The Hidden Benefit of Open Carry

 

Gun guru Rob Pincus has blessed TTAG with his take on open carry. Mr. Pincus argues convincingly that open carry is a mistake—on the tactical level. He’s shown us that the difference in presentation time—bringing a gun to bear on a bad guy—between open and concealed carry is relatively unimportant. I could quibble with his assessment. Most people who carry a gun suck at deploying (and aiming and shooting) a firearm; there’s a huge difference between the two carry systems for the average armed self-defender. But why bother arguing the point? If you home carry in any way, shape or form, you’re WAY ahead of the game. But Pincus and others fail to highlight an another mission critical aspect to open carry . . .

Deterrence.

The first person I ever saw openly carrying a firearm: an African American gas station owner in Atlanta, GA. As a ballistically sheltered northerner I was taken aback by the stainless steel Smith & Wesson 686 holstered on his hip. When I asked him about the gun he had a simple explanation. “It shows the bad guys I mean business.”

Like the rabbi, Pincus reckons anyone open carrying might as well wear a “shoot me first” T-shirt. Again, I’m not here to quibble. There aren’t any stats backing-up the assertion that showing a gun puts you first in the firing line. And I don’t have any relevant experience. So I’ll concede the point.

But there’s no ignoring the gas station owner—and thousands like him—at the sharp end of this debate. The business owner decided that open carry is in and of itself a form of self-defense. Bad guys see a gun, calculate their odds of success vs. the downside of corporal ventilation and look for easier prey.

Open carry isn’t just about getting to your gun more quickly. It’s about increasing the probability that you won’t have to use it.

Another frequently overlooked point: the more people open carrying in a given location the more effective the deterrent. If a bad guy or guys see more than one person carrying a firearm they know that any attempt to victimize the gun owners or nearby citizens will trigger a serious gunfight. Which they could lose.

Obviously, this deterrence multiplier doesn’t apply [so much] to gangbanger vs, gangbanger confrontations. And sure, a drug-crazed criminal or spree killer might not worry about the possibility of  multiple armed defenders. But the chances are they’ll look for a softer target. Spree killers have this thing for gun-free zones (e.g. Virginia Tech and Aurora Colorado).’Nuff said?

It must also be said: this multiple open carry deterrent effect is almost entirely theoretical. Estimates vary, but less than than two percent of Americans carry a concealed weapon. Period. The number who open carry is a fraction of that fraction. Round it down to zero.

Which brings us back to question of open carry as a personal deterrent. That’s a tough one. Again, there are no stats on open carry’s inhibitory impact on crime nor any reliable method for creating the date (how do you measure crime that doesn’t happen?). Gun owners have to judge the advisability of open carrying based on guesswork. Or, if you prefer, common sense.

Common sense says that people who see a man with a gun understand that the man is willing to use it. Aye, there’s the rub. At least for me . . .

I live in a state of 1m residents (excluding illegal immigrants). There are less than 4000 state-issued weapons permits enabling open carry and a few hundred city-issued concealed carry permits (no open carry). A Hope stater carrying openly isn’t just an outlier, he’s an alien.

If I open carry it’s only a matter of time before the police yank my chain. Sure, I have the legal right to open carry. I’d probably win the court case. But probably isn’t good enough. As a single parent, I don’t want to spend ANY time without being able to exercise my right to keep and bear arms.

And so my desire to open carry—a practice which could reduce the threat of violent crime for both myself and society in general—flounders on the rocks of the real world practicality. Which is a damn shame. Because those of us who believe in open carry deterrence should have a choice.

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

135 Responses to The Hidden Benefit of Open Carry

  1. avatar230therapy says:

    So far I have 2 pro and 2 cons. These are news stories, but I don’t have the links with me.

    The two pro-OC events were verified by the statements of the felons involved. They waited until the people open carrying left the store or restaurant.

    I know of two events where the person open carrying was robbed at gunpoint and the gun was stolen in addition to various valuables.

    I believe concealed carry would not have changed any of the four outcomes.

    • avatarPaul says:

      Here in NV. you have the right to open carry. However if you decide to do so, DO NOT do it on the strip. I can tell you now you will get to meet LVMPD up close and personal. I have a CCW, I am excluded from open carry. The law is very explicit. If you have a CCW, you must carry concealed. At least that is what was taught in the class, and I have no desire to find out different by testing the waters.

      • avatarRalph says:

        If you have a CCW, you must carry concealed.

        I am not aware of any such law or regulation. If that’s what you were taught, you were taught wrong. But while it’s legal, I agree that open carrying on The Strip is a bad idea.

        When Metro gets a “guy with a gun” call, they must respond. If they’re responding to you, you will be uncomfortable for ten minutes. However, Metro has been educated that open carry on the Strip is legal and that they must treat OCers with respect.

        You will find this story from the Las Vegas Sun very helpful.
        http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/apr/07/nevadans-are-free-don-their-arms-open/

      • Paul you must have permission to “hide” your weapon. You are not “required” to conceal just because you have a concealed permit. That would be like telling someone they cannot walk because they have a “drivers” license.

    • avatarDean Weingarten says:

      One scenario that you did not list is where a concealed carrier is attacked and beat on before he has to shoot his assailant because the assailant did not know he was armed. The most visible of these cases is probably the Zimmerman/Martin case, but I run across them from time to time. Zimmerman did not have the option of legal open carry in Florida.

      The statistics by Lott and others seem pretty consistent that upwards of 95% of the time, crimes are deterred without a shot being fired, by the mere display of the firearm. Open carry simply makes that deterrence more likely.

  2. avatarJoseph says:

    I open carry, at home and when I’m out. It is an inconvenience to have to find places that will allow some one to open carry in their store without calling the cops but the cops also have to remember that there is the potential for a force multiplier if there are armed citizens in the area. Our country was based on freedom’s of all types and we also had a base in helping our neighbors and even strangers. If the police where in the same area as I am and asked for may assistance weather it be a shooter (I doubt that would happen) or to just help keep a crowd or people back I would with out question. I feel its my duty as an American and retired U.S. Navy. But I don’t have the same opinion as many other Americans.

    • avatarjwm says:

      Joseph, unless federal law has changed if any law enforcement officer identifies himself to you and requests your assistance and you refuse you can actually face criminal charges. It’s under title 18 of the u.s. code and a deputy u.s. marshal showed it to me in the books in the 80′s. As for open carry at your place of business, such as the gas station, that’s a lot different from running you day to day errands with your weapon openly displayed.

      • avatarAnon in CT says:

        Exactly. The gas guy is essentially his own armed security. He’s in a known environment.

        • avatarMichael B. says:

          G.R. Mead, that’s distinctly different from what jwm was talking about.

          Being forced to render aid to LEOs if they demand your help is not something mandated by the constitution.

      • avatarMichael B. says:

        If that’s true, that federal statute or federal law needs to be repealed.

        • avatarG.R. Mead says:

          It’s mandated by the Constitution — Art. I, Sec. 8 Cl. 15 & 16 (Militia Clauses). That’s what the first function of the militia IS– to execute the laws.
          “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;”

          That’s all “law-enforcement” is — militia — or, in their case, select corps of militia. See Federalist 29 http://constitution.org/fed/federa29.htm

          This was also the common law before there was any statute.

      • avatarRich says:

        Could you provide the rest of the citation? I’d like to read it.

        Thanks.

    • avatarcole says:

      joseph i agree with you i think Oc should only be for current or retired military personal

  3. avatarmiforest says:

    I would argue that it’s not ” shoot me first “. its either “don’t start nothin’ here” or at worst “shoot me first, but you better not miss…” .

    • Exactly. Open carry says that there is exactly one crime that can be committed against the carrier, homicide. When the bad guys know there’s only the felony option with the potential for capital punishment, the bad guys think twice.

  4. avatarRob Pincus says:

    Excellent Essay!

    I like that it ends on a very practical note… too many OC Advocates seem to live in a fantasy land where there are no downsides to OC.

    The only thing I take issue with is the assertion that anything you said is/was an “overlooked point”, at least as far as I am concerned. Nothing you said there is something I haven’t considered carefully and factored in to my position against OC in the normal public environment.

    In regard to the store owners who OC, they are on their own property and in a controlled environment… issues of “hey why are you carrying a gun?”, interactions with the police and 360 degree lack of awareness are not nearly as much of a factor. I see the OC’ing gun or pawn shop owner or convenience store clerk as much more like an armed security guard in uniform at a mall. It just makes more sense.

    While the deterrent aspect is an appealing thought, it can be proven (with a quick google search) that bad guys have targeted OCers for gun grabs and that OCers have had their guns taken away at gunpoint. OCers have been drawn into confrontations with police an other citizens over their open carry of a firearm. So, for every HOPE for a deterrent, there is a possible confrontation that gets caused by OCing as well.

    At any rate, I appreciate the continued dialogue… hopefully, it keeps people thinking.

    -RJP

  5. avatarjoecr says:

    I think if I ever open a business such as a grocery store, fast food restaurant, or other type of business that allows the public in I would give a discount to people who open carry. Also management or anyone that ever works alone would be required to carry as well, with open or concealed at their option. Obviously I would have to stay away from states such as California, but there are plenty of other states that are smart enough to allow open carry.

    • avatarZM 1306 says:

      “I would give a discount to people who open carry. ”
      +1!

      Michigan allows OC without any permit as long as you legally own the gun you are good to go. (remember if you get in your car it becomes concealed)

  6. avatarPaul says:

    Good discussion. But the bottom line is that we should have the right to choose based on individual preferences and expectations.

  7. avatarTaurus609 says:

    I was going to comment about the weight of her firearm and her Daisy Dukes, but I won’t.

    With that said, there have been 14 officer involved shootings in the St. Louis area already this year, almost surpassing all of last year. And in a couple of those cases, the perp tried to take the officers gun. So I would surmise, that the criminals are getting more aggressive when they will go after (armed) LE’s, so us civilian folks would then be even more of a target of opportunity when OC’ing.

    I’m not a writer (yes I know it shows) but I hope you get my point!

    • avataranonymous says:

      > I was going to comment about the weight of her firearm
      > and her Daisy Dukes, but I won’t.

      If you won’t , I will.

      The girl in the picture is obviously carrying a pair of 38 specials.

      OK, I don’t know if they size 38, but they look very special to me.

      In her case, I don’t think she should conceal them, and am in favor of her right to open carry.

      • avatarspymyeyes says:

        no way dude!

        those are the 36 charlie weapons!

        • avatarjwm says:

          she walked into the bar with a pair of 38′s. then she pulled a gun out of her pocket.

        • avatarNot Too Eloquent says:

          Thank the Lord the babes with guns are back on TTAG!!!!

        • avatarspeedracer5050 says:

          .40S&W’s……..Sweet and WOW’s!!!!!!

        • avataranom says:

          Wait… You’re right. I had to go back to the top and look again. She did have a gun… I stared at that pic for a long time trying to figure out how it was relevant the first pass… I agree – she should have the right to open carry for sure! :)

  8. avatarSD3 says:

    “It must also be said: this multiple open carry deterrent effect is almost entirely theoretical.”

    Is the deterrent effect of armed police officers on crimminal behavior theoretical, too?

    • avatarRob Pincus says:

      Wow.. that was brilliant.

      Flashy red & blue lights, authority of the gov’t, uniform, shiny badge, radio that can call many friends, training, etc., etc.

      VERSUS:

      Cute Girl in Daisy Dukes with a Pistol.

      Yeah, those are equal….

      If you want to be a cop, try to get hired…. don’t just strap on a gun and think you are equal.

      -RJP

      • avataranonymous says:

        > don’t just strap on a gun and think you are equal.

        Some animals are more equal than others.

        • avatarRob Pincus says:

          Some actually post with their real names and stand behind what they say, for example.

        • avataranonymous says:

          > Some actually post with their real names and
          > stand behind what they say, for example.

          Well aren’t you special and better than the rest of us?

          I know for a fact that posting political comments on the web under my real name when I was younger has cost me a job I was seeking later in life.

          While you, on the other hand, are also promoting your shooting school [ http://www.combatfocusshooting.com/people/rob-pincus ]. Not that there’s anything wrong with that; more power to you.

          Guns is what you do for a living. It’s not what I do.

        • avataranonymous says:

          Mr. Pincus,

          Just out of curiosity, what exactly is it about the quote from George Orwell’s “Animal Farm” that you found so offensive?

          Rob Pincus says:
          If you want to be a cop, try to get hired…. don’t just strap on a gun and think you are equal.

          anonymous says:
          Some animals are more equal than others.

          Rob Pincus says:
          Some actually post with their real names and stand behind what they say, for example.

      • avatarJFP says:

        Yeah, its all about the uniform and the lights. No one ever pays attention to the iron strapped to the cop’s belt. You know, since many people are scared when they see guns out in the open, maybe the cops should conceal carry their sidearms to help calm people down.

        • avatarRob Pincus says:

          Again, I have no comprehension (other than the obvious WannaBe-ness of it) why OCers constantly want to compare themselves to cops.

        • avatarJake says:

          Because, Rob, they are generally better people than cops, simply by virtue of the fact that they don’t seek the badge. If you seek the badge, you are power hungry. Don’t say it’s because you want to help people. If you want to help people… help people, it’s not that hard and if you’re a cop you’re usually doing the opposite either voluntarily or “under orders”. Don’t become a freaking jackboot.

  9. avatarspymyeyes says:

    This is an ENDLESS debate with pro & con on both sides of the equasion and when you throw in the uncountable variables from one senario to the next, it becomes a meaningless argument about which is better and more about IT IS A RIGHT in this country to OC (where the 2nd amendment is still followed and obeyed) however you choose to do so.

    One thing that cannot be denied is: SURPRISE gives you the advantage in almost every single combat situation and used correctly can help more than hurt.

  10. avatarspymyeyes says:

    Oh and I must add….

    The picture of the little girl with the cannon on her hip looks to be a shameless attemp to garner more hits on the article with a hot lady than anything else.

    A better picture would be the same lady in a split-photo showing her shooting her cannon and the results on the targets…..just sayin

  11. avatarBrokeDad says:

    Open carry while a nice idea it is something that “scares” people. I would rather see people get via application a concealed carry permit.

    Pre-1889 firearms require no FFL purchase/transfer restriction even to felons wanting one although it may violate their terms. These are just as powerful as many modern pistols.

    As a gun store owner and seller we TOTALLY believe in the 2nd amendment and the rights of any American to buy/purchase most all firearms. But what we do not need is people doing open carry that just frighten the population and anti-gun lobby. Buy/Carry/Own responsibly .. showing off is not helping.

  12. avatarmountainpass says:

    Here’s an article about openly carried guns stopping a crime. http://www.examiner.com/article/open-carry-deters-armed-robbery-kennesaw

    • avatarRob Pincus says:

      Yeah, that is the Unicorn Event that everyone hangs their hat on…. but, it is the only verified example that I see thrown out by the small army of pro-OCers….

      • avatarDean Weingarten says:

        I teach Concealed carry courses in Arizona and have for 15 years. One of my students was open carrying with a shoulder holster, was very tired, and stopped at a rest area near the New Mexico/Arizona border.

        A car rapidly braked and stoped behind him. In his tired state, as two men were rapidly approaching from each side of his vehicle, he barely noticed them when one of them yelled “gun!” The two almost fell over themselves reversing and roaring out of the rest area.

        Open carry deterrence is very real and happens all the time. Of course, it is virtually always a non news event that is not reported.

        We have had great success with open carry normalizing the idea of armed citizens.

        The thought that people should not open carry for fear of offending someone concedes to the anti-freedom types the delegitimization of armed citizens.

      • Well then here is one you do not know. Robert Stratton, a daily Open Carrier of bellingham Wa, was in a 7-11 getting a sports drink. The clerks face became contorted and then he laughed. It seems a young man with a pistol in hand came thru the door, saw Mr Stratton and his well holstered XD, and hastily departed. Robert did not even get a chance to see the would be robber. Another “non-event”

  13. avatarRoll says:

    I home carry, but when i’m out i always CC. Keeps the antigunner derp away from me and makes me less of a target for any a-hole criminal. I sorta agree with the deterrent aspect but, i dont want to be the first person a mass murderer shoots in a dept store.

    Cute girl in the Pic by the way

    • avatarMichael B. says:

      Yeah. I don’t want someone going “YOU’VE GOT A GUN, DO SOMETHING!” in case trouble happens either. I probably wouldn’t OC in town.

      But there are times and places when OC makes a helluva lot more sense than CC. On your property or in your place of business, in the car, in the woods, etc.

      • Yes……those are the only places you would need a weapon…..NOT!!
        My county, (Whatcom County,WA) has over six hundred identified gang members. I see them occasionally and I have no trouble from them as they KNOW I will be trouble FOR them.

  14. avatarLeftShooter says:

    “There aren’t any stats backing-up the assertion that showing a gun puts you first in the firing line. “ 

    I agree, so instead when I plan for my personal defense, I think, “what would I do if I were the criminal?” To me, the surest way to create a gun free zone in which the “criminal me” could operate is eliminate all those I can see having guns. Accordingly,  I’d shoot the open carrier first. If there were more than one I’d have to reevaluate my plan, of course. It’s likely that if I entered a space where there were many open carriers, I’d probably find another space to target. A pack of sheep dogs dissuades the wolf.

    • Movie scenario, not real life. Most conv store robberies are hit and run. Most robbers are not looking for a fight. In and out, not calmly surveying the area to make the best approach.

  15. avatarMichael B. says:

    Try to draw your unloaded gun from your concealed IWB holster with a seatbelt on. Then try it with an OWB holster.

    • avatarspymyeyes says:

      That is one of the reasons I got a shoulder holster Mike B.

      • avatarMichael B. says:

        I live in FL and during the summer that is simply not an option.

        • avatarspymyeyes says:

          wrong Mike B.

          A shoulder holster can be concealed beneath a silk shirt or any other unbuttoned shirt that breathes well.

          Do you think you are the ONLY person who has to carry during hot weather in the whole country?

          Try thinking before you type.

        • avatarMichael B. says:

          Hey, Spy.

          I’m sure you and your big **** off revolver look pretty cool in a shoulder holster rig up in New Hampshire, but you’ve got a couple screws loose on the top shelf if you think for a second I’m going to wear a rig against naked flesh beneath a button up silk shirt in 100 degree weather with 100% humidity. Try not to troll.

    • avatarBrokeDad says:

      Most officers we have talked to that have shot their weapons have said it wasn’t who fired the first shot but firing YOUR first shot in control and under proper training which includes the suppression of emotion and fear.

    • avatarTaurus609 says:

      I have no problem at all with a full size M&P 9 in a Cross Breed STD. And I’m disabled with a screwed up right hand!

    • avatarMark C says:

      As far as being in a vehicle I do carry IWB. I carry a 1911 compact in a leather IWB holster and tuck my T shirt in behind the holster which allows access even with a seat belt on. Before it is said about right vs left handed I am left handed but an ambi shooter so when driving it goes on right hip and when a passenger it goes on left hip!!!
      As far as CCW I live in Arkansas where it is typical 100 degree and 90% humidity days all summer!!! Just wear a tank top style undershirt( wife beater shirts for those that know what I am talking about) and a loose t over it!!!
      It is going to be hot and humid anyways so doesn’t make a lot of difference!!!
      JMHO!!!

  16. avatarNelson says:

    while I do agree, tactically speaking, with Pincus, that the element of surprise is often key, just like how armored vehicles on the most part are based on popular SUV and high end German auto to, if you’re in Mexico, Toyota Camry, as inconspicuousness is more valued.

    That said, just as how there are no real academic data on what the variance in draw time had affected the final outcome in a gunfight, it’s equally disingenuous to proclaim that visibly showing your firearm is a less deterrent than say giving the baddies equal opportunity in attacking you first, only to find out you’re armed.

    ALL fights are ambushes, if you’re the good guy. So, YOU are always going to be reacting. Now, even Pincus’s own heavily biased test clearly shows marked difference in draw time: open carry won EVERY SINGLE TIME!

    I say “biased test” as you can clearly see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlojGZeu6GA

    Rob conveniently omits comparing appendix carry open vs. concealed; he actually deceptively compares an open hipdraw vs. concealed appendix carry.

    He knows as well as ANY tactical trainer that open appendix carry is the most efficient and fastest draw location, PERIOD. So to compare rear hip open carry vs. appendix concealed, is literally comparing apples and oranges. And, laughably, even then, the rear hip open carry still outdrew the appendix concealed, proving definitively, open carry draw is always fastest, for all the obvious reasons: you don’t have to move an obstacle (your shirt, jacket, etc.) out of the way before you reach your grip.

    And, let’s face it: there’s no quantifiable way of verifying whether the bad guy would’ve left Joe-Goodguy alone if he was openly carrying vs. concealed carrying.

    Even if you’re a 5’1″ 100lbs woman who carries herself like she won’t take sh*t from anyone, sometimes that’s enough for a potential predator to move on to seek an easier mark. Equally, you can look like Gerard Butler in 300, and some desperate crackhead ain’t gonna give a f*ck what you look like or carry yourself as, so would proceed to target you whether you are open or concealed carrying.

    The ONLY issue with open or concealed carry is a political one.

    But frankly, without the rather rambunctious rabble rousing 2nd Amendment open carry activists who made it a point to move the public discourse by making gunowners MORE visible, and normalizing armed citizenry, frankly the likes of Pincus would not be enjoying the Renaissance of Tactical school attendance that he’s a beneficiary of.

    Besides, if he and other tactical instructors REALLY had balls, we’d move beyond this chickensh*t bullsh*t of worrying about coming off ‘nice’ to Constitutionally imbecilic morons, and emphatically educate ALL their students on the true origins of the 2nd Amendment: to keep govt in check, PERIOD.

    And would openly push to abolish the ATF, and repeal the UnConstitutional NFA of 1934, GCA of 1968, FOPA of 1986, and ALL of Brady Bill of 1993.

    There is no doubt the smallarms the citizenry were intended to have, by the Founders were military weapons, for the very original intent of the 2nd Amend. PERIOD.

    And like this insane, currently operative statist legal fiction that just happened to have to normalized because a cadre of post-FDR New Deal socialist era appointed judges and ‘higher learning’ institutions sought to keep and expand statist policies, do we now have “qualified immunity.” It doesn’t exist. It’s NOT Constitutional PERIOD. The govt is meant to be a bunch of SERVANTS, and servants don’t get to dictate to their employers what they should or should not be ‘protected’ from, once they murder an innocent citizen. Likewise, there is NO part of the Constitution that alludes “common sense/sensible regulation.” PERIOD.

    This is what you get for having 100+ years of statist socialist and fascist Constitutionally imbecilic morons enter govt work, and stay there, as if it’s their birthright.

    • avatarRob Pincus says:

      That’s actually funny…

      It never occurred to you that I chose those positions because they reflect how _I_ generally CC and how 99% of the pics I see of people wearing guns openly chose to OC ?? ‘Cuz that was much more the point.

      If I really wanted to fake some aspect of the test, It wouldn’t have been hard.

      Pretending to have pointed out how I manipulated the data is pretty juvenile… OTOH…. If you REALLY believe what you are saying, get back under your tinfoil hat and focus on BIG conspiracies like how FEMA has concentration camps waiting for all the gun owners….

      Crediting yourself with my success if also quite delusional… but more entertaining than insinuating I had “cheated” on a demo that shows raw data against my actual position.

      -RJP

      • avatarNelson says:

        Oh Rob, if this is THE Rob Pincus, this is kinda disappointing.

        Must say, from all your rather more academic demeanor and measured thoughtfulness conveyed in all your videos and interviews that I have seen, frankly I thought your rebuttal would indicate a bit more neutral and more mature response.

        But, really to stoop to name calling, to jumping to “tin foil hats” and “FEMA camps”… all for the ‘offense’ of merely pointing out the obvious, about a minor point depicted/not depicted in a specific video you made? LOL Now who looks like the insecure one?

        Be that as it may, I’ll bite.

        So, allow me to address issues you’ve raised in more directly proportional context without reaching into more copious verbal flourish as you so rushed; if you really are Rob Pincus, I wouldn’t want to waste your time answering forums online, as frankly I appreciate highly, what you’ve brought to the shooting community and find you to be useful, and have no need to go into some childish verbal spat with you.

        That said:

        It never occurred to you that I chose those positions because they reflect how _I_ generally CC and how 99% of the pics I see of people wearing guns openly chose to OC ?? ‘Cuz that was much more the point.

        Yes it did occur to me, as obviously you chose that for that reason.

        But the purpose of the video, as you stated at the beginning of the video was basically to make your case that the disadvantages of OC far outweigh the minor variance in draw time, to wit, to make your point, you proceeded to demo a few combinations of OC vs. CC draws.

        As I also clearly started the reply to the thread, tactically, I agree with you, for what it’s worth, as not some multi-decade trainer stripes behind me, purely from a logical stand pt. alone. So that part, I agree with you.

        What I don’t appreciate is you NOT comparing OC vs. CC in appendix carry, when NOT demoing that WOULDN’T have mattered to the point you were trying to make anyway.

        So the real question is, why is this degrading to the sophomoric AR vs AK, and 9mm vs. .45ACP ‘debate?’

        If you’re gonna make the pt., make the pt.

        Don’t rationalize what you proved YOURSELF clearly, without a doubt, on the video: OC, especially in an accomplished shooter like yourself, is not just faster, it’s markedly faster.

        So if you really wanted to compare, you would do OC vs. CC in appendix carry. Then, OC vs. CC in rear-hip carry.

        That, would be the more honest comparison.

        Besides, you as an instructor should know that the only reason WHY you’d be doing this, IS for the benefit of those who aren’t familiar. The mere fact that you’re responding to me on what was meant to be a ‘drive-by commentary’ tells me that you know exactly what I’m saying. Most shooters know that you clearly didn’t do the OC vs. CC in appendix carry comparison in the video.

        So why the need to conflate?

        That. is the part that I was referring to as being “deceptive,” as when you know what you are doing, and expecting your audience of novice YouTube viewers to not know the difference, and to continue to convey that such compared examples are one of parity?

        Um… sorry to break it to you Rob, that is the very definition of being “deceptive.”

        But don’t take me wrong, suppose it could’ve been your oversight, but I just expected you to be more forthright about it.

        Frankly, it’s kinda disappointing to see someone of your caliber rationalize something so minor, in what you and I both know you did.

        But, really, this is nothing important, it’s just a free great lesson video you made, I’m commented, you replied. No biggie. This ain’t end of the world stuff, anyway.

        If I really wanted to fake some aspect of the test, It wouldn’t have been hard.

        Wouldn’t expect you to, if you’re an honest, un-self-rationalizing man.

        Pretending to have pointed out how I manipulated the data is pretty juvenile…

        Did I really “prentend[ing]” to point out how you manipulated the data, or are you just admitting to me that you did?

        As obvious to anyone who actually saw the video, since you clearly didn’t compare OC vs. CC in appendix carry, but only OC rear-hip vs. CC Appendix carry? I’d say it’s pretty self-explanatory.

        Why do you insist on keep stretching the obvious?

        OTOH…. If you REALLY believe what you are saying, get back under your tinfoil hat and focus on BIG conspiracies like how FEMA has concentration camps waiting for all the gun owners….

        Really Rob, are you being sarcastic, or do you have some intel you can’t tell us about?

        Because I’m sure you read this, before talking, right?

        SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.

        (a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.

        (b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure–

        (1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;

        (2) to provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of Federal, State, and local first responders;

        (3) to provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations; and

        (4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.

        SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.

        (a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.

        (b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be–

        (1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;

        (2) environmentally safe and shall not pose a health risk to individuals who may use the center;

        (3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;

        (4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;

        (5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;

        (6) required to consist of a complete operations command center, including 2 state-of-the art command and control centers that will comprise a 24/7 operations watch center as follows:

        (A) one of the command and control centers shall be in full ready mode; and

        (B) the other shall be used daily for training; and

        (7) easily accessible at all times and be able to facilitate handicapped and medical facilities, including during an emergency or major disaster.

        (c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:

        (1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.

        (2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.

        (3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.

        (4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.

        (5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.

        (6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.

        (d) Preference for Designation of Closed Military Installations- Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center. If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.

        (e) Transfer of Control of Closed Military Installations- If a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Secretary of Homeland Security administrative jurisdiction over such closed military installation.

        (f) Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use of Existing Military Installations- If an existing military installation other than a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for the establishment of the national emergency center.

        (g) Reports-

        (1) PRELIMINARY REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–

        (A) an outline of the reasons why the site was selected;

        (B) an outline of the need to construct, repair, or update any existing infrastructure at the site;

        (C) an outline of the need to conduct any necessary environmental clean-up at the site;

        (D) an outline of preliminary plans for the transfer of control of the site from the Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of Homeland Security, if necessary under subsection (e); and

        (E) an outline of preliminary plans for entering into a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f).

        Hm, why DO so many ‘smart’ people assume that they know things outside of the area of their expertise, purely based on their uninformed a-priori assumptions about something that they MAY believe not to be true, but without ever verifying it to be otherwise?

        Now, you’re right, since you do seem to believe in “FEMA camps,” as that’s exactly what the actual bill says: they’re camps run under the auspices of FEMA.

        Which by definition, ARE “FEMA Camps.” LOLOLOL.

        Now, of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re ‘nefarious.’ But since “national emergency” is a broad statist term, since I’m sure from your cop days, legalese in practice does not often apply in the way it’s written in real life, so once “state of emergency” is declared by the POTUS, it’s anything he says, goes, unless they’re UnConstitutional.

        Well, I’m glad that we got this much out of the way: you’re no tin foil hat wearer. You can’t be: you’d have to have some functional follicular outlets for a hat to stick onto, unless you like the feel of double-sided tapes. But since I’ve never worn one, WTF do I know?

        Crediting yourself with my success if also quite delusional…

        LOL Hey now, I don’t believe either of us are oBUSHmaBots here, so enough with that allusion.

        That said, I’ve never credited myself for your success, as I’m not an opencarry activist.

        But, one would have to be blind and daft not to admit that you’re a beneficiary of overall rise in popularity of ‘gun visibility’ made possible by the ‘loud political types.’

        Now, by the mere fact that I’m not such political type, and CLEARLY, nor are you the ‘loud protest’-type, you alone certainly didn’t move the national conversation forth, say in the manner that the likes of A. Gottlieb or Larry Pratt of GOA have.

        I can say this much, you’d be disingenuous to believe you yourself can enjoy not just success, but A LOT of success, without a shift in the overall zeitgeist of the prevailing political atmosphere.

        That, is the only point I was making. Again, I never said that you’re successful, because of me, as you’ve obviously asserted. So, let’s not get into the rather lawyer-ish ‘defend the indefensible negative in which the defendant never asserted in the first place,’ shall we?

        but more entertaining than insinuating I had “cheated” on a demo that shows raw data against my actual position.

        Now, now, Rob, you insinuate that you didn’t “cheat” one more time, you’re verging on the “she doth protests too much” arena.

        Now, other than diction I’ve deployed previously in the original reply, ie “disingenuous” which is more descriptive of someone’s approach to a particular issue, which do you feel is more of a mature response? That, or “tin foil hat” and “delusional?”

        Your insinuation that one must be delusional for pointing out the obvious conflation of a specific example that you yourself essentially proved beyond a shadow of a doubt ON VIDEO: OC is always faster, is truly disproportionately inappropriate.

        Now, whether 0.10~1.0 secs variance matters that much in combat effectiveness, whoTF knows? No one has a shot-timer with them when they’re being ambushed by a thug. And, from the get go, I already agreed with you that tactically, obviously the ‘element’ of surprise may just be what’s necessary and superior in many instances.

        But how does that really merit maligning someone with the neurologically permanent state of mind that you’ve asserted?

        I don’t expect a reply, nor do I frankly care (I just type fast, so please, don’t mistake the length of the reply with anything). That said, since I’m not the type to ‘worship’ some tactical guru, this bears no effect on how I may choose to incorporate your lessons. If it works, it works, if it doesn’t I’ll simply discard it, like your formerly ‘don’t shoot on the move’-meme. That goes for you, along with a whole roster of currently noted instructors.

        cheerio Rob.

        • avatarRob Pincus says:

          Actually, I didn’t think about it that much.

          OC being faster than CC is a foregone conclusion, demonstrated to set up the bigger point of my segment.

          -RJP

    • avataruncommon_sense says:

      I believe Nelson has valid points from a legal perspective. That said … a large, heavily armed, committed, and most importantly extremely well organized group of people (law enforcement) stand ready to use deadly force to bust the chops of any armed citizen who challenges any of the unconstitutional firearm laws.

      There are only two ways to correct the problem. “We the People” can either:
      (1) Educate and convince a super majority (at least 75%) of law enforcement rank-and-file personnel that nearly all firearms laws are unconstitutional and that they are committing crimes when they enforce them. Or …
      (2) Organize even better than law enforcement, gear up somewhat on par with law enforcement, and commit to busting their chops when they commit crimes as a result of enforcing unconstitutional laws.

      Remember, there is only 1 law enforcement agent for about every 500 citizens across the nation. It would be fairly easy for citizens to overwhelm them. The real task is to organize and commit. Until that happens, nothing much is going to change.

      • avatarRob Pincus says:

        Good luck with #1…. Hopefully, you won’t find many takers on #2 at your next domestic terrorism meeting. In case you haven’t noticed, there are many less restrictions on your RKBA than there were 20 years ago…. continued civil discourse will keep it moving in the right direction. The sky is NOT falling.

        -RJP

      • avatarMichael B. says:

        Agent provocateur?

        • avataruncommon_sense says:

          Michael B.

          I do NOT wish harm or violence upon any citizen or government agent. That is why I listed the persuasive approach first.

          Sadly, there is no getting around the facts. Every time government agents arrest and imprison a citizen who attempts to arm themselves for no other purpose than being able to defend themselves from unprovoked attack, those government agents are violating the core purpose of government and specifically the 2nd Amendment. At that point those agents are guilty of assault, kidnapping, false imprisonment, and denying civil rights under color of law. I would also argue that government agents are guilty of being an accessory to criminals whenever those government agents successfully intimated citizens to face criminal attacks unarmed.

          I specifically omitted the option of trying to challenge all of the unconstitutional laws in the courts for several reasons. First, many courts have failed to uphold the Constitution in many cases. Second, many courts are refusing to even hear cases. Third, it takes years to bring cases before the courts — which means years of denying civil rights to citizens. Fourth, law makers are enacting unconstitutional laws faster than “We the People” can challenge them in court.

          The courts have failed. I thus listed the only two options that I can see.

        • avatarspymyeyes says:

          your last option is to say NO YOU CAN’T HAVE MY WEAPON.

          If they insist, then open fire.

          like I said, last option.

    • avatarelnonio says:

      I don’t get it. Mr. Pincus specifically showed how concealed carry is in fact slower than open carry, thus conceding the point that OC is faster even as he argues that CC is the smarter, more flexible choice.

      Additionally, to me he showed that he gave a good faith effort at unholstering and firing his first shot as fast as he could under both techniques. So, while he does have a bias towards one practice, I didn’t see any attempt at discrediting OC from a speed perspective.

      The only times I OC I am in uniform, on duty, with a drop holster over my leg. My right hand rests naturally over the M9. I have the benefit of being aboard a military installation, so in that scenario I have no issues with OC. And, with my Safari holster, my first shot is incredibly faster than from CC. No doubt whatsoever in my mind, and I practice both.

      Still, I am convinced by Mr. Pincus’ argument about buying time and diversion, v. giving away your armed status right away. If I had any reservations about OC, I am now convinced CC is the way to go.

  17. avatarJosh Runkle says:

    Wow…so enlightening…criminals are thinking straight in the first place and aren’t crazy or desperate, and will go their merry way when they see a gun.

    Let’s be honest: I’ve met about 10 people who are hardcore open-carriers…all 10 were Barney Fifes when it came to shooting. They’d been to gun site for like one class, taken one concealed carry course, and were, of course an NRA certified instructor, and “former military.” They are barely competent with a firearm on a good day…

    I’ve yet to meet a person who’s been to 10+ serious classes, practices more than once a week and chooses to open-carry. People who open-carry “think” they’re better than they actually are, and that over-confidence is exactly what will get them killed.

    The humility of concealed carry will buy them priceless seconds to pick up their $h!t and get with it in a fight.

    • avatarLLARMS says:

      I’ve met 10 conceal carry toters who were all barney fife and couldn’t handle their weapons.

      See how easy that is?

      I hope you get my point.

    • avatarJohn Boch says:

      With all due respect, I haven’t seen any stories of open carriers getting killed because they were open carrying.

    • avatarmatt says:

      I’ve yet to meet a person who’s been to 10+ serious classes, practices more than once a week and chooses to open-carry.

      I’ve yet to meet a single police officer who has to been to 10+ serious classes and practices more than once a week.

      • avatarDerek says:

        I’ve yet to meet anyone who’s been to 10+ serious classes or practices more than once a week who isn’t a competitor or instructor. Most of us have shit to do other than go to the range 2 or more times a week and burning money on an ass load of classes.

        I take a few minutes to practice garment clear and my drawstroke a few times a week and get to the range whenever I can (usually around once a month) when I’ve got some down time but holy jebus, I’m not a fvckin SEAL. Draw. Point. Shoot bad guy who’s (probably) <20 away. Move to cover if applicable. That's all folks.

  18. avatarMark says:

    Her phone is printing too, betraying her as someone equipped to call 911.

  19. avatarLLARMS says:

    Ah the lovely OC vs. CC debate. Where both sides quote stories on this and that possibility. Or what I call the “This one time at band camp…” discussion.

    The reality; neither the Professionals or the Average Joes can provide any data on one method or the other.

    What we do know is the average criminal (aka not a criminal outfit decked out like SWAT to rob a bank) have no want or desire to make a score that involves any actual work, never mind might take their life.

    Criminals are cowards.

  20. avatarJOE MATAFOME says:

    I’ve watched plenty of Rob P’s videos, and I believe that they are very helpful and informative. I’ve never open carried outside my home, but I wouldn’t deny anyone else that right. I do feel it may be a deterrence to some criminals if they see someone OC’ing, because the last thing they want is someone willing to fight back. Criminals like good lil sheep who go along with the program and just hand over the loot. Now some of them will take you out either way, but most of them are cowards and they’ll move on to an easier target.

  21. avatarMatt says:

    Lots of good points in this article as well as in Pincus’. I can definitely see the tactical advantage while CC. While I also agree that OC does have a measurable deterrent effect in public, Farago really hit the nail on the head with the idea of OC not as an individual deterrent but a communal one with multiple instances of OC within the community.

    Now, I know people don’t like OC because of the hassle, the looks, people freak out and call the cops, the cops give you a hard time either due to ignorance or their own personal belief, etc., etc., etc. Not to mention, there is a marginal number OC’ers can seem to be a bit self-rightious, which just puts a bad taste in everyone’s mouth. I get that and I’m sure you all do too. But ask yourself, why do people freak out and call the cops when a law abiding citizen is exercising his/her legal right to responsibly openly carry a firearm, and why do police not know the law or feel the need to make you feel like a criminal? ONLY THE BAD GUYS HAVE GUNS! In their minds, that is. So, back to Farago’s point on multi-instance OC within a community. The benefits are two-fold. The more common OC is, the more familiar the community becomes with firearms and the good people that own them. The more familiar and accepted it is, the more legal and responsible gun owners are likely to exercise the right, because the stigma becomes less and less. Over time, people aren’t so irrationally afraid of guns. Even some people, who wouldn’t have otherwise, become gun owners themselves. Naturally, crime would likely decrease. If a normal citizen sees one or two people OC in their town every day, so will people intent on doing harm.

    CC is the way to go if want a tactical advantage on the small scale, I’m a believer. Responsible OC, while inconvenient as society is now, has the upside of potentially changing the societal view on firearms as a whole.

    I like both, and they both have a place under the 2A.

  22. avatarbob says:

    Why must you scary bastards spend so much time telling us not to open carry and why it’s a bad idea? Do you see us trying to convince you to open carry instead of concealing? No. So please STFU and leave us alone. We are not breaking any laws so what’s it to you?

    • avatarRob Pincus says:

      Me? I’m mostly harmless…. Don’t be scared.

      I do it for the same reason I tell people not to practice ‘defensive’ shooting in the weaver position, not to think of NAA .22′s as primary defensive guns and not train to double tap… it is what I do: Dole out advice on how to properly prepare to defend yourself or others with a firearm when it is necessary.

      What’s it to me? The antics of the OC Activists are going to create more restrictions and more distrust of those of us who carry guns responsibly.

      -RJP

      • avatarbob says:

        I agree with the first paragraph. The second paragraph? Not so much. Calling open carry advocates irresponsible is the kind of BS the antis feed on. Open carry advocates are not responsible for restrictions put on legal gun ownership. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Giving up the right to open carry in order to appease those who wish to restrict gun ownership is not the way I roll. The road to tyranny is a slippery slope. Next we will be urged to give up concealed carry to preserve the right to keep arms in our homes. Not on my watch buddy.

        • avatarAubrey Graham says:

          Well said Bob.

          “When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually…” – George Mason

      • avatarMichael B. says:

        So, Pincus, I see that you’re still on that blame the victim kick. “OCers got OC banned in California!”

        Give me a break.

        It’s also nice to know that you’re preemptively blaming them for possible gun control legislation in the future.

        I have a recommendation for you, Bob: stay out of politics. You’re in over your head. You know tactics and strategy but you shouldn’t comment on things that you don’t have a ****ing clue about. It’s sad because I mostly agree with you on the practice but the way you present yourself and inject senseless, stupid, divisive B.S. like that into the discussion makes you no better than a troll.

        Sutor, ne ultra crepidam.

        • avatarbob says:

          What I said is the truth sir.

        • avatarMichael B. says:

          I meant Bob as in Robert Pincus. Not you, Bob. Sorry for the confusion!

        • avatarRob Pincus says:

          Me? I’ll admit that I didn’t have the highest GPA in the world, but I did earn a degree in Political Science… and I’ve been to capitol hill lobbying for our RKBA.

          You, Michael: either? both? neither ?

          As for the Real “Bob”… so, you haven’t allowed your RKBA to be infringed ? Carry on an airplane lately? In a Court Room? Those things are not allowed “on your watch”… Bravado is easy to type.

          -RJP

  23. avatarSteve S says:

    I think I would like the option to open carry. I can see myself switching to a 1911 and wearing a “Wild Bunch” style traditional leather gunbelt and holster. If you’re going to carry openly, may as well have some style.

  24. avatarrsu11 says:

    To me, public OC is appropriate depending on two things: where you are and how many people will be around you. Busy suburban mall? No way. Tack shop in rural Montana? No problem. I always CC because wherever it’s legal to do so, it’s never a problem. No horrified stares, no confrontations, no questions. I like that. And I won’t be a beta tester for the first to be shot vs. scare off the bad guy theory.

    Can you is a function of the law. Should you is a function of good judgement.

  25. avatarG. Mason says:

    Despite the fact that Pearl Harbor was home to the U.S. Naval Pacific Fleet the Japanese attacked on December 7th 1941. A willing enemy or criminal who is determined enough can sneak up on and rob, steal or kill anybody. Did the open carrying of bows by the Cherokee cause the Shawnee to attack them? Did the Shawnee win by superior firepower or by surprise by their carrying of concealed bows? Of course in cultures where little clothing was worn, the idea of concealed carry is absurd. Much like this discussion.

    It’s important to know the difference between tactical advantage and strategic advantage. In the end, the Japanese got firebombed and two pretty atomic bombs fell on their heads in August.

  26. avatarGiao Nguyen says:

    I open carry at work. So do all my coworkers.

  27. avatarAharon says:

    IMHO (and I’m no expert on the subject) I would prefer to go with the approach of concealed carry rather than open carry.

    When encountering a threat at home:

    “home open carry” — racking the loud slide on your pump shotgun so the thug or thugs entering your home will hopefully run away all scared. Then again, in response he/they might just laugh to himself/themselves now knowing where you are and what weapon you have and shoot at you through the door.

    “home closed carry” — silently waiting for the intruder(s) to present himself visually to you,determining you are being threatened, and then taking the appropriate self-defense action to stop the threat.

  28. avatarAharon says:

    If she ever goes to visit NYC (even without her gun) she can expect some city cop to do a ‘stop & frisk’.

  29. avatarProfessor X says:

    I don’t think those who argue that OC provides more of a deterrent effect for society as a whole than CC have ever studied game theory. Imagine two hypothetical locations. 5% of the population in both towns carry a gun. In one town they all carry concealed, and in the other they carry openly. Where would you rather be a criminal?

    • avatarGiao Nguyen says:

      I’ll throw a twist into this. 100% of the population carries a firearm. Which town would a criminal rather be in?

      • avatarProfessor X says:

        That’s not a twist. It misses the point. As a criminal, you would be better off knowing who’s armed and who’s not. I would be more worried knowing that anyone might be able to shoot back than knowing exactly who might shoot back.

    • avatarRob Pincus says:

      My first thought was: Well played… by both.

      BUT, which is more realistic 5% or 100% ???

      ****

      Then I thought about it for another 35 seconds as I re-read my post. I would ABSOLUTELY rather be the criminal in the OC Town… I could pick the slowest, sloppiest, crappiest gun toting people to be my victims. I could pick my time and place to walk up and disarm the weakest, most uncoordinated of the lot with the crappiest holsters. No question… let me see all the cards on the table!

      -RJP

      • avatarGiao Nguyen says:

        Rob,

        It all depends on your scope of society. At my job, we open carry. No one thinks twice any option other than open carry on the job. Outside of the job, we conceal. We all carry on the job and we don’t leave any one alone.

        The interesting thing here is that the scope of the environment changes quickly. It’s fluid. Inside the doors of our business, we play by one set of rules. Outside, another set of rules apply. I think your perspective is valid in the general case. My particular situation may be a bit … unique.

        • avatarRob Pincus says:

          agreed… times & places that are more controlled might be more conducive to OC… but I still don’t see a significant advantage to OC’ing just because you “can”.

    • avatarZM 1306 says:

      Remember the criminal will have no idea of the % of the population that carries.

      They go case town A (CC) they see a bunch of average people just walking around. Nice bunch of targets!

      They go case town B (OC) see a bunch of average people. Oh, wait there is a dude with a gun.. there is another!! Well guys lets go back to town A!!!!

  30. avatarRalph says:

    There’s a time and place for OC, just as there’s a time and place for CC. Why does it have to be only one or the other?

    If I’m hiking in unrestricted woods in New Hampshire (where I am licensed), I might open carry. If I’m fishing in gator country in Florida (where I’m licensed), I might open carry. If I’m in a rural county in Nevada (where I’m licensed) and open carry is commonplace, I might open carry. If I’m visiting friends in Boston’s Back Bay (where I’m licensed), I’m carrying concealed.

    To me, it’s not so much a tactical choice as it is a cultural one. While I want to “normalize” guns, I also understand that there are a lot of a$$h0les out there who would sh!t their pants at the sight of one. I think we should leave them alone in their ignorance.

  31. avatarSanchanim says:

    RF if all those who open carry are as cute as the girl in the picture I am all for it nationally!!
    But I digress. Open carry is great in my opinion. Minus a crazed spree killer or organized crime group aka point break style robbery most will simply turn and leave. If we had multiple people open carrying in any given location it makes it even worse for the criminal. They don’t want to die or get an injury while getting a few bucks. Those that are crazy to continue on are probably not thinking clearly. Assuming you are sober you probably aren’t even being noticed by them hence a clean shot is probably much easier. The cool calculating ones are the ones you need to worry about.

  32. avatarRalph says:

    I am one of those who believe the pros of open carry don’t outweigh the risks and the loss of the surprise factor. The author makes a big assumption that the criminal will actually see the weapon being open carried and then give up… I can think of several scenarios where the criminal might approach you without actually seeing you are armed:
    - he could approach you from the opposite side or the holster and not see it
    - you could have part of your vehicle covering your lower body
    - it could be dark
    In any case, once he gets close enough he will see that you are armed, and at that point I believe there is a big chance things will not end well – while you are assessing what this guy wants with you, he might just assume you will draw and decide to take on the initiative while he still has the upper hand…

  33. avatarDon says:

    In general I don’t like to advertise anything, particularly that I am armed, or that I am at all worth being robbed. I think open carry should be a legal option everywhere but personally can’t see any reason good enough to do it that doesnt have a more likely bad concequence right behind it. There is a small but finite probability that someone can look at my gun as something worth trying to rob. To accomplish this would be as easy as shooting me first. There is no way you can be 100% situationally aware 100% of the time and be 100% capable of dedicating 100% to weapon retention either. Also, last thing i need is some gangbanger running in to rob a liquor store with his gun already in hand, see mine as I’ve got two fistfulls of boubon, and know he has to shoot me. Concealed there is a 0% probability someone will see my piece as something worth robbing, and when it comes to an armed criminal with an adrenaline rush doing his threat analysis on a crowd I would much rather blend it until I choose the best way and time to respond. Best bet is to not be seen as a threat until it is too late. i dont want to give anything away to the bad guy, including information.

  34. avatarMotoJB says:

    I have to admit…those guns, er, I mean gun looks good on her.

  35. avatarBrokeDad says:

    One of the sheriffs officers who frequents our range recently got a brand new Gerber patrol coat. He had it made up so when off duty he can remove the embroidered front left badge, the front right County Sheriffs Lettering, and the large “SHERIFF” in large gold letters on the back. These are all zipper attached on panels. He doesn’t like advertising he is a deputy when off duty and “out and about”. He said he would rather not scare off a robber etc as they would then just go somewhere else and do harm. He would rather be on scene to take action. This is only relevant in the fact that depending on the situation surprise is often a good advantage.

  36. avatarTheSleeperHasAwakened says:

    There’s a reason that all Police Officers open carry…deterence.

    • avatarelnonio says:

      I’m not sure that’s the reason. People here in the States would reasonably presume a police officer is packing heat, whether openly or concealed, when they see a police uniform. So, those policemen would certainly benefit from not having to carry concealed: there is no benefit of surprise, and only timing to gain from not having to fumble with gear, etc.

      Not convinced? Think about it this way: why do plain clothes police conceal, to some extent or another (though not “Texas anal”, not bothered by printing), if deterrence could be had by carrying openly? Since not all plain clothes police are undercover, it’s not that they don’t want to blow their cover. I think it is easier to appear to be a regular Joe if you don’t carry openly (provided your vehicle is also unmarked and not obviously a PD vehicle, and you’re not sporting a donut and cup of joe (sorry, trying to keep this light). So, you, as a policeman, get the element of surprise should you stumble upon a crime that could require the use of force. And if you don’t require the element of surprise, you un-holster as you see fit. On the other hand, a uniformed policeman has no element of surprise to work with, so why bother concealing?

      Lastly, uniformed police generally are required to use holsters that minimize the possibility of having their firearm snatched. Take my Safariland duty holster, it has a thumb activated mechanism that locks the pistol in place, and is pretty difficult to engage by someone other than the holster wearer. That remains a concern for anyone OCing.

    • avatarelnonio says:

      Don’t you just hate when a well written post somehow fails to post?

      Quick and dirty this time: uniformed cops have nothing to gain from CC, and everything to lose, that’s why they OC. Anyone seeing the uniform assumes they are armed, so why bother concealing if all concealment does, in their case, is make the firearm less accessible? The deterrent is knowing the person is a cop, it’s not seeing the weapon. Arguably, even unarmed cops deter crime (e.g. mall cops).

      If deterrence was the reason, plain clothes cops would OC as well. They don’t, and it’s not because they do undercover work. It’s because they have everything to gain from appearing to be regular folks.

      Finally, even uniformed cops have to worry about someone trying to snatch their firearm (hence complicated holsters to prevent). In my opinion, OC civilians have to worry about that even more.

      • avatarRob Pincus says:

        Excellent reply… thanks for taking the time.. TWICE apparently. I saw yet another OCer comparing themselves to a police officer fulfilling a duty to go into harms way and I just couldn’t muster the energy… :-)

        • avatarelnonio says:

          Interweb ate the first reply… In my haste, I forgot to elaborate on the point regarding why plain clothes cops CC: surprise. They want to appear to be regular folks, and have the element of surprise on their side. Uniformed cops just don’t have that, their status is plain to see to any criminal.

        • avatarelnonio says:

          And what the interweb taketh, the interweb giveth back. Original post above. Seems it was moderated before posting, not sure why (nothing was edited out).

        • avatarRobert Farago says:

          Just caught in the spam filter. If it happens again ping guntruth@me.com and I’ll release it ASAPer.

  37. avatarCargosquid says:

    Funny how OC was mandatory in Virginia whenever one visited a restaurant that served alcohol and panic DID not ensue. Nor do we see any reports of “man shot by crook because he was carrying.”

    OC. CC. Its your judgement. OC activists CAN cause political problems. As can ANY ACTIVIST that uses tactics that backfire. CC carry activists do too.

    But to say that OC’er’s are trying to be cops…that’s just downright stupid.

    OC has normalized gun carry in MANY places. 99.9% of the time its missed or ignored. And it also serves to educate any LEO’s that respond. Northern Virginia police and Norfolk police have definitely learned lessons…expensive lessons.

    That said…tactically BOTH have pros and cons. I like that OC is fine in Virginia because if I “print” or otherwise reveal my weapon…..so what?

    OC prevents some crimes. CC stops some crimes. Other times, neither works.

    That’s why BOTH should be available. And those that are worried about OC’ers need to get a life. Appeasement does not work. OH NO! The politicians might stop OC if we….OC. So we shouldn’t…OC? And stop it ourselves?

    Replace the politicians.

    • avatarSig says:

      We have the option here in WA, and I take it sometimes. I like that both options are on the table.

      Some of the discussion here misses a key point. It’s not an A or B solution, whether OC or CC deters crime better. If you see someone open carrying in a state which has both, you have to wonder who else may be armed? I always do.

      Both should be legal and normalized. That means doing your darnedest to not be a gun nut, whether you are CC, OC, or No-C.

      • Interesting, I didn’t realize that those of us saying CC is preferable are coming across as saying that OC should not be allowed. In my case, at least, that is simply not so.

        I have formed the opinion that CC is preferable for most of us mere mortals, but all else being equal, I would also prefer to have both options available. I am stationed in VA, but have a TX license. I can OC at this time, but still worry about printing because of my home state laws that I would have to follow upon my return. So, would I encourage TX to allow OC? You bet.

  38. avataranonymous says:

    Mr. Farago,

    Thank you for posting this.

    Based on his arrogant and condescending reaction to your readers, I now know to avoid Combat Focus Shooting, ICE, or any other training facility associated with Robert Pincus.

    Contrast Mr. Pincus’s posts here with the non-dogmatic approach of a true professional like Todd Green, who doesn’t need to stoop to insulting people who don’t agree with him.

  39. avatarZM 1306 says:

    I find that OC and CC are more of a moral issue.

    I am a honest productive member of society, I am not a criminal. I have no problem OC’ing because I intend no harm to any fellow good citizen. I see a OC’er I am more wiling to trust them, than a person who I can tell is hiding a gun.

    The criminals CC because they intend harm. They cannot bring themselves to OC because they KNOW they intend wrong and feel that they MUST HIDE, it is simple human instinct.

    I OC cross-draw and now that I have gotten my second handgun I do intend to CC the LC9 as a backup (just need to decide on how). I am CC licensed and OC is not restricted in Michigan.

    I favor the cross-draw OC for many reasons.

    I don’t have body armor so I do not intend to expose my full front to an armed assailant. I intend to draw with my right hand from my left side and shoot with my left shoulder facing the enemy to reduce my silhouette.

    If my right arm is for some reason disabled I can still draw my primary firearm easily with my left hand.

    It is difficult to improbable to “snatch and grab” my gun from behind. It is still vulnerable from my front but that however would require a bold criminal and result in a hand to hand fight.

    When sitting in my vehicle I can still easily draw and be aimed at the driver-door in-case of a car-jacker or other assailant. (left hand would be a quick aim to the passenger-door)

  40. avatarExNuke says:

    Wow, this thread drew a lot more comments than I’m used to seeing here. It’s plain that OC like guns in general draws some pretty strong opinions.

    My take on OC is that it’s a great idea, for somebody else. And I wish a lot more people would do it a lot more often. That doesn’t have anything to do with “tactical advantage” or “deterrent effect” or really anything to do with crime.

    I want to see it for the normalizing effect. Most of our hoplophobic (lower case) liberals have only seen a gun in a crime report or bogus propaganda piece on tv. It’s little wonder that they break out in a cold sweat and wet their pants when they see “A MAN WITH A GUN” in real life. There is a limit to how often a person can have an unrealistic panic attack over seeing a gun when nothing happens, when the “potential criminal lunatic with a full automatic revolver” just buys his loaf of bread and leaves the store and there are no dead bleeding bodies strewn across the parking lot. Maybe if they were forced to realize that 99.9% of what they have been told was bullshit specifically crafted to scare them into slavery they would get tired of being exploited and we could all get on about our normal lives.

  41. avatarBHirsh says:

    Open carry without situational awareness is suicide waiting to happen.

  42. avatarThomasR says:

    Why do I open Carry? Because I’m not a servant/slave
    Here in New Mexico, A person can CC an unloaded weapon with a mag on your your pocket or an OC weapon without a license; a person needs a license to carry a CC weapon. Rob Pincus showed pretty conclusively that OC is faster than CC, let alone dealing with an unloaded weapon as well.
    If I get a license i.e. (permission) to carry a weapon, a civil right, that “Shall not be infringed”, I am saying that the state is my master and I am thier servant/slave.
    If other citizens are scared because I OC, that says more about how far down the road we have gone as a country towards a police state.
    Think about it, people see a person with a badge and a gun, the enforcer for the state, people breath a sigh of relief, unless you just got pulled over for speeding.
    People see a citizen OCing a weapon; fear and loathing, even from many so called gun rights supporters.
    What does that say about how most people look at themselves versus an enforcer of the states power.
    People are saying that they don’t trust thier fellow Americans to use thier G_d given rights wisely, only designated agents of the state can be trusted.
    All this debate about surprise versus deterent, if that was really what it was about, cops and security guards would all be in plain clothes if CC was so superior.
    What this is really about, for me, is who do we look to first for our safety and security, the state or ourselves as a free people.
    You see, when I OC a weapon, I’m not trying to be a cop, they are servants to me; I am being an American citizen, practicing a right denied to most of the rest of world; if the definition of a free person versus a servant/slave is the right to carry a weapon with out the need of a permit from the state, not only is most of the world living as servants/slaves, most of the people here in this country who got a permit to carry that same weapon are servants/slaves as well.

  43. avatarRich7553 says:

    There’s an aspect to open carry that hasn’t, to my knowledge, been mentioned here. Forgive me, but I haven’t read every individual comment. If it has been mentioned, my apologies, but I believe it’s important enough to be considered.

    There are three categories of potential victims from which a criminal may choose. 1) Unarmed 2) Concealed carrier 3) Open carrier. From the criminal’s perspective, those unarmed and those carrying concealed appear outwardly identical. Only the open carrier appears as a “hard target”. Therefore, in order for the criminal to find out if a soft target is indeed a soft target, the criminal must initiate the crime, which increases the likelihood that someone, either the victim or the criminal, will get injured or killed.

    Although not in every case, burglars choose soft targets and look for indicators that show a target is either weakly or not at all protected. The presence uncollected mail and newspapers, and no lights inside during evening hours are prime indicators which tell a burglar the home is likely unoccupied, at least temporarily. However, a dog looking through the blinds, barking, and the presence of an alarm system sign are known deterrents. They clearly show an intent on the part of a homeowner that the home is a harder target, and clearly, burglars are more likely to seek a home where these indicators do not exist. It takes little effort on the part of the burglar to locate these vulnerable homes.

    Likewise, the practice of open carry is rare, even in states where permitted. It is much less risky on the part of the criminal to simply wait out an open carrier or choose another potential victim. This is the essence of deterrence.

    • avatarDean Weingarten says:

      Your points are well taken, and is reenforced by the information by Lott and others that 95% plus of the time, mere display of a firearm without a shot being fired, deescalates the situation and stops the crime.

  44. avatarJeff says:

    Years ago I read a report on interviews with gang-bangers in various California prisons. Those interviewed didn’t know each other, or what others were saying. From L.A. to Pelican Bay, there were responses that gangs sometimes targeted armed security guards as training to take on the cops. I know from experience that the bad guys will be eyeballing your firearm in open carry, as much from greed as fear.

  45. avatarBike Driver says:

    You know I have read all these comments and one the things that irks me about all these “tactical” trainers against OC cite that more training should be utilized. Just how much training does a criminal have? when the criminal is out there to do you harm, no matter your training, each situation is distinct and in fact the criminal often times doesn’t even have more training or tactical experience than the good guy. You want the best tactical advice, think just like the criminal and do the opposite and try to survive. I’m all for OC and I live in my own little world, no regrets here.

  46. avatarJeff says:

    I think you are a soft candy ass.

    You don’t open carry because of “possible” ramifications? Scare tactics keep sheep in line. Please exercise your rights, like me, and OC. Grow some balls for the good of the US

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.