The fallacy of concealed carry

I've always said concealed carry is next to worthless when you are confronted by criminals with their guns drawn. This case today once again proves my point.

"Major John Waldenville was working off duty security at a steakhouse when he was shot and critically wounded about midnight Friday. Knight says Waldenville had stepped outside the restaurant when he was confronted by two men and one of the two shot him."

"Waldenville was working at the Cattlemen's Steakhouse in historic Stockyards City and had gone outside to make a midnight deposit at a bank across the street from the South Agnew restaurant he was shot, police say."

http://www.news9.com/story/14689798/oklahoma-county-sheriffs-deputy-shot-in-stockyards

No the article doesn't mention whether or not the officer was carrying but come on, off duty police officer working security? We all know he had his weapon. I could post hundreds of stories about people with holstered guns being shot. CWP, fail once again.

...and others can post stories where somebody with a concealed weapon WAS able to get their out in time. Simply carry concealed does not equate to 100% protection from criminals and nobody has ever claimed that it does. But it can give you a chance if you keep your situational awareness about you (which may or may not have been lost in this case) and under the right circumstances (which do happen very often, otherwise we wouldn't have so many stories to post on here).

Your bit of anecdotal evidence does not reveal any sort of "concealed carry fallacy." You need to start applying a bit of logic to your thought process on this topic.

if we rely on your expert opinion every police officer shot was because he or she didn't have situational awareness? Also, with your tremendous training, so much more than an average police officer, your situational awareness is better? I bet you practice in front of a mirror.

...in a world of absolutes? Sorry, but reality isn't like that.

Nor could you have drawn the conclusion that you did from my post (at least not in any logical manner). I said that situational awareness may or may not have been lost here. It's a variable that is unaccounted for. No where did I state that the only way a person can get shot is by losing situational awareness. Clearly the fact that I allowed for the possibility that situational awareness was maintained on the part of the victim here implies that even while maintaining situational awareness you may still get harmed. Sometimes that's just how the cards get dealt to you. But your implication that it is ALWAYS how the cards get dealt to you is demonstrably false.

You should spend less time attempting to be down right offensive. It adds nothing to the conversation to say the least.

None of the people who insist on the "guns are useless" line seem to be able to answer me that. Nor, I'm sure, do you have a response to the story posted here recently of a woman who was assaulted in her home: grabbed out of the bathroom, naked, dragged to her bedroom, and still managed to get at her firearm and shoot her would-be rapist.

In any event, completely aside from the fact that your anecdote is not the same as data, you've lost. In the overwhelming majority of this country, people are allowed to carry handguns for self defense, and it's worked quite well.

like the one this officer was carrying when he got shot?

But the question remains: if guns are useless, why do the police carry them?

Is it just for fun?

tried (emphasis on tried) to mug me almost on my front doorstep.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

unless they are jelly filled, then its cop steak :D

Hoyt school of firearm training?

the assailants are caught without further injury...

...to provide substantive evidence. For every story of those so called "hundreds" you could post, anyone could post several where a CCW holder prevented a crime against themselves even when the criminal should have gotten the drop in them. You obviously missed the Walgreen's threads already posted too.

that is enough to justify concealed carry for me.

There are no guarantees. But I would rather be armed in such a situation than not. One of the downsides is that if you are incapacitated and criminals realize that you have a gun they may steal it.

stay home and lock the doors. Crime is down and if you stay away from drugs, lover triangles and flipping off other drivers, you most likely can live a long life without a gun. According to statistics.

like all those CWPs who stopped the Arizona....wait....nevermind

Note lack of question mark in the subject line. Or is your complaint that there's never a CCWer around when you need one? So we should all rely on the police... "wait....nevermind"

Wait a sec, let me get comfortable, here...

:popcorn:

between CCW's and violent crime, you are saying that if the violent crime rate EVER increases, it is also the cause of that increase. Are you sure you want to go there? With that logic you'd think there would be no crime in Somalia.

With your less guns equals less crime logic, there should be little violet crime in Somalia.

someone gets trapped in a burning or flooded car by their seat belt, no one should wear them?

Fire extinguishers and smoke alarms don't always work, get rid of them?

Why do police carry firearms if they're ineffective?

That rate might be lowered if they didn't carry, but that would be crazy..:crazy:

Drug dealers, gang-bangers, soldiers and innocent bystanders in some neighborhoods might beg to differ.

Firearms aren't effective 100% of the time so they shouldn't be relied upon. Why is this different for police?

A gun doesn't make you invincible. It just gives you a better chance.

This is a single incident; it doesn't prove a damn thing. It can't prove a damn thing, and while it can disprove a general rule (e.g. one black swan disproves a claim that "all swans are white"), there is no such rule being claimed. Sure, you (can claim you) "could post hundreds of stories about people with holstered guns being shot" but if I go through enough back issues of American Rifleman, I could probably find hundreds of stories of people who managed to draw in time. But the plural of anecdote is not data.

And of course, the next question that needs to be asked is "would Major Waldenville have been any better off had been unarmed?"

and get it over with .

Off duty officers regularly make extra money providing security for places like this steakhouse. These off duty officers normally are wearing their regular uniform and open carrying a handgun just as they do when on duty.

When the facts come out, it will be found that the Bad Guys ambushed an openly armed, uniformed LEO with the intent to murder and rob.

Yes, the deputy probably had at least one and possibly two concealed handguns as well as his open carry service weapon but that is irrelevant to a premeditated ambush.

My thoughts and prayers are with deputy Waldenville and his family.

Semper Fi,

What a silly post.

Usually, by knowing what to look for and being aware of your surroundings you can take the element of surprise away from the criminal. Merely carrying a gun concealed is of little help. One must have tactical training and apply such training.

is an "ace in the hole" but even with that ace you can still lose.

A CCW (along with the proper training and mindset) is potent weapon (no pun intended) but if confronted by an assailant who has either decided and/or prepared to kill, the odds are heavily stacked against you.

Criminals don't always use guns. Often they have knives or clubs or just fists. Since my wife is a senior citizen and only 4'9" tall the mugger's fists would have been sufficent to badly injure or kill her. But both times the would be mugger discovered that she wasn't easy prey after all. Both times they ran away, not shots fired. But according to you defending oneself with a gun against less than a gun doesn't count.

I hope that he recovers quickly, that his family is okay and that the low-life motherless scum that shot him are caught.


Having said that, exactly how will you FEEL if it turns out that he was unarmed?

Tit for tat; here's a legal CCW holder, punched to the ground, confronted by two men, one of whom was threatening him with a gun, when he pulled out his own gun and shot them. Guess that "shoots some holes" in your theory, huh?

http://www.azcentral.com/community/chandler/articles/2010/09/05/20100905chandler-shooting-two-dead.html#ixzz1N6JmSP3u


Note this article doesn't come from some silly right-wing rag that posts stories you've never heard of - this is Arizona's largest newspaper.

:evilgrin: :sarcasm:

who got their ass kicked by some street fighter.

I remember one time my judo, jujitsu instructor told of a black belt in Karate who soundly defeated an attacker and having left him on the ground in pain turned to walk away. The attacker picked up an object (a brick as I remember) and hit the black belt in the back of his neck. The black belt ended up paralyzed. Obviously the moral of the story was to never be over confident and to always consider your opponent to be very dangerous even after defeated. The fights never over until it's over.

One time at the dojo, a black belt in Jujitsu and I were practicing disarming an attacker with a knife. I had the rubber knife and he successfully disarmed me and we ended up on the mat with me on the bottom. I noticed the rubber blade lying where I could grab it, so I did and stabbed him in the back. When he realized what had happened he turned white and said, "In real life you would have killed me."

Yet skill in martial arts is valuable and has saved many lives.

Many people who carry a concealed firearm have been able to stop an attack often without firing a shot. Most muggers are not looking for an even fight and feel that if they are armed they have such a significant advantage that they have little to fear. When they confront someone who is armed, they often flee rather than get shot. Many of those attackers really have little interest in hurting their victim but unfortunately a percentage will enjoy shooting or slashing their victim even if he complies with all their commands.

In the linked story, it appears to me that the attackers wanted the nighttime deposit and were probably aware that the person carrying it was an off duty cop. The article doesn't say that the officer was in uniform, but often the cops I know wear their uniforms while working security. It appears these attackers decided to shoot the officer and grab the money. The shooter may have aimed for the officers head if he knew or suspected the officer might be wearing a bullet proof vest. No matter how proficient you are with a firearm it's hard to avoid injury in such a situation. however you may be able to return fire and survive. Handgun bullets are nowhere near as lethal as portrayed on TV or in the movies.

A firearm whether concealed or carried in the open is no guarantee that you will survive an attack but it does give you a better chance than being unarmed and facing an opponent armed with a knife or a firearm or a much larger and stronger foe.

A combat soldier once told me, "You can do everything right and still end up dead." That is simple reality but it doesn't mean that you shouldn't try.

Note that I am not recommending in any way that everybody run out and get a concealed carry license and a gun. That's an individual choice and much depends on your background and situation.

It's becoming down-right predictable.

:boring:

since he couldn't find it with both hands and a pointed stick when it comes to guns.

Therefore all men weigh 400 lbs.

Yur lawgek iz teh phale.

Based on the latest information that I've read on this story the Major was indeed armed.

I can't help but point out that an instance of a safety measure not preventing an injury, does not justify disregarding that safety measure.
Cops are frequently shot, probably more often than the general public. I am not aware of a single department that disarmed their officers after a fellow officer was shot.

If I read of someone who drowned or was burned to death in a auto accident because they couldn't get out of their seat-belts, I'll still be buckling when I get in the car. But you feel free to do as you like...it's evolution at work.

but not located...

As everyone here guessed, it was a planned ambush while he was armed and in uniform:

http://www.newsok.com/suspect-identified-in-shooting-of-oklahoma-county-sheriffs-deputy/article/3570437?custom_click=pod_headline_crime

cops should not have guns? Totally stupid logic. The OP might be the worst post this month.

some depts have policies saying officers cant work off duty as security. Some say you cant even carry off duty. It all depends

...failed to give details however a news story today stated that he was both armed and in uniform. I'm glad it appears he will recover. I believe he has lost an eye.

I know OK City is not tiny town USA but being from Philly, if it were me, I would not open carry and certainly not wear a uniform. I understand the idea is to make folks think again before trying something. That reasoning acts like a filter and screens out the casual troublemakers. It also gives away information to the serious scum. Carry concealed; work in plain clothes. Knowledge is power; give away nothing.

Situational awareness, and getting off the line of force if one develops, are paramount.

If you wish to develop a cogent argument against licensed carry and/or armed self-defense in general, it would probably help for you to study the issue a bit more, to avoid arguing against strawman constructs. A good general introduction to the topic for non-gunnies would be Massad Ayoob, The Gun Digest Book of Combat Handgunnery, 6th ed. It might help to at least understand where those you disagree with are coming from.