Where will you open carry, if anywhere?

[gerhard1]

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.

I don't know if this directly pertains to your question or not, but in 1971 two NYPD officers were shot in the back from ambush and their service revolvers were taken. The perps were members of what was called the Black Liberation Army, and while I doubt that this was the primary cause of the murders of Waverly Jones and Joseph Piagentini, the guns were taken. Gregory Foster and Rocco Laurie, also of the NYPD were murdered in similar fashion a year or so earlier and I believe, although I am not certain, that their revolvers were taken as well. So, it does happen; not often, but it does happen.

 

[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.

The shooting of four officers in Washington this past year would be a recent example of that.

Regarding your question on why not use the other 43 states, as I have stated repeatedly and provided a couple of examples from personal knowledge, there is no central, empirical database for this.

Plus we would have to compare a state that has firearm pre-emption laws like Oklahoma. The only one I know of that does is Arizona, but I am not an expert in this area.

The surrounding states like Missouri, Kansas, and Arkansas do not have pre-emptions preventing municipalities form having their own laws regulating carry laws as far as I know.

If anyone has good, documentable information on this, I would be interested.

That said, I believe it to be an exercise in futility as my rationale against open carry is primarily tactical not legal, so I don't have any general beef against the legality of it; I just think it's a bad idea and have suspicions about those who badly want to show others that they are carrying a gun.

Combine that with a lack of a central, empirical database to document positive or negative consequences of citizens' use of force, and we are simply going to have to agree to disagree.

Michael Brown

 

[1shot(bob)]

The shooting of four officers in Washington this past year would be a recent example of that.

No. That would be an example of the ruthless murder of 4 officers and had nothing ot do with gaining access to their weapons.

Regarding your question on why not use the other 43 states, as I have stated repeatedly and provided a couple of examples from personal knowledge, there is no central, empirical database for this.

Right. No evidence to support either side of this argument.

Plus we would have to compare a state that has firearm pre-emption laws like Oklahoma. The only one I know of that does is Arizona, but I am not an expert in this area.

The surrounding states like Missouri, Kansas, and Arkansas do not have pre-emptions preventing municipalities form having their own laws regulating carry laws as far as I know.

If anyone has good, documentable information on this, I would be interested.

I don't understand why we would need to only study states with this pre-emptive status.

That said, I believe it to be an exercise in futility as my rationale against open carry is primarily tactical not legal, so I don't have any general beef against the legality of it; I just think it's a bad idea and have suspicions about those who badly want to show others that they are carrying a gun.

You have suspicions about people that want to open carry? Is it that we all want to BBA or are compensating for our small members? How about that we just want a more comfortable means of carrying and don't buy into the hype the hype that we will be killed by our own gun?

Combine that with a lack of a central, empirical database to document positive or negative consequences of citizens' use of force, and we are simply going to have to agree to disagree.

You seem to always point out the lack of evidence as proof that your theory is correct. I see it the other way around: the lack of evidence is proof I am right.

We'll just agree to disagree as you suggest.

 

[saryan]

If I was a bad guy, and was going to rob a QT or such. I would walk up, shoot the guy in the fishing vest, and the open carry guy first, then announce I was robing the place. I personally do not like being ambushed. Although I do a pretty good job of staying aware of my surroundings I prefer to be the one with the element of surprise. I believe we should have the right to open carry. I also believe there should be training requirements to be able to open carry. I also believe that you should have so many hours (4-8) of continuing education every year to keep the permit. And not the 50 round joke of a qualification that the current CCW law requires. If your going to do it, do it right.

 

[1shot(bob)]

If I was a bad guy, and was going to rob a QT or such. I would walk up, shoot the guy in the fishing vest, and the open carry guy first, then announce I was robing the place. I personally do not like being ambushed. Although I do a pretty good job of staying aware of my surroundings I prefer to be the one with the element of surprise. I believe we should have the right to open carry. I also believe there should be training requirements to be able to open carry. I also believe that you should have so many hours (4-8) of continuing education every year to keep the permit. And not the 50 round joke of a qualification that the current CCW law requires. If your going to do it, do it right.

But then you're a guy who has taken time to think about it, and you reason out the resistance in your head. Plus, you're actually cognizant of guys in fishing vests and don't believe they are going fishing (I guess I really need to stop wearing my photographer's vest when I go to QT after a shoot).
Most bad guys will wait until the wee hours when no one else is there, and probably don't spend a lot of time 'casing' a QT robbery. Most robbers, I believe, really don't want to kill anyone, they just want to get in and get out with cash, and merely use the gun as their talisman. There are exceptions of course, but they are exceptions, not the rule.

 

[Martialartsblackbelt]

Today i opened carried at wal-mart, lowes, block buster, & taco bell.
had one customer ask me which department i worked for and i politely said " none of them"
Of course this was in Missouri

 

[Michael Brown]

Now that we've all agreed to disagree any further discussion is likely to be spinning the wheels, so I think we can bring this one to a close.

Michael Brown