Element of surprise is an offensive action, not a defensive action.
I really don't intend to get into debating the merits of either position. Just pointing out how different folks have legitimately differing views on the matter.
However, I disagree with your statement here. The element of surprise CAN be a very valuable defensive tool. This has been debated many times on this site and elsewhere, but the jist of it is that, a violent actor who does not know that you are armed is less likely to be able to react instantly to your defensive act than one who is aware of your gun and your intent to react against him. A hold-up man in a mini-mart who's about to eliminate the witnesses is at a disadvantage if he doesn't know that one of the witnesses is armed. If he saw an openly carried gun on someone's hip, maybe he wouldn't have held the place up -- maybe he would have, who knows? But explosive, violent reaction to the threat of violence can only be AIDED by the possibility of an
unexpectedcounter-attack.
No army trains their soldiers to conceal their arms in case they are attacked. They train them to have their arms out and exposed so they can attack before they are attacked.
A soldier's job is quite different from that of a civilian practicing self-defense, though. A soldier's job is to take the fight to the enemy -- offensively if at all possible -- and at as great a range as possible. Or to defend a known position with force of arms. Further, the presence of a military uniform implies the means of delivering deadly force, so concealment would be pointless.
A citizen is charged with no such obligations, nor does he/she have the freedom to act in that way.
Purely offensive action being off-limits to the civilian in public, you're left with the argument of the openly-carried weapon as a deterrant to violent attack. It is valid to believe that a gun on your hip would encourage some attackers to avoid you. It is also valid to reason that this simply gives the more bold/aggressive types the opportunity to change tactics.
If you carry concealed, you don't know if another citizen will attack you, and no other person knows if you have the means and will to fight back. You're on even ground, with the exception that an attacker will always have the element of surprise over you. If you carry openly, you've given that small bit of strategic advantage (for whatever it's worth) away, and now an attacker knows that you would act and HOW. Again, some may choose to avoid you. Some may choose to shoot you from behind and score a nice new free weapon.
Once more, I don't necessarily adhere strongly to either side of this argument. Statistics to give evidence of liklihood of either eventuality are hard to come by. We all step out into the world prepared as best we can be for the threats that we expect we are most lilkely to face. If you feel that you're more likely to ward off trouble by openly carrying, that's fine for you. If someone else desires to keep the surprise advantage that they believe exists, that's fine for them -- a gun isn't a magic talisman that wards off evil.
And some folks live in places where these decisions are not (legally) up to them.
Do cops conceal their arms on duty in case a criminal attacks them? They wear them openly
They wear them openly as part of their uniform -- as a badge of authority and a visible representation of the lethal force they are empowered to use while enforcing the law. A civilian has none of this authority or duty. Further, there are plenty of reasons besides the visible weapon for a violent actor to not attack a police officer. (Little gain in it even if successful, massive repurcussions, high probability of back-up or patrol partners nearby and the near instant communication/reporting of the incident over the police radio that will make escape difficult, etc.) There are a great many things that a police officer would do that are not applicable to the civilian on the street.
And, lastly, if the LEO angle is truly valid, why do the majority of off-duty cops (the few who carry off-duty, anyway
) carry concealed? Why not just throw on the duty rig with jeans and a polo shirt when they hit the town?
Springmom, that's why I will never live in a state that prohibits open carry, like TX.
Agreed. I'd hate to say "NEVER," but I'm glad I don't have to worry about it.
-Sam
