5 Reasons I Will Never Open Carry

courtesy-firearmstoday.com_

By Brandon via concealednation.org

As part of our ‘policy’ at Concealed Nation, we typically don’t cover open carry topics. After all, we are Concealed Nation. The policy wasn’t even a policy until it had to be a policy. Anytime we cover anything relating to open carry, a war plays out in the comments section of the post and article. Just watch. This time will be no different . . .

I get that some people are only for concealed carry and others swing the other way. Then you have those who don’t care… just as long as you’re carrying. In the end, it literally doesn’t matter one bit as long as the carrier is being responsible. It’s really that simple.

Let me state that in a different way… just to be clear. I am not against open carry, it’s just simply not for me.

For starters, it’s not even legal in my current state of residence. But even if it were, I still wouldn’t do it. Here are five reasons that I will never, personally, open carry:

1. I like the element of surprise

If I’m in a store when a bad guy comes in to rob the place, the last thing I’d want is to be seen with a firearm on my hip. Sure you can argue that it may be a deterrent in the first place, but reality shows me that most people are pretty oblivious to things around them. And when you factor in the adrenaline that would be running through the bad guy’s veins during an armed robbery, he or she is likely not not even notice the firearm on my hip.

But still, if I keep it concealed, there’s no way of being spotted.

2. I don’t like drawing attention to myself

I’m a pretty laid-back guy and when out and about, I blend in. Depending on where you live, the tolerance level from the general public will vary when they see someone walking around with an openly-carried firearm. For the people who aren’t really used to seeing it or just don’t like it, it’s going to draw attention. Hell, it’s going to draw attention no matter the case. I just don’t like it.

3. I maintain the upper hand while carrying concealed

This is similar to #1, but extends a little further. You want to have the upper hand as long as possible in a stick situation. If SHTF and I need to act, I should –in most cases– maintain the upper hand with my concealed firearm. Literally no one around knows it’s there. If you’re ordered to the ground by an armed bad guy and you comply, all you’ll need is for him to be caught off guard to make your move –if you’re going to make one. If you have a gun on your hip out in the open, you could be making yourself the new target.

Take this scenario: You’re in a bank with your openly carried firearm. Three bad guys come storming into the building and immediately order everyone to the ground. While scanning the crowd, one of them spots your firearm.

Guess who they’re going after first.

4. I don’t like people knowing that I have a firearm

Unless you’re this guy, I assure you that I’m not doing anything I shouldn’t be doing. I’m a law-abiding dude that carries a firearm around with him. Discreetly. Undetected. It’s no one’s business that I have my firearm. Hell, I don’t even like telling the majority of people that I hang out with. The only reason many people know is because of Concealed Nation. It’s kinda tough to run a pro-concealed carry website and not be outed for carrying a firearm.

If no one sees it while I’m out and about, literally everyone is happy and moves on with their lives.

5. I don’t want to make myself a target

Just because you carry a firearm does not make you invincible. I mention this with emphasis because some people truly believe that they are invincible as long as they have their firearm with them. They couldn’t be further from the truth.

With a firearm openly carried, you can inadvertently make yourself a target whether you like it or not. If someone around you wants that firearm, they could try and go after it. How’s your reaction time? How’s your holster retention? It’s happened before.

Keep it concealed and unless you’re printing, you’re the only one who knows that you’re carrying a firearm. Period. Done.

And that’s my 2 cents on open carry.

comments

  1. avatar Jonesy says:

    Yeah. I think some hardass wanna be would try some shit with an open carrier too. But like the guy said to each their own.

  2. avatar Al Booth says:

    Agree completely.

    The only time my handgun is not concealed is on very hot days on the range. Even going to and from the range, concealed.

  3. avatar NineShooter says:

    Preach it, Dan. Agree on all points. Well done.

    1. avatar BillC says:

      You don’t excel at reading, do you?

      1. avatar NineShooter says:

        Actually, I have 45+ years of reading experience, during most of which the person shown in the byline of a magazine-type article was also the author of said article. It’s only in the last few years, where the trend of copying or republishing an article has become popular, that I’ve had a problem figuring out who wrote an article, and who just teased/copied it. Especially when I’m in a hurry to comment and get on with my life. Unlike others, who apparently have no life, and can hang around and snipe at other folks who comment on the actual subject matter.

        All of which changes nothing. Still good points that I agree with, well done.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Not that it matters, but many times printed articles can only be legally copied for distribution if there is attribution along with it, including some users on this site. I think the difference is not the law, but the increase in reprinting articles due to the ease.

      2. avatar PW in KY says:

        Lol Billc, this is America so reading is for terrorists. But for reals there are so many “shared” articles on this website it would be foolish to not scan the top of every single one just to make sure you know who wrote it.

  4. avatar JohnF says:

    I agree with your conclusion and your reasons

    1. avatar LikeISeeIt says:

      I agree as well, and prefer to run concealed for those very reasons .. but no amount of hidden carry will increase what’s called the Mere Presence normalcy (in this application: of handguns being normal and ok) for the masses who have been programmed by decades of media and television to fear them.

      Hero cop has a gun, that great. But if a non-cop has a gun .. then they’re invariably presented as a criminal, or a psycho, or a racist, or a ‘rights nutjob’ that causes trouble and has to be brought in or put down.

      Seeing firearms in public only causes skittishness for a while. The mind won’t stay on alert for no reason. It accepts normal things as being normal through repeated non-traumatic exposures to the stimulus.

      While concealed can have a tactical advantage, the citizens who open-carry are the ones who are (surprisingly) doing the most good for public relations. Across time their responsible uneventful nonchalant actions converts “odd” or “scary” into ordinary and common.

      1. avatar Dan says:

        Actually it doesn’t really matter if one if CC or Openly Carries in public, with all that’s been going on with Riots in Ferguson and Baltimore and other places and all the looting, shoointgs, murders to go long with all the aforementioned actions by all those who believe they’ve been wronged for so long becausee some continually reminds them and the fact their poor, Black…excuse me (African American) what was I thinking, anyways with all the serious issues happening all around us today and any of that can happen to anyone of us on any given day of week that folk’s are becoming more and more accustomed to seeing people wearing Firearms whether they’re Open carrying or they have a CC permit doesn’t much matter. Intact those who were mostly opposed to folk’s carrying whether openly or CC are getting their permits so sooner rather than later all those Thugs running around like hoodlums they are, are gonna be in for a rude awakening when they find out that Grandma they decided to play knock out game on will pull a Glock on they’re Asses to they’re surprise and get shot full of lead by Grandma, Grandpa or that unsuspecting Mother to be or whom ever. People are getting really tired with this Administration, with States run by (Liberal Democrats) who feel its in there best interest to not enforce laws or DA’s like we’ve witnessed in Baltimore who are just out to get Whitey for reparations of African Americans who are so far removed for slavery its a non-issue but any excuse is a good excuse in their minds. But look at any State Data and you’ll find that permits are on the rise for CC Permits and look at any Gun Makers Bottom lines and you’ll see there making more firearms, selling more ammo and making a lot of money than ever before….why because of our insane society where the crazy Bastard are in charge of the asylum and those of us who are law abiding Citizen are getting screwed and only way to right the wrongs against you is having to spend a lot of your time/money to go thru Court systems. We The People are fed up with Federal gov’t and local Gov’t all the same and the lack thereof by many local Gov’t/Courts to enforce laws they have in place to stop thugs from there insane attacks on upstanding citizens. Stop the Madness, if not now when ?

        1. avatar LikeISeeIt says:

          ?? It’s like you’re ignoring whatever someone says just waiting to say your nonsequitur own thing.

          http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/08/daniel-zimmerman/rebuttal-5-reasons-open-carry-is-a-very-good-idea/#comment-2228387

    2. avatar mark s. says:

      I too conceal carry my firearm 90 % of the time , I do open carry in my office however because I handle the money and it is my office and my money and I occasionally see inmates for their eye exams and I want anyone who maybe is considering to rob me ( my company ) that they will have to do battle if they choose this path . I am also
      90 % of the time conceal carrying while I open carry , for back up .

  5. avatar Texheim says:

    Seems like that’s only 2 reasons, they’re mostly synonyms of each other

    1. avatar SonnyRoofy says:

      Synonyms, I don’t think this word means what you think it means…

      1. avatar Texheim says:

        A word having the same meaning or in this case a reason for not OP’ing being the same just worded differently.

      2. avatar BLAMMO says:

        BLAMMO sez:
        Well, they’re not onomatopoeias, that’s for sure.

        1=3=5
        2=4

        It all adds up to 2; More or less.

        1. avatar Obeyance Dekat says:

          Yeah i was thinking the same thing.

  6. avatar Retired Para says:

    I have no issue with his viewpoint, I firmly believe that people, when they carry, should carry in a manner that they are comfortable with. With that said, he does contradict himself from the get go, especially with point one. At the end he talks about not wanting to “be a target” and infers OC makes someone a priority target; however, in his opening paragraph he says, “And when you factor in the adrenaline that would be running through the bad guy’s veins during an armed robbery, he or she is likely not not even notice the firearm on my hip”. So which is it????

    I CC and OC. How I carry is dictated by what I’m doing, where I’m at, what I’m driving/riding, etc… To each their own but I am constantly amused by the vocal CC proponents who like to denigrate OC whenever the occasion presents itself. Oh well, I guess having to jump hoops for a government permission slip to exercise a enumerated right drives some to play that game.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      “I CC and OC. How I carry is dictated by what I’m doing, where I’m at, what I’m driving/riding, etc… To each their own but I am constantly amused by the vocal CC proponents who like to denigrate OC whenever the occasion presents itself. Oh well, I guess having to jump hoops for a government permission slip to exercise a enumerated right drives some to play that game.”

      Very, very well said.

    2. avatar John J. Jones says:

      I live in Arizona, where we don’t have to have a permit to carry either way. I do have a CCW in case I travel outside of the state, but it is not necessary here. Most people that I shoot with, hang out with, and go to church with all are armed, but I don’t think I have ever seen any of them OC, unless it’s a Wild West scenario and someone will have a .45 colt in a cartridge belt/holster scenario. Like the author, we see no need to broadcast that we have a gun. Only twice have I noticed someone OC, other than what I described before. Both were in a Walmart, different times. One guy was not trying to showoff, just walking around with wife and child, but he stuck out like a sore thumb. The other was a wannabe biker/outlaw, maybe just turned 21, tattoos and piercings covered his body, with spiked hair carrying a Sig Sauer P938 in a brand new leather holster.

      1. avatar Matt says:

        What part of AZ? I’ve seen tons OC, myself included, in the last few years in the Valley. I also used to work retail and saw plenty too.

  7. avatar JR_in_NC says:

    Sigh. A lot of FUD, there, Brandon.

    Carry how you wish, but for the love of “The Truth,” please stop promulgating Geezer Science.

    “Element of Surprise” is one I always find curious…AVOIDANCE may well be a better plan. (See Kennesaw, Georgia Waffle House story…).

    NONE of Brandon’s “reasons” are rational. They are all biased by his personal preference. He prefers CC to OC. All the ‘rationalizations’ he comes up with to justify it make him look like a 2 year old explaining why he likes chocolate better than vanilla.

    1. avatar Matt Richardson says:

      As usual JR, you’re spot on.

      Concealed, open, shoulder holster, IWB, OWB, whatever. Carry and be a responsible advocate for 2A rights whilst doing it. The chocolate vs vanilla analogy is one of the best comparisons I’ve seen made so far.

      P.S. We still need to meet for a beer.

      1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

        Indeed.

        I am pretty sure I still have your email. Will try to let you know next time I roll through your AO. It’s been spotty lately, with some trips happening spur-of-the-moment and others planned but canceled.

        The way of these things, I guess.

  8. avatar HotandEmpty says:

    “Hell, I don’t even like telling the majority of people that I hang out with”

    That is my biggest problem with some concealed carriers and their indifference of their fellow man. Concealed means Concealed if you have to disobey an unconstitutional law or an ignorant work place policy, not amongst your friends. How can a concealed carrier expect to be viewed as the good guy but they can’t even be honest with those around them. That does not inspire trust and integrity, which are the pillars of being a good guy.

    I wouldn’t trust a person that forces themselves to associate with people that they can’t trust to be themselves around. If a person can’t be honest with their associates about the fact that they carry a gun to defend all innocent life around them, that person is not a good guy with a gun.

    Exercise freedom of association if your acquaintances are lesser men, that would view you negatively for exercising your Second Amendment.

    1. avatar Hugh Glass says:

      I always open carry, and not just my firearm. I do not like to deceive others so I just carry everything in the open: how much money I have in my wallet/bank account, all my training and experience on my jacket, and of course the size of my member. I would hate for anyone including women or criminals to assume the wrong thing and be under a false impression. I want them to know what they’re getting into.

      1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

        When the anti-OC crowd starts emulating the anti-gun crowd, by fixating on penises, they might want to reevaluate their position.

    2. avatar pod says:

      All my friends know I’m pro-2A and that I carry. If OC were legal in FL, I’d still conceal depending on the situation. The (sad) fact is that the sight of a firearm on a non-LE civilian tends to make some people nervous, regardless of their stance on guns.

  9. avatar Professor Bangity says:

    Thank you for giving your thoughts on open carry. I’m not going to even attempt to change your mind on any of the points, because they are important to you regardless of whether or not the underlying assumption is factual. Instead, I’m going to write a rebuttal for the people who haven’t made up their minds yet.

    1) The element of surprise is an offensive element, not a defensive element. If you ever say “element of surprise” and that shows up in court after a defensive gun use, it’s yet another point against you in the eyes of the prosecution. Jury might not care, but why would you put yourself at that risk? In fact, I take issue with the process of “Get selected for a violent crime/rely on someone or something else to distract the bad guy/SURPRISE! I have a gun.” You’re really going to rely on a lapse of attention?

    2) Openly wearing a holstered handgun draws less attention than wearing a Firefly t-shirt. When people speak to you, they look at your face. Otherwise, they look at their phones, their children, or the things for which they are searching. A LARGE percentage of people (I estimate upwards of 80%, but I haven’t the funding for a scientific study) will never notice that you’re carrying. The ones that do will mostly be people who carry themselves.

    3) This is a very, very valid point. If you must act, you should be able to decide when and how. If you open carry and the cashier at a gas station notices, then he or she might ask for your help in the case of a robbery. However, if you’re worried about that, simply untuck your shirt while you do the “adjust after just getting out of my car” dance. You know the one.

    4) Personal preference. If you don’t like people knowing that you have a firearm, then you shouldn’t write for Concealed Nation under your real name. You shouldn’t post any firearm-related things on social media or even “like” or follow gun-related pages. You should purchase all firearms and accessories at locations outside of your normal circle of travel (as state laws permit). You should never talk about firearms with anyone, ever. Two people can keep a secret only if one of them is dead, after all. Me? I don’t care. If someone has a question about firearms AND is paying enough attention to notice me openly wearing my handgun at Walmart, I want them to feel comfortable asking me about it.

    4.5) If you live in a densely-populated city, then it makes some sense to be secretive about your firearms-related lifestyle. If your boss finds out about it AND is severely anti-gun (which is highly common in large cities), then you may be unfairly passed up for promotions and such. Rural environments differ in that the concentration of anti-gun people is relatively low.

    5) There are five parts of a violent crime: Intent, interview, positioning, attack, and retaliation. I get to make a real effect at step 2. You don’t get to act until step 5. In my mind, that’s worth it.

    6) You don’t have to open carry or concealed carry 100% of the time! (I wish I knew how to bold things here.) If someone gets you a pair of pants that happens to be the right size if you aren’t carrying concealed, then you can just use them as your “occasional open carry” pants. You can open carry on the second of every month, like the Yankee Marshal has done over on the YouTubes. However you want to do it, you legally can as of 1/16/2016 in Texas.

    Again, this rebuttal was not aimed specifically to change Brandon’s mind. It’s to keep prospective open carriers from making up their minds just yet.

    1. avatar NineShooter says:

      On point 4.5, it sounds like you’ve never lived/worked in a small town. It’s far more likely that a person who does something out-of-the-ordinary in a small town will have that “get back” to their potentially anti-gun boss, than in a large city/town. Even if the boss doesn’t personally see it, someone who knows someone or is related to someone who knows someone will see it, and the gossipy folks will take it from there…

      1. avatar Professor Bangity says:

        I actually do live in a very small town, and I have lost a job because I posted pro-2A videos on the YouTubes. However, that was due to the anti-gun mayor and not my supervisor (I worked for the town). Current popular opinion has him just slightly above horse manure.

        1. avatar NineShooter says:

          That might actually support my point. I’d bet that someone else brought the videos to his attention, vs. him just happening across them during a browsing session (unless he was looking for dirt on you, of course; then all bets are off).

        2. avatar Professor Bangity says:

          @NineShooter: He had his son, a police officer, digging on me.

        3. avatar Stinkeye says:

          Sounds like the mayor had a hard-on for you, for whatever reason. If he had someone trying to dig up dirt on you, he was going to find or manufacture a reason to fire you, no matter what kind of videos you put on the internet…

      2. avatar Grindstone says:

        Wouldn’t the same thing happen anyway if you own guns? Unless you conceal literally EVERYTHING you have related to guns, somebody will see your range bag/targets/gun oil/rifle bag/whatever.

    2. avatar Ben says:

      I figure if I’m open carrying, when the bad guy happens to see a gun that he doesn’t control, his Step 1 changes to ‘find a softer target’ and we never even knew he got to Step 1 at that location. Most bad guys don’t want anything to do with a gunfight. They want to use their weapons to intimidate people and get what they want. When they see someone who is likely to fight back, they slink off to find a softer looking target. At that point, maybe they run into a concealed carrier that can save the day by having to take action. I’m okay with having the criminal just leave.

    3. avatar panzercat says:

      “The element of surprise is an offensive element, not a defensive element.”

      Offense and defense are not static states. One can instantly turn to the other dependent on any number of circumstance. Retaining a concealed firearm allows you to keep the option of going from defensive to offensive and exploit an aggressor’s mistakes, as opposed to being instantly tagged as a combatant because of your open carry status.

      “Openly wearing a holstered handgun draws less attention than wearing a Firefly t-shirt”

      By average people just going about their daily lives without a vested interest in engaging in criminal activity, I would agree you are- on average -correct. You’re not carrying a firearm for those people, however. You are carrying against the criminal element who do notice things like camera placement, physical security, and armed individuals that may be detrimental to their purloining profession.

      ” However, if you’re worried about that, simply untuck your shirt…”

      Or you can simply reserve the option as to your level of action by having started concealed to begin with. As you say, if you would like to assist, simply expose your firearm and advise your willingness to help instead of being expected to by default. Or just shoot the bad guy outright. See where I’m going with this?

      “There are five parts of a violent crime: Intent, interview, positioning, attack, and retaliation. I get to make a real effect at step 2. You don’t get to act until step 5. In my mind, that’s worth it.”

      While I won’t argue the deterrent aspect, this statement appears to assume you will always find yourself at step two. In fact, out of the two parties we’re discussing in this particular section, only one of them can produce verifiable statistics as to how the crime was stopped. Not saying prevention doesn’t stop criminal activity, just that your entire justification here is built on quicksand supposition. Finally, does giving up the element of surprise in a situation that has actually happened in step five justify the maybe-possibility of prevention in step two while further taking on the risk that open carry exposure brings?

      “You don’t have to open carry or concealed carry 100% of the time!”

      Fair enough.

  10. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin) says:

    I generally CC but that is based on a desire not to grab the attention of MDA types not because I fear being attacked by some bad ass. I generally reserve open carry for the woods or small town environments in gun friendly areas. I could open carry where I live since pretty much everybody is armed to the teeth. Nobody is going to give a f**k that I am parading around with my pistol.

    There is no evidence that gad guys go after open carriers. Sure you could be in the bank when the modern equivalent of the James gang shows up but that isn’t a very likely scenario. Life isn’t risk free you know. You are probably at greater risk of being attacked when you are concealed since the bad guy doesn’t know to avoid you. Like all forms of deterrence you can’t measure the number of attacks avoided because you were open carrying. Since the objective of self defense is to avoid or deter the threat open carry is probably superior to concealed if that is your primary MOE.

    1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

      Concealed carry is a deterrent for those who don’t carry. If enough people CC then the criminals will have to become aware that anybody they try to victimize could be capable of fighting back with lethal force. Even if that’s a 1 in 20 proposition that’s still a hell of a deterrent.

      1. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin) says:

        I suspect that it takes more than 5% CCers to deter in general and we are well below the 5% number who actually carry. But the more CCers there are the more important it is to have a few OCers to remind the bad guys that acting bad is not a good idea.

        1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

          Well even 100% CC wouldn’t deter some criminals, but 5% pretty much eliminates the beta male criminal element. I suspect that the right to carry movement should get some of the credit for lower crime rates.

  11. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    If you open carry you need a retention holster and an elevated situational awareness. In a shooting spree you’re likely to be the first target and in any other criminal attack the first move the criminal takes will be to take your gun from you before you know you’re being attacked. It’s a little bit like off body carry in that you always have guard your firearm. On the other hand it is likely to be a deterrent and you don’t have to worry about snagging your gat on your clothing when you draw your weapon. If you’re comfortable with everyone you know and every stranger on the street knowing you’re armed then OC is fine. Personally I like to carry in anonymity.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      “an elevated situational awareness. “

      Disagree. We ALL need elevated SA regardless of carry mode.

      “In a shooting spree you’re likely to be the first target and in any other criminal attack the first move the criminal takes will be to take your gun from you before you know you’re being attacked.”

      BS. Never proven with actual data. Meme; Geezer Science. Emotion. All those things, but NOT DATA.

      Therefore, irrational.

      “If you’re comfortable with everyone you know and every stranger on the street knowing you’re armed then OC is fine.”

      In theory, this is true enough. However, in practice, most OC-ers report things like “no one noticed.”

      Getting back to the concept of Situational Awareness, the general SA of MOST people is close to zero. Far too many people are walking around in Condition White and totally clueless of what is going on around them.

      What makes you think “everyone” will notice the unobtrusive gun on your hip when MOST of what they are focused on is:

      (a) their own problems
      (b) their cell phone
      (c) the music pumping into their ears
      (d) the book they are reading
      (e) finding where they are going (walking or driving)

      etc.

      So, while theoretically OC announces your carry to everyone, the practical reality is that most people don’t care what you are “wearing” and are not paying any attention.

      Also, this argument STILL makes it “all about the gun.” No matter how much we try to oppose this view in SOME discussions, we will never make headway on this point so long as we concede that YES, YES it is “about the gun.”

      In other words…in a right world, why should anyone else CARE that you are carrying. The FACT is having a gun OC-d is only a SMALL part of ‘threat assessment.’ How you are acting should be a MUCH bigger player.

      “Personally I like to carry in anonymity.”

      That’s certainly your choice and I’ve got no problem with that, but I’m just trying to point out that all these “Reasons” people list for preferring CC to OC are EMOTIONAL and PERSONAL CHOICE and not really “reasons” (in the rational sense) at all.

      So, Brandon’s whole article could be summed up “I just prefer it.” I guess four words don’t spark controversy and discussion and thus page impressions and clicks for advertisers.

      1. avatar Ben says:

        Absolutely.

      2. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

        Actually the person who needs the highest level of situational awareness is the one who’s not carrying a weapon. In the OC vs. CC scenario you don’t have to worry about someone sneaking up behind you and grabbing your gun if your gun is concealed.

        I could have sworn that in the Naval yard shooting the first guy to get it was the armed guard. But you seem to know your ‘studies’ so I’ll concede your point.

        Depending on where you live, yes many people will not even notice OC when you walk by. But that doesn’t mean that your boss or a business client won’t notice or that you won’t find out that they’re rabidly anti-gun. Sure you might have a screw them attitude about that, but that’s your money to make or not make.

        I never claimed that OC is a bad thing, just that it necessitates a different set of rules than CC.

        1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          I could have sworn that in the Naval yard shooting the first guy to get it was the armed guard. But you seem to know your ‘studies’ so I’ll concede your point.

          Why do you conflate LEO, armed guards, or military service members to the average, firearm-carrying citizen?

          Terrorist attacks, attacks on LEO, or attacks on armed guards (especially the ones carrying bags of money) have nothing at all to do with the scenarios in which the average armed citizen will find himself.

        2. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

          Common sense, I guess. If I were going to commit a criminal deed and was willing to take a few lives in the process and I walked in and saw 10 people and only one of them was armed, I would target the one with the firearm first. I realize that not all criminals are that rational but they’re not all high on bath salts.

        3. avatar Stinkeye says:

          Gov, I would suspect that the state of mind necessary to rush into a room full of people and start threatening or shooting them isn’t really compatible with calmly assessing if any of those people might be armed. That’s why “gun-free” zones are so often the target – the shitheads can proceed with a pretty high certainty that nobody else will have a gun, and they don’t have to make such assessments on a per-victim basis.

          The reason that armed guards or LEOs might be targeted first in any kind of spree shooting isn’t the object on their hip, it’s the “SHOOT ME, I’M GOING TO TRY TO STOP YOU” uniform they’re wearing that draws ten times as much attention as a holstered pistol would.

        4. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

          Stinkeye, you’re assuming a situation where someone runs in guns blazing. That’s not always the way it works. Sometimes the criminal walks in with a concealed weapon and takes a look around before he opens fire. You’re right in that in the former scenario the uniform is more noticeable than the firearm, but that’s a moot point in the latter. The counterpoint is that the criminal might walk in and see an armed man and decide to move to another target, which is likely if he’s just looking to rob the place. But if he decides to stick around, expect to be the first targeted.

      3. avatar NineShooter says:

        JR_in_NC says: “That’s certainly your choice and I’ve got no problem with that, but I’m just trying to point out that all these ‘Reasons’ people list for preferring CC to OC are EMOTIONAL and PERSONAL CHOICE and not really ‘reasons’ (in the rational sense) at all.”

        All of which can accurately be claimed of the folks on the other side of the argument, as well.

        1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          All of which can accurately be claimed of the folks on the other side of the argument, as well.

          The difference being that one side says, “carry how you choose to carry; live free,” while the other side either tries to tell others how to carry, belittles/attacks those who choose to carry differently, or use unfounded claims and specious arguments to influence how others choose to carry.

          I don’t care how you carry, as long as you do so lawfully. If every single person-of-the-gun lived according to the same standard, the world would be a much better place.

        2. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

          Actually Chip, from my perspective, it seems like the OC side is overly sensitive about anything they perceive to be critical of OC. My original point was not anti-OC but you and JR seemed to be offended. Just because there are different concerns with OC vs. CC doesn’t one is right and the other wrong.

        3. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          I take no personal offense. I carry concealed.

          That said, I do find it offensive to the notion of free men exercising liberty in a free society for some people to deign to dictate to other people the manner in (or reasons for) which they choose to exercise a natural right in a lawful manner.

          I am all in favor of discussing legitimate pros and cons regarding that decision; that discussion can only do everyone good. But I tire of seeing specious arguments and irrational fears couched as legitimate grounds for discussion.

          By all means, we should preach situational awareness; but there has to be a reasonable balance between the typical oblivion of the average citizen, and the battle-readiness of an operationally operating operator – a reasonable balance that would serve anyone well, whether carrying openly, carrying concealed, or not carrying at all.

          Otherwise, I do agree that there are different matters for consideration, depending on one’s chosen method of carry. I just don’t think that they generally would rise to the level of being determining factors in the underlying choice.

  12. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    1. I like the element of surprise

    If I’m in a store when a bad guy comes in to rob the place, the last thing I’d want is to be seen with a firearm on my hip. Sure you can argue that it may be a deterrent in the first place, but reality shows me that most people are pretty oblivious to things around them.

    Statistically, that’s exactly what you’d want to happen. Studies show that criminals fear armed citizens above all else, including law enforcement. The criminal psyche wants to complete the criminal act as quickly as possible, with as little resistance or attention as possible. To a tunnel-visioned criminal, a concealed carrier is no different from a non-carrier, and if an open carrier is observed, the criminal is far more likely to seek out an easier target. Evidence – anecdotal, at a minimum – shows that criminals, in fact, do just that.

    2. I don’t like drawing attention to myself

    I’m a pretty laid-back guy and when out and about, I blend in… Hell, it’s going to draw attention no matter the case.

    And here, you contradict what you just said under the previous point, when you said:

    Sure you can argue that it may be a deterrent in the first place, but reality shows me that most people are pretty oblivious to things around them.

    So, which is it: people are oblivious, or will OC inherently draw attention?

    Also: what is your evidence that carrying openly draws attention? I would counter that the vast majority of openly carried firearms, the vast majority of the time, draw no attention whatsoever.

    3. I maintain the upper hand while carrying concealed

    This is similar to #1, but extends a little further. You want to have the upper hand as long as possible in a stick situation. If SHTF and I need to act, I should –in most cases– maintain the upper hand with my concealed firearm.

    No, this is exactly a duplicate of #1.

    Take this scenario: You’re in a bank with your openly carried firearm. Three bad guys come storming into the building…

    One, they’re attempting a bank robbery without casing it first? Two, remember that tunnel vision? They’re looking at the cash source, not your hip. So, if you make like you’re getting on the ground, you’ve drawn no attention to yourself. Three, carrying openly or concealed, are you seriously going to take on bad guys, when outnumbered three to one?

    4. I don’t like people knowing that I have a firearm

    Personal preference. Noted, and granted.

    5. I don’t want to make myself a target

    Just because you carry a firearm does not make you invincible. I mention this with emphasis because some people truly believe that they are invincible as long as they have their firearm with them. They couldn’t be further from the truth.

    With a firearm openly carried, you can inadvertently make yourself a target whether you like it or not. If someone around you wants that firearm, they could try and go after it.

    Wow, that story about the idiot kid in Portland, doing stupid things with stupid people in stupid places at stupid times sure gets a lot of play. That anecdote is essentially the exception that proves the rule. Do you have any actual statistics, or just this one story?

    Let’s look at police officers: a subset of the population who a) openly carry daily, b) interact with criminals with high frequency, and c) are actual targets for criminal activity, including firearm theft. One might call this subset high-risk for open carrying. So, for this high-risk group, what are the statistics for firearm retention, and having firearms stolen from their person while carrying openly?

    In reality, those numbers range from 20% down to 5% of officers killed in the line of duty being killed by their own firearm. (The lower number results from increased retention training, and better holsters.) But, around 0.1% (ballpark) of police are killed each year in the line of duty. So, those killed with their own guns amount to 0.01% (or fewer) of the entirety of this “high risk” group.

    The fear of being at high risk for being targeted for theft of your openly carried firearm is unfounded, as far as I can tell.

    Conclusion

    Your decision rests on one point, that constitutes nothing more than personal preference. More power to you, and to each person who decides on his or her own the manner of lawfully carrying a firearm. But hopefully, each person can make an informed decision, not improperly influenced by unfounded fears and specious claims.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      You saved me a lot of typing time with that.

    2. avatar Tex300BLK says:

      Glad I’m not the only one who noticed the dissonance between points 1 and 2.

      1. avatar Kapeltam says:

        I noticed too. People are oblivious, but they are going to notice? I presume he didnt mean for it to be in generalities. Some people are oblivious, although some are aware and he doesn’t want to draw unnecessary attention, especially from those that would cause harm, or otherwise harass him?

    3. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Well done, Chip.

  13. avatar Grindstone says:

    I’m pro-choice. OC has been legal here since 2012 and I have seen exactly two OCers since.

  14. avatar Ned says:

    It’s not just as simple as the question seems. Circumstance is so different for so many that what seems like a no brainer to some is not so exactly right for another. I live in an open carry state. I live far away from the big city. On Saturday morning I need to go to town and get a barrel of fuel or maybe a few parts or something, I have on shorts and a tee shirt, no socks and maybe just a bit of oil and dirt on my hands and clothing. I will always strap my firearm on, sometimes I will drape my shirt over it. No it’s not at all concealed for anyone who is looking but it doesn’t need to be. I always stay vigilant. It make no sense for this 20 minute trip to change my clothes or clean up for a quick run to my little town just to come home and change to get back to what I have been doing. Never open carry? It just doesn’t make sense to me.

  15. avatar Evan says:

    I understand both sides here. I’m all for OC and CC. Maybe it comes from my theater background but I just don’t care about attracting attention to myself. OC had advantages and disadvantages and CC has advantages and disadvantages. I prefer the loud and proud type. AR-15 stickers on the car, shooting competition hats, open carry. Lol I even wrote an essay comparing the AK to the AR for my English class in a very Antigun section of NJ. Roughly Half the U.S. Population has guns but we keep getting beat back because the only place the other half sees them is CNN and the movies. The more frequently they see them the less shocking it will be. Eventually they just won’t care or will start to like it.

  16. avatar Tex300BLK says:

    Absent from the authors “points” is draw time for a concealed carrier. Sure you practice and all that, but unless you are carrying OWB under a blazer or a loose unbuttoned shirt your draw will be slower than someone OC. So your “moment of distraction” needs to be longer as I’m sure you will have the criminal’s undivided attention the second you start untucking your shirt. If it gets to the point where you are being ordered to the ground then you lost pretty much any element of surprise so I think it’s a moot point.
    Maybe instead when you go to the bank don’t just mindlessly stand there with your back to the door, or better yet go to the drive through window. Few things seem worse than going to stand in line in a place that is at a higher probability of being attacked by armed criminals.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      I drill for maybe 5 minutes a day drawing from concealment. I’m pretty fast.
      I drill for maybe 5 minutes a week drawing from an open carry position. And yet, I’m much faster that way.
      I conceal carry, but when it comes to draw time, I don’t care how much I practice, open draw is faster.

      1. avatar NineShooter says:

        And if every conflict started in the middle of a dusty street at high noon with the whole town watching, that might be critically important.

        1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          Wow, what a colossally ignorant statement. And, a nice straw man, too!

          Sorry, man; but draw time matters. If you think it does not matter, you are not studying real life, fight-for-your life armed encounters.

          No one is talking about high-noon “Western” gun fights (that rarely, if even ever, actually happened). But…just wow.

        2. avatar NineShooter says:

          Careful there JR; you’re almost sounding like someone who “belittles/attacks those who choose to carry differently”, and we both know that would be wrong, correct?

        3. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          Do you understand the difference between belittling/attacking an argument (or, in the case of JR, a statement), and belittling/attacking a person?

        4. avatar Ralph says:

          Careful, JR. I’m sure that NineEmpties has been engaged in numerous gunfights on Call of Duty and is a world renowned authority, while jwtaylor, as a mere decorated combat veteran, knows nothing about this subject matter.

        5. avatar NineShooter says:

          Sorry to disappoint, Ralph, but I’ve never played COD in any form. However, I must plead guilty to being “world renowned”, as I do post messages on the Internet, which is read worldwide. As a frequent overnight poster here in the States, I’ve had many fine discussions with folks on all sides of the globe, and I hope to continue doing so.

          I was simply objecting (in a tongue-in-cheek manner) to the ridiculous notion that speed-of-draw should be the primary/determining factor in a person’s mode of carry. If that were true on any subjective level, then no one would carry concealed.

        6. avatar NineShooter says:

          Chip, the term “ignorant” is an attack on the person that made the statement, not the statement itself.

        7. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          Chip, the term “ignorant” is an attack on the person that made the statement, not the statement itself.

          I’m pretty sure we’ll be covering this sort of sentence structure analysis with my oldest daughter in her third-grade curriculum this year. Let’s examine the sentence:

          Wow, what a colossally ignorant statement.

          Colossally: adjective. Modifies (adjective) ignorant
          Ignorant: adjective. Modifies (noun) statement
          Statement: noun

          Ignorant (adj.): lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated
          Statement (n): a definite or clear expression of something in speech or writing

          Thus, the construct ignorant statement means, a definite or clear expression of something in speech or writing exhibits a lack of knowledge or awareness.

          Nothing in the original sentence is directed at the person who spoke/wrote the statement being declared to be ignorant.

        8. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Having watched a guy who played some gun game or other draw and fire on 5 targets in 1.8 seconds, I’m betting all a BG would have to do is blink his eyes and he’d be dead. I dare anyone to claim he can win whatever game that is from CC.

        9. avatar NineShooter says:

          Chip said: “Thus, the construct ignorant statement means, a definite or clear expression of something in speech or writing exhibits a lack of knowledge or awareness.” And I’ll include the unwritten but always implied part of any similar statement “…of the person making the statement.”

          Interesting that you left out each of the examples given in your quoted definitions (in quotes, below):

          – lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated or unsophisticated.
          “he was told constantly that he was ignorant and stupid”

          – lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about something in particular.
          “they were ignorant of astronomy”

          Note the term is always applied to people, not the statements they make/made.

          Or is it your claim that the statement, the WORDS THEMSELVES, “lack knowledge”, “lack awareness”, or that the words have no education (“are uneducated”)? Yeah, right. *snort*

          The word ignorant ALWAYS applies to the person making the statement (directly or indirectly), not the statement itself. If you didn’t know this before, you do now, and should modify your behavior in civilized discussions accordingly.

        10. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          And I’ll include the unwritten but always implied part of any similar statement “…of the person making the statement.”

          Nice attempt at moving the goalposts, but your redefinition, and adding in an unfounded assumption, renders the rest of your comment moot. I’ll address this point, though:

          Note the term is always applied to people, not the statements they make/made.

          Untrue. A statement can evince a lack of knowledge.

          Or is it your claim that the statement, the WORDS THEMSELVES, “lack knowledge”, “lack awareness”, or that the words have no education (“are uneducated”)? Yeah, right. *snort*

          Yes, that is exactly what is meant by applying the adjective ignorant to the noun statement.

          The word ignorant ALWAYS applies to the person making the statement (directly or indirectly), not the statement itself.

          And here, you’re begging the question.

          If you didn’t know this before, you do now, and should modify your behavior in civilized discussions accordingly.

          You should check your condescension before admonishing others regarding how one comports oneself in civilized discussions.

          And by the way, speaking of civilized discussions: even if the original statement had been that the writer was ignorant, i.e. lacking in knowledge, such a statement is not uncivilized, nor is it ad hominem. If the writer lacked knowledge that speed of draw mattered in scenarios other than high-noon wild-west shootouts, and yet wrote that speed of draw only mattered in that specific scenario, then the author indeed was lacking in knowledge regarding scenarios in which speed of draw matters.

        11. avatar NineShooter says:

          Chip says: “A statement can evince a lack of knowledge.”

          Lack of knowledge OF A SPECIFIC PERSON, Chip.

          e·vince

          verb formal

          – reveal the presence of (a quality or feeling).
          “his letters evince the excitement he felt at undertaking this journey”

          – be evidence of; indicate.
          “man’s inhumanity to man as evinced in the use of torture”

          Once again, the characteristics of the word refer to a PERSON or PERSONS, not a word or statement.

          Keep digging, you might pop out on the other side eventually…

        12. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          Keep digging? Only after you hand over the shovel. You’re arguing your own inferences and assumptions.

        13. avatar Another Robert says:

          You’re doing great, Chip, but just for future reference, “colossally” is an adverb modifying the adjective “ignorant” (adverbs, like “very”, modify adjectives as well as verbs).

        14. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          Well, it said “adverb” in my head, and came out “adjective” on the screen. Fail on my part.

  17. avatar Jay Slobey says:

    I agree with your conclusions. Respectfully, I think you might have thought through your reasons a little better, My take on people who open carry is somewhat different:

    1. Open carry folks scare people not in the open carry “club,” including some police officers (never a good thing);
    2. In my opinion it is “showing off;”
    3. Open carry folks make themselves priority targets for the bad guys.
    By the way, as I have indicated in the past, I conceal carry.

    1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

      1. Open carry folks scare people not in the open carry “club,” including some police officers (never a good thing);

      Last I checked, police officers are in the open carry “club”. Regarding scaring the sheeple: statistics, please?

      2. In my opinion it is “showing off;”

      You’re entitled to your opinion, but in this case, your opinion is bigoted, juvenile, projection, and simply wrong.

      3. Open carry folks make themselves priority targets for the bad guys.

      Evidence? Statistics? Or yet more specious FUD?

      1. avatar Dustin says:

        The usual BS…

        1. avatar Conway Redding says:

          BS as evidenced by what, exactly, Dustin? I agree with all of Zimmerman;s points, particularly the one that open carry simply lets the bad guys know from whom they can acquire a free firearm, or, if they already have a firearm, whom they need to shoot first to accomplish whatever felonious goal they have in mind.

        2. avatar Another Robert says:

          Except Zimmerman didn’t make those points. Some guy from ConcealedNation did. Zimmerman OC’s frequently, if I’m not mistaken.

    2. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin) says:

      I used to open carry when visiting my son on Larimer County Colorado because they didn’t recognize my Virginia permit. I didn’t know that I was showing off. I thought I was carrying the only legal way I could. Now that I have a Wisconsin permit I would probably CC in most but not all cases.

  18. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    “It’s not even legal in my current state of residence.”
    Not in mine, either. But I can’t help but think maybe Brandon would have a different perspective if he lived in a state where open carry has been “normal” for many years. Just sayin’.

    I agree with the opening premise: Carry how you want (legally), and do it responsibly.

  19. avatar bryan1980 says:

    I generally follow Brandon’s line of thinking here. I think you should be able to CC or OC anywhere, but I prefer CC for myself. It comes down to whichever method of carry works better for the person who’s carrying.

  20. avatar Ralph says:

    I don’t OC primarily because I’m a private person and don’t want strangers knowing my business.

    I don’t know if OCing is better tactically than CCing or vice versa. Neither does anyone else, despite unsupported conclusions that are based on absolutely nothing but the critics’ fevered imaginations. I just know that I strongly support people’s right to OC if that’s their choice.

    1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      That’s my reason as well.

      Another reason is that OC might detract from my carefully cultivated public image of being a harmless, cuddly, lovable fuzzball.

      Besides, if I OC’ed, I wouldn’t have the quality entertainment of the shocked look on some women’s faces when they give me a hug, find something hard under my shoulder and realize I’m carrying a gun. I would also be deprived of my standard Mel Brooks-esque quip after seeing the shocked look on their faces: “What’s the matter, dearie? I’m just very happy to see you…”

      This defuses 9 out of 10 women who would otherwise give me some harrumphing lecture on “why do you need to carry a gun?!”

  21. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    I see pros and cons to both open and concealed carry.

    The major advantage of open carry: deterrence.
    How many times have we said that the only assault we are guaranteed to survive is one that never happens?

    The major advantage of concealed carry: stealth.
    Do I really even have to discuss the ginormous advantage of stealth — something upon which our United States military and spy agencies spend 10s of billions of dollars?

    Both points play into Sun Tzu’s Art of War principles. One of Sun Tzu’s principles is to know your enemy’s weakness and attack accordingly on your terms. To a typical street thug, a visibly armed person with decent situational awareness has no weakness and thus the thug slips away to find a much easier target. Of course an attacker who does not know their adversary and underestimates their adversary’s capabilities is almost certain to fail.

    For those reasons, I support both open and concealed carry.

  22. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Meh-I see the occasional open carrier in Indiana. NO problems except dipshites making moronic comments. I wish I could open carry in Illinois-but I guess if your site says “concealed” you don’t want to rock the boat…

  23. avatar Dustin says:

    Disagree on all points. Not going to waste my time re-iterating the obvious.

  24. avatar Jared says:

    It’s the same old personal preference nonsense.

    This conversation isn’t even worth having as most states are more restrictive on CC than they are in OC. even Arizona.

    This analysis would only be appropriate in Vermont, because it’s the only place where OC and CC are 100% equal.

    Indiana and Connecticut are for shall issue states, MA NJ and MD are “equal” as well, but that’s another story.

  25. avatar William says:

    The real reason I don’t open carry: Holsters suck so if I can’t pocket carry a gun I likely will leave it at home.

  26. avatar Denton says:

    I’m hesitant about OC as well because of how it makes other people feel. I’m not a confrontational type of guy, licensed mediator actually, and I know that outward perception is very important in daily interactions. When you approach people or are approached by people while you are OC, you automatically and subconsciously change the stakes of the interaction for better or worse.

    In old Westerns a pistol on your hip was normalized to where people could even get into fist fights without upping the stakes of the confrontation and only a “reach” for the pistol was grounds for going for yours. Most people today are not normalized to OC. OC quite possibly can raise the threat level by itself and make another person even more confrontational or the flip side make them more compliant but resentful and dishonest. This phenomenon is apparent at protests when the police show up in full riot gear ready for a fight. Often that is the moment when the peaceful protest gives in to the expectation of not being peaceful thus ironically defeating the purpose of having the police show up at all.

    I recently helped a city councilperson file for an SBR. He is very Pro 2A but he will immediately shut down a city council meeting if someone enters OC. Why? Because it creates an outward perception that that person is serious about his cause to the point of using deadly violence to get his way (not appreciated in a democracy that values free speech). That person may be very peaceful but that particular outward perception is never one to be taken lightly nor does it create an atmosphere for peaceful discourse when the majority of others are not equally armed. This councilperson does not mind people CC in his meetings because that does not create an outward perception of being ready to “whip out his/her pistol at a moment’s notice”. In his mind, and I agree, CC is a higher level of defensive-only carrying as it does not come with that offensive outward perception.

    1. avatar NineShooter says:

      My comment disappeared; apologies in advance if this one shows up as a duplicate.

      More solid points, well-written. Thanks for posting!

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      “He is very Pro 2A but he will immediately shut down a city council meeting if someone enters OC. Why?”

      Because he’s an assh0le, that’s why.

      1. avatar NineShooter says:

        Ah, more of that tolerant, can’t-successfully-attack-the-argument-so-let’s-attack-the-person open-carry-supporter rhetoric.

    3. avatar Chip Bennett says:

      He is very Pro 2A but he will immediately shut down a city council meeting if someone enters OC. Why? Because it creates an outward perception that that person is serious about his cause to the point of using deadly violence to get his way (not appreciated in a democracy that values free speech).

      In the words of Rachel Jeantel, that’s real retarded, sir.

      In his mind, and I agree, CC is a higher level of defensive-only carrying as it does not come with that offensive outward perception.

      In a free society, you don’t have a right to be free from being offended, or to be free from perceiving irrational fears.

      1. avatar Denton says:

        You’re right that in a free society you are not protected against being offended or from having irrational fears, my point though was on how it is beneficial to sometimes actually be empathetic and think about the other person’s feelings. And in the Long term, other people’s feelings and objections are the most important factor of all.

        To your specific points:
        1) to protect the candid nature of discourse in a city council meeting (which can already be very heated) the city councilperson was thinking about everyone’s feelings which I think is very important in a government official when the issue at hand is giving every person the freedom to speak their mind without feeling threatened. To protect the freedom of speech, he’s made the meeting hall the wrong place to open carry but you still have the right to defend yourself by concealed carrying. It’s a fair balance.

        2) While other people can get offended by whatever they want without it affecting the right of your ability to open carry (which I support entirely), my own opinion is that the other person’s point of view still matters. Sometimes openly carrying can do more harm than good in escalating a confrontation. This may be true both during and after the confrontation. The person confronting you may be more aggressive because of the presence of the gun and the jury afterwards may think you went out of your way to use deadly force by openly carrying.

        Thinking Long-Term, If you don’t want to see the right to carry at all taken away by a populous anti-gun constitutional amendment you will pay extra special attention to what others are getting offended over. This is a republican democracy and even though it is very difficult to do, constitutional amendments do happen. More frequently judges of the anti-gun variety make popular changes to how our constitution is interpreted. How do those judges get appointed? By politicians voted into office by people other than you. If enough other people object to your conduct, regardless of what “rights” you think you may have, you will lose that right. We have no rights other than those given to us by the majority of the population. The beauty of our system is that we make it extremely difficult for the majority to get anything done so that cooler heads prevail and the minority remains protected. But every now and then the majority gets its but in gear. Either quickly like prohibition or inexorably slowly like women’s suffrage.

        Want to know what other “rights” people lost because more people objected to them? The right to refuse service based on race. The right to not provide housing based on religion. The right to not hire a person because she is old or a woman. And most recently, the right of states to not recognize gay marriage. These were all “rights” at some point. Now they are not and for good reason. Why? Because more people objected to them than not. If the people of the gun are not careful, we too can lose our right to carry at all.

        Therefore I implore you to think of others first and foremost in all political matters. Think of all the bad reviews of restaurants or the bad encounters with police. Offending people counteracts many more good meals or police interactions. I don’t mean role over and give in, I mean think about the repercussions of your actions and try to accomplish the same goal through a different method. Offer respect and you will most likely receive respect. Grind their nose in it and all they will do is fortify their own beliefs. In some places and under some circumstances, openly carrying can be seen as grinding their nose in it. So pick your battles.

        1. avatar Lorefanatic says:

          Yes, but what rights were WON by standing up and standing out?

          Every time I hear the argument, “we have to conceal because we scare the sheeple, and they’ll punish us” I get upset.

          Here in Michigan, the loud OC movement has normalized OC, and Open Carriers are winning major legal battles. If they stayed quiet and didn’t rock the boat, the gun rights overall would not have moved as far.

          People told Rosa Parks to comply and not be bold in demanding her rights. Because she refused to be treated as less, she pushed equal rights forward.

          People (some of whom inhabit this website) told those who were fighting for gay marriage equality to sit down, to not make waves, to live with the gains they already made. I think standing up and pushing back worked well for them.

          EVERY person who believes and supports the second amendment should be fighting for Open AND Concealed carry rights to be expanded. Each person should have the ability to carry in a manner that they determine best fits their needs.

          If you want to talk about why YOU chose the method you use, so be it. But to denigrate someone else’s method because you don’t like it, makes you an irrational bully.

          Unfortunately, the vast majority of reasoning can be broken down to either “I don’t like it”, or “here is some anecdotal evidence, at best, for my rationale”.

        2. I appreciate your well thought out statements. I wouldn’t open carry around my grandmother. Do I think she is oppressing me and my 2nd amendment rights? No, she has a different view than I and I respect her. I’m not going to alienate any possible allies to the gun community. How you present yourself absolutely makes a difference in every day life. Whether that means your cleanliness or choice of (carry) attire. People who don’t care what others think tend to be bull headed, insensitive and thrive to be a thorn in others sides. They often imagining they are the victims of discrimination. There are occasions were open carry is legitimate and I would even do it. If individuals want to “normalize” open carry, they should do something non-threatening. Volunteer at a soup kitchen, adopt a highway, protest with signs and matching shirts, not full tactical gear in a quiet neighborhood. OC or CC do what you want, just understand that others opinions do end up mattering.

        3. avatar Conway Redding says:

          FreakinPeanuts, your post is one of the more reasonable ones I’ve seen on this issue. Thanks.

  27. avatar Skygirl says:

    To each their own. It is easier, FOR ME, to CC.

    But I’m gonna OC any time I see an MDA shirt. Just because.

    1. avatar Gunr says:

      I have a black T shirt I’d love to wear around some MDA folks. It says:

      NOBODY NEEDS AN AR-15!

      picture of an AR-15 in this space

      NOBODY NEEDS A WHINNY LITTLE BITCH EITHER,
      YET HERE YOU ARE!

      1. avatar SteveInCO says:

        Only, hopefully the shirt only has one N in whiny, or it’s talking about a noise horses make.

        1. avatar Gunr says:

          It’s probably talking about the noise “I” made, when I was made aware of my mistake!

        2. avatar SteveInCO says:

          LOL. Well, thanks for being a good sport about it!

  28. avatar GenghisQuan says:

    Theoretical: element of surprise with CC is offset by shorter and easier draw time with OC.

  29. avatar Jim Blessing says:

    For me, as a Michigan CPL holder, the greatest benefit of open carry is that it allows me to carry almost everywhere. Openly carrying my pistol is required in such places as a school, church, entertainment facilities, and hospitals if I wish to have my pistol with me. And, if I open carry all the time, I don’t have to worry about coming across a place where I am not allowed to carry under state law.

  30. avatar Gunr says:

    Seems like we’ve argued this subject to death, in the last year or so. Both sides have good and bad reasons for their cause.
    I used to be “not too much for open carry”, now I see it both ways, and would not argue for or against either, except for one point made by the OCers.
    In the hypothetical situations made above concerning a “gang”, or even one guy suddenly bursting in a convenience store, or Wal-Mart etc., it has been said by some OCers, that a robbers adrenaline is up, and he probably would not notice a firearm on someones hip!
    Well, I can only speak for myself, but if I was attempting to rob a place, I can gurrantee you for sure that’s the first thing I would look for! Hopefully, I would be robbing the place with a gun small enough that I could conceal it myself, before I announced my intentions.
    If someone in there is carrying a firearm on their hip, I can’t think of any reason they wouldn’t want to use it on ME! So that would be an extremely important observation to make. Of course we can’t be sure a “first timer” would have enough grey matter to think about that.
    I will agree, that in some situations, an “exposed” firearm would definitely be a deterrence, but not all! Myself, I would either attempt to disarm the “mode”l citizen, shoot him, or get the hell out of there.
    To sum it all up, you gotta do what you gotta do. Open or concealed, carry well, my friends!

  31. avatar Louis Marschalko says:

    Let’s not make an issue of how we all carry, shall we? Unless it’s really relevant to the story there is no need to emphasize whether a person is carrying openly or concealed. We need to de-emphasize our differences and concentrate on the things that unite us.

  32. avatar gsnyder says:

    I’ve always seen open-carry as something which can’t be outlawed. In the face of a need to use a firearm in an emergency etc., it simply can’t be concealed and you may not have a permit to conceal. It’s an action attached to having the 2A which in function can’t be removed. If you didn’t have open carry your Rights would immediately be infringed. I subscribe to the element of surprise given a choice, but in the real world it’s not possible for every lawful American citizen.

  33. avatar LarryinTX says:

    A subject I didn’t see you cover-for many years of my life. carrying at all was illegal, and I carried anyway, needless to say concealed. What would your answer be if OC was legal and CC was not? ‘Cuz that could be the case tomorrow afternoon.

    1. avatar Conway Redding says:

      LarryinTX, were OC legal and CC not, I would bring my behavior into compliance with the law. No point in setting myself up to be served a ration of shit.

    2. avatar Conway Redding says:

      LarryinTX, were OC legal and CC not, I would bring my behavior into compliance with the law, but would be plenty pissed off at having to chose between OC and not carrying at all. In any event, I would see no point in setting myself up to be served a ration of shit, whether by ordinary citizens or sworn members of the constabulary. Btw, considering the panicked reactions of many folks, including LEOs, to seeing someone who is not obviously a LEO openly packing heat, I deem it very unlikely that tomorrow, or any of the succeeding tomorrows, OC will be legal and CC not. Indeed, if those who get the cold cobblies even THINKING about firearms have their way, both OC and CC will be illegal.

  34. avatar PW in KY says:

    Reason #2 is really the only one that keeps me from open carry. I don’t like to draw attention to myself. I don’t wear fancy watches, I don’t drive a fancy car, I don’t wear fancy clothes, I don’t have a fancy haircut.

    Plus I just know if I’m OC-ing I’ll have to deal with a bunch of idiots, not even anti-2a types, just idiots in general.

  35. avatar Don Prather says:

    My two cents:

    Open carry is unnecessarily confrontational. There are many who are uncomfortable with firearms, particularly sidearms. They have the right to their opinion/discomfort. It is not gentlemanly to purposefully cause others discomfort.

    That said, I’m pleased about OC for one reason: now I don’t have to worry about accidental display.

    1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

      Open carry is unnecessarily confrontational.

      No, it isn’t. You might as well say that an inter-racial couple or a homosexual couple holding hands in public is “unnecessarily confrontational”, or that a Jehovah’s Witness evangelizing door-to-door is “unnecessarily confrontational”.

      People exercising their rights in a lawful manner as they go about their business are not being “unnecessarily confrontational”.

      There are many who are uncomfortable with firearms, particularly sidearms. They have the right to their opinion/discomfort. It is not gentlemanly to purposefully cause others discomfort.

      Acquiescing to the delicate sensibilities of the perpetually aggrieved is in direct contrast to a free society. Some people will find absolutely anything offensive. Taken to the logical conclusion, allowing such people to dictate societal behavior would result in a society that has no interaction whatsoever.

      It is not the law-abiding citizen lawfully exercising natural rights as he goes about his business who is causing others discomfort; rather, it is others who allow themselves to be controlled by irrational fears and whose delicate sensibilities are too easily offended, who cause discomfort for themselves.

      The solution is not to make society less free in order to accommodate such people.

      1. avatar Denton says:

        Well said and I agree.

        I would point out that people can be “unnecessarily confrontational” even without being armed at all. Can OC ever become unnecessarily confrontational by itself?

        For example, a guy grabbing milk at the Seven-11 with a holstered 1911 vs. a guy with an AR slung across his back walking through the mall. Does the balance change if the guy with the 1911 is in rural Texas and the guy in the mall is in Boston? What about one of the other commentators from Michigan who may open carry at a school around soccer moms?

        Your examples of inter-racial couples and homosexual marriages are good ones. Both involved open displays but both also have had long term background campaigns to normalize those open displays supported by the media. And they both took, are still taking, decades of normativity training.

        If we are to succeed we need prudent and thoughtful OC combined with a campaign to teach. In some regions it may not be prudent to OC at all, while in others it may be widely accepted. Same as it may not be prudent for a guy to kiss his male partner in a honky-tonk but safe to do so on a NY subway.

  36. avatar Charles Ray says:

    And his two cents was worth precisely that.

  37. avatar PavePusher says:

    “…a war plays out in the comments section of the post and article.”

    Probably because every time carriers who oppose Open Carry start talking about it….

    THEY SOUND JUST LIKE THE ANTI’S.

    Ponder that.

    For the objectors: Seriously, do you have any citations to STATISTICALLY MEANINGFUL evidence, or, like the anti’s, just your opinions and feelings?

    1. avatar NineShooter says:

      Another “argument” that is as applicable to one side as it is to the other.

      No, I don’t have any stats handy, but I’ll be willing to review the reams of peer-reviewed and carefully researched data that supports the Open Carry position…

      *waits patiently*

      1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

        No, I don’t have any stats handy, but I’ll be willing to review the reams of peer-reviewed and carefully researched data that supports YOUR position…

        I’ll take up that challenge, chief.

        The Armed Criminal in America, DOJ (1985) (PDF)

        Refer especially to Table 15, page 27; and Table 7, Page 15.

        This study supports the claim that criminals fear armed citizens, even above LEO; that criminals use firearms in crime primarily to scare victims, to escape, and to defend themselves (far more than injuring or killing their victims); that a criminal is not going to mess with an armed victim – refuting the contention that armed criminals would see, and target, an openly carrying citizen, in the process of committing a crime.

        Your turn.

        1. avatar NineShooter says:

          Fortunately, I’m familiar with that study, so this won’t take very long.

          First point: The study you referenced is 30 years old, and builds on a study that was 38 years old. Show of hands; anyone think that perhaps the nature of violent crime and criminals has changed a bit in the last 4 decades? Gangs/gang initiations, violent criminal aliens, street drug types and use, as examples? Yeah, me too.

          Second point: from page 2, Background:

          “although first offenders often are not imprisoned, and as a consequence would be seriously under-represented in any sample of prisoners, repeat offenders (those most likely to be imprisoned) apparently constitute the source of much criminal behavior and often of its more serious forms”.

          So, as long as we are satisfied with using a small subset of all violent criminals (serious repeat offenders over age 18 who were stupid enough to get caught and/or not bloodthirsty enough to kill all their victims and witnesses) to represent ALL violent criminals’ attitudes, then we’re good-to-go here, right? No chance that these folks do NOT accurately represent the “average” violent criminal that we’re worried about (30 years later), right? Wrong. In addition to these concerns…

          Third point: from page 2, Sampling and Data Collection:

          “Our initial hope was to obtain access to the main maximum security facility in each of the selected states, on the grounds that hard-core gun using felons would be housed primarily in such institutions. In fact, in every case, the decision as to which prison we were allowed to study was made unilaterally by the state’s Commissioner of Corrections. In most states, we were NOT granted access to the main maximum security prison, often because the safety of the field team could not be assured, and so we interviewed in some other prison instead.”

          Translation: they often ended up interviewing the less-dangerous felons, ironically,because it would be too dangerous to interview the most dangerous felons. Everyone still feeling good about the quality of this study?

          Fourth point: from page 2, Sampling and Data Collection, and page 3, Data Quality:

          After a basic screening conducted by the researchers, these prisoners were self-selected to participate. It is not a true random sampling of any criminals “in the wild”; it is only what it was: a cross-section of SOME pre-screened felony prisoners in State prisons who CHOSE to participate in the survey. Hell, it was probably some nice time off from their normal day-to-day routine, but not hardly representative of the breed.

          Last point: Finally, because of the time frame it was conducted (30 years ago), prisoners in this study who referenced running into or dealing with potentially armed victims were almost entirely referring to people who were armed in their homes, NOT on the street. 30 years ago, armed legal carry of ANY type was still highly restricted in the vast majority of states, so any interaction between criminals and armed potential victims would have been limited to home robberies or burglaries. And yeah, 30 years ago, a criminal caught in someone’s home was quite likely to get shot (seen by a reference to “escape” as one of primary reasons they carried guns).

          My conclusion: the attitudes presented in this survey have almost NO application to today’s criminals and their attitudes about concealed OR open carry by their victims.

        2. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          Your conclusion? [Citatuon Needed]

          Live by your own standard. Produce a study. In short: put up or shut up.

        3. avatar NineShooter says:

          You must have missed where I said I didn’t have one.
          Re-read my comment above the 5-point review of your study.

          No rebuttals on the points I raised? You feelin’ okay?

          Don’t feel bad; if there were any good hard data on either side of this discussion, it would have surfaced long before now.

  38. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    What a friggin’ jackwagon! Never mind his stance on OC. Never mind that he makes some good points.

    My problem with him is his condescending, hypocritical tone. Essentially: “We’re all about concealment, not OC, so we don’t get into those immature ‘wars’, but let me go ahead and launch the first salvos in that war we’re supposedly too good for, then scamper away and not address rebuttals.”

  39. avatar ItWuzMe says:

    These articles are typically written by people that live in either a licensed open carry state, like Texas will be, or at least in a state in which open carry is a new thing.

    Generally, no one gives a shit that you’re open carrying. In 15yrs only 1 person ever had the balls to mention my gun and that person just wanted to compliment me on my grips.
    The “element of surprise”… That’s what I call cases of defensive gun use where “tactics” actually had any bearing on reality…
    Targeted open carriers isn’t really even a thing on TV. It’s certainly not in real life. Put down the pipe, seriously. I don’t care about those 2 stories you read about that got passed around the internet like your mom at a high school party. If you think that’s a valid point then you might as well add alien invasion tactics to your training regiment. It can go right between “De-escalating with cowboy trick shots” and “How to blow the smoke from your barrel without looking like you’re kissing an invisible man”…

    Choose your method of carry based on what is comfortable for you. Just don’t think you should or even that you could justify it with some fantasy bullshit. This is never a subject you’ll see discussed with real life examples. It’s always just made up bullshit that revolves around overly self-conscious closet fags that watched too many cop shows on netflix and think they’re life is a live filming of American Ninja 12.

    Bring on the hate! I”m not even going to follow this thread because, the type of faggots that think this is a good article are the exact same ones that CANNOT stop themselves from giving me a piece of their mind.

    1. avatar Gunr says:

      A little hateful there, arn’t you?
      Especially calling folks posting on this thread “faggots”!

  40. avatar Aerindel says:

    Are Concealed Carriers becoming the new anti’s? With the kind of logic used in this article it makes you wonder.

    1. You want the element of surprise, in self DEFENSE?! How does that work? they draw a gun and point it at you and then you need your super ninja conceal carry magic and beat them at a fast draw?

    Deterrence doesn’t work because because nobody notices you have a gun?? You mean just like when you conceal carry?

    2. Its going to draw attention….wait…I thought it failed as a deterrent because nobody noticed? But at least he is honest this time “I just don’t like it”

    3. WTF? A stick situation? If your opening carrying in a bank when the bak robbers come in, you shoot the bank robbers.

    4.Fair enough, some people don’t want to fight the fight.

    5. Cities a case where a person had to OC unarmed as its illegal for him to CC there or OC armed…yeah, typical anti-logic.

  41. avatar Gunr says:

    I’d like to address your #3 point.
    There’s a good chance the robber will notice you while you are drawing your gun and shoot YOU!
    I’m sure the robber will already have his gun out and pointed, with his finger on the trigger, Unless you are “Matt Dillon, or some other quickdraw artist, your probably not going to get a shot off first.
    I’ll have to side with the CC crowd here. At least if your weapon was concealed. you would have a choice on whether or not to use it. And beside, as has been mentioned on these page previously, there may be more than one robber, plus, there may be plant in the bank to take care of unexpected embarrassing moments, such as you described. If there is a gun on your side, and the robber notices it, you can be pretty sure he will be addressing you in some unpleasant way on that issue!
    Myself, unless there were only one robber, and he was roughing up badly, one of the nice young ladies, in the place where I bank, I would stay out of it.

    1. avatar mark s. says:

      I loved the discourse between Chip and nineshooter and all the comments here hve their own merit and e should probable mark this one as unfinished and not able to finish ever because people are just different and have justifiable reasons for doing different things .

      To Gunr , I would be willing to bet you a sizable amount of cash that I could draw and shoot a bank robber or any bad guy before they could shoot me and I would include the statement that I believe I could hit my acquired target quicker and much more precisely than they could me .

      I train much more frequently and diversely than most , so the formula of your discourse breaks down when you so broadly paint your picture . Your assumption would probably stand up in many cases but as is the case in all these arguments and discussions the brushwork is much to broad and general to create a consensus .

      I am a better shot with the firearm I carry daily than most anyone around me on any given situation and I am a better shot with the guns I own and have practiced with than I would be a gun I have stolen and not had many opportunities to practice with which would be the case with most bank robbers or petty criminals .

      I conceal carry and open carry firearms . The disagreements as to or not to OC are actually just background noise to the diversity that is us ( people ) .

      1. avatar Gunr says:

        Good post there Mark,
        Good for you that you have trained and become efficient with your carry weapon. I need to spend more time at the range myself.
        There is on thing that I would never want to do though, and that is, draw on a robber that already has his gun out and pointed in my general direction. However, if he turned a bit and was looking the other way for a moment, that would be a different story.
        It is too bad that some posters choose to slander and belittle others on the blog, just because they have a different view on things. As long as these types of discussions are brought up, The arguing and bickering, along with the pointless name calling will continue.
        I try and keep it clean myself, but there might have been a few times (addressing politicians) that I have let myself go a bit.
        Thanks for your post.

  42. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    Take a look at the photo above.
    The man is obviously concentrating on something.
    Anyone familiar with the Blackhawk Serpa holster could walk up behind him and relieve him of his gun pretty quickly, I think.

    I would love to have the option of open carry. But it obviously requires more situational awareness than some people are prepared for.

    1. avatar marty says:

      quote-I would love to have the option of open carry. But it obviously requires more situational awareness than some people are prepared for.

      EXACTLY….
      One must not be oblivious while Open carrying. Too easy for someone to possibly grab and run, not to mention situational vulnerability.

  43. avatar American Made says:

    Only an idiot would attack an Open Carrier, though cops have been victims as of late it is a RARE occurrence when compared to the civilian population, why? Because they’re ARMED of course. The image of an obviously armed individual is a STRONG deterrent (see witnesses reactions to Morgan Freeman’s “granddaughter’s” stabbing).

    A Concealed Carrier is a MORE likely target since the criminals see nothing that would cause them alarm. If you desire to “spin the wheel and take your chances” go ahead I’d prefer NOT to get into a confrontation in the first place and Open Carrier provides that opportunity.

    1. avatar Gunr says:

      “Open carrier” may get you a bullet too! Not knocking OC, just pointing out one of the bad points, On the other side, it may very well be a deterrent, myself, I wouldn’t want to find out.

  44. avatar Howdy says:

    Whether you agree or not, support both. Both should be nationally Constitutional and not subject to government preference at any level.

  45. avatar Matt in TX says:

    I don’t care as long as you’re carrying.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      + Eleventy Billion.

      First Rule: Have a Gun.

  46. avatar Valente Gonzalez says:

    you are more likely to get assaulted for open carrying a wallet, a cell phone, or your car keys than if you were to be open carrying your pistol.

    Thanks for giving us your personal reasons why you will conceal carry, that is fine.

    Open Carry prevents crime. Conceal Carry Stops it if you are lucky.

    1. avatar matt says:

      Territorial. I agree with the authors opinion to a point. Urban areas where thugs are in abundance and putting ones business out there is making you a mark and unwanted attention.

  47. avatar Michael says:

    I do both, OC & CC, depending on what my plans are. CC has the advantage of being able to go more places (if allowed by law where no firearm signs can be ignored) while carrying. In light of all the recent events, those of us law-abiding gun carriers need to ban together to find a way to abolish “Gun-Free Zones”, Why are businesses able to discriminate against a Constitutional Right?

    Part of the problem with today’s hoplophobic society is that if a citizen sees anyone with a gun, other than law enforcement, they get paranoid like something will happen.

    One big drawback with CC is that you are not always able to go across statelines, as there may not be reciprocity between states. At the same time however, you may be able to OC.

    1. avatar marty says:

      Just like I can conceal carry in my business (without a Concealed carry permit) or tell someone not to bring a firearm into my home, – businesses can post no pets, no guns, etc. because it is their property ( whether rented, leased or owned) that happens to be open to visitation ( business).
      If one does not like that a business has that choice, ( whether one agrees or disagrees with a policy) then simply choose to do business elsewhere.

      What about cities and towns that say ” you can carry, you just must be UNloaded.”??

    2. avatar marty says:

      As a followup thought, just because the Constitution allows me Freedom of speech, a business owner does not have to allow or put up with anything or everything I say inside or on their premises, simply because the Constitution says I can voice my opinions or thoughts.

  48. avatar Whyawannaknow says:

    Quote:
    Take this scenario: You’re in a bank with your openly carried firearm. Three bad guys come storming into the building and immediately order everyone to the ground. While scanning the crowd, one of them spots your firearm.
    End quote
    ———-

    If you walk into a bank with an openly carried firearm, there are 2 possible outcomes:

    1: You will be arrested for violating federal law. NO ONE but police and bank security brings a firearm inside a federally insured bank facility under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES!!! You can’t even keep your guns unloaded and disassembled in your safe deposit box.

    2: The bank guards/police just shoot you.

    1. avatar Michael says:

      I’ve open carried into a bank several times with no issues. One of those times the Armored Truck was there, & all the guard did when he saw my sidearm holstered on my hip was smile & nod in appreciation.

    2. avatar FedUp says:

      You obviously don’t know the meaning of the phrase “Federal Depository”.

  49. avatar John says:

    My reason is similar to the ones listed. I have more than one gun, and I can’t carry all of them at once. Therefore, most of them get left home. I live alone, and am gone for most of the day. Thinking like a criminal, I see an open carrier, say at Walmart. I figure where there’s one, there’s more. I discretely follow him to his car, then to his home. A little surveillance, see what’s what, and who’s who, and when the coast is clear, in I go. Maybe, I just get his plate number, do a little ‘net work, and I don’t even need to follow him home. Open carry is not for me, but to each his own. Everyone has a different situation.

  50. avatar marty says:

    I agree with the concealed reasons above, that would be my preferred way to carry. Wish all or my state had constitutional carry (Concealed) without needing to ask for and notify the Gov. for the approval, to conceal carry. Open carry (for those who desire) should always be a legal option too.

    Many states unfortunately have the ability to have FOIA Disclosure of permit holders. (see NEW YORK NEWSPAPER RELEASES of 2012 FOR ONE) So much for safety, privacy and security.

    I SHOULD NOT AS A LEGALLY ALLOWED PERSON have to request , get and be listed in a database to carry concealed.

  51. avatar marty says:

    Guy in the photo above is an IDIOT.
    He may be carrying the firearm but he is not in control of the firearm

  52. avatar fsilber says:

    One justification would be if the concealed carry permit were not valid in a particular location. Many state supreme courts a century ago upheld regulation of concealed carry on the basis that open carry was still legal.

  53. avatar Andrew says:

    While I don’t OC as much as I used to, I have a major issue with people who claim to be 2A and marginalize those of us who do.

    Having some basic retention training and maintaining your situational awareness all but eliminates the “problem” of somebody trying to take your firearm.

    I also despise the “element of surprise” argument. It implies the weapon will be used. I am capable of using my weapon if the need arises, but why increase the chance that you would have to? Criminals are after high reward and low risk situations. I have had two situations where people acting like they were up to no good saw for a fact I was armed and decided they probably had somewhere else to be. All of this paranoia about people following you, targeting you first, and trying to take your weapon is BS. What is more likely is that some ignorant buffoon may decide to call the cops on you. I got called on in Montana of all places, but have never had it happen in liberal WA where I live.

    There are times I prefer to be discrete and don’t want the risk of additional attention – I am more concerned with ignorance than I am about my weapon being used against me. However, I don’t give one iota of care what other people think of me or that I carry a firearm. I dress presentably and professionally and go about my day as normal. I have far more positive reactions about my carrying than negative and most of the negative are from people who claim they are pro-gun.

    Also, I don’t like the fact I need a permission slip to exercise my right to protect myself. OC is unrestricted (no permit required) in many states.

    All of that being said, I don’t care if you don’t like OC or not. I am just sick and tired of people like the author hating people who do. I have a military “friend” who despises OC just as the author does … and I hate him for fighting for my “rights” while harping on me for exercising them as I see fit.

  54. avatar Stuki Moi says:

    It’s not like you cannot carry one open, the other concealed, if you’re so bent on surprising people.

    A benefit of carrying open, is it is often easier to arrange the rig to be more comfortable. Besides, like the swords of yore, a firearm is an integral part of proper gentleman’s attire.

  55. avatar Michael Saldaris says:

    It’s an opinion piece…Nothing more, nothing less…Take it for that.

  56. F*ckin’ amazing issues here. I am very happy to look your post.

    Thank you a lot and i’m looking ahead to touch you.
    Will you please drop me a e-mail?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email