Open Carry (OC) is a hot topic on TTAG. No surprise; a lot of gun rights proponents heart OC. At first blush, it seems a promising way to extend and defend Second Amendment rights. In many states (including my home state of Colorado) there’s no law against openly carrying a firearm—as long as one is not brandishing said firearm in a threatening manner. Quite a few Western, Midwestern, or Southern states also lack prohibitions against the practice. Include me out. I think OC will ultimately harm gun rights. It’s ill-advised practically, tactically, and politically.
OC advocates claim they’re simply capitalizing on the fact that there’s no law against strapping on a gun and walking around in public in most parts of the United State (even in urban areas). Yes, but— there’s no law against carrying a gun openly for the same reason as there’s no law against break dancing in the middle of Death Valley in July while wearing a fur parka. It’s something that very few people would even consider doing.
Whether they realize it or not, OC advocates are trying to make the open carry of firearms into a “social norm.” In theory, firearms ownership will pass the point of no return, where gun rights are enshrined and assumed rather than constantly defended. Possession being nine-tenths of the law.
Well, that ain’t gonna happen.
For all their little inconsistencies and irrationalities, people are generally pretty practical in terms of what they wear and carry. Women don’t wear hoop skirts or corsets (at least outside of the kinky parts of town) and men generally don’t wear bowler hats or carry canes because these things are pretty impractical, particularly since we don’t live in Victorian England and most of us get around by car (now where did I put that damn cane?).
People don’t customarily carry sidearms or swords for the same reason they don’t carry bullwhips: They aren’t needed. And they are: Cumbersome, heavy, and uncomfortable.
As I noted in my first TTAG article, there are places in the world where it really is necessary for people to arm themselves to go about their daily business. When Uncle Sam was my employer I got to visit several of these lovely garden spots. I can honestly say I wouldn’t wish that kind of life on anyone I liked. Furthermore, in places where arms are a necessity, rather than a fashion statement, people generally eschew the handgun and go straight to a two-handed weapon, preferably with a long (and full) magazine.
[Before someone brings up Switzerland, yes, it's true there are lots of guns in the Helvetican Confederation. And the Swiss keep those guns securely locked up when they aren't using them for target practice. Not only are the guns locked up but they keep a strict accounting of their ammo.]
So, practically speaking, the number of people who would actually be willing to carry guns on a daily basis is miniscule – certainly not enough to change the social dynamics of weapons carry in modern-day Western society.
Consider, for example, how many people with a concealed weapons permit rarely or never carry. I’ve had my permit for over three years and have probably carried 20 times. My wife has had her permit for over two years and has never carried a weapon. Are we typical CCW holders? Well, I think we’re closer to “typical” than the people who pack everywhere they go.
And that brings me to my second point: real gunfighters (that is, people who make their living shooting other people) don’t use pistols, except as a last resort. The rifle and the machine gun are the tools of the trade for soldiers, terrorists, guerillas and SWAT cops.
The pistol’s prime advantage is its small, concealable size. OC gives up the pistol’s single greatest advantage over a rifle: stealth. It alerts every criminal that you are armed, so he can take you out first. He can then relieve you of that pistol which, besides being a threat to him, is also an item of considerable value that he can sell to his criminal buddies.
Tactically, concealed carry beats open carry every time.
The final factor is political. Post-Heller and McDonald, gun owners are feeling their oats, flexing our political muscles, feeling ten feet tall and covered with hair. But don’t forget that we’re still a minority in this country. A significant, well-organized, well-funded, politically active minority, but a minority nonetheless. it’s also worth noting that a huge number of gun owners would be more than happy to support laws that restricted other people from owning guns.
In that kind of political environment, Open Carry has two very negative effects. First, it rubs our opponents faces in the fact that we have guns.
Gun rights may be front and center in your world, but it’s mostly beneath the radar for most people. OC creates anti-gunners and generates support from uncommitted voters. “Do you want someone carrying a gun to school? THINK OF THE CHILDREN!) RF raised the warning flag over the Supreme Court’s McDonald decision, wondering if it could turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory. With a little help from OC, it could very well be.
Second, Open Carry is an invitation to a PR disaster.
Lets be honest: not all gun owners are rational people. There are crazies out there. With guns. Advocating Open Carry. If one or two of those people push the limits of civilized behavior all firearms owners will get tagged as “crazy gun owners.” That’s infuriating to those of us who consider ourselves to be mature and responsible citizens. But that’s the world we live in. Enough such incidents and the hammer will drop on some serious (read: Draconian) gun laws that will make the now-expired “assault weapons” ban look like a pleasant memory.
I get where OC advocates are coming from. I read Heinlein books when I was younger, and enjoyed the short-lived Sci Fi series “Firefly,” too. I like westerns and the image of Han Solo swaggering around Mos Eisly with a blaster strapped to his thigh. But real life isn’t like books, movies or TV.
OC is not a social norm and it’s not going to become one. And open advocacy of OC runs a real risk of dragging all gun owners down into the pit of some serious, no BS gun control. Call me crazy, but for the dubious pleasure (and questionable tactical advantages) of walking down the streets with a pistol on your hip, it just ain’t worth it.
43 states allow open carry – open carry is constitutionally protected, while concealed crry is not (see Heller). And yes open carry is working politically like drano to make even moderately pro-gun states more pro-gun.
I agree with Mr. Albright. Open carry is your right, but it hurts the cause.
Good points all. As the Pope once said to Nuns who wanted to build a convent at the site of the barracks at Auschwitz: "Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD." And that applies to all sorts of life's dilemmas. (mosque comes to mind…)
While I agree with the author that concealed carry is to be preferred over OC, not all gun owners are afforded the choice between the two. I do not have a problem with OC at all. Law Enforcement has been doing it for years! Officers are citizens as well. They are no better than you or I. They are human and can make mistakes. They may be having family problems at home or they may be having an off day. Just because they have chosen a profession that requires them to carry a weapon does not necessarily make them immune to the same issues that your average firearm owner may succumb to.
Further, I heartily disagree with the author that the typical CCW holder never carries a weapon. I believe that you have not only a right, but an obligation to protect yourself and your loved ones against harm to the best of your ability. If you have the "luxury" of being able to legally carry a firearm, something that thousands of gun owners would gladly give a leg for, I believe you are shirking your responisiblities by not doing so whenever and whereever possible. It is this type of lackadaisical attitude that does more to hurt the cause of gun owners than those who chose to carry open where it is legal to do so. If you do not exercise your rights, you will lose them! Quit complaining about those who choose to exercise theirs.
Well, Dave, I was content to let you rant and rave until you got to the last part.
Do you know the statistics on how many CCW permit holders carry regularly? Because if you do, I'd love to see them. (Seriously, I would!)
I know quite a few fellow CCW'ers who, like me, almost never carry (we have the permit because we want the option, should we deem it neccessary.)
Truth be told, carrying a firearm is a collossal PITA. It digs into your side, you have to be careful of how you move so as not to "flash" it, and do we really need to even talk about going to the restroom? (More than one cop/security guard/soldier has had to face a disciplinary hearing because a weapon was left by the toilet and found by someone else.)
Not to mention, some people (like me) have jobs in locations that expressly prohibit the carry of weapons.
Finally, I'm not going to strap on my Glock to mow the lawn or change the oil in my motorcycle. If I lived in a neighborhood where I thought that was neccessary I'd move.
But good comments, all. This site is all about stimulating discussion, so let's keep it coming!
Martin,
Yes I do know how difficult it can be at times to carry concealed. Living in the Arizona desert, it can be a downright pain. However, OC provides a means to carry that is much more comfortable in those instances where a 9mm in an IWB holster is just too hot and sweaty. I, for one, welcome the choice of OC.
And no, I do not advocate wearing a pistol 24/7. I usually take mine off to shower
. But for someone who apprently does not feel the need to protect themselves and their family when in public, I feel you have no place to complain when I do, by whatever legal means I choose. Having met Suzzanna Hupp and having heard her story about watching her family die in that Lubby's in Texas because she had to leave her gun in her car, I realized that you will never know when you might need to be armed. Watching your family be murdered because it was too hot and uncomfortable to be armed that day will not be much comfort later on. If you do not want to accept the responsibility of being an armed citizen, along with the risks and ramifications that entails, then perhaps you should not have a CCW. Sorry if that seems like a "rant", but as a transplant from Illinois where our right of self-protection has been smothered by liberal politics, I am particularly sensitive to those who take these rights for granted.
You might consider leaving your gun locked and hidden in your vehicle while at work locations that prohibit carry. As far as comfort factor, if it is uncomfortable to carry your gun you simply have not found a comfortable rig to carry your gun in. I have three incredibly comfortable holsters for carrying my guns, but I also have a box of uncomfortable holsters that I had tried out before I found my comfortable holsters.
The real reason I wanted to chime in though was the comment that you have a CCW permit to give you the option to carry a gun sometime if you ever feel it necessary. If you were to be able to know when it would be necessarybecause you could see into the future, wouldn't it be better to just not go to location x at time y to avoid the need to defend yourself altogether? Most of us however are not omniscient, so we simply have to be prepared at all times, or at least whenever possible. I for example put my gun in my holster right after I put on my pants in the morning, and I put it back in my fast access safe at night while I'm sleeping due to the fact that I have children at home. I also park my car off campus and leave my gun hidden in my vehicle when I have to go into a gun free school zone.
Just the other day a bank was robbed for the first time in a "good" area of town about 5 miles from my house, a bank I've walked in myself to make deposits. A week back, a home was broken into in a "good" neighborhood a few miles away from my own home. Bad things happen to good people in good places, it's a fact of life. We don't know when, and we don't know where. That's why Baden Powell came up with the Scout Motto to teach young men in his Scouting program: "Be Prepared. " It isn't just for Scouts, it's for everyone.
I forgot to address your bathroom and careful how you move concerns. I've used many a public restroom while armed, and have never had any issues. You just leave your gun in your holster – if you have a good belt you won't have any issues. My favorite is the Wilderness Tactical belt. Infinitely adjustable to exactly the right length.
As far as having to be careful how you move, I have not experienced that problem either. I carry IWB with an untucked shirt. If I reach with my right arm to grab something off a high shelf, I might have a momentary issue where part of my gun could become partially visible, but nobody has ever noticed that I'm aware of.
In fact, just this week my Doctor asked me to take off my shirt for my physical, and it was literally several minutes later before he even noticed my holstered gun on my belt. I was surprised that it took him so long to notice it, but people often don't notice those types of things. Even when I open carry I am surprised how few people appear to notice. I think people mentally see it in their peripheral vision and automatically check it off as a cell phone or pager without noticing it is actually a gun.
Let me just hit two of the inaccuracies in that piece.
1. OC is not legal simply because no one has thought to make it illegal. Do you think the anti-gunners haven't tried? In Alabama it is legal because the Supreme Court had to weigh in and say that the right is protected and the State cannot outlaw it. In other States, the right was restored by acts of the legislatures. OC is being made legal in more States consciously, not accidentally, as implied by the author's unresearched and inaccurate "facts."
2. People are practical in what they wear and carry. The implication is that OC is impractical. That implication is false. If one is going to carry, the most practical way to carry depends on what else one is wearing. If one wears an overcoat, CC is most practical. In the summer, it is more practical not to conceal.
Frankly, this is about the quality I expect from a message board post, not an article that was planned and crafted. The inaccuracies and lack of factual support (most opinions are supported with opinions) make this "article" read more like off-the-cuff remarks.
How about the author come on over to opencarry.org and try his "post" there? We might be able to help him refine his thinking.
I've had a license to carry a concealed handgun since I turned 21. I made a conscious decision before that to carry it whenever I went out in public wherever it was legal, which in my state is pretty much everywhere besides courthouses and secure areas of airports.
I have an uncle who has his carry license and he almost never does. In fact, I don't know if he ever actually has carried. That makes no sense to me because that means if he ever needs his weapon he is almost guaranteed not to have it with him. Why bother to get the license?
Carrying is not a PITA for me. I've been doing it for so long that it doesn't feel right if I don't have it. My personal philosophy is that it's better to have and not need than to need and not have.
As for OC, well, I work at an armored car company and I get enough stupid comments from ignorant people about my gun while I'm wearing my uniform that I don't care to deal with that kind of attitude when I'm not working, so I always carry concealed. I have no problem with people who OC, but I choose not to deal with the hassle.
The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
Bear arms
Shall not be infringed
Any Questions?
Well said!
CC will NEVER prevent the crime, only possibly, give one an option to react. Of the states that have CC, somewhere between 2-5% of the total population, on average, have the permit. The Bad Guys know this. You don't look armed, 95% chance you ain't, here comes the BG gun in your face. You DID NOT PREVENT THE CRIME, you might be able to respond.
OC labels you as a clear hardened target.
Read mailsail's post on OC found here: The Open Carry Argument
Open carry is ALWAYS a better deterrent. (From someone who OC's every day).
I actually read the thread that you linked to. Thanks.
Just curious, did you read the comments to it? Just wondering because if you had you would have run across these:
http://www.usacarry.com/forums/general-firearm-di…
Post by an open carrier who was shot in the back and robbed of his gun.
also this:
http://www.usacarry.com/forums/open-carry-discuss…
Post by another open carrier which lists his reasons for carrying openly. Among them are "Political statement" and "pisses off anti gunners."
Sure, I'm cherry picking to support my argument, but that's what we do on the internet isn't it? And they are legitimate concerns, whether OC advocates choose to think they are or not.
Yup, read the "story" about that guy shot in the back. By the way, he's NOT an OCer, at least, as far as I know he never claimed to be. In fact, I'm pretty sure he was against the idea of open carry. At the time he was "shot" he was on his way home from work, as an armed, uniformed security officer. If you'd read the entire post, you might have noticed that.
Another thing, so far, we've not been able to verify his claim. There were no news stories about it. (and believe me, I searched.) He never offered any links to any news stories, and more than a few found it odd, that, so far as I know, has said little else about the incident.
Basically, until someone can show the rest of us the story in the news, it's his word only. And for many, that's just not enough.
The first link you provide is to an unverified claim on a forum by an anonymous poster. Before believing his claim, I would need to see some sort of irrefutable evidence to support it.
That said, for the sake of the argument, let's just say that it is true.
The only thing that does is give a personal reason not to carry. Something for the individual to decide, it is not an adequate argument to prohibit another's right to OC. Only for you yourself to decide that OC may not be right for you.
As for the second link. I don't really see how that applies to everyone. Are you saying that all OCers think that way? Because I could find a negative quote from a CCer then try to say that it applies to everyone that CCs. Maybe something along the lines of "I CC so that criminals will think I am an easy target and attack me so that I can kill them." I could just as easily apply that to all CCers as you have that man's comments to all OCers.
All of the arguments against open carry are precisely the same arguments that control activists use against concealed carry or even against owning a firearm in the home.
They share exactly the same fallacies of logic and exactly the same lack of evidence.
No one has been able to show that concealed carry causes any problems, but if you will look at the actual evidence no one has been able to show that open carry does either.
Foolish assumptions — assumptions because they are without evidence and based on that same false 'common sense' that gun banners try to invoke — such as tactical superiority of one method over the other are without basis.
How many times have you read or hear the false claim made against gun ownership in general that criminals will just take your gun? It's just as false when made against open carry.
Check the facts before making such assumptions.
There is only one VALID argument against open carry (or owning or concealing a hand gun):
It is your choice to decide it makes sense or not, but only for YOURSELF.
Make any choice that is right for you.
Let others make their own choice — and if you want to argue against that choice then first review the actual facts.
I have no idea what proportion of people with carry licenses, regularly carry. I doubt if there are any accurate studies to support about how many do.
But I would suspect that only a fraction actually do.
As one of those who typically DOES carry, open vs concealed makes a huge difference in the size of pistol one can carry comfortably, and the quality of the concealment.
Many "concealed-ONLY!" people fixate on the perceived advantage of surprise of carrying concealed, yet fail to appreciate that that "advantage" is only of use after an attacker has already committed himself to an assault. Personally I am starting to agree with the rationale of being visibly armed to dissuade an attack in the first place.
We can argue all day, and forever about which mode is more tactically sound.
20 years ago I would not have believed that so many states would enact lawful concealed carry, the momentum is on the side of liberty, not further restrictions.
I have never seen such a "study" and would be dubious of anything that purported to be one. People are (understandably) reluctant to discuss their self defense practices so I wouldn't expect much accuracy from any kind of polling, which would be the only way you could gauge that statistic anyway.
Well, a pendulum has "momentum" right up to the point just before it stops and swings back the other way. And that is exactly my concern: Right now the pendulum of American politics is swinging "our way." But we'd be fools to think that's always going to be the case. Sooner or later the pendulum will swing back and when it does, I'm worried that OC will be the weak portion of our armor that our opponents will exploit to acheive their ends.
Actually it helps the cause. It helps because it brings the issue in front of the people and it shows that we are not alone in our beliefs and desires and it gives us hope.
PHEWWW… almost worried for a second!! Til I realized this article isnt about FACT – just the author's OPINION!!
Feel much better now.
>> Hoola-hoop skirts & canes arent a Guaranteed GOD-GIVEN RIGHT, chump. The 2nd Amendment is! Dont make the mistake and ever TREAD on MINE. ANY of them. My advice to U: GET OVER IT.
NOTHING TO SEE HERE, FOLKS. MOVE ALONG NOW…
It's just not worth it. Freedom is icky. All you immature gun owners are going to make it so that mature, intellectual, superior gun owners like me will lose our rights. Stop exercising your rights and putting mine in jeopardy. I support the second amendment by advocating IQ and psychological testing for all gun purchases.
Bah.
Characterizing open carry advocates as capitalizing on the lack of a law or laws against open carry is uninformed. Open carry only exists because it has been litigated, it has been defended, or it has been restored. Banning open carry along with all carry has been a goal of gun control advocates for decades. Far from claiming that they are capitalizing on the fact that there is no law against open carry most open carry advocates state they are exercising their constitutional right to keep and bear arms. And the use of the phrase, “strapping on a gun,” is rather pejorative – and used in a way one would expect to find in an opinion piece by the Brady campaign or an editorial in the New York Times or Washington Post.
As far as open carry becoming part of the social norm – well social norms do change – not that long ago it was acceptable to smoke almost anywhere – at work – at schools – in hospitals – in supermarkets and stores – and in other peoples homes, such that non-smokers had ashtrays available for guests who smoked. And it was not that long ago that tattoos where socially unacceptable in polite society and that concealed carry was considered taboo or illegal. Just four or five decades ago (less in some parts of the country) it was normal to see kids walking around or riding their bikes with rifles or shotguns as they went hunting or plinking. The normative nature of those activities had little to do with the absolute numbers of people engaging in them – as in a majority of people – but with the public perception of the activities. The public perception was that smoking was just a choice with little effect on people who did not smoke and that smoking was cool. Tattoos were only for military or ex-military or more often for criminals, carnies, or prostitutes – and tattoos were to be hidden not worn with pride. Kids with rifles or shotguns were considered normal and a kid having a gun was a right of passage. After decades of political and social activism – smoking is evil and disgusting – tattoos are cool and to be shown off – kids must be kept away from guns as to not do so is irresponsible.
In line with this I would offer a recent Harris poll (Harris is not noted as a politically conservative polling organization) – “This Harris Poll was conducted between May 10 and 17, 2010 among 2,503 adults (aged 18 and over). Large majorities of U.S. adults think that Americans should be allowed to have rifles or shotguns (80%) and hand-guns (74%). Fewer, but still substantial numbers, think that unconcealed (or “open carry”) weapons (50%) and concealed weapons (45%) should be allowed.” Fascinating that as of today more American adults find open carry acceptable than concealed carry.
While bowler hats may not be popular – people still wear hats – while canes may not be a fashion accessory anymore – people with disabilities still use canes. More to the point a firearm is a means of self defense and the single most effective means of self defense and the only means of self defense that results in less injury than non-resistance. Therefore to equate a firearm to a hat or a cane as a fashion accessory is rather inane or irrational.
While it is true that individuals may not carry firearms because they are an added burden physically that does not mean that responsible and thoughtful individuals will not carry them and/or carry them regularly. Just as responsible and thoughtful individuals carry jumper cables in their vehicles or carry a pocket knife or a multi-tool on their person.
Frankly your implication that open carry advocates are engaging in fashion statements, betrays your bias and bigotry. That somehow a person carrying concealed is carrying for self-defense while a person open carrying is carrying for fashion or to look cool and not for self-defense. The statement that, “Furthermore, in places where arms are a necessity, rather than a fashion statement,” is incredibly condescending and out of touch with reality – perhaps you could talk to the millions of individuals in this country that have used a firearm to defend themselves and/or their loved ones and explain to them how their firearm isn’t really necessary and is just essentially a fashion accessory – because if they were really serious they’d have and carry a rifle. Many major cities in this country are statistically more dangerous to live in than Afghanistan or Iraq.
The pistol or revolvers “primary” advantage is it’s small size, as it can be easily carried openly or concealed. That they are concealable may or may not be an advantage – in so much it is an advantage it is more of an advantage for a criminal concealing a gun than it is for a law-abiding citizen carrying a gun. The shibboleth that criminals will target open carriers is not only unproven by any factual data, but also fails to consider the deterrence benefits of open carry.
As for a PR disaster – the more non-mainstream firearms are and the more they are not accepted as a normal and everyday part of our world – then the easier it is to demonize them and to eventually restrict them. A concealed carry permit holder could just a easily be part of some horrific PR incident as an open carrier.
Finally, mature and responsible citizens – exercise their rights – because rights imply a concomitant responsibility. We have the right to free speech with means that we have the responsibility to speak the truth and to speak out against injustice. We have the right to keep and bear arms which means we have the responsibility to defend of ourselves, our families, our communities, and our liberty. I am sorry that you do not evidently share that view – “I’ve had my permit for over three years and have probably carried 20 times.”
I’m sorry you see open carry as a threat to what you evidently view as your government granted privilege to own a firearm or to carry a concealed handgun. But then I imagine a lot of his peers told Patrick Henry to sit down and shut up when he declared – “Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”
Doing the right thing sometimes demands that a price be paid for doing it – but it is still the right thing. I’m afraid I must stand with those who inconveniently choose to exercise their rights.
I think it is funny that you attack the practicality of open carry, then lament the impracticalities of CCing.
Just about everyone of your CC complaints could be easily addressed simply by OCing. Living in Texas, I understand your complaints about CCing, and they're one of the two main reasons I want OC legal in Texas. The other is that I believe that OC is a strong deterrence.
However, as annoying as CCing my be, I wont let that stop me. I, like so many others, recognize that you never know when trouble is going to hit you and that it is smartest to always be prepared. I can think of several instances off the top of my head where trouble found it's way to my home and/or the area around my home. Places where most people would feel safe, places where you probably wouldn't "bother" to carry your sidearm. Now, fortunately I was unharmed, but I may not be so lucky next time.
Blacks sitting at lunch counters only hurt their cause… or something.
Since when did the open, unashamed exercise of a Civil Right become harmful to the cause of Civil Rights?
Quick, someone tell gays not to hold hands or kiss in public… it'll hurt their cause!
P.S. My Civil Rights do not wear a burkha.
Perhaps fewer people would OC if a permit were not needed for CC
Some really well thought out comments on here. Martin I'm interested in your response to some of these. I respectfully disagree with just about every point you make, but especially the main one: OC hurts gun owners' cause.
I don't think anyone has ever looked at me while OC'ing and either changed their supportive attitude, or fell off the fence onto the anti side of things.
Every single OC'er I've met has seemed courteous and respectful of others, and especially the law. As a rule we go out of our way to stay within the legal limits, even if we don't agree with them.
And the previous comments are dead on about another thing, just about every point you make about OC has been made by anti's regarding CC or gun ownership in general and none of them are good enough to dissuade me.
I open carry ALOT, as much as i can. I dress nice but casual, often blue jeans and nice shirt. I get WAY more handshakes and positive interested people asking me questions about rights and info than you CC types ever will. The OC people are ambasadors of the second amendment, visible and aproachable by the common citizen. Walking talking advertisements of true American freedom. The facts are out there, and easy to find, OC has done more to promote a positive immage of firearms owners than any other movement out there.
- Regarding criminals and "being shot first" – Show me where this has happened … But alas, at some point it might … but again the fact is that criminals kill innocent people no matter what. At least with OC you might deter them, and at best, we can access and use our arms much faster than CC under clothing.
- The Facts are out: Open Carry is here to stay. http://wwwoencarry.org – check it out.
- Bat