Open Carry (security vs. us)

[spat]

Here we go. The law isn’t what I wanted it to be so let’s start the twist. Really? You think every cop knows every law? Or that they need to? Ever hear of looking something up? You don’t think a cop is capable of having a cordial conversation with someone? You think they just spring out of their car guns a blazing and start cuffing everyone in sight? You think nobody is capable of a conversation? If asked about it one could simply cite the law and the officer could quickly verify they are correct using one of those fancy new wireless devices. Even if not, it still makes every difference in the world. Why? Because it’s the right answer. Your argument is akin to someone being arrested for wearing yellow socks. A cop somewhere might not like it and might even think it could be dis con or something. He can write away. At the end of the day he will be embarrassed and on the hook for violating someone’s civil rights under color of law. Knowingly doing so also strips them of their qualified immunity. Kind of a silly argument on your end but whatever.

Since the number of security guards arrested in NY for OC may someday get as large as 1, I'm not sure what you think this "discovery" changes.

This has been a long going discussion about the legality of OC. People have often brought up the example of hunters and security guards. Congratulations, you found some law specific to security guards, that minor point can be removed from the discussion.

But it doesn't significantly change anything. We still don't have any examples of permit holders being successfully prosecuted *just* for OC.

So, you've explained how a good lawyer would approach the defense for a security guard accused as such. There's still everyone else.

There's still the problem that none of the officers who *aren’t* out arresting security guards left and right are even aware of this law. So, obviously they have another reason for not doing it.

 

[Chevusa]

Since the number of security guards arrested in NY for OC may someday get as large as 1, I'm not sure what you think this "discovery" changes.

This has been a long going discussion about the legality of OC. People have often brought up the example of hunters and security guards. Congratulations, you found some law specific to security guards, that minor point can be removed from the discussion.

But it doesn't significantly change anything. We still don't have any examples of permit holders being successfully prosecuted *just* for OC.

So, you've explained how a good lawyer would approach the defense for a security guard accused as such. There's still everyone else.

There's still the problem that none of the officers who *aren’t* out arresting security guards left and right are even aware of this law. So, obviously they have another reason for not doing it.

Agree with this post.

I actually am now leaning towards this shows is that OC for regular folks could indeed be illegal, but because this preemption isn’t specific that is just a guess. The argument used to be “security can so we must be able to also”. This argument is now invalid.

Back to square one I guess.

I will say that I think people worry about it a little too
much. Nobody is going to run up and tackle them. If approached be polite and have a cordial conversation. If it’s a problem say sorry didn’t realize and be on your way. I think it is extremely unlikely it would go further than that for most licensed people.

This isn’t about OC or CC being the better way to carry. It should be the personal choice of the licensee.

 

[kev74]

Nobody gives a crap if rent-a-cops can open carry, or not, or why. The real test is if the kid at Dunkin Donuts gives you your coffee for free!

I would like to take this opportunity to thank God for giving me enough other stuff to do that I don't feel like I have to prove everyone else on the interwebs is wrong all the time.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Nobody gives a crap if rent-a-cops can open carry, or not, or why. The real test is if the kid at Dunkin Donuts gives you your coffee for free!

I would like to take this opportunity to thank God for giving me enough other stuff to do that I don't feel like I have to prove everyone else on the interwebs is wrong all the time.

Fuck I even have other stuff to do and mix it up from time to time

 

[togmaster]

Fuck I even have other stuff to do and mix it up from time to time

Yes. Yes you do.

 

[spat]

Agree with this post.

I actually am now leaning towards this shows is that OC for regular folks could indeed be illegal, but because this preemption isn’t specific that is just a guess. The argument used to be “security can so we must be able to also”. This argument is now invalid.

Back to square one I guess.

I will say that I think people worry about it a little too
much. Nobody is going to run up and tackle them. If approached be polite and have a cordial conversation. If it’s a problem say sorry didn’t realize and be on your way. I think it is extremely unlikely it would go further than that for most licensed people.

This isn’t about OC or CC being the better way to carry. It should be the personal choice of the licensee.

Oh, CC is obviously the best way to carry, unless everyone already *knows* you're armed (Like a security guard)

The question has always been if OC was expressly forbidden. There is nothing in NYS law that would forbid it.

 

[1911guy]

Pfffffft

 

[Chevusa]

Oh, CC is obviously the best way to carry, unless everyone already *knows* you're armed (Like a security guard)

The question has always been if OC was expressly forbidden. There is nothing in NYS law that would forbid it.

OC vs CC can be argued both ways. That isn't what this thread is about. It has been said an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of the cure. If someone is deterred by seeing a gun on me and it prevents me from having to use it I'll take that scenario every day.

Anyhow, I tend to agree with the historical mindset that OC has always been legal, and the concealing of weapons is what was to be regulated. They wanted to see the weapons to know who was armed, and if weapons were going to be concealed they required a license so they knew the people were upstanding who did it.

The "to have AND carry concealed" argument can go either way, and I see both sides of the argument as being plausible. The only sure way to know is to have a court make a determination. It does make for interesting discussion though.

 

[spat]

OC vs CC can be argued both ways. That isn't what this thread is about. It has been said an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of the cure. If someone is deterred by seeing a gun on me and it prevents me from having to use it I'll take that scenario every day.

Anyhow, I tend to agree with the historical mindset that OC has always been legal, and the concealing of weapons is what was to be regulated. They wanted to see the weapons to know who was armed, and if weapons were going to be concealed they required a license so they knew the people were upstanding who did it.

The "to have AND carry concealed" argument can go either way, and I see both sides of the argument as being plausible. The only sure way to know is to have a court make a determination. It does make for interesting discussion though.

A gun should never be used as a deterrent. The whole "they'll see/hear it and stop what they're doing" argument is a terrible idea.

Tactically the bad guy should have as little time to react to the news that you're armed as possible.

Advertising is is just as likely to attract an attack as it is to deter one. You may have demonstrated that you're a harder target, but you've also demonstrated that you're a more valuable one.

 

[Chevusa]

A gun should never be used as a deterrent. The whole "they'll see/hear it and stop what they're doing" argument is a terrible idea.

Tactically the bad guy should have as little time to react to the news that you're armed as possible.

Advertising is is just as likely to attract an attack as it is to deter one. You may have demonstrated that you're a harder target, but you've also demonstrated that you're a more valuable one.

Each case will be different, but weapons act as deterrents in many forms and have for hundreds of years. You may be confusing it with things you've heard about not firing warning shots or not using the sound of a shotgun racking to scare off a criminal. These are very different things. Most criminals are criminals of opportunity and not well planned, sophisticated, professional thieves or attackers like you see in the movies. The vast majority of people are going to see a gun and say to themselves "not worth it" and move on. Also I personally have been trained on retaining my weapon during a grab attempt. You would be shocked how many ways there are to fend off this type of attack. Some that you'd never think of. Some are excruciatingly painful and some will involve the bad guy having a broken wrist very quickly. Of course, situational awareness and a quality level 3 duty holster have their places too. Also there are simple things like not letting someone get too close to you and turning your gun side away from someone when they approach you, just to name a few.

 

[spat]

Each case will be different, but weapons act as deterrents in many forms and have for hundreds of years. You may be confusing it with things you've heard about not firing warning shots or not using the sound of a shotgun racking to scare off a criminal. These are very different things. Most criminals are criminals of opportunity and not well planned, sophisticated, professional thieves or attackers like you see in the movies. The vast majority of people are going to see a gun and say to themselves "not worth it" and move on. Also I personally have been trained on retaining my weapon during a grab attempt. You would be shocked how many ways there are to fend off this type of attack. Some that you'd never think of. Some are excruciatingly painful and some will involve the bad guy having a broken wrist very quickly. Of course, situational awareness and a quality level 3 duty holster have their places too. Also there are simple things like not letting someone get too close to you and turning your gun side away from someone when they approach you, just to name a few.

You may have been trained to retain your weapon after a grab attempt, but any attacker who tries that isn't a serious threat anyway.

How's your training on retaining your weapon after you're dead ? A smart attacker would kill you before you knew you were under attack if they knew you were armed.

 

[Chevusa]

You may have been trained to retain your weapon after a grab attempt, but any attacker who tries that isn't a serious threat anyway.

How's your training on retaining your weapon after you're dead ? A smart attacker would kill you before you knew you were under attack if they knew you were armed.

Sure they could. That type of attack is incredibly rare, except for Jason Bourne and his friends in Hollywood. The thieve of opportunity is the much bigger threat. They are everywhere.

 

[spat]

Sure they could. That type of attack is incredibly rare, except for Jason Bourne and his friends in Hollywood. The thieve of opportunity is the much bigger threat. They are everywhere.

You don't think a thief of opportunity is capable of surprising you ?

What if instead of reaching for your gun, they slide a knife between your ribs instead ?

I maintain that an attacker who's entire plan is to "grab the gun in your holster and run" isn't much of a threat to begin with. If that's all you're preparing to deal with, you could end up completely unprepared some day.

 

[Chevusa]

You don't think a thief of opportunity is capable of surprising you ?

What if instead of reaching for your gun, they slide a knife between your ribs instead ?

I maintain that an attacker who's entire plan is to "grab the gun in your holster and run" isn't much of a threat to begin with. If that's all you're preparing to deal with, you could end up completely unprepared some day.

Again, these people exist more in the movies than at the corner store. The overwhelming majority will see the gun and say "not worth it" and move on to an easier victim, possibly even the guy who is CC. If the crim's intent is to murder someone they will also more likely pick the soft unarmed or CC target. Very few crim's are on a mission to die. They see the gun as a challenge they want no part of.

 

[spat]

Again, these people exist more in the movies than at the corner store. The overwhelming majority will see the gun and say "not worth it" and move on to an easier victim, possibly even the guy who is CC. If the crim's intent is to murder someone they will also more likely pick the soft unarmed or CC target. Very few crim's are on a mission to die. They see the gun as a challenge they want no part of.

Attacks in general happen more in the movies than the corner store. For any of us, the odds that *any* attack of any type will happen is miniscule.

The fact remains that a visible weapon has the potential to be either a deterrent or an encouragement. It's *is* the equivalent of hanging several hundred dollar bills out of your pocket.

The only question is which of those is more prevalent. I doubt either of us will find any hard statistics, so it comes down to personal judgement.

On that I think we will have to disagree.

I will maintain my stance that in the civilian world weapons should not be used in any sort of "deterrent" fashion.

Far too many people have an objectionable notion that they can influence someone else's behavior with the implied threat that a visible weapon provides. That is a fundamentally dangerous way of thinking.

 

[Chevusa]

It's *is* the equivalent of hanging several hundred dollar bills out of your pocket.

Dollar bills cannot shoot the would be robber. I don't see a correlation. Most will want nothing to do with it and move on. There are exceptions to every rule, but they are rules for a reason - they are almost always right.

will maintain my stance that in the civilian world weapons should not be used in any sort of "deterrent" fashion.

I know it's uncomfortable for you, but out of this little corner of the country civilians carry every day without issue. It's just like putting your shoes on.

Far too many people have an objectionable notion that they can influence someone else's behavior with the implied threat that a visible weapon provides. That is a fundamental dangerous way of thinking.

Never carry a gun if you're not trained, ready, and prepared to use it. That was the eye opener they gave our class on day 1. It will still act as a deterrent to most common criminals.



Let's get back on topic....

 

[spat]

Dollar bills cannot shoot the would be robber. I don't see a correlation. Most will want nothing to do with it and move on. There are exceptions to every rule, but they are rules for a reason - they are almost always right.

I know it's uncomfortable for you, but out of this little corner of the country civilians carry every day without issue. It's just like putting your shoes on.

Never carry a gun if you're not trained, ready, and prepared to use it. That was the eye opener they gave our class on day 1. It will still act as a deterrent to most common criminals.



Let's get back on topic....

Your gun is worth several hundred dollars and is sought after on the black market. It *is* the equivalent of cash sticking out of your pocket.

That is a completely separate issue from it's possible value as a deterrent.

Obviously anyone carrying a gun should be prepared to use it. I am suggesting that is *the only* thing you should be carrying it for. Your attempt to impress the bad guys with your badassedness is not a valid reason.

Civilians carry *in* this little corner of the country every day too. Roughly 1 in 6 people in my county has a pistol permit. While I am sure the vast majority of them don't carry on a daily basis, I doubt I'm the only one walking around Wegmans armed.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Your gun is worth several hundred dollars and is sought after on the black market. It *is* the equivalent of cash sticking out of your pocket.

Actual probably more sought after than just cash

 

[Chevusa]

Your gun is worth several hundred dollars and is sought after on the black market. It *is* the equivalent of cash sticking out of your pocket.

I suppose.. if cash was a deadly weapon. Snatching cash poses almost no risk of death. Attacking someone with a gun poses a great risk of death. But yeah, other than that they are exactly the same.

Your attempt to impress the bad guys with your badassedness is not a valid reason.

It always comes down to this. Trying to make the carrier out to be the bad guy. Saying it's showing off. Didn't know I needed your opinion of a "valid reason" in order to exercise my rights. "Shall not be infringed". You might want to look into it. Regardless of your feelings or personal attacks, the common criminal will be deterred and pick an easier victim, possibly you.

Civilians carry *in* this little corner of the country every day too. Roughly 1 in 6 people in my county has a pistol permit. While I am sure thr vast majority of them don't carry on a daily basis, I doubt I'm the only one walking around Wegmans armed.

I was discussing OC. You must have forgot. Oh well.

 

[spat]

I suppose.. if cash was a deadly weapon. Snatching cash poses almost no risk of death. Attacking someone with a gun poses a great risk of death. But yeah, other than that they are exactly the same.

It always comes down to this. Trying to make the carrier out to be the bad guy. Saying it's showing off. Didn't know I needed your opinion of a "valid reason" in order to exercise my rights. "Shall not be infringed". You might want to look into it. Regardless of your feelings or personal attacks, the common criminal will be deterred and pick an easier victim, possibly you.

I was discussing OC. You must have forgot. Oh well.

Quite literally you are attempting to impress the bad guy with your badassedness. That is precisely what your notion of deterrence is. Not sure why you're taking offence.

You are right, you do not need my permission to carry. There are a very large number of ways to carry that are well within your rights, and also stupid as hell. We just disagree about what's on that list.

 

[Chevusa]

Quite literally you are attempting to impress the bad guy with your badassedness. That is precisely what your notion of deterrence is. Not sure why you're taking offence.

You are right, you do not need my permission to carry. There are a very large number of ways to carry that are well within your rights, and also stupid as hell. We just disagree about what's on that list.

oh boy

 

[Acer-m14]

Never carry a gun if you're not trained, ready, and prepared to use it. That was the eye opener they gave our class on day 1. It will still act as a deterrent to most common criminals.

so how much training did this shooter get ??

NYC officer shot, killed while sitting in police vehicle

Suspect was shot and killed by responding officers.

abcnews.go.com

 

[Chevusa]

Here's what it really boils down to: What does your licensing judge think? That is who will let you keep or take away your permit. It is a very far stretch to be convicted of a criminal charge if you OC. So if your individual judge says it's permitted (as some do, we've seen the letters) then it really doesn't matter what anyone else thinks about it. Reach out to your judge and see. I will say I find it interesting that mine makes no mention of it. I pulled out my original paperwork I got when I was approved and there are a few pages of guidelines and rules and nowhere is it mentioned to keep it concealed. If a cop approaches you tell them your licensing officer said it's permitted. That is really all that matters.