Sheriffs across America are asking law-abiding citizens to go armed

kcbrown · Feb 9, 2016

foxtrapper said:
Oh for crying out loud, ANOTHER open carry vs CC debate?

The real question is why people think it has to be an either/or thing.

Qbeam · Feb 9, 2016

I can see the no votes. They may know a "least common denominator" that would be allowed to carry who shouldn't. Even I would have hesitation on some folks carrying due to their personality.

Q

Bob A · Feb 9, 2016

kcbrown said:
There's no real advantage (save one, which I'll describe below) to open carry when concealed carry is off the table. But open carry has advantages when concealed carry is an option.

The only real advantage as such, and it's a conditional one, is that it makes it plain that you're a "hard" target. Criminals who are interested in going after "soft" targets (which will presumably be the majority of them, since criminals do what they do in order to "make a living") will pass you by. Criminals who are relatively crazy might prefer to go after hard targets, but Darwin will tend to take care of them. Which is to say, their mortality rate will be higher than that of criminals who avoid hard targets. So the condition is whether or not the criminal in question is crazy.

The hard target versus soft target thing isn't new. We see it in nature all the time. Animals that have stronger defenses tend to survive better, and those that have stronger defenses (e.g., wasps) tend to be more obvious (e.g., brightly colored). Advertising that you're a hard target is a survival advantage in nature. So much so that other animals (e.g., certain types of flies) mimic the appearance of hard targets so as to fool predators, and thus increase their own survival.

Criminals are generally predators. The lessons from nature almost certainly apply equally as well to them. Open carry is the equivalent of bright colors, and most predators will avoid people who are open carrying because a predator is more likely to survive when his prey is unarmed than when his prey is armed.

There are a few animals who are able to ingest and use the "weaponry" of their prey, but for the most part, "hard targets" in Nature are not likely to be attacked to gain access to their defensive or offensive tools.

That's not the case in open carry by humans. You are signaling that you have a desirable weapon, and wearing it openly in a holster from which it can be extracted by a hostile individual. There is no element of surprise that would work against the potential weapon thief; in fact, the surprise works against the open carrier.

In a situation that could involve a group of possible attackers, the mob mentality will trend toward increasingly illogical actions. Mobs don't think clearly, and the individuals which compose them are susceptible to impulsive actions. So the threat increases in such a situation. The possibility of successfully intimidating a mob by a single open-carrying individual seems slim to me. I don't see many scenarios where things end well.

fred333 · Feb 9, 2016

kcbrown said:
Then again, even the sociopathic shooters have generally intentionally done their deeds in gun free zones. How do you reconcile that fact with the notion that they'd target known armed individuals first? Why aren't they going to a shooting range to do their deeds there, if their intention is to go after hard targets?

When taken into consideration, I think they nearly always target soft targets. And for the obvious reasons.
Still, while paranoid or criminal in nature, these doofs generally aren't complete morons. If they encounter an openly armed individual, knowing that that's the only thing standing between them and their pray, it's only logical to take out the armed individual first. No?
On the other hand, if, once they start shooting at the unarmed, there's a CCW there who surprises them with return fire.....well, that's a whole other karma there partner.

photoracer · Feb 9, 2016

kcbrown said:
There's no real advantage (save one, which I'll describe below) to open carry when concealed carry is off the table. But open carry has advantages when concealed carry is an option.

The only real advantage as such, and it's a conditional one, is that it makes it plain that you're a "hard" target. Criminals who are interested in going after "soft" targets (which will presumably be the majority of them, since criminals do what they do in order to "make a living") will pass you by. Criminals who are relatively crazy might prefer to go after hard targets, but Darwin will tend to take care of them. Which is to say, their mortality rate will be higher than that of criminals who avoid hard targets. So the condition is whether or not the criminal in question is crazy.

The hard target versus soft target thing isn't new. We see it in nature all the time. Animals that have stronger defenses tend to survive better, and those that have stronger defenses (e.g., wasps) tend to be more obvious (e.g., brightly colored). Advertising that you're a hard target is a survival advantage in nature. So much so that other animals (e.g., certain types of flies) mimic the appearance of hard targets so as to fool predators, and thus increase their own survival.

Criminals are generally predators. The lessons from nature almost certainly apply equally as well to them. Open carry is the equivalent of bright colors, and most predators will avoid people who are open carrying because a predator is more likely to survive when his prey is unarmed than when his prey is armed.

All very true.

photoracer · Feb 9, 2016

By the way the WV House passed the permitless CCW law voting over 2 to 1 in favor. Goes to the Senate now, which will likely pass it also. Even if the Governor vetos it only requires a simple majority to override it. This is the one that was reworded after last year's veto.

Alea Jacta Est · Feb 9, 2016

Vulnerability. Center of gravity. Achilles heel.

Some quick terms that suggest weakness.

The folks who are evil want to know their plans and actions can be best leveraged by a lack of practical resistance.

The notion that we advertise and brag about our vulnerabilities is in truest terms a gift to those who would cause harm and promote fear.

Some days you just have to ask yourself..."Really?"

kcbrown · Feb 9, 2016

Bob A said:
There are a few animals who are able to ingest and use the "weaponry" of their prey, but for the most part, "hard targets" in Nature are not likely to be attacked to gain access to their defensive or offensive tools.

That's not the case in open carry by humans. You are signaling that you have a desirable weapon, and wearing it openly in a holster from which it can be extracted by a hostile individual. There is no element of surprise that would work against the potential weapon thief; in fact, the surprise works against the open carrier.

As true as that is, it only changes the odds. And now you're talking about an unusual sort of thief, the kind that would attack police officers (since police officers openly carry their weapons). How often are police officers attacked, when they are simply going about their business (rather than actually already confronting the criminal), for the purpose of stealing their weapons? I'd wager it's rather rare.

The point here is that if you are openly carrying, your chances of being attacked by a criminal are, logically, generally smaller than if you're not openly carrying. Most criminals will look for soft targets. Yes, they may attack an open carrier in the event that what they intend to do requires that they disarm any opposition first, but now we're no longer talking about the typical criminal carrying out the typical crime.

There are no guarantees here. It all involves playing the odds.

In a situation that could involve a group of possible attackers, the mob mentality will trend toward increasingly illogical actions. Mobs don't think clearly, and the individuals which compose them are susceptible to impulsive actions. So the threat increases in such a situation. The possibility of successfully intimidating a mob by a single open-carrying individual seems slim to me. I don't see many scenarios where things end well.

Huh? I'm not sure where that scenario comes from. If you're talking about how a group of people might act with a lawful open carrier in their midst, it quite clearly depends on how acclimated they are to the act of openly carrying. However, you can never get to the point of acclimation if nobody can ever openly carry. Legal open carry has to come first before acclimation becomes possible.

kcbrown · Feb 9, 2016

fred333 said:
When taken into consideration, I think they nearly always target soft targets. And for the obvious reasons.
Still, while paranoid or criminal in nature, these doofs generally aren't complete morons. If they encounter an openly armed individual, knowing that that's the only thing standing between them and their pray, it's only logical to take out the armed individual first. No?

Of course.

But what are you optimizing for? The most common case (a typical attack by a garden variety criminal), or the most uncommon case (a mass shooter)? And in any case, the above calculus really works only if there's just one person openly carrying. Introduce more than one, and now you have what amounts to a hardening of the entire group, even against a mass shooter who would otherwise have the guts to take out a single open carrier.

On the other hand, if, once they start shooting at the unarmed, there's a CCW there who surprises them with return fire.....well, that's a whole other karma there partner.

Yep.

This is why I think both options need to be available. Not only does it allow one to choose how to carry based on the situation, it allows for overall situational flexibility in groups. So not only will the typical criminal be faced with some people who they know to be armed, which will thus be a disincentive to the criminal, they will also be faced with the possibility of concealed carriers. Disincentive due to a known quantity plus disincentive due to an unknown quantity is surely greater than disincentive due to an unknown quantity alone, no?

wjackcooper · Feb 9, 2016

All real Americans should be required to open carry, those that object may carry without a chambered round.

Regards
Jack

Alea Jacta Est · Feb 9, 2016

Now Jack...big fella....you may just have gone FULL WETARD.

wjackcooper · Feb 10, 2016

Fair, balanced and unafraid.

Regards
Jack

KevinK · Feb 10, 2016

I would love to hear why mark71211 and tkd4life voted no.

PJDiesel · Feb 10, 2016

The second one said something to the effect of "I know some people whom I would not want to be armed in public".

So, I guess that means he's comfortable with that being applied to EVERYONE.

ChannelCat · Feb 10, 2016

foxtrapper said:
Oh for crying out loud, ANOTHER open carry vs CC debate?

wjackcooper said:
All real Americans should be required to open carry, those that object may carry without a chambered round.

Regards
Jack

Maryland will never have "shall issue" carry laws, concealed or otherwise, as long as the same pinheads rulers are entrenched in state government. I wont get that option until I retire and GTFO of this Godforsaken state.

That said, when I finally do get my full rights and choose to carry, it will be concealed. I'm not going to bust on anyone choosing open carry, but I don't want perps seeing that I am armed, and single me out.

...by the way, of course I voted in favor of carry!

KevinK · Feb 10, 2016

PJDiesel said:
The second one said something to the effect of "I know some people whom I would not want to be armed in public".

So, I guess that means he's comfortable with that being applied to EVERYONE.

Maybe I'm missing it but I don't see where either 'no' person posted in this thread.

INMY01TA · Feb 10, 2016

kcbrown said:
How often are police officers attacked, when they are simply going about their business (rather than actually already confronting the criminal), for the purpose of stealing their weapons? I'd wager it's rather rare.

Good point.

ourway77 · Feb 10, 2016

Maryland sucks I moved out after retirement to Delaware the same PIN Heads her now not quite as bad yet but it's coming Damn Dover Dumacrats

PJDiesel · Feb 10, 2016

KevinK said:
Maybe I'm missing it but I don't see where either 'no' person posted in this thread.

It was another thread, I'll check when I get back to the office.

Minuteman · Feb 10, 2016

KevinK said:
Maybe I'm missing it but I don't see where either 'no' person posted in this thread.

Simple click on the 'show poll results' to see the results.

And now there are three.

Here's a current snapshot:

For law-abiding citizens to be able to be armed in public.
40-Cal-Polymer, 44 Bulldog, 6pack, 71Chevelle427, 762fiftyRanger, AACo, Absolute, Adolph Oliver Bush, airsporter, amoebicmagician, Arcamm, Armadillofz1, Augie, Bafflingbs, BeoBill, bigdaddy12, Bigfoot21075, bladehack, bmorewineguy, Bob A, BOHICA, Boss94, Brychan, budman93, Buff7mm, campns, cb51, ChannelCat, Cheesehead, chesapeakeIRON, chevellenut71, chooks9, chucks, clandestine, cougar7890, DaemonAssassin, DaftPict, DanGuy48, Dan_Br, Dave Greenberg, Dingo3, Don H, dontpanic, Doug S, Dreago, Ellegon, enya60h, F8L_Funnel, Fatboy20646, FPL53, fred333, gamer_jim, george g., GottaEat, gre24ene, Gryphon, Gunny1, HailVon, haoleboy, HappyCamper, Hicap, HordesOfKailas, ih23, INMY01TA, J Beard, J1911, Jason21237, jbrown50, jc1240, JC92, jhcrab, jjsat, joe261, jonnyl, JPG, justin820, j_h_smith, Kcruz2189, kenpo333, KevinK, Kevlar, Kiev88cm, Kimber45, kmittleman, Knuc, Laddertowr, lawrencewendall, llkoolkeg, Long1MD, lsw, Lucca1, lumbermut, Mark75H, MigraineMan, Mini14tac, MocoJed, moojersey, motorcoachdoug, n3wcl, Nnztg8r, NYRangers917, paxfish, PharaohF4, photoracer, PJDiesel, platekiller, plinkerton, plumberone, Privateer, Proline Fisher, protegeV, Qbeam, qorban88, R56 Ed, Rab1515, rambling_one, Reaper812, Redd Byrd, Rickman, rmiddle, rockstarr, Rocky BearDog, rondon600, RoninZero, RRP II, sbbieshelt, shootin the breeze, Sling Blade, somd_mustangs, spclopr8tr, Squirrel Hunter, SRD, steves1911, stonet21, t84a, taxidermy2, tball, Tbone1234, ted76, TheBulge, theneckie, thomfantomas, Threeband, ToBeFree, tom b, ToneGrail, Trepang, usa259, Vic, VNVGUNNER, wilcam47, wjackcooper, wolfwood, Z_Man
154 98.09%

Against law-abiding citizens be armed in public.
Bethesda John, mark71211, tkd4life

Sheriffs across America are asking law-abiding citizens to go armed

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

What say you?

For law-abiding citizens to be able to be armed in public.

Against law-abiding citizens be armed in public.

Super Genius

Ultimate Member

όυ φροντισ

Banned

Competition Shooter

Competition Shooter

Extinguished member

Super Genius

Super Genius

Active Member

Extinguished member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Banned

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Member

Banned

Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics