Where will you open carry, if anywhere?

[purplehaze]

The more surgeries i have the less that nickname fits me bro.

I looked at a fbi report for 2008 shows 41 officers in the united states were assaulted with their own weapons... where does the 20% come from?

Oklahoma has 3.5 million people or so.... it doesnt have large municipalities. Arizona has nearly 7 million people... I think although not perfect these more densely populated states not having issues is a great testbed. Rightly so i cant say opencarry is worse than concealed carry. But, the one thing i can say is that open carry is no worse, having active testbeds for legal experiments have a long history in american history and if successful are often exported to the various states. I think in the history of legal experiments this is one is hard to argue with. Although, the 20% statistic is far to high and would love to see the study.

Todd you are "terribly" incorrect about a number of things you posted here and the rest are unsupported by facts.

20% is statistically significant if you are referring to disarmings and that number has been consistent for the last twenty years.

The repeated argument about the other 40 states not having bloody streets is entirely anecdotal because a large number of those states don't have pre-emption laws like Oklahoma does so while the state doesn't forbid open carry, the large municipalities frequently do.

You cannot support your supposition that open carry worked out more often than concealed carry. I would certainly agree that open carry is better than NO carry, which is really the comparision you should be making but that is a non-issue in Oklahoma so it doesn't support your argument.

As far as those who "live by the gun" operating unconcealed, again that is not correct. That is a contextual issue. Everyone who "lives by the gun" and carries it openly also wears a uniform to make them identifiable for their agency/country's reasons. A number of those personal who do the actual fighting, as opposed to being support personnel conceal when it is appropriate and wear openly when appropriate.

private security forces out of country often open carry without being readily identified as a soldier or leo.. thanks for the argument you will have to wait until i gain some more stamina to contnue our debate.



However I don't know any of them that regularly walk around openly carrying without being identifiable as a soldier or police officer.

As I said before, I do not favor open carry because I don't think it's a good idea but I don't oppose someone else's wish to do so, no matter how silly I think it is.

About the only thing I agree with in your post is that open carry does not freeze someone's ability to act, however that is not what I wrote.

What I wrote was that speed of decision-making is more important than speed of presentation and that open carry gives away one of your critical advantages in such a scenario.

If you disagree, I offer as my perspective hundreds of students that I've worked with who have very rarely been able to hit, without getting shot, a suspect already armed in force on force scenarios. However they typically succeed when they pick the appropriate time to draw as opposed to getting into a 50/50 gunfight and trying to beat a drawn gun. If you look at the context of criminal assault, weapons and numbers are usually disproportionate as opposed to the range, indicating that criminals pick the time, place, and generally manipulate the context to their advantage. If you accept this premise, and you should if you understand what criminal assaults as opposed to agreed upon combat looks like, then you would have to agree that you give unnecessary information to your assailant if you open carry.

If you ask any of the board members here who have taken our class or the hundreds of others who have, I'm confident they'll tell you that the speed of their presentation was not the deciding factor as opposed to appropriate timing of presentation. I think it's probably the most statistically significant pool anyone on this board has.

While I agree that this is not a life or death scenario, I will point out that I don't know firsthand of any scenario where speed of presentation was the deciding factor in a lethal force situation even when the shooter was carrying openly i.e. LE and Military.

This does not mean that smooth, efficient presenation is not important; It's simply far subordinate to speedy decision-making, such that open carry offers such minimal advantage and such large detriment, that I simply believe it's a poor tactical decision.

I would venture that I have enough firsthand experience investigating these cases to offer an educated opinion on the matter but I recognize that some will simply want to do what they want to do.

Michael Brown

 

[Michael Brown]

The more surgeries i have the less that nickname fits me bro.

I looked at a fbi report for 2008 shows 41 officers in the united states were assaulted with their own weapons... where does the 20% come from?

Oklahoma has 3.5 million people or so.... it doesnt have large municipalities. Arizona has nearly 7 million people... I think although not perfect these more densely populated states not having issues is a great testbed. Rightly so i cant say opencarry is worse than concealed carry. But, the one thing i can say is that open carry is no worse, having active testbeds for legal experiments have a long history in american history and if successful are often exported to the various states. I think in the history of legal experiments this is one is hard to argue with. Although, the 20% statistic is far to high and would love to see the study.

The study you are quoting is the 2008 Officers Killed and Feloniously Assaulted Summary.

However your quote is incorrect; 41 officers total were killed in 2008 not killed or assaulted with their own weapons.

The 20% number is from the number of officers killed from 1975 (the first year of the study) to the present. The numbers have changed dramatically in the 1990's and forward as weapon retention training has become much more common in the majority of police academies.

From 1994 to 2005, the number killed dropped to 8% and is frequently attributed to better training and better holsters.

However one flaw in the research is that they only count succesful disarms and only count the deaths.

I am familiar with over two dozen attempted disarmings and one where an officer was shot in Tulsa alone, none of which are recorded by the LEOKA summaries except as statistics in the aggravated assault catagory.

If you would like to see the summaries that are not online I will be glad to show them to you in person but the agreement agencies make with the Behavioral Sciences Unit at the FBI is that they will not reproduce the BSU's work so I will not post them online.

However what you can extrapolate from the LEOKA summary is that there is a large enough percentage of criminals who are not deterred by a known armed person to make the issue of deterrance by appearance significant.

If a criminal is deterred by the appearance of a gun, I probably didn't have to worry about them as significantly as a criminal who is NOT deterred by an open weapon. Those are the criminals I am preparing for.

Regarding municipalities, there is no central, empirical database for any non-LEO shootings so you cannot say with ANY degree of certainty that open carry is no worse. Thus we don't know anything about whether or not open carry is an issue in those states and we don't know what effect municipal laws prohibiting open carry have had on the issue since the state may say open carry is legal but the municipality does not i.e. St. Louis and Kansas City in Missouri. This is why I don't think the lack of known incidents is any type of evidence or any type of legal experiment.

To demonstrate the importance of this lack of data, there is a frequent IDPA shooter from Missouri (many here may know him) who was shot with his firearm in his own house. Fortunately he was a tough SOB and got his gun away from the susect before he could clear the malfunction and shoot again.

Did anyone here read about that story? I'm guessing not because it had been in his local paper for a week before he called me and told me about it, but since I don't live in Missouri, I'm not terribly familiar with what goes on there.

The only statistic this will be in any central, empirical database is an aggravated assault in the FBI UCR.

In a more recent case (within the last couple months), a bounty hunter in KCMO was disarmed and shot with his own weapon. http://www.kmbc.com/news/23066866/detail.html

The argument that we, collectively, have not heard about it is not any type of good argument for open carry.

Michael Brown

 

[1shot(bob)]

A question Michael: how many of those LEOs that were disarmed were done so by a person to whom they made the first contact? What I mean is, was the officer attempting an arrest or enforcement of a police action? If so, the perp was in a 'fight for his life' situation. By this I mean they did not walk up to the officer and attempt to take his weapon, they only did so in order to maintain their livelihood and freedom.
My guess is that the likelihood of a perp specifically picking out a LEO to get his gun or to commit his crime is minimal. In the same way it seems unlikely that a perp will attack me because I have a gun. Given the choice, I would think most perps would look elsewhere before attempting a robbery in a store with an armed person standing nearby.

 

[tacmedic]

I am not against open carry but I would not do it. I do think RESPONSIBLE gun owners who choose to do so should use quality retention holsters and get some type of weapons retention training.

 

[purplehaze]

I would agree 20% of the officers killed since 1975 to present is a high number. I am dimly aware of the agreement to not disclose the data and i of course take you at your word. The 8% would have been a number i would have guessed.... well come closer too. but, then i was shocked at the fbi study comparing offender training to that of police training and how unprepared and under trained the average police officer is to some of these offenders. i guess many police officers are not gun enthusiasts. one shot is arguing my next point.

The study you are quoting is the 2008 Officers Killed and Feloniously Assaulted Summary.

However your quote is incorrect; 41 officers total were killed in 2008 not killed or assaulted with their own weapons.

The 20% number is from the number of officers killed from 1975 (the first year of the study) to the present. The numbers have changed dramatically in the 1990's and forward as weapon retention training has become much more common in the majority of police academies.

From 1994 to 2005, the number killed dropped to 8% and is frequently attributed to better training and better holsters.

However one flaw in the research is that they only count succesful disarms and only count the deaths.

I am familiar with over two dozen attempted disarmings and one where an officer was shot in Tulsa alone, none of which are recorded by the LEOKA summaries except as statistics in the aggravated assault catagory.

If you would like to see the summaries that are not online I will be glad to show them to you in person but the agreement agencies make with the Behavioral Sciences Unit at the FBI is that they will not reproduce the BSU's work so I will not post them online.

However what you can extrapolate from the LEOKA summary is that there is a large enough percentage of criminals who are not deterred by a known armed person to make the issue of deterrance by appearance significant.

If a criminal is deterred by the appearance of a gun, I probably didn't have to worry about them as significantly as a criminal who is NOT deterred by an open weapon. Those are the criminals I am preparing for.

Regarding municipalities, there is no central, empirical database for any non-LEO shootings so you cannot say with ANY degree of certainty that open carry is no worse. Thus we don't know anything about whether or not open carry is an issue in those states and we don't know what effect municipal laws prohibiting open carry have had on the issue since the state may say open carry is legal but the municipality does not i.e. St. Louis and Kansas City in Missouri. This is why I don't think the lack of known incidents is any type of evidence or any type of legal experiment.

To demonstrate the importance of this lack of data, there is a frequent IDPA shooter from Missouri (many here may know him) who was shot with his firearm in his own house. Fortunately he was a tough SOB and got his gun away from the susect before he could clear the malfunction and shoot again.

Did anyone here read about that story? I'm guessing not because it had been in his local paper for a week before he called me and told me about it, but since I don't live in Missouri, I'm not terribly familiar with what goes on there.

The only statistic this will be in any central, empirical database is an aggravated assault in the FBI UCR.

In a more recent case (within the last couple months), a bounty hunter in KCMO was disarmed and shot with his own weapon. http://www.kmbc.com/news/23066866/detail.html

The argument that we, collectively, have not heard about it is not any type of good argument for open carry.

Michael Brown

 

[cowmugger]

The argument that we, collectively, have not heard about it is not any type of good argument for open carry.

Michael Brown

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

There are some undesirable results of the first amendment; pornography, left wing propaganda, no talk of religion on federal property. We are dealing with those. Open carry will, in some peoples opinion, be an undesirable result of the Second Amendment.

 

[kcatto]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

There are some undesirable results of the first amendment; pornography, left wing propaganda, no talk of religion on federal property. We are dealing with those. Open carry will, in some peoples opinion, be an undesirable result of the Second Amendment.

I agree with this quote.... it is what I have been saying all along...keep means to own and bear arms means literally to carry weapons.... This is our RIGHT not a privilege therefore the state government can choose to make laws pertaining to our rights but they cannot make laws that interfere with or dismiss our constitutional rights.... but not allowing people to carry weapons they are infringing on our rights....

Whether you agree or disagree with open carry that is not the issue.... The issue is if people are willing to negotiate their ability to exercise their RIGHTS then what is next?

Just because something is against the law does not make it wrong.... it makes it illegal

just some thoughts....

 

[Michael Brown]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

There are some undesirable results of the first amendment; pornography, left wing propaganda, no talk of religion on federal property. We are dealing with those. Open carry will, in some peoples opinion, be an undesirable result of the Second Amendment.

Some agree that regulation of mode of carry is an infringement; some do not agree.

Same old yarn.

Michael Brown

 

[Michael Brown]

A question Michael: how many of those LEOs that were disarmed were done so by a person to whom they made the first contact? What I mean is, was the officer attempting an arrest or enforcement of a police action? If so, the perp was in a 'fight for his life' situation. By this I mean they did not walk up to the officer and attempt to take his weapon, they only did so in order to maintain their livelihood and freedom.
My guess is that the likelihood of a perp specifically picking out a LEO to get his gun or to commit his crime is minimal. In the same way it seems unlikely that a perp will attack me because I have a gun. Given the choice, I would think most perps would look elsewhere before attempting a robbery in a store with an armed person standing nearby.

Don't know.

No matter what the answer is, we are speculating as to the results.

Probably a better comparison for what you are suggesting would be the Philippines or Brazil as individuals with permits are able to open carry in both of those countries.

Michael Brown

 

[1shot(bob)]

Don't know.

No matter what the answer is, we are speculating as to the results.

Probably a better comparison for what you are suggesting would be the Philippines or Brazil as individuals with permits are able to open carry in both of those countries.

Michael Brown

No. We are speculating as to the cause.

Are there amy instances in which a person assaulted an officer in order to gain access to his firearm when that action was the initial one?
What I am asking is why did the perp attempt to take the weapon? Was it to stop his own or his friends arrest? How often would a civilian be put in that situation?

Why those countries? Why not one of the 43 states that allow open carry? I would think that with the Brady Bunch doing everything they can to make guns look bad, that if this ever happened it would be blasted all over the media.