Why I would never CC

[blamecharles]

This is probably going to ruffle some feathers but here it goes... I truly believe there are quite a few people out there who OC because they like the attention they get from it. Regardless of what they say, they like the looks/stares/questions they get from people in public. Also, some people don't care what kind of attention they are getting as long as they are getting it.

I seriously think that some of you are mistaking confidence with attention seeking, and that is really sad. Maybe OCers have higher self esteem?

I don't see myself ever wanting to OC in 99% of everyday carry situations, mainly because I believe I have a tactical advantage in nearly every situation by carrying concealed, which is why I carry a gun in the first place (self defense).

Oh look this same old argument.

I guess one of the things i think about most when choosing a carry type is....like the Lucky mart near me in Merrillville not to long ago, if that guy came into commit that crime when there was actually people in the mart and seen that someone was OC'ing, he of course was CC'ing.....he would have shot the OC'er due to the fact that an armed customer would have spoiled the robbery...and now your gun is out there for more crimes, now if they were CC'ing...MAYBE...he would have had them get on the floor.

I know you never know whats going to transpire, but thats my train of thought....i mostly CC.

Oh look this same tired argument again

 

[WestSider]

I agree with the above part of your post 100%. However, I don't know which percent falls into what category, and many fall into both IMO. I've only seen 2 OC-ers outside of the range or a hunting/woods area so I have no way to judge. People do things for all sorts of reasons. I, nor anyone else, can look into their mind to truly understand why. Everyone tries to project what we may think the reasons may be...makes sense because that's the way that WE think...not the way other people think.

Despite what we may think hanging around here, OC-ers are a VERY small minority of those carrying a firearm for SD. The larger group, being made up of many emotional ninnies, tends to pounce on them every chance they get...and defend their pouncing with emotional and easily disproven rants.

Personally, I'm proud that people have the balls to OC...and I don't care what their reasons are as long as they are good representatives for all gun owners. They are paving the way to de-sensitize people people to thinking that guns are only used for evil. Many people only see firearms on the news and in movies where people are being murdered. They have no idea how many times firearms are used for SD in this country.

So hats off from me to the OC crowd. I have not ventured there. But I'm proud that others have.

It's no secret that gun owners get stereotyped right from the start quite a bit as right wing nuts or "bad guys" by the general public. I don't necessarily see people walking around with guns in plain view as something that remedies this, if anything it get's people more worked up.

I also don't see someone OC'ing and pretend to know why they are doing it or quite frankly even care, people choose to OC for various reasons and I respect that and think it should be legal. I have my theories as to why people do it as I outlined in my last post, but in the end it's their right and I respect that. However, I also don't put people who OC up on a pedestal as the freedom fighters for the 2nd amendment either. If they choose to OC that's fine, but I for one don't OC, not because I don't have the balls to, but because I don't think it's a better option for me.

So in summary, the 2 myths that I don't buy into are:

1. OC'ing helps educate the public and make people more receptive to guns and gun owners, I think, if anything, it does the opposite.

2. People who don't OC lack the balls to go out and do it, so we should praise the people who do as the heroes of the 2nd amendment.

 

[Bunnykid68]

So in summary, the 2 myths that I don't buy into are:

1. OC'ing helps educate the public and make people more receptive to guns and gun owners, I think, if anything, it does the opposite.

2. People who don't OC lack the balls to go out and do it, so we should praise the people who do as the heroes of the 2nd amendment.

I agree with your 2nd point.

I completely disagree with your first.
You think OC does the opposite? If people see people OC and learn that it is legal, where is the downside.

If someone is OC vs CC they are infinitely more likely to have a conversation about the legalities of firearm ownership.

 

[Bunnykid68]

I didn't read through the thread to much, but OC is just not really for me.
I don't have an issue with it, but..
1.OC mabey more physically comfortable, but I feel more comfortable with it concealed.

2.I do not believe that OC works as a crime deterant, IMO it could make you a target.

3. I am no undercover cop either...(?) however I do want it to be a surprise if it comes to that.

4.I don't want people asking me questions, that's what the internet is for.

5. I don't care what the sheeple think, as long as they leave me alone I am good.

6. I got all the freinds I need.

7&8 . I don't carry a gun to look cool.

9. As long as they don't wand me at the door or something I feel fine knowing I am legal. Opinions weather it be a persons or a buisness are irrelevant to me.

not this tired ole argument again. Find a few stories about someone with a gun being the first target anywhere outside of a combat zone or with a conflict with LEO

 

[indyjoe]

Actually, indyjoe, you made it not quite the same thing, not me. I am looking at it from a personal choice perspective. YOU have the right to patrionize and YOU also have the right to seek employment whereever you desire and IF OC is that important, THEN you will find employment that allows it.

Actually I don't have a personal choice, without completely changing what I do for a living. If all employers treat OC firearms the same, I don't have a choice of seeking employment elsewhere. I have a choice of keeping my firearm quiet, or not having a job.

The same thing would apply if no businesses that supply a certain item allow you to OC. You wouldn't have the choice to shop somewhere else, you would have the choice to shop for it or not.

It is great to talk about having the right to go somewhere else to work. But in the real world, the employer is king, and the number of jobs out there are not large for all lines of work. I could take a $40k pay cut and work at a job that is carry friendly or I can work at a job in which I excel and have 15 years of experience. And a job where I have NEVER seen a carry friendly environment.

For me, CC isn't a big problem. The no firearms sign at the entrance is no legally binding. I accommodate certain wishes, because they are paying me. Other things I'm quiet about ignoring, with the understanding that it would cost me my job.

I see quite a large difference in this than choosing what businesses I patronize.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

1. OC'ing helps educate the public and make people more receptive to guns and gun owners, I think, if anything, it does the opposite.

2. People who don't OC lack the balls to go out and do it, so we should praise the people who do as the heroes of the 2nd amendment.

Personally I don't agree with either of these. I know several guys with enough "balls" to do whatever they want but simply choose not to OC.

As to your first point do you have anything besides your own unsupported opinion to back it up? I know I have lots of counterpoints. In fact, I wonder how in fact people who never have OCed know so much about it and how people react to it?

 

[Bunnykid68]

Personally I don't agree with either of these. I know several guys with enough "balls" to do whatever they want but simply choose not to OC.

As to your first point do you have anything besides your own unsupported opinion to back it up? I know I have lots of counterpoints. In fact, I wonder how in fact people who never have OCed know so much about it and how people react to it?

They don't, they are just going on their feelings 100%

 

[KG1]

First off let me preface this with I 100% support the right to OC and respect people's decision to do so. The following is only my opinion.

This is probably going to ruffle some feathers but here it goes... I truly believe there are quite a few people out there who OC because they like the attention they get from it. Regardless of what they say, they like the looks/stares/questions they get from people in public. Also, some people don't care what kind of attention they are getting as long as they are getting it.

According to this expert it's 95% of OC'ers.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/carry_issues_and_self_defense/221962-oc_mindset.html

 

[Bunnykid68]

According to this expert it's 95% of OC'ers.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/carry_issues_and_self_defense/221962-oc_mindset.html

After 51 pages I think he proved something, not sure what though

 

[iChokePeople]

Maybe I've missed this when it's been posted before -- does someone have studies or other evidence that being exposed to OC makes the general public more receptive/open/comfortable to/ with it?

 

[CPT Nervous]

It's always the same old arguments. Makes you a target, not really a deterrent, blahblahblahblahblah. I OC, I've never had to draw. My buddy CCs, he had to draw his gun twice.


Why are they assuming that criminals don't have self-preservation? They are people, too. What would be accomplished by attacking an armed man?

 

[CPT Nervous]

This thread was not an argument. It was a discussion for reasons not to CC. I warned the hardcore CCers about this.

It has been argued. We have won. It's over. This isn't derailing now. If you don't OC, fine. I really don't care. I'm not telling you why you shouldn't CC, I'm stating why I don't.

That's it. My OCer friends here are welcome to discuss this topic. We're tired of these arguments. It's the same crap, different toilet. It wasn't relevant the first 1000 times I've heard it, it isn't relevant now.

 

[iChokePeople]

This thread was not an argument. It was a discussion for reasons not to CC. I warned the hardcore CCers about this.

It has been argued. We have won. It's over. This isn't derailing now. If you don't OC, fine. I really don't care. I'm not telling you why you shouldn't CC, I'm stating why I don't.

That's it. My OCer friends here are welcome to discuss this topic. We're tired of these arguments. It's the same crap, different toilet. It wasn't relevant the first 1000 times I've heard it, it isn't relevant now.

Oh, that's it, then. You won. Shut down the Internet, everyone.

I fully support your right to OC, but statements like this, like the thread in general, do very little to help anyone.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Maybe I've missed this when it's been posted before -- does someone have studies or other evidence that being exposed to OC makes the general public more receptive/open/comfortable to/ with it?

Not on guns themselves, but it really is like anything else, the more you see it the less you notice it. Someone made the cell phone analogy, 20 years ago if you were on a cell phone you were stared at now if you are not holding a smart phone you are behind the times.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Maybe I've missed this when it's been posted before -- does someone have studies or other evidence that being exposed to OC makes the general public more receptive/open/comfortable to/ with it?

I would say that I doubt there are any university studies about OC in particular but I would think that common desensitization therapy would obviously apply.

I have dozens of personal experiences with dealing with the public while OCing. 100% of it positive.

 

[iChokePeople]

I would say that I doubt there are any university studies about OC in particular but I would think that common desensitization therapy would obviously apply.

I have dozens of personal experiences with dealing with the public while OCing. 100% of it positive.

So really, there's no proof. I see people smoking around their kids a lot, and I haven't gotten comfy with it. Just one example, but I don't think 'desensitization' is a gimme for which you can claim a sort of common sense exception to the evidence rule that you demand of the anti-OC crowd... "must show proof or it's only your opinion" has to work both ways, IMHO.

TF, you and I have discussed this before -- you are probably a good ambassador for us, even with chimps and giraffes, and will tend to have positive experiences and good results. Others, maybe, or maybe not, depending on them and the audience.

 

[CPT Nervous]

Oh, that's it, then. You won. Shut down the Internet, everyone.

I fully support your right to OC, but statements like this, like the thread in general, do very little to help anyone.

As I said, I was letting off steam. I get so frustrated with all this fighting.

Yeah, I went after CCers a little there. Maybe I shouldn't have. Oh well. I knew I could win the argument, I just didn't want one.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

So really, there's no proof. I see people smoking around their kids a lot, and I haven't gotten comfy with it. Just one example, but I don't think 'desensitization' is a gimme for which you can claim a sort of common sense exception to the evidence rule that you demand of the anti-OC crowd... "must show proof or it's only your opinion" has to work both ways, IMHO.

There isn't irrefutable proof for many things we all believe, it doesn't make it any less true for those that believe it.

Comparing OCing to smoking around children is morally apprehensible and I expect better than that from you considering how much you and I have discussed this topic. Let's both just give each other the respect we deserve here.

I don't understand your last point. To say that I should not perform a perfectly legal task I think some proof should be necessary to get me to change my beliefs. I do not expect CCers to convert so I am under no obligation to prove anything to them except to get them to let me do my thing and not bash the way I choose to carry sometimes.

 

[88GT]

Help me with your answer.

You believe that you HAVE to choose between two alternatives. Food onthe table OR OC at work

I believe that you have to choose between the choices that you have at the time. Future choices aren't choices because you can't guarantee they'll materialize. So while it's theoretically possible someone could continue to seek employment at a job where the RKBA is respected, he does at the cost of putting food on his table by not taking the job offered at the time.

If you're only offered one job (or only jobs that prohibit RKBA at work), there ARE only two alternatives. Of course, NOT putting food on the table and waiting for a job that allows RKBA is technically a choice. But that's where th e prioritization comes in. See how that works?

I say that's a false dichotomy. Do you believe there are any other alternatives?

Strictly speaking, yes. But when it comes to feeding one's family as a highest priority, no, there may not be.

I also think that if one starts a thread titled such as this one then then never means never but I still believe words mean something.

I want to buy some Chinese tea. Do you happen to know the price?

 

[Bunnykid68]

There isn't irrefutable proof for many things we all believe, it doesn't make it any less true for those that believe it.

Comparing OCing to smoking around children is morally apprehensible and I expect better than that from you considering how much you and I have discussed this topic. Let's both just give each other the respect we deserve here.

I don't understand your last point. To say that I should not perform a perfectly legal task I think some proof should be necessary to get me to change my beliefs. I do not expect CCers to convert so I am under no obligation to prove anything to them except to get them to let me do my thing and not bash the way I choose to carry sometimes.

I resemble that remark, but I take no offense at it