Open Carry vs Concealed carry.

[OriginalShroom]

The 2nd Amendment states clearly that we Americans have the Right to keep and bear arms.

I want to discuss the "Bear" part.

I don't open carry. Not because I oppose it, but because I would rather my weapon be a surprise to someone who is wanting to do harm. I don't want to put a target on my back.

But then the open carry would, could, and should let those who would do harm to me know upfront that they are going to a fight on their hands and prevent most of it.

It's a "Six of one, half dozen of the other" situation.

I've been watching videos on youtube of the open carry people who are stopped by the police. While there are the few who simply treat it as it should be treated. A person who is no more a threat than a person who is concealed carrying.

But then there have been the others who say that the open carry "scares and alarms" the citizens and is a basis for charging them with disturbing the peace.

I support those who are open carrying in States where it is legal. I believe it should be legal everywhere.

If a citizen calls in saying they are afraid because someone is open carrying, they need to be asked or told that unless that person is waving the gun around, pointing it at people, threatening to shoot someone, there is no law being broken.

How would/should the police respond to a caller saying they are afraid because there is a group of Black men or Hispanic men walking down the street at night? They aren't doing anything illegal, just exerting their right to walk down a street.


Should a person's right be restricted simply because someone is "afraid"?

 

[blastoff]

A potential problem or area of concern is no one knows when they see someone open carry they don't know the person is licensed to do so. They just see someone walking around with a gun.

 

[KNB]

The US Federal government is spying on all of us without cause or reason, squandering trillions of dollars on a war that was designed by the CIA to never be won, torturing POWs to death in secret prisons, raining death on civilians from remote-controlled planes, locking up thousands of Americans for weed when weed can be legalized to support our troops in war, and letting banker scum get away with funding terrorism against us, and you praise your guns because you can stop a druggie from stealing your wallet.

You do not know what the 2nd Amendment is for.

 

[OKTexas]

A potential problem or area of concern is no one knows when they see someone open carry they don't know the person is licensed to do so. They just see someone walking around with a gun.

When you see someone driving a car do you assume they are licensed to do so, or do you call the cops?

 

[The Rabbi]

I think open carry is stupid and pointless (although I've done it a couple of times myself when the weather gets really hot). That said, I don't think we need to criminalize bad behavior. If carry were more common people would get used to seeing it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Washington State is a prime example of why stupid laws exist about open carry. When I lived there there was no law against open carry. However there was a law that stated you could not intimidate others with a weapon.

Guess who got to decide when open carry was intimidation? That's right the local DA.

 

[westwall]

The 2nd Amendment states clearly that we Americans have the Right to keep and bear arms.

I want to discuss the "Bear" part.

I don't open carry. Not because I oppose it, but because I would rather my weapon be a surprise to someone who is wanting to do harm. I don't want to put a target on my back.

But then the open carry would, could, and should let those who would do harm to me know upfront that they are going to a fight on their hands and prevent most of it.

It's a "Six of one, half dozen of the other" situation.

I've been watching videos on youtube of the open carry people who are stopped by the police. While there are the few who simply treat it as it should be treated. A person who is no more a threat than a person who is concealed carrying.

But then there have been the others who say that the open carry "scares and alarms" the citizens and is a basis for charging them with disturbing the peace.

I support those who are open carrying in States where it is legal. I believe it should be legal everywhere.

If a citizen calls in saying they are afraid because someone is open carrying, they need to be asked or told that unless that person is waving the gun around, pointing it at people, threatening to shoot someone, there is no law being broken.

How would/should the police respond to a caller saying they are afraid because there is a group of Black men or Hispanic men walking down the street at night? They aren't doing anything illegal, just exerting their right to walk down a street.


Should a person's right be restricted simply because someone is "afraid"?

To answer your question. No. I can find someone who is absolutely terrified of ANYTHING. They are everywhere. That is the ultimate problem with progressives is they want to establish laws that cater to lowest common denominator and the problem with that is there are some truly incompetent people.

Why should competent people have to pay for the ignorance and incompetence of others?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Should a person's right be restricted simply because someone is "afraid"?

The fear of OC mostly manifest in state legislatures that outlaw it.

Otherwise, there is no rational basis or objective evidence in support of laws that prohibit open carry; in Arizona, for example, there is no evidence that OC in any way contributes to an increase in gun related crime, violence, or accidents.

I conceal carry a handgun, and wouldn’t OC even if it were allowed in my state; my right to self-defense, and right to carry a concealed handgun pursuant to the self-defense right, pertains only to me.

Concealed carry affords me a comprehensive list options in the event of an incident.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

A potential problem or area of concern is no one knows when they see someone open carry they don't know the person is licensed to do so. They just see someone walking around with a gun.

That’s an interesting point.

One shouldn’t need a license to OC; or more precisely, the state may not require of a citizen to have a license to OC a handgun because it’s a protected right.

Requiring a license for concealed carry, of course, is perfectly appropriate, as carrying a concealed weapon is a felony in most, if not all, states, absent a license.

 

[williepete]

Westwall brings up a perfect point. There are people who are terrified of everything--and they have phones.

I have a CCL but rarely use my privilege to carry. I do when I travel for a few days, get off my beaten path or go to the hood for my monthly fix of the best soul food you ever tasted in your life.

I don't want to make some sissy quivering behind their drapes feel skeeeeeerd and call the cops on me. Given my age, I've developed the grumpy old man version of Tourette syndrome when I'm around young punk cops. Once confronted by Barney Fife, my pistol wouldn't get me in trouble but my mouth would. Best I stay away from the little tikes while they play cops and robbers.

 

[tyroneweaver]

Washington State is a prime example of why stupid laws exist about open carry. When I lived there there was no law against open carry. However there was a law that stated you could not intimidate others with a weapon.

Guess who got to decide when open carry was intimidation? That's right the local DA.

who's going to win the byu gonzaga game. they play in provo this time

 

[Spoonman]

you should have the right to do either. given the choice, my preference would be to conceal carry. no one needs to know I have a gun and I have no need for anyone to know I do.

 

[rightwinger]

The 2nd Amendment states clearly that we Americans have the Right to keep and bear arms.

I want to discuss the "Bear" part.

I don't open carry. Not because I oppose it, but because I would rather my weapon be a surprise to someone who is wanting to do harm. I don't want to put a target on my back.

But then the open carry would, could, and should let those who would do harm to me know upfront that they are going to a fight on their hands and prevent most of it.

It's a "Six of one, half dozen of the other" situation.

I've been watching videos on youtube of the open carry people who are stopped by the police. While there are the few who simply treat it as it should be treated. A person who is no more a threat than a person who is concealed carrying.

But then there have been the others who say that the open carry "scares and alarms" the citizens and is a basis for charging them with disturbing the peace.

I support those who are open carrying in States where it is legal. I believe it should be legal everywhere.

If a citizen calls in saying they are afraid because someone is open carrying, they need to be asked or told that unless that person is waving the gun around, pointing it at people, threatening to shoot someone, there is no law being broken.

How would/should the police respond to a caller saying they are afraid because there is a group of Black men or Hispanic men walking down the street at night? They aren't doing anything illegal, just exerting their right to walk down a street.


Should a person's right be restricted simply because someone is "afraid"?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

The 2nd Amendment states clearly that we Americans have the Right to keep and bear arms.

I want to discuss the "Bear" part.

I don't open carry. Not because I oppose it, but because I would rather my weapon be a surprise to someone who is wanting to do harm. I don't want to put a target on my back.

But then the open carry would, could, and should let those who would do harm to me know upfront that they are going to a fight on their hands and prevent most of it.

It's a "Six of one, half dozen of the other" situation.

I've been watching videos on youtube of the open carry people who are stopped by the police. While there are the few who simply treat it as it should be treated. A person who is no more a threat than a person who is concealed carrying.

But then there have been the others who say that the open carry "scares and alarms" the citizens and is a basis for charging them with disturbing the peace.

I support those who are open carrying in States where it is legal. I believe it should be legal everywhere.

If a citizen calls in saying they are afraid because someone is open carrying, they need to be asked or told that unless that person is waving the gun around, pointing it at people, threatening to shoot someone, there is no law being broken.

How would/should the police respond to a caller saying they are afraid because there is a group of Black men or Hispanic men walking down the street at night? They aren't doing anything illegal, just exerting their right to walk down a street.


Should a person's right be restricted simply because someone is "afraid"?

One correction regarding your first line,

"The 2nd Amendment states clearly that we Americans have the Right to keep and bear arms."

Actually it doesn't. A literal reading of the 2nd Amendment makes it clear a "well-regulated militia" has such a right. As it happens, it's the Supreme Court who has decided that it also means individual citizens have the right, militia or not. Give credit where credit's due.

As to the topic of open-carry. If it's legal where you are, and you're ok answering law enforcements' questions everytime one shows up go right ahead. Still subject to any other local laws which apply to CCW like gun-free zones so you'd either have to not shop at such places or come up with some means of functioning in your area if such zones exist and you need to make use of them.

Are good sites to help with understanding your local laws like
OpenCarry.org | ?A Right Unexercised is a Right Lost?

 

[Clementine]

As long as the gun is in a holster, there is no cause for alarm. I prefer concealed carry just because I'd hate for someone to sneak up behind me and try to grab the gun. Some idiots might take it as a challenge or opportunity to steal the gun.

Liberals think the mere mention of a gun traumatizes people. Look at the countless instances of children being suspended for paper guns, bubble guns, little toy plastic guns, holding their hands like guns, biting poptarts into the shape of guns and talking about toy guns. The left prefers people who freak out about guns, real or imagined.

They don't even show concern about terrorism, street gangs or drug cartels pouring through the borders. Go figure.

Seriously, a little kid is expelled for taking a few bites out of a poptart because some teacher thought it looked like a gun shape, yet Obama is allowing people with minimal terror ties to seek asylum here. It's so fucked up what the left sees as a threat or not.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

As long as the gun is in a holster, there is no cause for alarm. I prefer concealed carry just because I'd hate for someone to sneak up behind me and try to grab the gun. Some idiots might take it as a challenge or opportunity to steal the gun.

Liberals think the mere mention of a gun traumatizes people. Look at the countless instances of children being suspended for paper guns, bubble guns, little toy plastic guns, holding their hands like guns, biting poptarts into the shape of guns and talking about toy guns. The left prefers people who freak out about guns, real or imagined.

They don't even show concern about terrorism, street gangs or drug cartels pouring through the borders. Go figure.

Seriously, a little kid is expelled for taking a few bites out of a poptart because some teacher thought it looked like a gun shape, yet Obama is allowing people with minimal terror ties to seek asylum here. It's so fucked up what the left sees as a threat or not.

Have had a kid grab my sidearm on-duty as a security officer going "Bang bang bang!" Scared the crap out of me that some little kid did it. From that moment onwards, I spent the money and got a 'retention' holster like law enforcement use. There are various levels of retention and what needs to be done to draw the weapon out, most of which require the hand and arm to be at the angle the wearer will be at, instead of from an outside angle as during a grab. They're worth the money.

As to making yourself a target, that's a real concern. If I see a plain-clothese person wearing a sidearm I don't think 'open carry' but plains clothes police. So in these hypothetical situations you need a weapon, if you're not immediately involved you might become a primary target to fire on first and without warning because of the perception you're law enforcement of some sort or otherwise going to be involved in the incident. Something to consider.

I don't agree most civilians negatively react to it though. If you could pass for an off-duty cop or detective I think that's what most people will interpret it as. Most OC gunbelts and holsters do deliberately convey that image. They're not single-action old west gunbelts like. Look and behave professionally, and that's the impression people will get.

 

[g5000]

I prefer conceal carry. The last state I lived in, they only allowed concealed carry. If you accidentally exposed your gun, like your shirt lifting above the holster for a second and revealing the weapon, you could be arrested for "brandishing".

It was a 50/50 chance you would actually be arrested, depending on the cop.

Nevertheless, I think if we were allowed to open carry wherever we went, it would make enough people nervous that places which currently do not explicitly ban guns would start to do so.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

What determines if you get arrested is usually more about the person than the cop. If it's legal it's legal. But if asserting your legal rights means you're disrespecting an officer you might get arrested for "litering" dropping a cigarette butt. Bad arrests can result in civil lawsuits and massive judgements againt a police department, so there isn't as much 'personal discretion' as you might htink. If it's legal, stay calm, don't start mouthing off like you're a lawyer, follow the officer's orders and answer their questions. Simple. Don't give a cop a reason to arrest you or delay you longer than is necessary and you'll be fine.

 

[percysunshine]

I do not have a strong opinion about concealed vs. open. Though, there is an argument to be made that concealed is effective as a deterrent after certain people hear about stuff like this;



"An off-duty Houston police officer and his girlfriend were leaving a movie.

Outside the theatre, 6-year HPD veteran Officer J. Johnson says a silver sedan pulled up, the passenger pulled out a pistol and demanded their belongings.

Officer Johnson then drew his gun and opened fire."

Off-duty Houston police officer fires at robbery suspects - Houston weather, traffic, news | FOX 26 | MyFoxHouston


The story implies that he is s reasonably good shot.

.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

My thought from the story is he's faced off gun-wielders before. Most police aren't "reasonably good shots" and their shootings are their first times. Someone who reacts that way has been face to face with a weapon before. Didn't hesitate in any meaningful way, knew exactly what he was gonna do if faced with such a thing (again) and did it.