Open Carry

A stigma may be brought to mind when we hear, “Open Carry.” Lone Ranger or other hero complexes perhaps? Opposition to open-carry suggests more gun related-incidents will occur, but is this premise based upon speculation or raw data?  

As much history has happened around the world, we now have vast amounts of data to give Open-Carry a truly academic and intelligent analysis, instead of, “Okay well if this happens, then this could happen...”  This raw data is important because it gives light to mitigating factors of the use of firearms.  For example one might speculate that if they witnessed a crime they would go stop it or intervene in some way, but when the moment arrives with the mixture of fear and adrenaline, what would truly happen and would this go to plan? This data gathered with interviews and other data, assembled over the years is much more enlightening than speculation.

Scandinavian countries have some of the highest populations of gun ownership per capita yet still have a low crime rate involving firearms.  This angle paints a different view than what some opposition would tell us when they mention negligent use of firearms.

I feel open-carry is a good deterrent for crime.  It shows passive force in which crime can be deterred as shown in Arizona.  Open-carry has been allowed in Arizona since 1994, which has a correlation with the drop in crime rate. 

However, there are more variables that affect our society when it comes to guns than just having them.  As I have always said, education is everything; it is the most valuable asset we can have.  Firearm discipline and education should be understood as the common attribute by all gun and non-gun owners, just as an automobile education, a 4,000 pound bullet which has the potential to cause devastation, is understood.