An analysis of open carry problems

How do you know that?

Find for me a well known or qualified trainer who thinks OC is optimal
Click to expand...

I doubt you will be supplied with any examples of LEOs, Tactical trainers, Experts in the field of SD or anyone knowledgeable is any sort of protective services that will be a proponent of OC as a individual self defense initiative.

I will exclude those in uniform or others openly/obviously working in a protective capacity. You may as well OC within that context.

Generally speaking, the more training a person has.. the less likely they are going to be a proponent of open carry in public spaces.
 
Interesting video. Lots of colorful characters and egos in that store. Reinforces to me why guns should be concealed.
 
There is so much wrong with that video incident, I don't even know where to start. That is the poorest excuse of an "attack" that I have seen in a long time. I am not going to allow someone to physically harass me and force would likely be necessary to change his channels but I cannot imagine pulling a gun let alone shooting a lone unarmed lumbering guy who in a dozen attempts has seemingly not managed to do anything other than push and pull at my shirt.

I tip my hat to the guy with the handtruck who got clear of chaos and never came back into frame.
 
Last edited:
Really allowed himself to get backed into a corner. Was the fuel additive (my guess at the bottle) really that necessary that you stay in what is obviously a situation you don't want to be in? Leave, call the police, be a good witness. That and going back into the store. You have a vehicle I imagine, can't tell on the recording, that affords you some level of protection, certainly against a man with just fists, and the ability to get away. Why abandon that for a location where you don't know the exits or layout?

I've mentioned it before but in one force on force scenario I was part of a person is sitting at an open air cafe when two people come in, knock two people to the ground, kick them a few times, then walk around talking trash. Every person's interaction was recorded so we could analyze after the fact. Some people waited for an opportunity and bolted, others faded into the back of the crowd. Two students chose to get involved and drew their firearms. The problem was they had given no thought to what was next. They drew their firearms and expected compliance. When they didn't get it they ended up getting cornered and eventually shot the aggressors. The end result was two people assaulted and two people killed for an assault that hadn't originally been directed at the students that did the shooting. In the other cases the original two were assaulted and the aggressors left.

It was a real eye opener for the people that did shoot. One was a man and one was a woman. The man had been pretty vocal during the day about his shooting abilities and the woman was an NRA certified trainer. Obviously and thankfully it wasn't real, but there was some actual shock on their faces in watching the other videos. For anyone interested the course is put on by Todd Rassa both in Texas and New Hampshire and is called Active Shooter Response for the Concerned Citizen. Todd was in Balitmore, MD PD for 26 years. I get no kickbacks, I just like him as an instructor.
 
Last edited:
Anyone reading this thread gets a lot of good input from several good perspectives from both "trained instructors" and those who have very good real world experience as well as a little of both to utilize in making their own informed decisions. Right on, Firing Line!
 
The big guy was obviously angry and it would be smart not to under estimate the fellow but even as he seemingly became angrier and angrier, he passed on every opportunity to actually harm someone. He threw a drink, he postured, he ran around, he seeming blocked his license plate he pulled at the guys shirt and pawed at his outstretched arm, lumbered around, pushed and pulled. Its all a rather benign representation of "attack" if you even want to call it that. Its provocative, its harassing, its goading, its unpleasant, its probably a minor crime in most places but if someone wants to highlight what part suggests life threatening peril... I am all ears.


TunnelRat hit on some good points.. put the drink down and leave, get gas somewhere else... walk away, break contact, create distance, pay attention to what is unfolding around you and remember that a firearm is not always the deterrent you might expect it to be.

I will add: Stay out of minor skirmishes, civil disputes and all other adversarial jackassery that you can simply walk away from. You will never find me getting involved in the troubles of other people. I will call the authorities and I may intervene if innocent life is actually in peril but short of the worst thing you can imagine, I am going to keep my nose out of it.
 
Last edited:
Its all a rather benign representation of "attack" if you even want to call it that. Its provocative, its harassing, its goading, its unpleasant, its probably a minor crime in most places but if someone wants to highlight what part suggests life threatening peril... I am all ears.
Click to expand...


When his only chance of retreat was lost, he was in a corner and a guy who stood maybe five feet taller and outweighed him by what looks to be forty or so pounds had been tossing him around like a bag of chips. Without audio, we don't know what sort of threats or other exchanges happened, but we do know that the guy had yelled aggressively at the cashier. The guy was apparently out of his damned mind. The guy with the gun drew it far too early, he was wobbling around trying to keep it away from the guy, but gee, the guy didn't seem to want it yet with that gun in his right hand, wth could he do but get his butt whipped?.

When the guy with the gun decided to fire, he was trapped, a man who was adrenaline pumped was banging him around, and in a matter of seconds, that was going to go beyond his control. he was going to go on the floor with this guy on top of him. He had two possible assumptions to make, one was to assume that the guy just wanted to beat him up a little bit because he was angry.

That assumption is one that can lead to death.

The other possible ending was that the guy did trip him, get him on his back, knee him, punch him, take his gun, kill him. a knee to the nads or solar plexus would have literally put him out of combat.

The erratic, completely abnormal behavior led him to choose deadly force over being crushed and disabled, and possibly killed.

I don't know if you would ever find yourself in that same stupid situation, but if you did, I would want you to shoot. I believe that if the guy had not been stopped, he would probably have caused a serious injury. Not maybe, probably. He had escalated from yelling at a poor old guy to beating an armed man. why would we believe that he wouldn't escalate further? I don't want your death to be another piece of propaganda. I don't think that you would have made all of the dumb choices that led to this guy backed in a corner with a wired up monster on top of him.

Among all of the stupid things that he did, the only one that I believe was right was to shoot, and maybe save his life. He didn't have to use three rounds, as far as I can see the guy was already backed off and maybe he didn't have to kill the guy. I can't fault his decision based on the guy's behavior. You can't tell if the dog is going to bite until you are bleeding.
 
Fireforged has it covered. Avoid conflicts if possible. Let the Police handle it. Running around acting and trying to look like a tough guy, sticking your nose into non-life threatening situations while openly wearing a sidearm and "Instructor" shirt could easily be seen as provocation by an intoxicated, drugged or enraged mentally unstable person who feels justified in their anger. Then there are the Police and Prosecutor.. who's side will they take? This guy wasn't charged, but in many jurisdictions he undoubtedly would have been. Criminal charges and or Civil lawsuits are no fun. Keep your egos in check.
 
Last edited:
When his only chance of retreat was lost, he was in a corner and a guy who stood maybe five feet taller and outweighed him by what looks to be forty or so pounds had been tossing him around like a bag of chips.
Click to expand...

You are describing a mental trap.. not a physical one. Firstly, he was defending himself from jackassery. This had gone on for a pretty good while and the big guy had not harmed anyone. Sure the guy was big but he seemingly lacked the motivation to do much other than injury pride. It looked like pure silliness and the guy with a gun had the same options the entire time. He could simply redirect the "attackers" forward momentum, using it against him( pull him in) and get him out of the way. As far as him being boxed in.. lol a rack of chips and soda is not a sufficient barrier to keep any able bodied person confined, its a mental illusion. If he really wanted to get away from the guy without fighting him, he could have gone over the food isle. Sure it would make a mess but come-on.. its hardly a trap. Using a gun to manage that situation is nearly unbelievable.
 
Last edited:
briandg wins with this one

A person's driving tells more about them than ten years in therapy. Trust me.
Click to expand...

This is 100% truth. If you want to know if someone practices situational awareness, ride with them. I can't stand riding with someone who doesn't anticipate traffic and other drivers, moving into the proper lane to make a turn well enough in advance, anticipating the far off stop light, or paying attention to the street signs. This drives me WILD! I have a good friend and co-worker (who is a cop) that I ride with on occasion. I can't stand it, I constantly want to reach over and grab the steering wheel!

Sorry for the aside, but those were sage words.
 
I read the "old thread" warning, but wanted to add another dimension that wasn't mentioned.

I would also agree that his use of deadly force seemed excessive, although it was technically legal. The attacker was just some big, slow, dumb galoot who was just yelling and shoving people around. Maybe he was a mental patient off his meds or something.

No point in debating the details, like not being so obvious about getting his plate number (he could have stayed inside and done that).

But anyway, another angle: while in general we talk of "shooting to wound" as a bad idea, I'm wondering if this might have been a viable case for doing so. The shooter could have easily put a bullet in the knee or foot of the attacker and stopped him, without killing him.
 
I would also agree that his use of deadly force seemed excessive, although it was technically legal.
Click to expand...
Should it be determined that the force used was excessive in the perspective of what the actor knew and reasonably believed at the time, it would not be considered legal, "technically" or otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top