Why does printing matter?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Early '70's I was a young, relatively new officer and carried a round butt Chief in an inside holster off duty. My wife and I were up in Harlem one summer day, going to the Museum of the American Indian, which used to be located there at 155th St. and Broadway.

As we approached, someone grabbed my strong side wrist in a solid grip, put a gold NYPD detective shield in front of me, and asked me why I was carrying a gun. I looked over, and up, and there was a rather large African-American individual there in plain clothes. Obviously, my gun under a t-shirt was printing.

I produced a shield and ID and he released my arm. I was extremely embarrassed. There are very few legal carry permits in NYC, he told me I had to be more careful in not broadcasting that I was carrying. I took his advice to heart and have tried very hard since not to print.

I later realized how dangerous my mistake was, he could have just as easily grabbed my gun and I could have been shot up there. Harlem at that time was pretty nasty and I was definitely not practicing good situational awareness.

OP, my advice would be if your intent is to carry concealed, make sure you do a good job of it. Depending on your location, printing can get you hurt.
 
Open Carry in Kansas has been legal for several years so a LEO should know what the law is. If a Officer makes contact with me because I am legally open carrying he/she will know the law after he/she gets done talking to me.

Open carry has been legal in Alabama since the state constitution was ratified in 1901. Police still get called and sent to "man with a gun disturbances." Just because someone has a badge, doesn't make them an expert.
 
Regarding the Police or rather the fear of the Police by some members of THR.

Open Carry in Kansas has been legal for several years so a LEO should know what the law is. If a Officer makes contact with me because I am legally open carrying he/she will know the law after he/she gets done talking to me.

This may sound like threat or Internet bravo. It isn’t. I will not be bullied and I will not to tolerate professionals who are ignorant. I expect, no demand, that a LEO know local and State laws. If they don’t or are unsure then I expect them to call a more experienced officer and learn what the law is.
Hopefully you'll conduct your law class in a polite and civilized manner. Cops are just people and nobody likes to have someone yell in their face.
 
Hopefully you'll conduct your law class in a polite and civilized manner. Cops are just people and nobody likes to have someone yell in their face.
I had a short 3 years as a city police officer in my youth. Wise asses always got extra special treatment. More latitude in those days. But bear in mind even in todays climate once stopped by the law they got all the time they may need it’s your time on the line.
 
If a Officer makes contact with me because I am legally open carrying he/she will know the law after he/she gets done talking to me.

Rather, you may learn what a jail cell looks like after he gets talking to you. You may even know it feels like to be tazed or shot if you really work at it.

Being a wise ass with police officers is always a bad idea. Been there, done that. You will have time to state your case later on. During the actual encounter prudence dictates compliance.
 
First let me say that the majority of officers are good. With that said, these guys have your life and freedom in their hand just based on their word against yours, and your word is as worthless as a pile of steaming feces in a court of law unless you have a recording of some sort... Even then, it's still an uphill battle unless there's some social media viral outrage or something. I've seen L.E. "embellish" facts in order to stick it to someone they didn't like or who was being mouthy. Yes, you may get off when it's all said and done, but don't count on getting any justice or disciplinary actions being taken against the officer.

You got to play it smart and use your brain and common sense instead of relying on emotions and ego...
 
I remember the first time I encountered a person open carrying. I was working at a gas station in colorado in my early 20s, guy walked in with a giant revolver on his hip and I swear my heart just about stopped. Being from suburban Chicagoland I just wasnt used to seeing that.
 
Regarding the Police or rather the fear of the Police by some members of THR.

Open Carry in Kansas has been legal for several years so a LEO should know what the law is. If a Officer makes contact with me because I am legally open carrying he/she will know the law after he/she gets done talking to me.

Fear of police? How about not wanting to instigate an unnecessary incident that results in police interaction? Emphasis on unnecessary. I am pretty sure that police would prefer to avoid such unnecessary incidents as well.

This may sound like threat or Internet bravo. It isn’t. I will not be bullied and I will not to tolerate professionals who are ignorant.

Good thing you clarified that , cause it does sound and look like bravado. If and when you have occasion to display your intolerance of "professionals who are ignorant" I wish you luck. Print proudly and pre-set your cell phone to your attorney's office.
 
And another thing -
Cops , the vast majority of whom are good , committed professionals , have lots better things to do that dealing with some crusader who wishes to "make a statement" or "take a stand!'.

Conceal - and take the time and trouble to do so in a discreet and non-printing manner.
Or wear a cape.
 
I'm guessing that printing = not completely concealed = open carry , depending on the situation and interpretation.
Consensed version : printing = best avoided.
 
Where is "printing" illegal?
As a Florida resident I know the state passed a new additional law a few, perhaps two, years ago that clarified display of a concealed weapon. The new part addressed accidental display. Someone walking thru Walmart with his shirt or jacket caught up and revealing a weapon.
Printing against displaying I don’t know but apparently enough of a problem to warrant legislation.
 
Sorry, no disrespect intended to anyone who's posted in this thread, but some of the comments seem to indicate that quite a few here think that people actually notice "printing" of otherwise concealed handguns. My experience has been that the only people that notice are those that are looking for people carrying. And folks, that doesn't include your average criminal.

Posts saying stuff like this:

are just wrong. Unless you're talking about professional bank robbers doing takeover style armed bank robberies, they don't care so much. Your basic criminal is trying to score money for his dope fix.
And while we have a handful of instances nationwide where this has been documented, it is truly uncommon.

If citizens notice, and you're legal -- who cares?

This, to me, is the one topic in the gun culture that people tend to way, way overthink. Only on the internet do we give the average citizen credit for such astute powers of observation.
If that is the chief concern I'd agree; if we get into the mindset of a criminal interested in doing something where you're not the sole target (IE Mass Shooting or Take Over Bandit) then from what I've seen of the former is that they are cowards and don't want to deal with someone giving armed resistance. The latter are both rarer yet also have even more to lose, they are in it for personal gain and every possible vector of complication makes things infinitely harder to do, not to mention the mass appearance of security cameras everywhere makes stuff like that horribly risky. A good criminal wouldn't worry about how he was going to disarm you trying to knock off the gas station, a good criminal knows he has seconds to get in and out cash in hand and put as much distance between him and the cops as possible and there's always tomorrow too, he's probably been staking out his target location for days or weeks before hand to see when the business is most cash laden and how fast he can get away; a bad criminal is for one of several reasons probably dumb enough to not even consider the situation.
 
What has just been stated constitutes reasons why one would probably get away with printing ; that does not mean that it is prudent or responsible.
It is neither of those.
 
A good criminal wouldn't worry about how he was going to disarm you trying to knock off the gas station, a good criminal knows he has seconds to get in and out cash in hand and put as much distance between him and the cops as possible and...
There is no such thing as a "good criminal". but...

...what you are overlooking is the fugitive in immediate need of a firearm in addition to your car and money.
 
As a college student I don't really have a lot of chances to carry so I've never really pursued it yet, but a lot of people tend to stress the problem of printing. What's the issue exactly?

I'm assuming you understand what "printing" means: It's a visibly identifiable outline of a weapon which you are otherwise carrying concealed.

This is a very good question, and the answer revolves around the saying "concealed means concealed".

From a legal standpoint, there are some jurisdictions which do not allow open carry. South Carolina is one such place. If your weapon is visible in any way, then it's not "concealed" and you may therefore be in violation of the law, carry permit or no.

From a personal and practical standpoint, there are a variety of additional reasons why this is important. Even though you may be perfectly legal in carrying, the adage "out of sight, out of mind" carries weight. There are people who are "busybodies", who like nothing more than to notice such things and make your life miserable. There are people who may target you physically, verbally, politically, etc. There are people who may fear you.

People not knowing you carry may also give you an important tactical advantage, should a time come where you may need it.

Bottom line is that if you are carrying concealed, this means in all aspects.
 
I don't know how many do that, but at least a few noticed mine before iI changed shirt size.

My experience has been different. Well, I reside in a state where open carry is legal, and concealed carry of the shall-issue variety has been around since 1934 or so. Aside from metro King County, most folks who grew up here don't stress if the see a firearm.

And if it were true, what would it mean to us? I suspect many of us practice looking to see if we can spot other concealed-carriers, just for sport, but truly, it doesn't mean anything to us (unless we're packing illegally and trying to not attract attention).

What makes you think that? Because your average criminal isn't plotting crimes where a citizen carrying a concealed firearm would be any kind of a factor in the success or failure of his criminal actions. Your average criminal does not like confrontation in any form, which is why most crime is not up close and personal.

Do happen to have a basis for either of those assertions? Why yes, yes I do -- a bit of experience working in the corrections field in a prison (during my break in active duty) and a jail (before the sheriff let me on patrol), and many more years interviewing and investigating. Unless one needs to subscribes to what one sees in half of Robert DeNiro's films or watched stupid network shows such as "Prison Break" or "Oz," one should probably know that prison inmates don't sit around talking about how to spot a citizen's concealed firearm. They talk about ordering commissary and how many packs of top ramen they lost betting on last week's NFL games, they talk about manipulating staff, which female C/Os they are working on manipulating, planning gang activity, how they can get drugs into a facility or who they can score tobacco from.

Just what is "your basic criminal"? The typical thief who breaks into unoccupied dwellings, engages in car-prowls, smash-and-grab robbers, addicts looking for just enough for their next score, usually committing crimes of opportunity and never well planned. Yes, there are smarter criminals out there, and some who even plan robberies, but by and large, most of the crime I have encountered is shoplifting, retail fraud, embezzlement, other white-collar crime, but far too many sex offenses. The evil people, by and large simply aren't looking for people packing firearms. Even the gang-bangers (more than you'd think) have a code where they don't like citizens as collateral damage if they have to go to guns -- 80 percent of our shootings are gang-related, gang member on gang member.

How might his unlawful objectives influence whether he looks to see if someone is carrying? Look, as I noted, some bank robbers or others looking to rob a business do think about this. It's just not that many of them. Most criminals acknowledge, at least where I am, that a citizen could be packing, so they will look elsewhere.
 
Will, ff you have persuaded yourself that those ideas are valid and meaningful, proceed as you wish.

I do not subscribe to the belief that risk mitigation should be designed around what someone believes about how "your average criminal" might behave.

..or the "typical thief', for that matter. By the way, those who break into unoccupied dwellings are not thieves, typical or other wise.

Nor do any trainers or LEOs whom I know.

Not do I think it would make any sense whatsoever to draw any conclusions from what "80 percent of our shootings" might involve.
 
Will, ff you have persuaded yourself that those ideas are valid and meaningful, proceed as you wish.

I do not subscribe to the belief that risk mitigation should be designed around what someone believes about how "your average criminal" might behave.

..or the "typical thief', for that matter. By the way, those who break into unoccupied dwellings are not thieves, typical or other wise.

Nor do any trainers or LEOs whom I know.

Not do I think it would make any sense whatsoever to draw any conclusions from what "80 percent of our shootings" might involve.
Where did I say I believed that risk mitigation should be designed around what someone believes about how "your average criminal" might behave? My personal approach -- as I've stated in hundreds of posts on this very forum since 2004 -- is that I prepare based on the worst possible scenario.

I'm not sure why you bring up "trainers or LEOS whom I know" -- we're talking about an incredibly simple concept here -- concealed carriers "printing" and I have no idea why you're extrapolating all this extra stuff into it. I said "80 percent of our shooting are gang-related, gang member on gang member." You asked some specific questions. I answered. You can draw whatever the heck conclusions you want, but quit trying to make your opinion more important than someone else's, or imply someone else is wrong -- I have a few minutes of experience in the world we're talking about.
 
Where did I say I believed that risk mitigation should be designed around what someone believes about how "your average criminal" might behave?
You repeatedly refer to the average criminal" pr "typical thief", and to such things as "80% percent of our shootings. If that is not your point, why mention it?

...I prepare based on the worst possible scenario.
I'm not sure what you mean by that.

For me, it is a surprise attack by one, or more likely more than one, persons who are willing to kill or injure me to obtain money, my car, or perhaps my firearm. It has nothing to do with gang related shootings, bank robberies, or the unlawful entry of unoccupied dwellings.

It is the last of those--the taking of my firearm- that pertains to "concealed carriers printing". The person whose gun is visible obviously presents a target of opportunity to someone who might desperately need it.

You asked some specific questions. I answered.
I'm afraid you have not really done so.

You can draw whatever the heck conclusions you want, but quit trying to make your opinion more important than someone else's, or imply someone else is wrong
Take such comments to PM. Our discussion here is about the subject.

I have a few minutes of experience in the world we're talking about.
If so, you really should try to substantiate your assertions, rather than simply putting them forth as fact without providing any objective basis for them.
 
I live in a part of the country which has been politically conservative but is now trending "progressive". I am honestly surprised that our last few sheriffs have allowed what is essentially "shall issue" to continue. Our deputies appear to be overwhelmingly in favor of it, but also are very protective of it. They (and we) know that it may only take a single jackass to screw it up for everyone. Along those lines, one hoplophobe plus one "who really cares if I'm printing" licensee may well equal a big obnoxious series of articles in the L.A. Times, and then the capitulation of our sheriff.


I expect it to happen, but I'll be damned if I'm the one to cause it.
 
Regarding the Police or rather the fear of the Police by some members of THR.

Open Carry in Kansas has been legal for several years so a LEO should know what the law is. If a Officer makes contact with me because I am legally open carrying he/she will know the law after he/she gets done talking to me.

This may sound like threat or Internet bravo. It isn’t. I will not be bullied and I will not to tolerate professionals who are ignorant. I expect, no demand, that a LEO know local and State laws. If they don’t or are unsure then I expect them to call a more experienced officer and learn what the law is.

You get in any LEOs face and start quoting laws, you'll be teaching law from a jail cell to your lawyer as he/she needs to then talk to the DA. LEOs just LOVE to be lectured on the law-not. No matter how many times you yell, 'call your supervisor', after getting yelled at, I doubt he'll do anything but disarm you, cuff you and put in the back seat...

As for 'printing', it's called 'concealed carry' for a reason.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top