Several examples of Christians opposing all violence and means of self defense have been in the news lately, and I can't deal with all such examples. But three particular examples come to mind, and I first want to show you one example from Mr. Robert Schenck in a ridiculously titled article, Christ or a Glock. "Well, first of all you're making an immediate decision that if someone invades your home, they are going to die," Rev. Schenck replied. "So you are ready to kill another human being [read more]
Uniformed security guards are hired by stores to provide peace of mind and serve as a deterrent to casual criminals, such as petty shoplifters and aggressive panhandlers. They are not law enforcement officers, do not generally have good training, and the physical and mental screening for security guards isn’t that high (which is perhaps why we’ve had two security guards go on terrorist killing sprees this year alone).
Aggressive predators are not deterred by either unarmed or armed security guards, but it is relatively rare to seen a criminal so callous that he would murder a guard just to acquire an additional handgun.
A man who would murder someone for a handgun would presumably have no problem doing the same with an open carrier who typically has even less training and general awareness than armed security guards.
We’ve noticed that there are generally only four kinds of open carry stories.
- a group of people open carry as a form of political protest (generally without law enforcement involvement)
- an individual open carries as a form of political protest (often with law enforcement involvement, including occasional arrests)
- an individual open carrier who is oblivious to his surroundings has his/her picture posted to gun forums pointing out his/her utter lack of awareness and generally poor choice of gun and holster.
- an open carrier is attacked for his weapon, with the criminal generally being successful.
We would love to report that open carry deters crime, but there is simply no data suggesting that this is a true statement. Folks, criminals laugh at open carriers. They view them as targets, no different than someone with a cash-filled wallet hanging out of their back pocket as they stand in the checkout line, nose buried in a smart phone and oblivious to the world.
I’ve seen Bob hate on open carriers before, but this is ridiculous. This commentary is completely out of control (I hesitate to call it an “analysis” because nothing is being analyzed).
Bob doesn’t really know that all uniformed security is poorly trained. He doesn’t know that open carriers are even more poorly trained than uniformed security. He also doesn’t know that open carriers have poor situational awareness.
He doesn’t know that open carriers fall into only the four categories he lists. He’s just referring (anecdotally, not analytically) to news accounts he believes he has read.
He especially doesn’t know that criminals laugh at open carriers. In fact, I challenge Bob to supply me with one verifiable instance in public where a known criminal laughed at an open carrier. I’ve open carried many times, and I’ve also been around people I knew to be gang members when doing so. No one – no one – has ever laughed at me. In one particular instance when multiple gang members were heading my direction on the sidewalk (it was four or five of them), they saw me open carrying and decided to cross the road, walk past me, and cross back over when they were clear of me. They kept their heads down and studiously avoided making eye contact with me while walking on the other side of the road.
As I said, this commentary is completely out of control, and I simply have no earthly idea what Bob’s problem is with open carry. There is no law requiring him to do it, so why the negative attention? It’s legal, so what business is it of his to bash the practice? How does a crime against uniformed security turn into open carry bashing? I’m beginning to think this is a psychological issue that Bob has.
What is your malfunction, Bob?