| Author | Post |
|---|
charlie12
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 20th, 2009 11:35 pm |
|
Capt. Dan, Glad you family is ok.
I have a question you said. ."He asked her if it was registered and she said no"
Do you have to register guns down there or did the LEO just not know LA law?
Thanks
|
Jerry McBride
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 21st, 2009 12:31 am |
|
CaptainDan
If criminal acts can occur anytime or anywhere and you are knowledgeable of that, I agree that an increase in a person's awareness, armed or not, may make the difference. Just making yourself 'appear' to be a harder target is an advantage IMO.
Increased awareness, meaning 'situational awareness', would seem to me, all the time, a good thing. All of us need good things.
So, I agree with your follow-up thought too.
|
yale
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 21st, 2009 07:35 pm |
|
charlie12 wrote: Capt. Dan, Glad you family is ok.
I have a question you said. ."He asked her if it was registered and she said no"
Do you have to register guns down there or did the LEO just not know LA law?
Thanks
The LEO didn't know the law.
When I encounter a citizen who asks, "Is that gun registered?" I have an overwhelming desire to present them with a sticker to wear that says "Everything I Know About The Law I Learned From Watching Reruns of Law & Order".
|
CaptainDan
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 21st, 2009 11:15 pm |
|
charlie12 wrote: Capt. Dan, Glad you family is ok.
I have a question you said. ."He asked her if it was registered and she said no"
Do you have to register guns down there or did the LEO just not know LA law?
Thanks
Charlie 12 - Thanks for the concern, as to your question, absolutely not. There is no registeration of any kind for hand guns in La. This officer just didn't know it. I guess that is why he told her to go home after she told him no, but she was scared ard shook up so going home was all she wanted to do anyway.
|
XD-GEM
Activist Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 22nd, 2009 02:26 am |
|
yale wrote: charlie12 wrote: Capt. Dan, Glad you family is ok.
I have a question you said. ."He asked her if it was registered and she said no"
Do you have to register guns down there or did the LEO just not know LA law?
Thanks
The LEO didn't know the law.
When I encounter a citizen who asks, "Is that gun registered?" I have an overwhelming desire to present them with a sticker to wear that says "Everything I Know About The Law I Learned From Watching Reruns of Law & Order".
Yeah, it's tempting to be sarcastic, but remember that your response will forever color that person's view of gun-owners in general, and not just of OCers. I usually smile and say something along the lines of, "In Louisiana, it's not required. The stuff you see in the movies or on TV about registration is there because the writers all live in California where the laws are different."
That's usually good enough for most folks, as they are familiar with the concept of Louisiana having a Napoleonic Code as opposed to Common Law like the other states. They just assume that it has someting to do with that and let it drop - often with one of those "Isn't that something?" kind of looks.
|
Dustin
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 22nd, 2009 02:39 am |
|
cajunpapapump wrote:  Good posts and replys. Boy that holster sure does hide the weapon. I use the blackhawk sepra for my XD40, I chose it because I like the locking feature it has and the release is pretty useful.
Or the Level 3 Serpa.
|
charlie12
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 22nd, 2009 05:47 am |
|
XD-GEM wrote: yale wrote: charlie12 wrote: Capt. Dan, Glad you family is ok.
I have a question you said. ."He asked her if it was registered and she said no"
Do you have to register guns down there or did the LEO just not know LA law?
Thanks
The LEO didn't know the law.
When I encounter a citizen who asks, "Is that gun registered?" I have an overwhelming desire to present them with a sticker to wear that says "Everything I Know About The Law I Learned From Watching Reruns of Law & Order".
Yeah, it's tempting to be sarcastic, but remember that your response will forever color that person's view of gun-owners in general, and not just of OCers. I usually smile and say something along the lines of, "In Louisiana, it's not required. The stuff you see in the movies or on TV about registration is there because the writers all live in California where the laws are different."
That's usually good enough for most folks, as they are familiar with the concept of Louisiana having a Napoleonic Code as opposed to Common Law like the other states. They just assume that it has someting to do with that and let it drop - often with one of those "Isn't that something?" kind of looks.
Yep its all about how you say it. Saying hey butt hole we don't have that in LA wouldn't go over too good.
|
nolacopusmc
Banned
| Joined: | Mon Dec 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 259 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 09:17 am |
|
Political opinions aside....
Are some of you saying that there is no tactical advantage to concealing your weapon?
|
marshaul
Activist Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 09:28 am |
|
nolacopusmc wrote:
Political opinions aside....
Are some of you saying that there is no tactical advantage to concealing your weapon?
Depends on your threat model.
|
nolacopusmc
Banned
| Joined: | Mon Dec 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 259 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 01:35 pm |
|
marshaul wrote: nolacopusmc wrote:
Political opinions aside....
Are some of you saying that there is no tactical advantage to concealing your weapon?
Depends on your threat model.
Threat model. Wow.
I guess that would be a no?
|
GoldCoaster
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 02:49 pm |
|
CaptainDan wrote: You know, one other thought. It might even be that OCers actually have the advantage if for no other reason than we know everyone can see our weapon and am more aware of our suroundings , I know that while I don't suspect every one is out to get me, I am careful not to let groups of people stand directly behind me. if they do an occasional head turn with a smile or nod lets them know (politely and in a friendly manor) that i am aware they are there. Also I allways make sure when walking or standing in a crowd , my elbow rests against my side arm. It naturally rests there any way and if any one did try to disarm me they would have to knock my arm away first. Also when in large crowds I often speak to people in close proximity to me, this to me gives me a feeling of the mood of things. Usually a smile followed by somthing like , "wow , they realy need to open more checkouts, huh?"
People usually peg me as a friendly, happy go lucky kinda guy becouse of my conduct where strtangers are concerned. It isn't that I'm trying to make new friends out of strangers as much as weighing the enviornment I am currently stuck in.Also you can check out the shifty drug slinger looking type much easier if you BRIEFLTY exchange greetings with him. To just stare blankly is in itself rude and suspicious. And could provoke an attack. "How ya doin?" rarely invites trouble where an odvious 3 minute silent size up might.
Just my take on things, besides if somthing does go terribly wrong it would be nice for the witnesses to tell police "that man was very polite and was bothering no one talking to the gentleman behind him in line." instead of "That man was just staring at him with a mean look on his face and the other man said watta you lookin at? and that is where it started"
Any way that is just how I carry myself in public, I think it gives me a better picture of the types of people standing around me and makes it easier to identify any possible threat while better protecting myself from losing my side arm to a suprise snatching. Also I like to think it makes all of us (OCers) look like regular Joe's instead of trouble hunting ex-military violence hounds, I know some people are gonna think what they want but why add fuel to the fire.
Dan,
What you have described here is something I've believed for quite some time but never seen it written down. You are controlling your situational awareness, you are also extending your awareness to others by engaging them in a non-confrontational manner which allows you to size up their moods at least if not their intentions.
I'm sorry to hear your wife was hurt and your son as well, it's a damn shame that normal law abiding folks have to feel like prisoners in their own homes. It's too bad the Chinese didn't quarantine your mayor for longer so you could get some sensible government in that great city of yours.
I'm very glad she had the 38, lucky is the family who's provider has provided for their defense if he's not around. That gas station incident would have turned out much worse had she not had the means to defend herself.
Regards to you and the family
|
GoldCoaster
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 02:50 pm |
|
double tap
Last edited on Sat Jun 27th, 2009 02:54 pm by GoldCoaster
|
JT
Regular Member
| Joined: | Thu Jun 12th, 2008 |
| Location: | Mississippi USA |
| Posts: | 129 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 02:52 pm |
|
nolacopusmc wrote: Political opinions aside....
Are some of you saying that there is no tactical advantage to concealing your weapon?
"Tactical advantage" is somewhat of a misnomer when you are talking about self defense. The first object is not to be chosen as a victim by the criminal. LEO's like yourself talk alot about that when you talk about things like not going certain places at certain times, parking in well lighted areas, etc. What you are saying is that self defense starts with crime prevention which primarily consists of finding ways of deterring the criminal. Open carry fits this deterrent model better than concealed carry because it shows the criminal that his risk is dramatically increased. The more people that are carrying openly in a given area the greater the deterrent.
Once the criminal attacks it can be argued that a concealed weapon will surprise the criminal more than an openly carried weapon but any "tactical advantage" will depend on the ability of the victim to deploy his or her weapon from concealment. What is generally said is that a determined violent criminal is more likely to target the open carrier first to reduce his risk. That same logic applies to the concealed carrier the minute he goes for his concealed weapon because once the criminal is aware that he is going for a weapon he becomes the primary target. His "element of surprise" advantage depends more on his skill level and willingness to act decisively than on the fact that his weapon is concealed.
The truth is that more often than not, just the display of the weapon from concealment ends the confrontation. Why would that not be true of the openly carried weapon as well? If the display of the weapon will most often end the confrontation without shots fired then why would we assume that the display of the weapon will embolden the criminal to attack? The tactical advantage argument makes no sense to me because it only deals with a supposed aspect of self defense once an attack is in progress.
|
nolacopusmc
Banned
| Joined: | Mon Dec 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 259 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 04:51 pm |
|
JT wrote: nolacopusmc wrote: Political opinions aside....
Are some of you saying that there is no tactical advantage to concealing your weapon?
"Tactical advantage" is somewhat of a misnomer when you are talking about self defense. The first object is not to be chosen as a victim by the criminal. LEO's like yourself talk alot about that when you talk about things like not going certain places at certain times, parking in well lighted areas, etc. What you are saying is that self defense starts with crime prevention which primarily consists of finding ways of deterring the criminal. Open carry fits this deterrent model better than concealed carry because it shows the criminal that his risk is dramatically increased. The more people that are carrying openly in a given area the greater the deterrent.
You are absolutely correct in the concept of not "becoming a target", but there are times when you are not the intended victim, but could still suffer consequences, even though you were situationally aware. Otherwise, that is a very eloquent regurgitation of the typical OC pipe dream that some "average guy" with a gun will deter the average criminal. While it will serve as a limited deterrent to purely opportunistic criminals, it does not serve as a deterrent to motivated offenders. Of course, neither of us can prove what does not happen, but the closest correlation are published studies using convenience stores with varying level of deterrents from increased lighting, CCTV, to security and fully uniformed officers in marked units.
Again, while we cannot ever know the number of assailants deterred by the actions, or of the OC guy at the counter buying a lottery ticket and some Skittles, we do know what does happen. A reasonable exstrapolation can be made from those criminals that do act in the presence of these "deterrents" to make a reasonable estimation of their effect.
Once the criminal attacks it can be argued that a concealed weapon will surprise the criminal more than an openly carried weapon but any "tactical advantage" will depend on the ability of the victim to deploy his or her weapon from concealment. What is generally said is that a determined violent criminal is more likely to target the open carrier first to reduce his risk. That same logic applies to the concealed carrier the minute he goes for his concealed weapon because once the criminal is aware that he is going for a weapon he becomes the primary target. His "element of surprise" advantage depends more on his skill level and willingness to act decisively than on the fact that his weapon is concealed.
You are oversimplifying it a little. I could give you a thousand scenatrios where i could draw my gun and react without the criminal ever knowing I had a weapon. Now if you are being mugged as the primary victim, then yes, it is a matter more os speed of draw unless you can fake getting a wallet and grabbing a weapon or something similar.
The truth is that more often than not, just the display of the weapon from concealment ends the confrontation. Why would that not be true of the openly carried weapon as well? If the display of the weapon will most often end the confrontation without shots fired then why would we assume that the display of the weapon will embolden the criminal to attack? The tactical advantage argument makes no sense to me because it only deals with a supposed aspect of self defense once an attack is in progress.
It could, and I am not saying that OC does not ever deter criminals, when when you do a detailed study of the motivation and assimilation of the modern criminal in today's society, they are not deterred by much because of the same concept of inoculation to punishment that we utilize as trainers for inoculation to stress---the more you experience, the less effect it has on you.
Another argument, is that if you are OC, and an assailant comes into the Quickie Mark, and then notices you, now he must address you as a threat. Sure, he may run away scared, but he may also do what most people who see a gun as a threat relative to them would do, and draw, or at least address the threat. Now you are forced to respond to that address. What is you are getting your daughter a Slurpee and an armed robber comes in and tells the cashier to give him the money, and tells you to get on the ground? He already has the drop on you, so even with a cross draw revolver, your reaction will not beat his reaction. Drawing will almost certainly result in you getting shot.
If you are OC, then he must address your weapon, IE shoot you or at least disarm you, or if you were concealed, you could play the part of the sheeple, be a good witness, and not have to get in a shoot out with your daughter. Point is, you choose when to react, instead of him forcing your hand.
Again, you seem very intelligent, so I am sure you are aware, these types of scenarios are far more complex than can be addressed here.
I appreciate your rational and mature argument. Please do not take any of my text as inflammatory, as this is how I type. You have very many valid points, I just think the issue is a little to complex to get to the bottom of online.
OC or CC? You can develop tactics to make either work in many situations. Just like some people prefer bigger bullets over bigger magazines, I prefer my element of surprise and my control over my reaction to the hope that my display of a gun will scare an otherwise criminal person who had made the conscious decision to victimize someone.
Last edited on Sat Jun 27th, 2009 05:46 pm by nolacopusmc
|
JT
Regular Member
| Joined: | Thu Jun 12th, 2008 |
| Location: | Mississippi USA |
| Posts: | 129 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 07:07 pm |
|
nolacopusmc wrote: You are oversimplifying...
That is precisely the point. Each situation is different and we could all identify pros and cons to a method of carry in a given situation against a given opponent. The possible scenarios are endless. Those that argue open carry is a "tactical disadvantage" constantly cite an over-simplified scenario in which a criminal targets the open carrier. In defense of concealed carry you said;
I could give you a thousand scenatrios where i could draw my gun and react without the criminal ever knowing I had a weapon.
I don't dispute that. I could give you lots of scenarios too. Each scenario has different variables. My point is that there is no sure fire "tactics" argument that makes one method of carry superior to the other. Each method has its pros and cons. The biggest pro for each is a law abiding citizen having a firearm with which to defend himself. Each person's success will vary in a given situation but the ability to freely excercise the right is the point.
You asked "political opinions aside" but unfortunately the arguement for "tactical advantage" often takes place in the context of whether or not open carry should be allowed. You alluded to that sentiment when you said;
Otherwise, that is a very eloquent regurgitation of the typical OC pipe dream that some "average guy" with a gun will deter the average criminal.
I tried my best not to discuss the "politics" as you requested but you since you have injected that back into the discussion let me ask you this. Why the apparent contempt for the "average guy with a gun?" Is not the idea of arming citizens to make the "average guy" more than just average? You honestly believe that an apparently armed "average guy" is no greater deterrent to any criminal than an apparently unarmed "average guy?" How does the criminal know the skill level of the armed "average guy"? I suspect that by "average guy" you really mean non-state sanctioned or non-LEO.
The bottom line is this. In is a good thing when law abiding citizens are armed. The arguement about tactics is useless to the cause of civil rights for gun owners. In the current climate, the law abiding armed citizen, whether he carries openly or concealed, has more reason to fear a confrontation with LEO's than with criminals. That isn't the way it should be.
Last edited on Sat Jun 27th, 2009 07:11 pm by JT
|
smoking357
Banned
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 07:14 pm |
|
nolacopusmc wrote:
You are oversimplifying it a little. I could give you a thousand scenatrios where i could draw my gun and react without the criminal ever knowing I had a weapon.
Do any not involve a bottle of Jergen's?
|
CaptainDan
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 07:21 pm |
|
Thank you Goldcoaster for the concerns regarding my family.
That is another instance where the sight of a sidearm alone defused a potentially deadly situation.
|
CaptainDan
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 08:03 pm |
|
Again gentlemen, as I have stated many times before the average criminal is a COWARD and chooses his victims carefully, waiting for the old lady in the parking lot,kids at the register at happy burger, etc. Thease people are out for an easy score with as little resistance as possible , sure they might shoot everybody inside if pushed being the cowards they are. But that is why they don't hold up night clubs (too much security ) or any place where they can't "hit and run" If the threat of harm to themselves is present, however slight, they will choose another target, store, whatever. In my opinion thease violent criminals , while cowards through and through, are axtremely dangerous as they attack unseen, they wait, plan and attack when they think they can get away , The very reason you asses your suroundings and make a quick glance around scanning all around you. If you meet the gaze of a stranger smile or nod and move on. Now if some one new walks in behind you, you only have 1 new person to survey. You have allready assed every one ealse. Now if this guy does intend on doing bodily harm to you or someone near you, HE KNOWS YOU HAVE SEEN HIM AND KNOWS YOU KNOW HE'S THERE , THEN HE SEE"S YOUR GUN. Not gonna happen.
As far as being a victim by accident, becouse BG see's your gun and takes you out first at the Quicky Mart, PAY ATTENTION (see above) ASSES your suroundings!! If Kareem is walking to the door with an AK in his hand you shoukd be the first to know it. If Jatonqua jerks a raven .25 out of his pants as soon as he opens the door, again , you should be the first to know it. Also who in their right mind walks ANYWHERE especially in a questionable part of town IE - where I live, and doesn't look behind them at regular intervals? A quick glance over your shoulder now and then?
Now on the dedicated threat, where the attacker knows EXACTLY who he's gonna get it makes absolutly no difference if you are carrying a gun in your pants or in your hand as far as whether he's gonna attack you or not. The advantage there is OC the gun is readilky available CC you gotta fish it out.
In my opinion if you keep your head out of your a@@, you(OC) will allways have the advantage over violent crime. Bury your face in a Big Mac unaware of everything around you and yes you stand a chance of gett'n snuck !
Besides on the odd chance I don't see 3 or 4 thugs running at me from the side while in the Quarter (the bum rush tactic) , I don't want to have to dig for my piece after 2 or three blows to the back of the head.
One more thing to consider Guys, try to conceal a full size sidearm, if I have to return fire to save the life of my wife or children it aint gonna be with a compact .380 becouse it fits neatly inside my trousers and hides so nicely. I want a full size combat hand gun!!!
Yes Gentlemen, you Guys see me outside my house and YOU WILL ALLWAYS SEE THE XDM ON MY HIP , 1 in the pipe and 16 right behind it.
In my opinion.....OC or CC ? No question about it OC baby.
Last edited on Sat Jun 27th, 2009 08:09 pm by CaptainDan
|
marshaul
Activist Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 08:45 pm |
|
nolacopusmc wrote:
marshaul wrote: nolacopusmc wrote:
Political opinions aside....
Are some of you saying that there is no tactical advantage to concealing your weapon?
Depends on your threat model.
Threat model. Wow.
I guess that would be a no?
What's your threat model? Are you James Bond, or Joe Citizen?
|
PT111
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 27th, 2009 08:46 pm |
|
You can list all the advantages of OC vs. CC and in an attack by BG's there is no doubt that the advantages of OC will come out on top. There are some advantages of CC but in the overall scheme OC far outweighs CC in the defensive scenario where BG's are involved in most cases. Where CC comes out on top is the societial or as some put it the political side. This does not involve BG's but rather the general public. You walk into the 7-11 OC, start looking for you favorite beer and if the cashier sees you he/she is going to be paying attention you you rather than the BG walking in with his gun hidden until he has it shoved into the cashier's face. If she had been paying attention to the BG she would already be hiding behind the counter pushing the alarm.
Advantages to both CC and OC but in the majority of defansive situations OC comes out on top.
|
Current time is 10:08 am | Page:   1 2 3 4 5   |
|
