Now that is a good subject for a thread. Most open carry folks are making a political statement, from their POV it’s no difference than carrying a signboard around. I won’t argue the legality of it, because again, that’s a jurisdiction thing, but I find it incredibly stupid from a safety (because AD is a thing and having an exposed trigger to the world is STUPID) and defense POV (because unless you’ve trained, getting a longarm off your back and ready to use when someone knows you have it is silly).
[yes that’s a generalization, but most open carry people I see are carrying AR platform carbines slung on their back, the ones that open carry in ready to use position, well, they’re scary for different reasons]
Something to keep in mind is that (depending on your state), anyone can go to a gun store and buy a gun with not too many hoops to jump through. At least where I am, you don’t need a license, you don’t need to register it, you can legally open carry it in public etc. And, now that you own it, there’s not a whole lot stopping you from pulling your jacket over your holster or tossing it in your glovebox while you’re driving. It’s illegal without a CCW license, but it’s not like anyone’s all that likely to find out you did that. The fact that people voluntarily go out and get a CCW license does show some amount of responsibility and those that do so, are probably more likely to be more responsible with it.
Also, any time a gun discussion comes up, several people say things along the lines of “When I took my CCW class…” or “My CCW teacher told us…”, which goes to show that those of us that took the class actually learned and retained something we didn’t know. Many of the things that come up in that class aren’t common sense.
Sure, everyone knows you always treat a gun like it’s loaded, even if it’s not loaded, assume it’s loaded. But many of us never thought about not using the gun as a confidence booster or that even though it’s just for home protection and it’s not likely to ever leave your nightstand, you still need to practice with it.
Years ago, I gave my sister (amongst other things) one of those keychain pepper spray canisters. My uncle, the cop, saw it and promptly took her outside and made her practice with it a few times (and actually spraying it). Explaining that if she’s going to use it, she needs to know how to grab it quickly, how to make sure it’s pointed the right way, how to make sure the safety is off (if there is one), how far it’s going to spray etc. Just having it isn’t enough, you shouldn’t be attempting to use it for the very first time while someone is coming at you.
Regarding MA, doesn’t it depend a lot on the individual trainee, the instructor, the school, etc.? I’ve been to schools that really emphasize the Karate Kid “there is no first strike” philosophy (but you have to learn to defend yourself) mentality, others that emphasize risk avoidance and de-escalation (hit your opponent in the ears really hard and then run), others that encourage aggression and fighting (the best defense is a constant offense). Not all arts emphasize de-escalation; others focus on sportsmanship or lethality.
Of the fighters I’ve known, most are keenly aware of both the potential for injury and the respect for the people you train every day/week with. Most probably wouldn’t start a fight, but there are some who I don’t think would back away from one either. Just depends on the person, what they practice, and their personal philosophy towards violence.
There’s room in the world for all sorts of philosophies. The only one I have a real problem with is the “women’s self defense classes” that use unrealistic attackers (who are super gentle and accommodating) to teach a false sense of empowerment. As someone pointed out above, a real attacker wouldn’t be so nice, and if you don’t train in those scenarios, how would you ever be able to respond accordingly? I worry for the women who go through those 2-3 hour workshops and build up a false sense of confidence.
As a 200-lb dude, I’ve also known women who routinely kick my ass, and could easily kill me if they wanted to. But that’s after years of training.
Yeah - we spent hours and hours training how to fight with a knife, but we also worked on where to carry and how to draw it. Isn’t much use if you can’t pry it out of your skintight jeans, of open the blade quickly.
Yeah - size matters. I also have trained w/ women who could easily kill me, but the average 200# person has great advantages over a 150 pounder. At 185#, I found myself at the absolute bottom of the “unlimited heavyweight” class of NHB competitions I was fighting in. Was tough going up against 300 pounders. So I put in the effort to bulk up to 215#.
Let’s say A has armed herself, taken a few supervised shots to get a feel for the weapon, but has no other firearm experience. B is a middling bully who has been in a few parking lot dust-ups, and played a little HS football ten years ago, but is unarmed. They confront each other from across the living room. B suddenly rushes A.
I managed to earn a purple belt with a red stripe with an organization called the World Self-Defense Federation. The teachers both taught this as the first choice.
Of the two teachers, one had on intervened, when he saw 1 men getting attacked by a group of 4-5 men, outside a bar. He could have walked away or called the police, but that would have taken too long.
The other one? He used his martial art skills quite as a police officer in one of the high crime cities of New Jersey.
After 20+ years of no practice, I would definitely walk away, if I can if. If I can’t, let’s see how many of those pressure points I might remember, so I can get away.
What do you mean by “A has armed herself”?
If she is holding the pistol in her shooting hand, cocked and with the safety off, yeah…she might prevail over her husband in the living room.
But if the pistol is inside a drawer, she’s in trouble.
And if the pistol is sitting out in the open, she’s in trouble.( It may be on the table top within arms reach, but it is also within reach of her attacker).
And if the pistol is in her hand, she’s in trouble…if she hasn’t fired it since she bought it 6 years ago,
(“No experience”, you said. Under pressure, will she remember how much strength it takes to rack the slide, and where to grip with her fingers to do so? Will she remember where the safety is, and know how to use it without looking down at the weapon , taking her eyes off the attacker?
In your scenario, it would probably be better for the woman to use the “Nike” defense…Run out of the living room and into the street.
Yeah, the one fight I ever got into was in middle school, right after I sent away for “50 Kung-Fu Secrets! Fear No Man!” from the back of a Brain Boy comic book.
(Maybe Secret #51 was “What to do if a much bigger kid just falls on you and won’t get off til you say ‘I give, I give!’”)
I’m not a lawyer any more than those police, gun owners and instructors. But it does seem to me if you shoot someone and kill them, the burden kind of shifts to you to prove that it was, in fact, self defense and not “murder”. It seems like wishful thinking that the police would just be like “whelp…looks like we only have the shooter’s side of the story here.”
Responding to the OP: There is a huge difference between a group statistic (‘more people who own guns or learn self defense are harmed than people who don’t’), and making a specific or personal claim.
In other words, the chance that -I- will be harmed by owning a gun or learning self defense is totally determined by my behaviour, and not a statistic. Statistics are useful for determining societal effects or figuring out why something happens in large groups, but is completely irrelevant to determining personal risk, unless the risk is exogenous.
For example, the risk of dying in Russian roulette does not change, so long as someone is playing the game. The only way to reduce your risk is to not play the game. There are no strategies that can reduce your risk other than not pulling the trigger. So group risk equals individual risk.
On the other hand, flying a small airplane has about the same risk as riding a motorcycle. But unlike a motorcycle where you can do everythjng right and be killed by someone else, in general aviation your personal safety is determined mostly by your training, aptitude and attitude.
Guns and self defense are like that. A gun isn’t going to magically get me killed uust because I own it. It totally depends on how I use it. Same with self defense.
The statistics are useful when you dive into them, because they can help tell you what not to do. Many light plane pilots die because they fly into adverse weather. The statistics tell us that, so a prudent pilot will learn from that and avoid those situations.
But general statistics around gun ownership and self defense simply don’t apply to individuals, so long as they aren’t doing the things that get others harmed.