought some JHP ammo back when the price was sky high. His response to the price, "I hope you get a refund if you ever have to shoot anyone with that. Maybe give them a receipt. Ball ammo's killed everybody we needed to kill." Sometimes a witty response calms the situation down a bit.

 

It may or may not have stopped a bad situation but everyone went home (good guys) at the end of the day. It's up to everyone on how they choose to carry and if you are comfortable with OC or CC go with it. I see there are some who are worried about giving up the element of surprise to the BG and they have a right too. I feel CC is best for me but, if you are aware of your surroundings (as we all should be, crappy world these days) then I see that there is really no tatical disadvantage to OC'ing. Just my thoughts though.

 

Its sad that any of us feel a need to justify a legal activity. Its almost as if a person cannot show that his activity, however legal, is a benefit to society it is permissible to ban it.
Its no longer good enough to show that your activity harms no one else. Now you must also show that it has a legitimate value not only to you but to society.

Michael

 

Open carry bashers will never agree that it was the open carrier that prevented this nor will the open carriers fail to use this example of "See open carry does stop crimes". After reviewing threads Ad naseum about this subject, I have come to the conclusion that there are just people on both sides who are gong to point fingers and bash the others because they dont conform to THEIR way of thinking. Trying to justify one over the other sure does waste a lot of bandwidth without changing anyone's mind. Never mind open carry is legal in some places. There are just going to be some folks, for whatever reason, that look down their noses on people they dont feel are as smart as they are. That is what the argument is about really. I am smarter than you kind of argument. All the antis have to do is just sit back and let us pound ourselves. I will most likely continue to follow these types of threads just in case someone comes up with a magic solution. (Like carry like you want to as long as the law allows and I wont worry about it and will do what I think is best for me and my family, kinda solution)

 

Lucky that this guy was perceptive enough to assess the situation. I feel like a persons instincts will kick in when something like this starts happening. Go with your gut. Glad everything turned out well for this guy.

In regards to the open carrying... I have always been under the impression that criminals, like most predatory animals, seek the weaker individuals of the herd. When they see confrontation, they will avoid the scene or pick a different target. There are so many variables, it is impossible to be sure what a criminal is going to do in any given situation. Whether it is more "tactical" to attempt to whip out a concealed gun and start firing, or more tactical to prevent a situation from happening by appearing as the "stronger" target, I couldn't tell anyone. They both seem to make sense, to me.

 

I personally do not have a problem if you want to open carry, or concealed carry, I am not opinionated on this issue, as I somtimes OC , usually it is when I am at the farm or around the house kicking cans as my dad calls it, but i prefer cc when i leave the house, course out here, it is a little different than the big cities, but one thing for sure, i will be carrying one way or the other....there is no option there.

 

Now this is an opinion I could rally behind!!! +10,000!!

 

The problem, and the only REAL problem, I have with OC, that it seems that people either don't think about, or, refuse to consider, is that a gun carried in the open becomes a factor, whether you want it to or not.
In other words, it's just as easy to attract rude, unwanted and even provocative comments during an encounter with an idiot and escalate the situation in even a minor encounter where there may be an exchange of words with someone. They see the gun on your hip, and begin to feed off of that.

Take something like a minor traffic incident, where you accidently bump someone in a parking lot. The person you hit is angry because it may be your fault. You exchange words, but now he sees you have a gun on your hip. Now, it becomes a factor. I should not have to elaborate on this any further, as if anyone here has had a run in with certain types of people, it should be self explanatory how this could snowball.

I'm sure there will be no acknowledgement of the potential for this to happen by those who are so quick to jump on the platform to defend OC against any and all logic.

But in reality, this type of incident, in which OC may actually add fuel to the fire is just as likely to happen as the belief that it deters crime.

Once that weapon is viewed it becomes a factor, whether you want it to or not.

 

Cant argue with this a bit. No matter how a weapon is carried there are going to be issues that MUST be taken into account. Common sense would tell one that someone open carrying must take weapons retention into account. Not that you dont while concealed carry but it becomes more important (in my mind) if you open carry. People are going to react in different ways once a weapon is observed. That is human nature. Because they choose to react negatively (their problem or issue in my opinion), we as weapons carriers have to take their reactions into account. Your concealed carry could be observed or you may be open carrying. Either way you have to be ready to deal with people's reaction. Dont let the fact that you CC lull you into a state where you are not prepared to be "outed" in a negative fashion. As humans, we have to deal with all types of personalities and "types" of people. We need to be prepared to diffuse a situation quicker than we might normally would if we are carrying just in case we encounter the types of folks if we can. If not, we have to have a plan to deal with them.

 

The only reason I brought this particular scenario up, is because, I heard about it from a fellow officer who responded to a disorder in a parking lot at a local grocery. The person who was hit also claimed the OC guy threatened him with the weapon he was carrying. Muddied the waters quite a bit. Witnesses stated they heard the man screaming, "What are you going to do, shoot me!?".

While noone saw the man actually pull his gun out of the holster, they did say he put his hand on it.
Unintended consequences arose here that would not have been, if the gun was not introduced into the mix.

It's harder for a legally armed man, wearing a gun in the open, to run away from a situation, than to stand there and take an ass whipping. And, when he gets scared, ( and he will, because that's why he is carrying in the first place for all the bad guys to see), he will use it. And when he does, it opens up a whole world of nightmares.

It's easier to run from trouble if noone sees a sidearm on your hip.

 

Absolutely. Walk softly, carry a big stick. I do OC on the farm but it attracts un-needed attention elsewhere. If I am asking someone to leave my property because it is posted, I also conceal and politely ask them to leave. It seems to me that I read an article in the news a few weeks ago about someone OC'ing who lost their side arm to a thug. No injuries, just a robbery. Retention becomes an issue and you don't want your "purse" snatched.....

 

Bashing a guy from another forum on this forum? Check.
Bagging on open carry in the open carry subforum? Check.
Denying that open carry deters crime, when it obviously does? Check.

Congratulations, Defensivecarry.com!

 

No one is bashing anyone. We are discussing the pros and cons of a method of carry to attempt to give a full circle of thought. That's what we do around here, not stroke each other for a feel good effect.

Checkmate

 

So the post about the OC'er having his gun taken away and killed with it apparently disproves your proof that OC deters crime? So now I raise you the Waffle House robbery attempt and call with the dead guy having his gun taken away from him.

This topic has been hashed and rehashed. A common low threat thug may be deterred by someone carrying a firearm. A person determined to commit a crime does not care and will commit said crime anyways with the person OC'ing being the first target/victim.

As has been stated a firearm introduced into some situations can go bad quickly but the fact remains that if everyone can see it the process tends to speeed up. If you OC you better have your head on a swivel and think about every little thing. Body positioning, your enviroment, your loved ones around you, people in general around you, the bad guys, the good guys it all comes into play.

 

So, besides your disdain for an opposing view, what exactly are you attempting to add that will be beneficial to the thread?

 

Wow I guess he does not like folks that do not agree with his thoughts, he apparently does not like the Po Po, 5-0 or any of the pricks in uniform so he just gets butt hurt all the way around I guess. Acting like a 5 year old who does not get his way is surely not the way to get your point across.

Just an opinion

 

I think he scared the crap out of him when he stared right back at him, most BG's don't like it when people don't cower to them.
The second guy scene something that he sensed may possibly hamper there future earning ability, A non-thug with a gun.

 

There is nothing that is concrete fact that a crime was in the making. It is nothing but the person perception at that moment.

And, to explore this a little further, for the sake of argument, let's assume that there was a crime in the making. Was it the sight of the gun on the hip of the OCer, or the thought that he may be LE? And, if that be the case, let's go even further.
If a crime was about to be committed, and the group felt their numbers trumped one LE, who has training and instant logistical support, what kind of s- storm would the OCer have found himself in?

 

1. We'll never know what these particular guys were thinking, i they indeed were planning on committing a crime or not. It's possible they may have thought he was LEO, or they may have thought he was an employee who was armed.

2. If they decided their numbers trumped a LEO's training, then the person's status or non-status as LEO would have been irrelevant. You seriously overestimate the training of the average LEO. Do you think all LEO have special commando training? Hardly. Many LEO only shoot their guns enough to be able to qualify once or twice yearly. Or do all the documented cases of LEOs missing their targets, or hitting innocent bystanders, is evidence of that special training they receive?

In a gunfight, anyone, whether they're LEO or a pudgy librarian carrying a Glock, would have been screwed. Don't kid yourself by thinking otherwise.