The Open carry and/or printing debate

[Meanie]

I subscribe to a PI magazine who brings up the issue of printing and/or open carry and the likelihood a bad guy will single you out if they are ready to commit a crime. They cited an incident in Tennessee where a store clerk was chased down cause the bad guy saw his gun. I refuted that claim with there are exceptions to every rule, but in general, an open carry or printed gun is not the target of a bad guy and in fact, the opposite usually occurs, whereas the bad guy will go elsewhere or return later if they see a citizen carrying because they want to limit the possible fight or death. Any possibility of a fight eludes them and they will move to an easier target. Additionally, most really don't want to kill anyone and the gun is for intimidation (at least in the US). If they kill and are caught, they will get life or the death penalty, whereas if they're caught without killing, they will receive armed robbery, a sentence and a chance to leave jail one day on parole or good behavior. Am I correct?

[buckey]

I was under the understanding that now days when caught the bad guy is booked, released and given his gun back. Has something changed?

[Leader]

Open carry PREVENTS crime.
Yes, there are a VERY FEW exceptions but as a rule all the people that were going to commit a crime shy away from open carriers.
When was the last time a crime was reported when an open carrier was on site?

[G22]

Obviously the only news reports are the ones where open carrying gets singled out for some kind of attack.

The problem is trying to 'prove' open carry deters criminals, when the proof never gets reported (criminal turns around and walks away) and is likely unknown to anyone at the scene.

When open carry deters a crime it just happens, and nobody hears about it.

[TheWabbit]

It's my opinion that being aware of your surroundings is more important then open/printing or conceal carrying. in the incidents where open carriers were targeted the police reports pretty much show the open carrier wasn't paying attention, they never got the opportunity to pull their firearm.
I had an incident where I was carrying my 1911 late at night, I was getting gas and 2 guys come out of the gas station, they had been eyeing me while putting gas in their car. they came out and one started heading toward me , the other went toward his car then started cutting through the pumps ( we were the only 2 vehicles there ) I slid my over shirt back showing the 1911 hanging off my hip and they immediately went to their car and left, their car had no license plate paper or permanent. this was back in the early 2000s so it was very unusual to not have a plate on your car. Did I deter a crime or just scare the crap out of 2 guys? I know the the answer, I seen the look on their face and they were talking about it before going in the gas station.

[Leader]

Obviously the only news reports are the ones where open carrying gets singled out for some kind of attack.

The problem is trying to 'prove' open carry deters criminals, when the proof never gets reported (criminal turns around and walks away) and is likely unknown to anyone at the scene.

When open carry deters a crime it just happens, and nobody hears about it.

The proof is a crime didn't happen where the open carrier was.
Other places in that county had crimes happening where there wasn't an open carrier.

What more proof do you need?

[JohnJak]

Common sense says take out the open carrier first.

[Leader]

Common sense says take out the open carrier first.

Then explain why it doesn't happen.
Why aren't crimes committed where there are open carriers?

[DeSchaine]

Common sense says take out the open carrier first.

Common sense says don't commit a crime. By extension, most of those those that do commit crimes are not possessed of common sense, therefore they probably don't think about looking around for people carrying at all.