Posted on 12/17/2014 1:16:05 AM PST by marktwain
No discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of open and concealed carry used to be complete without the obligatory theory that open carry was more dangerous. It was asserted that a criminal will target the open carrier because they are armed. Here is an example from freerepublic:
Why would anyone want the bad guy to shoot him first?Fortunately, the gun culture is becoming educated in the matter. People now realize that open carry promotes tactical deterrence. There have been two known instances where open carriers have been targeted, but they are very rare. The other side of the coin also occurs. Concealed carriers are targeted because their attacker does *not* know they are armed, and the attacker sometimes wins. In this case in Ohio, it is doubtful that the woman would have been attacked if the attacker knew that she was armed.
As she was struggling face down on the floor, the victim reached for her 9 mm Smith and Wesson handgun. Her attacker knocked the weapon out of her hand, causing the weapon to discharge. Each time she'd try to turn and fight back, her head was smashed against the floor.The attacker probably did not know that she had a gun. He came very close to being shot and/or killed. A half second of inattention on his part, or a half second faster response by the victim, and he would have been. A shot over the back of the neck and above your own buttocks is hard to miss, if you practice just a little bit.
"I don't remember how I got there, but I remember crouching in the corner with my back against the wall and my gun in my hand," she said. "The door was open. I didn't know if he was coming back."In both circumstances, either an open or concealed carrier being targeted, the best solution is situational awareness. The woman who was attacked acknowledges this:
"I'm a survivor," she said. "I haven't been back to work yet, but I will be. ... I thought I was invincible. I'm not. But the best tool's not a gun; it's the knowledge of your surroundings."Everyone who studies self defense says the same thing. An awareness of your surroundings is more important than having a weapon. Most attacks can be avoided if you see them coming. Open carry allows the attacker to avoid the open carrier; concealed carry gives the defender more of an element of surprise.
I don’t actually see a situation as a concealed carry fail. On the other hand I don’t think there must be legal difference between open and concealed carry at all. As far as you have right to bear arms does it really matter is it concealed or exposed?
No matter that CCW is legal in my state, most employers, including mine, forbid weapons on their property - even in one’s own car which spends the duration of the shift parked on their grounds.
So here’s the case where if I ultimately value my survival over employment, but must of course work for a living, my method of carry places more value on deep concealment rather than quick deployment. What my employer doesn’t know does not hurt me. But it might make the split second difference if I am forced to draw my weapon. Hopefully I’ll never face that, but I’m fine with going home unemployed to a grateful family.
However as the woman in this article points out, arming oneself while neglecting situational awareness may also make the difference.
I wish her a speedy recovery. She reads as a tough lady who will be fine, eventually.
“Surprise surprise!”,,Gomer Pyle would say about concealed carry.
If both types of carry are allowed, then the perps will be cats in a room full of rocking chairs... And isn’t that what we all want anyway?
‘But the best tool’s not a gun; it’s the knowledge of your surroundings.”’
Most important part of the article likely missed b/c readers fixate on the tool. Id amend that to read more like this but the woman is certainly on the right track....
But the best tool’s not a gun; it’s whats between your ears.
There’s NO substitute for training and education. Leave those out and you’re tossing the dice.
This simply demonstrates that a person can be ambushed.
There isn’t a cop in this country that couldn’t be knocked out from behind while in uniform and armed.
Guns aren’t magical. I don’t think open carry would have mattered a wit in this case.
Sadly, you’ve now got to view all lnteractios with strangers as high risk situations.
I think the rapist would never have attacked her if she was openly armed. Most rapists say they do not attack armed women.
Most robbers do not attack armed cops either.
Predator learn to go after easy prey. If they go after dangerous prey, they may win a few times, but the odds are against them.
predator should be predators sticky keyboard..
/thread
Possibly. But then again, rapists like the sense of power, so it might have just egged him on. Its hard to predict those things. Realtors are in a different situation than a woman walking to her car or answering her door. The rapist can wait to attack if an easy opportunity presents. If policewomen started patrolling alone on foot in bad neighborhoods, I think a disturbing number of them would end up getting raped/killed. There is a certain evil mindset to seeing an openly defiant (armed) woman, as a trophy challenge.
In the case of vulnerable female realtors, it would probably provide the best deterrence to scan the client's drivers license to the home office before going anywhere alone with them. Don't know if this was a client, or someone that came in the house behind her.
Knives are also undersold as defensive weapons. They are generally easier to conceal than a gun and can provide a good one time break-free defense. Most concealable knives are not large enough to kill quickly with one jab.
Another point here is that most rapists are "unarmed", which is a bit of knowledge to kick back Leftists when they start talking about the poor unarmed perp.
By one account, at least part of the Chinese martial arts system known as Wing Chun was developed by Buddhist nuns.
Generally being smaller and weaker than men, they needed some means of defense at very close range, especially from a “bear hug” attack. So they developed the “iron hand” techniques.
With slow and methodical, ritual training, they were able to use individual fingers and even their hand, much like knives, at very close range. Nothing quite dissuades a rapist like having a finger shoved between his ribs into a lung, or a straightened hand shoved into his intestines.
This is not apocryphal, as some experts still follow the same ritual to learn the techniques today. About the only drawback is that they are very short range weapons only, and do not work at arms length, so other techniques must be used.
I mention this to once again suggest having a knife as a complementary tool to a gun. Losing your gun in a close quarters fight is bad, but if you have a knife backup available, at least you are not helpless.
And like the iron hand techniques, a very close range attack is still vulnerable to a very close range defense that a knife can provide.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.