So who open carries?

OC used to be OK here until all of the Yankees moved in, get enough of them and they take over. No venom here. Sarcasm.

My place in NC, nobody blinks an eye. There's also not much reason to carry unless going into the woods.
 
Open carry is IMO great if we all did. However until the minority is the majority CC is the way to go. The element of suprise is the ultimate tool in self defense, but if more than 50% of the population open carried it wouldn't matter.
 
OC once when I visited a local bank with a good amount of cash in hands.

They are "legal" in Ohio, just not to the LEOs. My buddy was detained for more than an hour before they clean him; funny thing is, he is a dispatcher for the the county.
 
I would refrain from open carry, myself, because I don't have confidence that I could retain the gun if someone else wanted it. I walk carefully with the radar on when I cc, I'd be downright paranoid if I were to oc.
 
I OC quite a bit, as my primary holster is generally a Don Hume JIT slide OWB. T-shirts cover it in the summer but for now I usually like my shirts tucked in. So if I'm out without a coat, especially around the house and block, I'm OCing. Soon as a jacket is put on, it's concealed. Michigan makes that pretty easy, though you can be harrassed in more citified areas by cops that, for some reason, don't believe it's legal.:rolleyes:
 
OhioAAA! Having a firearm in a financial lending institution is eillegal unless you are employed there as a armed gard, or you are a LEO. It's a fed. law no matter what state or territory you are standing in. Your banker can't even have a working gun in a shadow box on his wall. OC or CC it doesn't matter in the bank.
 
OC is prohibited by City Code inside the city limits of Kodiak, CC is legal statewide, state statute clearly states that municipalities may not infringe on the right to CC. Just one more reason to love Alaska...;)

I OC when I'm hunting/fishing/hiking, just for the ease of access if Yogi bear isn't in a good mood. If I'm going to run into town, I'll throw on my long jacket, conceals all my handguns in OWB holsters nicely.

The only real hassle I encounter is when departing/arriving on base. CC is not allowed. Guns in vehicles must be in a separate compartment (preferably locked) from the ammunition. Though MILPOL probably wouldn't give me much grief over it, I still prefer to walk on the right side of the law/regulations.
 
Last edited:
IMHO

I think CC is preferable to OC for civilians in populated areas. Surprise is your friend in a gunfight. I know I am a target when I am at work, it is nice to blend into crowd off-duty.

Although, if it's legal and you want to, God Bless.
 
My primary goal when I’m out and about (besides whatever I went out and about to do) is to go about peaceably and not be the victim of a violent crime. To that end I carry a firearm whenever I go out as well as follow all the other standard safety practices like maintaining situational awareness, staying out of high crime areas, and avoiding confrontation. I also have a larger overall goal of making it through my life without shooting anyone. Simply put, I don’t want to be responsible, legally or morally, for another’s death. Those two goals might appear at first blush to be mutually exclusive, and with concealed carry it would be a difficult set of goals to realize.

Carrying a concealed firearm presents to a criminal that I am unarmed. Every study I’ve ever read, not most but every study, says that criminals will avoid an armed person or home when selecting a victim. That only makes sense, right? Robbers, rapists, or carjackers might be dumb and opportunistic, but they have the same instinctual sense of self preservation we all have. Hyenas don’t attack lions to steal the gazelle the lions have just killed. It’s all about risk management; are the potential gains (a tasty gazelle dinner) worth the potential pain and damage the lion’s teeth will cause, and does the hyena really need to test the lion to figure out the answer? No, the hyena can see the lion’s teeth and knows to stay well clear.

Deterrent Value:
When I’m carrying concealed I feel like my ‘teeth’ are hidden, and thus of no real deterrent value. If I appear unarmed then I am unarmed in the eyes of the robber, I appear as easy a target as almost anyone else out on the street. My probability of being a victim of a crime, violent or otherwise, is completely unchanged by the fact that I have hidden beneath my shirt the means to defend myself. My goal, however, is not to be a victim in the first place, remember? I don’t want to be a victim that fought back successfully and triumphed; I prefer to not be victimized at all. Concealed carry is good; it throws a wrench in the works for criminals who might see the teaming masses as a smorgasbord of financial gain. This deterrent effect is, nonetheless, indirect. At some point the thug will weigh the risks vs. the gains; is his current desperation for money/drugs/booze/gold grille greater than the gamble that one of those people might be carrying a gun? If he decides to play the odds, which helped along with surprise tip the scale in his favor, he will attack. Will his attack allow enough time for me to draw my concealed firearm to affect a defense? Maybe, but then again, maybe not.

Remember, I don’t want to be a victim and I don’t want to shoot anyone. So how do I realize both goals; or how do I make them inclusive? I can do that through open carry. By making it clear and obvious that I am armed, that I have teeth, I tip the risk scale to the point that the criminal’s gains are far outweighed by the risk. There is no ambiguity when the thug is doing his risk assessment, there’s something right there in plain sight that can quickly and painfully change or terminate his life. You may not think his life has much value, but as I mentioned before, he has the same sense of self preservation as any other living creature and to him it’s every bit as valuable as yours is to you. It would be foolish to ignore this indisputable fact when you develop your overall tactical strategy.

First One To Be Shot:
There are some who criticize open carry and claim it will make you more of a target or ‘the first one shot’ when a robber walks into the 7-11, despite the absolute lack of credible evidence that this has ever happened. If the robber walks in and sees that you’re armed, his whole plan has encountered an unexpected variable. In bank robberies where he might expect to see an armed guard he will have already factored that possibility into his plan, but only for the armed guard, not for open or concealed carry citizens. No robber robs a bank without at least a rudimentary plan. Nevertheless, being present for a bank robbery is an extremely remote possibility for most of us regardless of our preferred method of handgun carry. Back in the 7-11, if he sees someone is armed he is forced to either significantly alter the plan or abort it outright. Robbing is an inherently apprehensive occupation, and one that doesn’t respond well to instant modifications. He is not prepared to commit murder when he only planned for larceny. He knows that a petty robbery will not garner the intense police manhunt a murder would. He doesn’t know if you’re an armed citizen or a police officer and isn’t going to take the time to figure it out. Either way, if someone in the 7-11 is unexpectedly armed, how many others might be similarly adorned and where might they be? Does this armed individual have a partner who is likewise armed behind him in the parking lot, someone who is watching right now? Self preservation compels him to abort the plan for one that is less risky. So we see that the logic matches the history; open carriers are not the first ones shot because it doesn’t make any sense that they would be.

Surprise:
Probably the most common condemnation of open carry comes from the armchair tacticians who believe it’s better to have the element of surprise in a criminal encounter. Although this was touched on in the previous paragraph about deterrence, I’ll expand on it specifically here because there are some important truths you need to consider before you lean too heavily on this false support. Surprise as a defensive tactic is based on unrealistic or ill-thought out scenarios. The circumstance where several street toughs surround and taunt you for a while like in some Charles Bronson movie is not realistic; the mugger wants to get in and out as fast as possible. In most cases you will have only seconds to realize what’s happening, make a decision, and react. Imagine you’re walking along the sidewalk when two gangsta looking teenagers suddenly appear at the corner coming in the opposite direction. You have only seconds to react if their intent was to victimize you. Do you draw your concealed firearm now or wait until there’s an actual visible threat? If they are just on their way to church and you pull a gun on them, you are the criminal and you may forever lose your firearms rights for such a foolish action. If you don’t draw and they pull a knife or pistol when they’re just a couple steps away, your only options are draw (if you think you can) or comply. Imagine staring at the shiny blade of a knife being held by a very nervous and violent mugger, three inches from your or your wife’s throat and having to decide whether or not you have time to draw from concealment. The element of surprise may not do you any good; in fact the only surprising thing that might happen is that your concealed carry pistol gets taken along with your wallet. The thug will later get a good chuckle with his buddies about how you brought a gun to a knife fight. The simple truth is that while surprise is a monumentally superior tactical maneuver, it is exclusively an offensive action, not a defensive one. I am not aware of any army that teaches using surprise as a defense against attack. No squad of soldiers goes on patrol with their weapons hidden so that they can ‘surprise’ the enemy should they walk into an ambush.

It Will Get Stolen:
Another common criticism of open carry is that the firearm itself will be the target of theft, prompting as criminal to attack simply to get the gun from you. Like the previous example of being the first one shot in a robbery, above, this is despite the fact that there is no credible evidence it happens. It also blindly ignores the more obvious fact that anything you possess can make you the target of a crime, be it a car, a watch, or even a female companion (girlfriend, wife, or daughter). Crooks commonly steal for only two reasons; to get something you have that they want, or to get something that you have so they can sell it and buy something they want. There are no Robins in the hood trying to help the poor by stealing from the rich. I don’t claim it could never happen; just that it’s so remote a possibility that it doesn’t warrant drastic alterations to your self defense strategies. If you believe otherwise, leave your watch, sunglasses, jewelry, and cell phone at home, hop into your Pinto wagon, and head out to do your thing.

It Scares People:
One other statement against open carry I hear is that it damages public perception of firearms owners, or that by carrying openly we are not being good ambassadors to the public. While there are some people who have a genuine fear of firearms, due either to some horrible past experience or anti-gun indoctrination, the majority of people are either indifferent to them or quite fascinated by them. I’ve never kept track of the dozens of fellow citizens I’ve encountered who have marveled at the idea of open carry, but I do know exactly how many have expressed displeasure at it; one. People are scared of many things for many reasons; however, pretending those things do not exist only perpetuates the fear. Someone who is disturbed by open carry is going to be every bit as disturbed by concealed carry. The only effective way to overcome a fear is to come to the intellectual realization that the phobia is based on emotion and not on fact. By being a firsthand witness that a firearm was carried responsibly and peaceably, and wasn’t being carried in the commission of a crime, one discovers their fear is not fact based, but emotional. Thus, open carry can be a very effectual way of helping to overcome the emotionally based fear of the firearm. After all, you’d be much more likely to believe in ghosts if you saw one rather than if you listened to a ghost story around a campfire. We give much more credibility to the things we experience than we do to the things we hear. The bottom line is that this argument is made by people who don’t or haven’t carried openly; those of us who do so on a regular basis have an entirely different experience.

I’m Not Comfortable Carrying Openly:
This is really the only reasonable argument against open carry for an individual. We all have a comfort zone for any aspect of our lives and we prefer to stay within that comfort zone. We all agree that it’s better to be armed and never need the firearm than it is to need it and not have it. There is a point where concealing your firearm becomes so problematic, due to conditions like temperature or comfort, that some choose to either leave it behind or carry in such a way that it would be difficult or impossible to draw it quickly. If it takes me five or six seconds to draw my firearm from deep concealment and I had sufficient time before hand to do so, I would prefer to use that five or six seconds to avoid the entire encounter. I’m glad we have concealed carry laws in most of the states; it empowers and protects not only us but the general public through the offset deterrent effect. Some of us, however, choose the more direct deterrent effect of open carry. The combination of the two makes the criminal’s job that much more risky, that much more dangerous, and that much more uncertain.
 
I open carry occasionally, but most times I carry concealed. I was warned by the employees at a local gunshop that although it was legal, it was frowned upon by the police. I have never had a problem though, as most people don't even notice. I carried openly alot while living in Vermont and never had an issue there either.
 
So who open carrys?

I mix it up. Here in Indiana it does not matter. But some police like to bust your chops about it. I have not had that problem yet.
 
Is open carry a deterrence?

Many, many moons ago I worked as an armed security guard in a mini-mart in a bad part of town. Thinking back it was probably one of the dumbest things I ever did, but I was going to college and it was a job that helped with finances.

As soon as the store I was working in posted an armed guard, robberies went down to zero. There were several other 7-11 type stores in this neighborhood. One of them was held up at least once every week or so. More often the robbers were armed.

Was having a person, armed, and with gun exposed the difference?
 
the one who is open carrying is a target. Just my $.02

Mine too.

Mine three....or is it third...maybe thrice?
I can legally open carry, but choose not to. I see no reason to open carry other than making a statement to others about your right to carry.
Which is fine, but I'd rather not let others know I'm carrying. I don't need the attention when the only possible attention it brings, IMHO, is bad attention.
 
I do it on occasion, when I feel like answering questions or getting remarks behind my back. Otherwise I just CC as I'm somewhat introverted and don't like talking to people.

BTW this whole "target" thing is BS. Go ahead and come up with facts on this happening. No? Then zip it.
 
I accidently open-carried the other day. Stupid sweatshirt riding up... Good thing my state allows it or the old lady at the supermarket could have called the cops instead of asking me about the permit application process.:p

Oh, well. At least I was able to encourage somebody to get their permit by mistakenly showing the green veggie section my Hi-Power.:)
 
I keep hoping someone will ask me about it. It's disappointing to not see anyone else carrying now that I know there are no restrictions against it.

and I also disagree with whole, "it makes you a target argument". I highly doubt most would be robbers have murder in there plans.
 
When I’m carrying concealed I feel like my ‘teeth’ are hidden, and thus of no real deterrent value. If I appear unarmed then I am unarmed in the eyes of the robber, I appear as easy a target as almost anyone else out on the street.
The fact is, once a criminal knows you're armed you ARE as easy a target as anyone else. He just makes a plan that doesn't involve giving you any chance to respond. If the consequences or implementation of such a plan are undesirable to him then he will leave you alone. In other words, being openly armed deters criminals who wish to accomplish a crime without injuring their victim. Those who have no compunction against hitting you hard from behind when you're not expecting it won't be deterred in the least.
There are some who criticize open carry and claim it will make you more of a target or ‘the first one shot’ when a robber walks into the 7-11, despite the absolute lack of credible evidence that this has ever happened.
There are two responses to threats. Avoidance and engagement--the criminal can either turn & leave or he can engage/eliminate the threat. One can argue that one is more likely than the other, but obviously either one is a possibility.
Probably the most common condemnation of open carry comes from the armchair tacticians who believe it’s better to have the element of surprise in a criminal encounter.
This is a combination of a strawman and equivocation. No one's really saying you want to "surprise" a criminal with your pistol, what you want is to avoid a criminal making a plan to attack you based on the fact that he KNOWS you are armed. The point is not "surprise" so much as it is "counterintelligence". You don't want him to know everything you can do.

If he DOESN'T know you're armed, his plan may leave a loophole for you to exploit. If he DOES know you're armed then he can easily make a plan that eliminates any advantage your firearm might provide. It's not so much that you want to SURPRISE him as it is that you want to conceal your capabilities so that he doesn't neutralize them before you realize there's even a problem.

As you aptly point out, everyday life involves coming into close proximity with many people on a daily basis and you can't respond "tactically" to them until you know there's a problem. Until a criminal tips his hands you can't really do much of anything. If he already knows your hand before he tips his own, who has the advantage?

Yes, there are certainly scenarios where a criminal could eliminate the option of using a concealed handgun. Coincidentally those are exactly the scenarios that a criminal could use to eliminate the option of using an openly carried handgun. The difference, of course, is that if he KNOWS a handgun is involved he has much more incentive to take such a course of action. The point being that it's far easier for him to neutralize your response options if he already knows what those options are.
Another common criticism of open carry is that the firearm itself will be the target of theft, prompting as criminal to attack simply to get the gun from you.
Maybe it will, maybe it won't. People advise against wearing flashy jewelry because it might make the wearer a target for robbery. If that's good advice then it's also reasonable that any highly desirable item that is worn openly could have the same effect. One can argue the odds of this happening, but it's not really possible to construct a reasonable argument against it happening at all. Particularly since it HAS happened on at least one occasion.

So am I arguing against OC? Not really, I'm just pointing out that OC has benefits and disadvantages. The primary tactical disadvantage is that you're putting all your cards on the table when you don't even know who all the players are. That is, EVERYONE you come in contact can easily see that you're armed. Some will see that as a deterrent, some clearly won't (or gun stores and banks with armed guards would never be robbed). In other words, the OC philosophy depends very heavily on the deterrent value of an openly displayed weapon (the "talisman effect") even though it is well-known that not all crooks are deterred by openly displayed weapons.

I will say that your initial point is exactly correct. If your desire is to deter criminals and never have to use your weapon, OC is definitely the proper choice.

Those criminals who are deterred by OC will leave you alone, and those who are not will never give you a chance to use your weapon.
 
Those who have no compunction against hitting you hard from behind when you're not expecting it won't be deterred in the least.
Concealed carry is not an advantage in this case either. A firearm will not deter all people, that's a given. Very few criminals will test someone openly carrying.

I see concealed weapons as an act of shame. History tells us that city folk would conceal arms in pockets and concealed holsters about the body while country folk and working men wore them openly outside the city as the need for speed and show of force was welcomed on the open range out of the safety of numbers. When the riders came to town they cleaned up and wore their arms concealed or not at all. Concealment to me is being embarrassed to be armed. For me that is not the case. I hate that I have to carry concealed at my other job, but the boss dictates that I do as I deal direct with customers.
 
Concealed carry is not an advantage in this case either.
It is in the sense that a robber won't feel that he has to take this approach--that may leave you an option to respond constructively.
freakshow10mm said:
I see concealed weapons as an act of shame. ... Concealment to me is being embarrassed to be armed.
Well, if that's how you feel, you should definitely carry openly, especially if you feel that the shame/embarrassment of concealment would outweigh any tactical advantages you may give up.
 
Back
Top