 |
| Could the woman pictured be shot in the back and have her gun taken? |
Phoenix, AZ—There is a significant contingent of gun rights
advocates that are enamored with the idea of openly carrying handguns in public
places. Yes, I believe it’s a right but is it safe or advisable?
Let me begin by making it clear that such activity is constitutionally
protected. I have no desire for
legislation prohibiting any form of bearing arms by the law abiding. It’s a choice pure and simple.
The truth is that open carry is a horrible idea. I’ve seen the fallout of open carry over and
over for decades. The ignorant advocate that seeing an armed civilian is
somehow a deterrent to violence. Nothing could be further from he truth.
Let’s begin with reality and some cold hard facts. Until the
1980s when ballistic vests became the normal attire of cops more than half the officers
killed where shot with their own guns. Better holsters and training has also
helped protect our police. The FBI Uniform Crime Reports publishes
circumstances concerning the deaths of every cop each year.
Civilians generally get limited training on weapon retention
and they certainly don’t routinely wear body armor.
Carrying concealed firearms provide important tactical
advantages. Surprise is by far the best
advantage to concealed carry. Open
carriers understandably become an instant target and are at a huge tactical
disadvantage.
Carrying an unnecessarily exposed firearm opens the carrier
to a host of hazards. One is that some
troublesome and or drunken fools love to provoke anyone they see that’s
armed. These same people love to call
911 and falsely claim they were victims of Aggravated Assault.
Statements to police from an accuser along with a recovered
firearm provide probable cause for police to arrest the gun carrier. Bail,
lawyers, bad publicity, conviction and prison time may follow. This kind of mess is also very
expensive! I know of numerous bogus
convictions from that scenario. Ruined innocent lives are no laughing
matter.
If an armed robber sees an exposed gun he may simply shoot
or otherwise disarm the gun-displaying carrier. Why give them the advantage?
I would say that exposed firearms may be a deterrent only for
a group of armed people. Also a group
means there will be witnesses to derail phony assault complaints too. But for anyone alone open carry is a nightmare
waiting to happen.
There are those people that want to be seen with exposed
guns for narcissistic or vanity reasons. Perhaps they want to shock members of
the public. Frankly I can’t imagine that
kind of proclivity. I recommend psychiatric therapy for those people. Unfortunately a number of states only allowed
open carry making concealed carry a crime.
What I learned is that an exposed firearm is far more likely to be
involved in regrettable incident than a concealed weapon.
Those of you that disagree with me and insist that open
carry has some benefit should simply get help.
I don’t think you should be possessing any weapons. Saying all of that I won't suggest for a second that there could be some rare circumstance where exposed carry may have an advantage. Think very carefully before making that choice.
Comments
The time for open carry is in the aftermath of a disaster where groups of citizens who are armed may prove a deterrent to potential looting. It needs to be more than one or two people though.
I also view CCLs as a double edged sword. Kansas recently passed Constitutional carry. I'm fine with that. The simple fact though is the folks who go attend a class come out better trained in how to deal with life's curve balls and sliders that the average Joe.
When a person has a CCL, I know they have been vetted by law enforcement, trained by professionals, and are investing time and money in their effort to keep their community safe.
I would rather have those kind of folks around any day of the month.