Why I Think Open Carry Isn't Wiser than Concealed Carry (In Most Instances/For Most People)

[Ignition Override]

If you were a thug, no matter What your reason to attack somebody, would You choose walking/running at them from a Forward angle, or from their rear or other blind spots?

Let's be frank: I would attack from their 6 o'clock (or 7 thru 5 o'clock), and most thugs probably have even better "street" smarts than I do.
The fact that they never attended Econ 101, Western Civ. etc classes and went to " a Kegger " is probably a huge advantage. You get my drift.......

Also, as a thug I could have a buddy distract the victim ("Hey man, what kinda cool piece you got?"), & immed. poke My gun into somebody's back and thereby acquire an Extra handgun.

 

[Kleanbore]

If you were a thug, no matter What your reason to attack somebody, would You choose walking/running at them from a Forward angle, or from their rear or other blind spots?

Let's be frank: I would attack from their 6 o'clock (or 7 thru 5 o'clock), and most thugs probably have even better "street" smarts than I do.
The fact that they never attended Econ 101, Western Civ. etc classes means nothing. You get my drift.......

That, of course, would largely negate any deterrent or defensive advantages of open carry.

That's why I mentioned establishments involving shelf shopping, standing at a counter, ATMs. and fuel pumps.

It would also apply to busy side walks.

But there are places where one could mitigate the risk.

And, of course, it could apply almost equally to anyone who is not carrying openly. People are texting, or white haired people like me who work slowly with canes. The former is a bad idea, and the latter requires different risk mitigation.

 

[Mike J]

So I've carried for a while. I live in the Metro Atlanta area. I choose to conceal unless I am in an area where the population is less dense. I haven't hunted in a while because life gets in the way but I have been known to open carry when I go to the woods. For me less people equals less chance of a problem with people.

There was a fellow not far from here a year or two ago that was waiting in line to get donuts. I don't know if he was open carrying or if his weapon was just poorly concealed. Someone in line behind him grabbed his gun. He pursued them attempting to retrieve his firearm. He was killed. After learning about this happening I found out he was a fireman. He was the guy that was coaching my daughters soccer teams wife's cousin. All of this encouraged me to go to a micro 9mm & go to appendix carry. Concealment is important to me.

I try not to draw attention to myself. My wife tells me I fail at the gray man thing because it is too obvious that I am paying attention to what is going on around me.

I believe the attacker always has the advantage as the attacked always has to play catch up. I don't believe I know what criminal I might get. One guy might be deterred by the sight of a gun. A more determined individual might decide to just shoot an open carrier first thing then make his play. I don't know.

I don't see many people open carry around here. The last two I noticed stick out in my mind. The first struck up a conversation with me while I was looking for ammunition at Academy Sports. Noticing his openly carried pistol I asked what he was carrying. I'm not going to detail our whole conversation but he was carrying a FNX-45 (DA/SA pistol) chamber empty hammer cocked (to make it easier to rack the slide & chamber a round). The last one I observed I had stopped to get a cup of coffee. He & his wife were sitting at the counter of a local eatery with their back to the door directly behind them. He was wearing a full sized 1911 in a straight drop holster with a thumb break on his left hip with the butt forward drinking & eating with his right hand. It occurred to me that it would be time consuming & difficult for him to access that pistol.

I do think open carry should be legal & I believe everyone should have the right to do what they choose. I also believe we really don't know what others notice & don't notice unless they give us indication (they may not).
I also believe a person should take the time & trouble to learn the proper manual of arms for their pistol before wearing it out in public & at least give some consideration to tactics. Different situations (enviroments) call for different tactics (carry methods).

 

[Some_Mook]

^^^ well said my friend.


I've yet to see anyone here make the point of intentionally carrying openly in places where it is socially unacceptable. I certainly wouldn't OC to my grand-kid's soccer game. Here in Wisconsin, I certainly wouldn't open carry a weapon within 1000 feet of any school. This is just responsible gun ownership. Yet, the focus on the majority of these types of threads, is that it is irresponsible to open carry at all.....unless you are in the woods hunting. Folks that have no clue as to what is "socially unacceptable" where others live, trying to make the claim it is. Telling tales of woman and children screaming and running away at the mere sight of a exposed weapon. "Real" men looking down their noses in disdain. Basically trying to make those actions....socially acceptable. So many times what I see here, are folks that are our own worst enemy. They trash talk about FUDDS, but are in reality, FUDDS themselves. You either support legal and responsible gun ownership or you don't. While you may not embrace how others practice their 2nd Amendment rights, as long as they do it legally and responsibly, what's the issue. So many of these threads are all about trying to get folks to reinforce the authors own opinion. Let's start a thread that I know the majority of folks feel a certain way and go with it. The ol' "preachin' to the choir" thingy. As has been said, this topic has been hashed over so many times here, that unless you just joined yesterday, you already know where it is going.

In Michigan, open carry is generally legal for any person who is at least 18 years old and legally able to own a firearm. No permit is required for open carry, but there are restrictions on where it is allowed.

In all honesty, unless out in the woods or at a shooting range, I have never seen anyone other than uniform wearing LEOs openly carry in my over 55 years of living in Michigan. Off Duty, the LEOs that I have shared experiences with never open carried. Some were actually uncomfortable about even carrying concealed off duty (Detroit PD are (or were) required to carry at all times, on and off duty) and the ones I knew did not open carry when off duty.

In Michigan, there is no law that prohibits individuals with a concealed pistol license, or CPL, from carrying a gun in schools as long as that gun stays visible. For CPL holders, a gun is only fully prohibited from being carried in a concealed, or hidden, way. Therefore, a person who holds a CPL is legally allowed to open carry a gun onto school property.

Going to various school athletic functions for the grandkids, I have never seen anyone openly carry on school property. It would however not surprise me in the least if it became known that someone was carrying concealed on school property. Probably more than one. I just automatically assume that every one I see is potentially armed, and politely act accordingly.

The place that I work at has an emphatic 'No Weapons' policy (to the point that those of us who carry folding pocket knives for work purposes are told that if we wear them clipped to the outside of a pocket they are considered 'tools' and allowed, but if we have the exact same knife clipped to the inside of the pocket they are concealed 'weapons') When my Manager was passing around the Official Stellantis latest and greatest 'Active Shooter' response literature I asked him what he personally felt we should do if presented with an active shooter situation for real. His response? "Shoot Them".

 

[.308 Norma]

There are always examples that simply cannot be countered and any ambush for any reason gives the advantage to the attacker. But honestly the risk of that is similar to the risk of being trampled by a wild bison.

LOL!

https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2022/06/29/bison-attacks-family-yellowstone-national-park-orig-jc.cnn

Ah, in some areas (not too far from where I live in fact) the "risk" of being attacked by a wild bison are probably a little higher than where you live in "Deep South Texas."
Oh, and something else I just thought of - when I go out to shovel out the sidewalk and mailbox later on today, the gun I'm carrying will be concealed under my coat. That's not because I really give a rat's behind whether or not someone driving by on the county road out front sees that I'm carrying a gun, it's just that I'd rather my gun and holster don't get soaked.
Of course, the "risk" of slipping on the snow or ice and falling on my gun (concealed or otherwise) are probably a little higher here in SE Idaho than they are in Deep South Texas too.

 

[The Night Rider]

Such a list would be meaningless. Kinda like "thse folks survived crashes without seatbelts".

^This^

People who noticed you open carrying and didn't react aren't the issue. The people who notice and take your gun are.

 

[The Night Rider]

I recently stopped to pump my monthly half-tank of gas.

It was early and as I pulled up to the pump I saw two men standing next to the display of bottled water in front of the station. They exchanged looks as I turned off the car and just as I was getting out of the car started walking towards me. As I closed the door my revolver in its holster were clearly visible and it was obvious that I was also looking at them.

They seemed to realize I was not the friend they were waiting to see and turned and headed off into the parking lot of the row of shops adjacent.

I would have got right back in the car and drove away.

 

[Craig_AR]

Over 15 years ago, with my first permit in Virginia, I regularly carried concealed a pocket snubnose, and occasionally open carried a 1911. A naive, inadequately trained, newly armed citizen, I even did the traditional (?) WalMart open carry baptism with the 1911. Due to a quirk in Virginia law at the time (since corrected) permitted concealed carry was not allowed in restaurants that served alcohol, while open carry in those establishments was legal. So after pocket carry to and at the range, when stopping for lunch at a local Mexican restaurant, I would transfer the snubbie to an open carry 4 o'clock OWB holster with no cover garment, then move it back to the pocket holster for the ride home.
I never saw anyone notice or react to the open carry 1911 or revolver, at the restaurant or anywhere else. And this was all on super-liberal northern VIrginia DC suburbs,

Even with that experience, though, as I watched the vocal open carry protesters in Texas a couple of years ago, I also think they actually damaged the argument pro-gun forces were making at the time about the law and responsible gun owners.

 

[LookAtYou]

Don't really have much to add, other than this seems to be the same old tired circular discussion, but I do live in a state in which open carry is not uncommon (even on the West side, though admittedly rare in King or urban Pierce Counties). I can't recall but only a couple anecdotes where open carriers caused any sort of stir, apparently due to Karen Syndrome. Guy up in Bellingham (near Canada border) a few years back encountered a couple local cops who apparently were unaware OC is legal in this state, so a bit of a ruckus ensued, but the OCer was vindicated and a LE advisory bulletin went out to all the departments in the state to remind patrol cops of the legality.

While it's not something seen every day, in my little village, at least once a week I'll see an OCer or two in a local Wal-Mart, Fred Meyer, Home Depot or Lowes... lots of young military types or older redneck dudes, sometimes couples.

If someone presents themselves well (neatly dressed and groomed), is quiet and courteous, has a good holster/belt combination, demonstrates a modicum of situational awareness, my answer is no (so long as the locale is not one in which any carry of a firearm is illegal/prohibited).

But when I see some obese (especially if it's a younger guy) man who starts panting after bending over to tie his boots, with a cheapo floppy nylon holster, no retention device, on a thin belt, looks sloppy and is very loud and rude, calls attention to himself... well, not a good representative of the RKBA community.

One can discuss the presumed tactical disadvantage of open carry should bad actors arrive on the scene, but the fact is that there are seemingly relatively few documented instances (@bearcreek's list notwithstanding) where folks intentionally open-carrying have been robbed of their firearms or victims of gun grabs.

Ever seen a report (and not in Brazil, please) of an OCer who became the first victim in a mass shooting, armed robbery or assault? That would seem to belie the supposition that an OCer is begging "shoot me first."


Call it what you will. Yet you go to some lengths to state that you don't think open carry is "wise," while presenting multiple statements to support your contention that open carry is not tactically sound and that there are any number of bad things that can result if one does engage in open carry. So what you have concluded, without coming out and stating so, is that all of those who open-carry just are NOT smart, tactical and have not considered the myriad disadvantages to open carry.

I might be wrong, but I don't recall saying in this thread that open carry isn't wise, but rather that (in my opinion) it isn't wiser than concealed carry, in most instances/for the majority of people. I also have never concluded that "all of those who open-carry just are NOT smart, tactical, and have not considered the myriad of disadvantages to open carry." That is projecting what you think I've concluded, onto me.

 

[LookAtYou]

Different tools for different jobs. Open Carry has its place and is an effective deterrent. My wife for example works in commercial real estate as an agent. She conceal carrys as required by law. But at the later hours, when she's leaving a property, it isn't unusual for a vagabond to size her up and approach her in a parking lot.

Open carry would act as a deterrent and tell said vagabond, "I'm armed, I'm not worth your time, go elsewhere."

Instead, since by law, her rights are restricted. She instead has to deal said vagabonds, she has to get defensive, become assertive, etc...

But if she could open carry, it would be vastly different. Much like nature. The rattlesnake rattles to warn others of, "don't mess with me, I'll kill you."

She's drawn once from concealed and other times have had to get in defensive posture and become very aggressive. Open carry would have prevented that.

It tells criminals to move along. As we saw during the "Summer of Love" when riots were happening across the country. Home owners and business owners stood their ground, defended their livelihoods, and did it by openly carrying. You had business owners stand on their roofs and in parking lots, openly carrying. You had home owners face down mobs who wanted to bum rush their house, and stopped it because they were openly carrying.

Politically, open carry is a very valuable tool. It allows the public to exercise their First Amendment rights to protect their Second Amendment rights. When you get a group of gun owners, openly carrying, it sends a strong political message to lawmakers and gun grabbers. It says, "we aren't afraid. We're proud, we're loud, we will not be silenced."

In TX, open carry protests laid the foundation for their constitutional carry, NFA nullification law, and Second Amendment protection act.

When I travel to GA and AL, I open carry all the time. No one bats an eye. Women, kids, cops, etc... no one cares. 45 states have open carry.

it doesn't hurt tourism in those states. TX, TN, GA, AL, NM, AZ, etc.... they all have open carry and their tourism related industries are perfectly fine. It does not scare people away. It doesn't shock folks. It is simply part of life.

In FL, it is a crime to open carry. As such, a number of people simply don't carry at all because of the ban. Spend a day in FL during summer and try to conceal something that isn't a Ruger LCP without melting. The need to keep concealed and not print limits the options out there.

Some folks don't carry micro-compacts because they don't like the recoil, others simply can't afford another gun. In the end, the hassle of trying to keep things concealed makes it a bother and some just say, "screw this, it is a pain in the butt to try to conceal a GLOCK 19 in this heat. I'll just leave it in the car/home."

As for you claiming your post isn't to bash, admonish, curtail, etc folks who open carry. You're wrong that.

Your post is what fuels gun grabbers. Your post is no different than folks who say things like, "I'm pro-gun, I'm for folks owning a Winchester 30-30 for deer hunting. But those dirty ARs with those icky 30rd mags need to be banned. And carrying handguns? Heck no! No one needs to carry a handgun!"

I fight anti-gun lawmakers for a living. It is my job. Prior to that I was a cop and I saw the abuses that otherwise law-abiding gun owners went through in FL. And I'm telling you from personal and professional experience. Your post and attitude helps fuel the gun grabbers and helps them continue to violate the people's Second Amendment rights.

It is real simple when it comes to dealing with other folks.

Does it pick my pocket or kick my shin? Does it hurt kids? Does it infringe on my rights or others? No? Then why make it an issue? You don't like open carry? Fine. Don't do it. Stop trying to force your mindset on others.

Your actions, and more importantly, your mindset doesn't help the cause. It doesn't preserve freedom. It doesn't help secure the Second Amendment for future generations.

So to stay on topic, I'll ask you this, do you see any cons to being a visibly armed individual in public? Aka, open carrying. "Public" includes, well, potentially all sorts of people. Men, women, teenagers, children, thief's, thugs, confrontational/rowdy/testy people, criminals, etc.

Or maybe you don't see any cons to open carrying? Not tactically, socially, emotionally, etc.? No increased risks when compared to proper/effective (no-printing) concealed carry, aka not being visibly armed, yet still armed.

Please answer.

 

[JohnKSa]

Open carry would act as a deterrent and tell said vagabond, "I'm armed, I'm not worth your time, go elsewhere."

There are different ways a criminal can respond to open carry by a possible victim.

1. Leave the possible victim alone. (The gun acts as a deterrent, decreasing or eliminating the chance of attack.)
2. Try to take the gun. (The gun acts as a motivation, increasing the chance of attack or even creating the motivation for an attack.)
3. Look for a way to prevent the possible victim from using their gun and then proceed with the original plan. (The gun acts as neither a deterrent to the attack nor a motivation for the attack but allows the criminal to come up with a plan to neutralize the gun.)

(1) is a positive result for the possible victim, but (2) and (3) are negative outcomes.

 

[Miami_JBT]

There are different ways a criminal can respond to open carry by a possible victim.

1. Leave the possible victim alone. (The gun acts as a deterrent, decreasing or eliminating the chance of attack.)
2. Try to take the gun. (The gun acts as a motivation, increasing the chance of attack or even creating the motivation for an attack.)
3. Look for a way to prevent the possible victim from using their gun and then proceed with the original plan. (The gun acts as neither a deterrent to the attack nor a motivation for the attack but allows the criminal to come up with a plan to neutralize the gun.)

(1) is a positive result for the possible victim, but (2) and (3) are negative outcomes.

First rule when carrying a gun. Every situation, has at a minimum, one gun involved.

Everything you just said, the same applies to LE. Guess what, they open carry.

 

[JohnKSa]

Everything you just said, the same applies to LE. Guess what, they open carry.

Sure they do. Wouldn't help to conceal since they wear a uniform. And yes it does all apply to them. Sometimes it acts as a deterrent as in (1) in my post. But when a person decides to attack a cop, if they are rational they usually try to do something to neutralize their ability to use their firearm as in (3) from my post. We can see this in the ambush attacks we see from time to time where someone will walk up and shoot a cop without warning. Or they will shoot immediately when the officer walks up to their car on a traffic stop without giving the officer a chance to respond.

And yes, there are criminals out there who will target a uniformed cop specifically to try to take their sidearm as in (2) in my post. Here are a couple of examples.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGCcGtRKWTE

Philadelphia Police Officer Fights Off Man Trying to Steal His Gun, Cops Say

The officer was working detail for fellow cop wounded in shooting.

abcnews.go.com

 

[Kleanbore]

Everything you just said, the same applies to LE.

Yes ,it does.

Guess what, they open carry.

Only the uniformed officers--and the uniform serves as a much bigger giveaway to their status than the openly-carried firearm.

 

[Miami_JBT]

Yes ,it does.

Only the uniformed officers--and the uniform serves as a much bigger giveaway to their status than the openly-carried firearm.

As a plainclothes agent, we open carried. We wore civvies, open carried, and either wore our badge on our necks or belt.

Half the time, folks wouldn't notice the gun or the badge.

Honestly, a good chuck of society is glued to their phones. They wouldn't notice a naked man covered in green jello running the the street while smoking a cigar.

 

[Miami_JBT]

Sure they do. Wouldn't help to conceal since they wear a uniform. And yes it does all apply to them. When a person decides to attack a cop, if they are rational they usually try to do something to neutralize their ability to use their firearm. We can see this in the ambush attacks we see from time to time where someone will walk up and shoot a cop without warning. Or they will shoot immediately when the officer walks up to their car on a traffic stop without giving the officer a chance to respond.

And yes, there are criminals out there who will target a uniformed cop specifically to try to take their sidearm. Here are a couple of examples.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGCcGtRKWTE

Philadelphia Police Officer Fights Off Man Trying to Steal His Gun, Cops Say

The officer was working detail for fellow cop wounded in shooting.

abcnews.go.com

Then stay inside your house and never leave. Bad things can happen like crossing the street and you get hit by a car.

Again, you have people in this thread saying the law-abiding shouldn't exercise their inalienable rights because:

1. Some folks will get their feelings hurt seeing someone OC. So the law-abiding shouldn't OC
2. The actions of bad people means the law-abiding shouldn't exercise their rights.

I don't care.

People have the right to carry how they choose. I will not stop fighting to ensure that people in FL and the rest of the US have their rights fully secured and recognized. That goes beyond OC. That means national reciprocity, repeal of gun free zones, repeal of magazine capacity and firearm bans, repeal of under 21 bans, etc...

If you don't like OC. Then don't it. Stop shoving it down other's throats that OC is bad. Let them choose and make up their own mind.

Seriously, I hear these arguments all the time and it is the same as "but she kinda asked to be raped for wearing that short skirt and walking down that alley at 3am after leaving the club."

It sounds the same as "I support the Second Amendment, but..."

It sounds like this:

 

[JohnKSa]

Half the time, folks wouldn't notice the gun or the badge.

It's interesting how often people who argue that an openly carried gun is a deterrent also frequently comment that the gun often goes unnoticed. I suppose that's a 4th option in the 3 responses that criminals have to an openly carried gun. They just never notice it. It doesn't deter them, it doesn't attract them, it does nothing at all.

Then stay inside your house and never leave. Bad things can happen like crossing the street and you get hit by a car.

Maybe I should paint my house blue as well? That's about as relevant to what I said as your comment. We're discussing the relative merits of open carry vs concealed carry, not whether people should stay at home all the time or go out.

Again, you have people in this thread saying the law-abiding shouldn't exercise their inalienable rights because:

Just because a person has a right to do something, that doesn't automatically make it the best course of action. You'll note that I listed both advantages and disadvantages in my post. How can a reasonable discussion about the relative merits of two things be held without pointing out both advantages and disadvantages?

1. Some folks will get their feelings hurt seeing someone OC. So the law-abiding shouldn't OC

There are arguments on both sides of this. You'll notice I didn't even discuss the idea of hurt feelings in the post you are responding to--nor have I on this thread.

2. The actions of bad people means the law-abiding shouldn't exercise their rights.

Well, I don't believe that. That said, not all courses of action are equally advantageous. It makes sense to look at possible courses of actions, identify the advantages and disadvantages of each, compare those advantages and disadvantages to each other and then decide which of the possible ways a person can exercise their rights makes the most sense for their situation.

If you don't like OC. Then don't it. Stop shoving it down other's throats that OC is bad. Let them choose and make up their own mind.

So maybe I should try to lay out the possible advantages and disadvantages and then let people decide for themselves based on that information. Like I have been doing.

Seriously, I hear these arguments all the time and it is the same as "but she kinda asked to be raped for wearing that short skirt and walking down that alley at 3am after leaving the club."

No, it's not blaming the victim. When a criminal attacks someone, it's the criminal's fault, the blame lies on them, not on the victim. That said, as prudent people, there are things we can do to avoid being targeted by criminals. Not to avoid having to share the blame if there is an attack, but in the interest of remaining unattacked. I think most people like the idea of remaining unattacked. Which means that if a particular course of action can result in being targeted, people should consider that in forming their overall carry strategy. That doesn't drive them exclusively to one style of carry, but it might motivate them to come up with mitigating strategies for certain risks. But if they are not even aware of the risk, that makes it very difficult to try to mitigate it.

 

[Kleanbore]

hen stay inside your house and never leave. Bad things can happen like crossing the street and you get hit by a car.

That is ridiculous!

Again, you have people in this thread saying the law-abiding shouldn't exercise their inalienable rights because:

1. Some folks will get their feelings hurt seeing someone OC. So the law-abiding shouldn't OC
2. The actions of bad people means the law-abiding shouldn't exercise their rights.

No. That is a gross distortion.

The reasons offered against OC are twofold:

1. Sociopolitical factors that drive some citizens to oppose legal carry or that cause proprietors to not permit carry on their premises.
2. Tactical considerations.

Let them choose and make up their own mind.

Fine. That is their right, in many places.

And it should be an informed decision. That is what this thread is about.

Seriously, I hear these arguments all the time and it is the same as "but she kinda asked to be raped for wearing that short skirt and walking down that alley at 3am after leaving the club."

That is absurd in the extreme.

 

[Miami_JBT]

That is ridiculous!

No. That is a gross distortion.

The reasons offered against OC are twofold:

1. Sociopolitical factors that drive some citizens to oppose legal carry or that cause proprietors to not permit carry on their premises.
2. Tactical considerations.

Fine. That is their right, in many places.

And it should be an informed decision. That is what this thread is about.

That is absurd in the extreme.

I had Republicans tell me they didn't want permitles carry.

Here's the Second Amendment Committee Chairman in FL saying he's against it.

 

[JohnKSa]

I had Republicans tell me they didn't want permitles carry.

Here's the Second Amendment Committee Chairman in FL saying he's against it.

Interesting and disappointing. But it that is not the same as saying "but she kinda asked to be raped for wearing that short skirt and walking down that alley at 3am after leaving the club." That is the comment you made and what the comment about absurdity in the extreme was in reference to. Nothing about a person saying they don't want permitless carry or saying they are against permitless carry implies that victims should be blamed for being attacked.

 

[Kleanbore]

I had Republicans tell me they didn't want permitles carry.

Here's the Second Amendment Committee Chairman in FL saying he's against it.

Off topic.

 

[Jeff White]

If you all want to talk about the tactical advantages and disadvantages of open v. concealed carry the thread can stay open. The next political post and it's done........................

 

[jar]

I would have got right back in the car and drove away.

The whole incident began and ended before I could have gotten back in the car.

 

[Miami_JBT]

Interesting and disappointing. But it that is not the same as saying "but she kinda asked to be raped for wearing that short skirt and walking down that alley at 3am after leaving the club." That is the comment you made and what the comment about absurdity in the extreme was in reference to. Nothing about a person saying they don't want permitless carry or saying they are against permitless carry implies that victims should be blamed for being attacked.

I didn't get that record.... that was a different meeting.

 

[jar]

LOL!

https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2022/06/29/bison-attacks-family-yellowstone-national-park-orig-jc.cnn

Ah, in some areas (not too far from where I live in fact) the "risk" of being attacked by a wild bison are probably a little higher than where you live in "Deep South Texas."
Oh, and something else I just thought of - when I go out to shovel out the sidewalk and mailbox later on today, the gun I'm carrying will be concealed under my coat. That's not because I really give a rat's behind whether or not someone driving by on the county road out front sees that I'm carrying a gun, it's just that I'd rather my gun and holster don't get soaked.
Of course, the "risk" of slipping on the snow or ice and falling on my gun (concealed or otherwise) are probably a little higher here in SE Idaho than they are in Deep South Texas too.

Don't be so sure. It's snowed twice here just in the last quarter century.