Posted on 12/26/2014 12:24:24 PM PST by marktwain
Another concealed carry failure happened that might have been prevented by open carry. In this rare event, a concealed carry weapons (CCW) permit holder was robbed of his defensive firearm. He was pistol whipped to the head before he could draw, indicating that his attackers did not wish to draw attention with a shot, and/or they did not wish an obvious murder. It is likely that if the victim had been openly carrying his firearm, the robbers would have chosen less dangerous prey. From uptownmessenger.com:
The victim, a man in his 40s, was near Henry Clay and Coliseum around 9 p.m. Monday, Dec. 22, when he was approached by two attackers who hit him with a gun, according to the initial NOPD report. They then “put him face down on the ground, frisked him, and stole the victim’s concealed weapon,” the report states.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 has been 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. As in the above case, concealed carriers are targeted because their attacker(s) do *not* know that they are armed, and the attacker(s) sometimes win.
“Saint Gentle Giant and fellow thugs attack openly armed, trained people.”
One has to make allowances for congenital and self-induced mental retardation.
LOL
I adhere to “Layers of Response” by John Farnam
You can’t “blend in” and “disappear” wearing a gun (unless everyone else is too)
Probably the latter........Nobody can be prepared for everything.
Anyone could easily walk by you in your local Walmart then suddenly turn and whack you upsida your head.....
What are you responding to and what are you saying?
I agree that the sum bags are not looking for a fight of any kind with a person open carrying, and I agree that they are unlikely to become a target.............unless the aggressor has pre planned a cheap shot/pearl harbor job from behind that is designed specifically to knock out the victim and steal his exposed weapon. Among the different, weapons I use for concealed carry, the ones in .45acp anyway, are 3 very expensive, (Well to me they are expensive, but my life is worth it as they say), and 100% reliable/dependable custom jobs that I sure as heck would not want some dirtball to sneak up on me and conk me over the head from behind and run off with one of those weapons of mine because he saw it open on my belt and took the opportunity and couldn’t resist the temptation to steal a high dollar handgun. (Even with observing situational awareness at all times, a blind side attack can still happen.) Different strokes for different folks/each to his own applies again!
I posted in error.(thought you were asking me the question)
My apologies.
...just don't be whiter than your attacker.
Thing I can't understand is here in Kansas, you can open carry without training, fees or permit, but conceal carry requires all.
It's an ancient law that we here in Michigan have also.......
The history is, way back then, arguments were tragically ended with firearm violence. So, in order to level the playing field, the carrying of a concealed weapon was illegal since each party was entitled to know if the other had a weapon.......
In other words, if you're going to solve an argument via a firearm, then you have the right to know that he too has a firearm......
Neither is any advantage if you’re not paying attention to your surroundings.
Open carry they attack from behind or simply draw on you first.
Concealed carry, you let them get too close without identifying the threat.
I will take my chances on that.(not that I need too)
It does considerable good if the individual simply maintains familiarity with the firearm, controls, and basic skills.
More is generally better.
1. https://www.frontsight.com/ This is the premier site. Located outside Las Vega, NV
2.https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/
This organization will send you helpful videos just for subscribing. They offer a magazine and also legal insurance of 1,000,000 in the event you ever use your pistol to defend yourself. Both sites are excellent.
Hope this helps. Both will send you a lot of free videos and information when they get your email address.
Thanks for the private mail Dvan, but you neglected to answer my question
Since you come across as an expert in these scenarios, which of these classes did YOU personally attend?
I had a student relate to me how he did not realize that he was under attack until after the perps saw that he was armed, decided to abort the attack, and were retreating\leaving the scene.
If it comes to becoming ‘open carry’, to deter crime, then I’m going to carry a service-size revolver, as my second choice. My first choice would be to ‘open carry’ a snubnose, preferably a concealed hammer design. Why? It seems that the usual CCW class ‘distance’ is 10 yards or less. Since it seems that most ‘occurences’ are within that distance, the snubnose is the better choice, over the service-size revolver of the same caliber, which excels at the old school distances, out to 25 yards. Also, a snubnose is manufactured with a ‘zero/zero’ designed for a 158 grain projectile. The ‘old school’ projectiles employed for many years have been both solid standard pressure lead 158 grain full- and 148 grain semi-wadcutters. They are still efficient in their design.
Pocket concealment is still the better method.
Magazines on the belt, or their shape seen on the body, is not too concealed, are they? I know, the same for cylindrical speedloaders, too.
I’ll stick with concealed. Especially in church or around cops.
The first rule of “security” is “don’t let them see your security”.
The reason for the rule is that to let them see it, invites speculation as to how to defeat it.
I doubt that is the first rule in security. If so, there would not be any uniformed security personnel, no visible walls, no alarm stickers...
Deterrence has its place, as do non-obvious or hidden security measures.
Read any DOD Program Security Guide.
The first rule is to not disclose the security measures you’ve taken.
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.