i understand what is being said,but if your gun is open carried and a person is going to just start shooting at every one,guess who he is going to shoot first. yep the one with the gun. plus most people do not use a security holster so mister bad sees you and wacks you in the back of your head and takes your gun.also it's not the gun on your hip that keeps mr bad guy from attacking you,if it did no one would shoot at cops. it's has more to do with how you carry your self. do you look like a easy victim/prey or are you one who walks like i know what is going on about me and maybe not an easy mark as they think.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
The Open Carry Argument
- Thread starter ATM
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Think more about that, then get back with us. Some of your automatic conclusions just aren't based in reality.
How often have you heard of an OCer getting shot first (or second...or third...or fourth), or how about even targeted? A simple internet search can show you daily of people carrying concealed defending themselves because they looked like easy prey, forcing them to defend themselves.
Exactly. While I'm sure it can and has happened, at least in certain instances, I get the feeling this is more information put out by Hollywood and the Libtard media. Don't get me wrong, criminals are unpredictable and I'm sure drug addicts can do stuff like this without a doubt, I just don't think it's as common as conventional wisdom would dictate. Also, how many concealed carriers have been targeted and have had to defend themselves because they looked like unarmed targets of opportunity? You're taking a chance in life no matter what you do. I choose to believe that open carrying makes me safer due to the deterrence factor.
Are you talking about "can and has happened" for the OCer getting shot first (2nd, 3rd, etc) or that CCers have to defend themselves more often?
I'm saying that OCer's have probably been shot. I'm sure there are some incidents where it has occurred, providing a basis for the "if you open carry, you're the first one shot" message from Hollywood and the media. I personally believe there are more times that CCer's have been targeted due to their weapon being concealed. My thought is that open carry, combined with SA, is safer. I could be wrong, but that's what the research I've done seems to suggest.
Anytime someone says an OCer was shot, I ask to prove it. I live in the world of facts, not fake news.
I'm just saying I'm open to the possibility, not that it's a fact. If it has happened, I believe it's rarer for an OCer to be shot than for a CCer to be attacked. I haven't found any articles stating an OCer was shot for open carrying, but I have read about CCer's being attacked.
If it has happened, I'm sure all the CCers would point to it, but it doesn't happen. Anything is possible, but again, I live in the world of reality where things either happen or they don't.
Like I said, just keeping open to the possibility. In any event, OC is the way to go in my book, when possible. Sometimes CC is a must, but when it isn't, I'll OC
When someone walks in, intending to do harm, he/she has to take in all kinds of information. And there is a group of people. Most of the time, things are happening so fast. And people standing near an OCer for a while often do not even notice the gun.
Yet, the bad guy is going to notice, in the half a second before he instigates the poo hitting the fan?
Yet, the bad guy is going to notice, in the half a second before he instigates the poo hitting the fan?
Act, you have seen how operators practice in shoot houses, entering, assessing threats and dealing with them. What makes you think that bad guys don't do the same?
They even have instructors in the background critiquing in AAR's. Joe you didn't identify the open carrier, you are dead. OK, guys, Lets run through this gas station robbery one more time.
They even have instructors in the background critiquing in AAR's. Joe you didn't identify the open carrier, you are dead. OK, guys, Lets run through this gas station robbery one more time.
Because 99 out of 100 "Bad Guys" are not "Operators".
A lot of them don't even have guns that work.
Most "smart" criminals, go for the white collar crime.
Most of the rest of the "smart" criminals are on a TV show.
People keep asserting points such as these, without providing any evidence to support them. Where is the evidence that these assertions are true? There are millions of open carriers; if what you assert is true, then there must be copious amounts of evidence to support that assertions.
And here, you contradict your own assertions, by stating (IMHO, likely correctly) that it is the manner one carries oneself, and one's situational awareness, that impacts the likelihood of being targeted, and not the manner that one carries a firearm.
Having dealt with them, I hardly call them "smart".
Not bureaucrats! The power hungry politicians. However bureaucrats are smart enough to act dumb and as an impediment to anything getting done.
But, we digress. That is a nice word for thread jack.
Just carry.
But, we digress. That is a nice word for thread jack.
Just carry.
Identifying threats with weapons in their hands is significantly easier than identifying someone who has a holstered pistol on their hip. They're looking at hands and what people are doing with them and still mistakes get made (like seeing a gun or knife when it's actually a mundane object like a mobile phone).
