OPEN CARRY VS CONCEAL CARRY FOR SELF DEFENSE.
Open Carry versus Conceal Carry for self defense, a debate that seems to keep perpetuating among firearms enthusiasts and very similar to the 9mm vs .45 debate, it seems endless. As a disclaimer I should say right up front that I personally do not have issue with whatever side of the argument anyone is on as long as they have thought it through and can do it safely. Otherwise, it is up to each individual to choose what is best for their own lifestyle (assuming it is legal in their state). Back in my home state of Illinois; open carry isn’t even an option. Now living in Texas, open carry is legal and might be worth considering.
Before we really get into the finer points of each side, it should be said that we are comparing open carry vs conceal carry in the terms of self-defense for the average citizen. That means we are not including members of military, law enforcement or security. We are also not including the folks such as the ranchers I have met in Texas who open carry, but do so because their environment exposes them to rattlesnakes and varmint. I can understand their choice to open carry with no issue. We are also not comparing the two in terms of political statement; meaning we are not talking about the supporters of open carry who support it mainly because they are making a statement for the 2nd amendment. With that all being said, let’s get into it.
Let’s start by looking at the fairly well known pro’s and con’s of both open carry and concealed carry. Each has their own specific nuances that are worthy of consideration.
Open Carry:
- Easier access to the firearm MAY lead to a faster holster draw. The caveat is the retention mechanism. If you have a leather holster with a snap ring strap, that strap will slow your draw time down. Also assuming that your method of carry is somewhere along the waistline.
- Comfort is typically greater using an outside the waistband type holster.
- Less access in other facilities. There are MANY stores, offices, and retail areas that may allow for conceal firearms but do not allow open carry. In that case you will either have to conceal the firearm or store it somewhere else while you are a patron of such facility.
- Negative attention. There are many average everyday citizens who do not understand firearms who may see you carrying your firearm and either contact the authorities or management. Sure, it may be your right and you may end up winning the debate but that does not mean that you won’t waste a bunch of time.
- Increased interaction with law enforcement. If a citizen calls the authorities, it is their job to come investigate. That means you will be in that conversation regardless of rights, and all too often you are at the mercy of their determination. This is in NO WAY insulting our police officers, they are doing their job.
Conceal Carry:
- Less negative attention. If the public cannot see your firearm there is nothing for them to call the authorities, or complain to management etc.
- Greater access to facilities such as restaurants, stores, offices that may allow conceal carry but do not allow open carry.
- Lesser chance of the firearm to be in contact with environmental items such as furniture, counters, cars, etc. Typically a conceal carry will be done in the means of inside the waistband whether it is an appendix carry or the 4 o’clock position (7 o’clock for lefty shooters).
- Comfort levels decrease a bit when carrying in an inside the waistband. Finding the right holster for your body type is important. Keep in mind that many people will carry outside the waistband but have a covering garment such as a hoodie, jacket etc.
- Possibly a slightly slower holster draw time
Now I want to focus on a real hot topic debate within the open vs conceal argument. Often times people who prefer open carry will state “In the case something happens, I will have easier access to the firearm and by default will be more effective.” On the other side of that point are the conceal carry advocates who rebuttal by saying “If a bad guy see’s your firearm, you’ll be the first one taken out.” It’s a timeless banter, so who is right??
The truth is that they are both right and they are both wrong. Certainly each of those arguments has some merit in a hypothetical situation, but when we look at actual account via surveillance footage, witness testimony, FBI statistics, police reports or footage, and any real world data; we can come to a different conclusion.
Incident Statistics: Let’s take a look at some known data, most of which is publicly available thru the FBI statistics online.
- Nearly 100% of civilian based shootings are within 20 feet
- Nearly 90% of those shootings are within 9 feet
- Approximately 77% of shootings are at 6 feet
- Nearly 80% of assaults are not aggravated assaults but simple assaults. Meaning there is no other weapon involved. This would mean that the assault initiates from 3 feet or less
- A far majority of aggravated assaults are done with an edged weapon or impact weapon and have little to no precursor behaviors in which a person can respond by accessing their firearm.
- Over 50% of assaults were initiated by from behind the victim
Now let’s look at some basic performance numbers:
- Average open carry holster draw to first round time: 1.52 sec
- Average conceal carry holster draw to first round time: 1.77 sec
- Tueller Method demonstrates that an average person can sprint approximately 21 feet in 1.5 seconds starting from standing still. Other demonstrations have even shown people who can cover 30 feet in the same time.
- Based on an independent study, the deadliest distances are between 3 to 6 feet
- Expert shooters were approximately 10% more accurate than novice shooters from 3 to 15 feet
Based on that data, we can pretty much conclude that the relationship between distance/time is critical. If we as citizen defenders are at greatest risk from an average of 7.5 feet, then our time from draw to first round must be at approximately .5 sec. On a personal note, I work my holster draw reps daily, and average a high .8 second draw time to first round and even that wouldn’t be fast enough in a real world application simply because the of the close proximity.
The data doesn’t account for us moving which will also help us buy some time back, but the data also does not account for the processing time. What do I mean by that? In testing, the clock starts when the buzzer goes off, but in the real world the clock starts when we recognize an incoming threat. So even if the bad guy started their approach at 21 feet, but we don’t realize it until they are at 3 feet away or closer… no draw speed will help us. You can study the dynamics of the OODA- Loop applications which show us that average times to recognize a threat and actually doing something can range from .6 sec to 1.5 sec for the average person. This means that if someone is charging us, the far majority of that mythical 21 feet is already covered by the time we even have an initial response.
More Statistics:
Speaking of “moving,” there is some independent data on this as well that I believe is worthy of sharing. According to testing by Tier Three Tactical who conducted a variety of tests using real world incident based scenarios and a variety of training gear to replicate a violent encounter to the best of their ability.
- If you stand still in a gunfight you have an 85% or greater chance of being shot with an over 51% chance of being shot in the torso
- If you move and shoot you have a reduced 47% chance of being shot with an 11% chance of being shot in the torso
- Seeking cover first and then returning fire reduces your exposure to being shot to 26% chance with a 6% chance of being shot in the torso
- The average gun fight lasts 3.59 rounds per incident
What does this mean??? The threat/cover principle is far more important to surviving a gunfight than any holster speed. Although these particular set of statistics are more driven toward law enforcement training they still provide good insight. The stats also encourage us to have a constant higher level of environmental awareness and recognizing the things we can use as concealment or cover. That might include a vehicle, desk, table, a different room, etc. Get off the line of attack and get behind something as quickly as you possibly can. But realize that majority of civilian based incidents will not allow you to move that way, unless you are at distance from an incident like an active shooting.
Now back to the debate between open carry vs conceal carry. If we look at the simple data, even if there is a margin for error or you have a different preferred source.. they all come back to the same thing. Civilian based defensive shootings are usually in close proximity and holster speed will NOT be the determining factor for surviving the attack. So the marginal benefit of open carry should not provide a false confidence for you.
“If you open carry, then you will be the first target!”
In a recent debate I was a part of in an online group (because that is where tactics and science matter) a few folks were again repeating the one liner of “if you open carry, then you will be the first target,” which was met by the opposing one liner of “when has that ever happened?” We should answer that too!
By all accounts, open carry in civilian life is not a typical thing. There are only a few states that allow it, and a small percentage of people who choose to go this route, and even less data on “civilian based defensive shootings using an open carry in which the attacker shot the armed citizen first.” That is placing so many qualifiers in the way it almost like saying “a defensive shooting that took place in an alley at 11:06 pm and was observed by 3 homeless people, a dog, and an owl.” See the problem?? That being said, we can look to the community that has been open carry for the longest stretch of time and has actual data…. Law Enforcement! We can see time and time again that when an officer has a non-compliant subject and has to engage in hand to hand combat.. there is almost always a struggle for the officers firearm. As my friends from the SWAT community say, “Every fight is a gun fight and we brought the gun.”
Something else to keep in mind when making your decision between open vs conceal carry is this. Often times when criminals intend to do you harm, they are ambush hunters. They watch you carefully, observe you while they encroach the distance. They plan their attack at an opportune time in which you are unprepared, unaware, and usually not in best condition to fight back. In the case that you are open carry, they will do everything they can do ensure that you do not get to your firearm. Period. Imagine a female who is walking thru the parking lot where someone is watching her for an opportunity to attack a sexual assault. If that attacker elects to move forward with their attack knowing that the gal is armed, they will either get that weapon first or make sure they restrict that female’s access to it.
Conclusion:
What does all of this information boil down to? The bottom line here is that by the numbers, in a civilian based defensive shooting the option of open vs conceal carry will make little to no difference. The real lesson is that your firearm may be a tool in your defensive measure, but it is likely that you will have to fight for the right to use it. The focus should be on other aspects such as situational awareness, pistol retention, hand to hand combatives, ground fighting, and other skills that will afford you the opportunity to use your firearm. “Hey, I am coming to assault, harm and kill you and starting at 21 feet” said no criminal ever.
As a trainer/instructor in the personal defense industry, one of the most cringe worthy aspects is to be witness to debates that simply have zero relevance to actual self defense skills. For far too long we as firearms and self defense enthusiasts have take the approach of arguing our preferences rather than being subjective and using data. To add to the problem, there simply isn’t enough proper training and testing being done to perpetuate real world solutions.
If you are serious about your self defense capabilities with or without your firearm, the answer is never going to be in your gear or your choice of carry. I would encourage every single law abiding citizen to dedicate more time in training with qualified instructors. Learn how to not only improve your firearms skills but to make those skills as a part of an entire array of skills. Start educating your proficiency in unarmed combat, ground fighting, pistol retention, edged/impact/improvised weapons, threat assessment, verbal de-escalation/conflict resolution, single handed shooting, low light engagements, and emergency medical. These skills count!!!
Until Next Time, Be Safe, Be Well, and Stay In The Fight!
Nik Farooqui
S2 Strategic Defense
www.S2Strategic.com
