If there's no evidence to support if open carrying prevents crimes would it not be better to assume that it does because of the potential situation that could be avoided? I also understand your last point of not getting involved in a potential active shooter situation because we all have families at the end of the day that we have to take care of, though that doesn't stop it from sounding bad in that you're letting people die that you could've potentially saved... overall I think people should carry however they want as long as they get training it doesn't matter.
"looking strong is being violent because you're influencing others' behaviour by looking as though if they tried to start a fight with you then you would win" -Icy mike logic. You're an dumdum bro stop misusing the word "violence"
Mike, Do you have any idea how hard it is to listen to someone in the 2A community try to put down one method of carry over another? 🤔 To your point about open carry. If open carry is illogical, why do police prefer open carry? If it's training, then the operative issue is training, not the carry method. It amounts to no more than "I would never use xyz gun". It's not logical. The more logical approach is "how would I use xyz gun in xyz scenario". I prefer Clint Smith's approach to every firearm, I just need to know the most efficient use of every firearm. Also, if you think influence is a use of violence, you're saying emotions are the equivalent of physical. It's not. Lastly, if you are promoting people to carry themselves in a way that criminals don't want to attack them, while at the same time saying you shouldn't display the more disparaging tool to deter such crime, you're displaying your own personal bias and there is a cognitive disconnect between the two actions.
advocating for open carry: it's more comfortable than concealed. it normalizes constitutional rights. out in rural missouri it's totally normal, no one's intimidated by the gun on your hip, they've got a gun on their hip too. Open carry to deter the cougars and black bears?? Nah if we out here want to intimidate anyone, it's the ATF and any other petty tyrant.
Yeah but what if you wanna open Carrie to feel or look cool? Because I know that when I walk into Starbucks with my golden tiger striped desert eagle on my hip a ballistic face-mask, body armor and Barrett strapped on my back I feel kind of like a bad ass. However warning for whoever wants to try this, expect places like Starbucks and other places wear colorful haired people visit will typically smells like shit in peoples pants after seven or eight seconds of you kicking open the door of the building. Warning don’t try this in an Alabaman Walmart. Bulletproof vests are not cheap or easy to replace and in all situations expect to be on the news
I'm sure we've all seen that guy who dresses like he desperately wants you to think he's not carrying a firearm. He usually arrived in a truck with a sticker on the back window that says he's carrying a firearm.
I always thought the 'grey man' idea was exactly what you said to do - wear your *normal* clothes and just hide your f***in' gun. I think what you presented as 'grey man' is what happens when a tacticool mall ninja starts to exit their 'mall ninja' phase and tone it down so they're not sticking out like a sore thumb just to end up sticking out like a slightly less sore thumb. Baby steps. Have patience with them, they will get there eventually. Maybe.
@@aztechnology7996 he does like to be right but i feel like he’s usually receptive in the comments when people add something he might have missed or elaborate further on something. idk though i haven’t looked at all the comments.
@@ShengFink Yes. My original comment was just an elaboration/expansion of the term "gray man" which was coined somewhere in the 2000's by the prepper community. KGB/CIA personnel would gather information and their job was to *continue* gathering information, often from the same sources, so that meant not carrying weapons at all. (Having a gun at all would blow someone's cover completely.) Anyways, he took it the wrong way and thought I was "correcting" him, when in reality I agree and respect his entire video. Was just expanding on the subject, because I am nerdy that way and that's what the internet is for, sharing information. Oh well
literally. saw someone carry a really nice looking .50 AE on their hip. I was half tempted to get their contact info to see if i could shoot it one day XD
@@Great_Wall_of_Text I mean it really want that normal except in the west, and in most towns and what not you still couldn't open carry. you checked your gun at the sheriff's office and got it back when you left.
Soooo... you're saying that where you live, there's a lot of douche bags? It's like wearing a shirt that says shoot me first. Just like a light on a weapon in the dark says SHOOT HERE.
I conceal carry and stay as low key as possible. I don't care about not being remembered or identified, I'm just not trying to get into anything with anyone. Out here living my best life.
You are confusing a gray man for a tacticool try hard based off your costume lol. That kid that shot that mall shooter from 40 yards away is pretty good example of a gray man.
The concept of the "gray man" has been twisted up so bad recently that it's almost unrecognizable from what it was pitched to me as. The concept of the gray man, or someone who understands urban camouflage is actually quite logical and when done right it should allow you to slip away from a bad situation. But for some reason tactinerds have bastardized the concept.
@@primaltactics6885 Depends where you live. Urban, suburban and rural “grey man” attire can look very different. And what region of the country you’re in for some cases.
@@jaredmackey4511 very true. There’s a big difference between how people dress at Walmart and Banana republic lol, and those could be right across from each other
Yeah, being a "gray man" means conforming to your surroundings, wearing a gray hoodie on a beach tourist spot where everyone wears brightly colored shirts just makes you stand out like a sore thumb.
The owner of the bar i was a bouncer at was an older guy that would carry a pistol in the front of his waistband. When someone wanted to get rowdy, he'd just lift his shirt up and say "I'm too old to fight you and I don't wanna kill you, so fuck off." Worked every time lol
Similar things happen in the uk when tough bouncers threaten people by clearly stating that they can’t handle them as they’re a pro fighter. Often young hot headed guys will come back to the club and shoot said bouncer to death…
He also probably didn't want to deal with the HELLA legal repercussions he'd face. As someone whose family has worked generations in security, yeah... guns are the FINAL resort, and he hopefully retired before going to the big house. Too many John Waynes hiding behind the big iron until they're in prison for baiting an unarmed person into physical contact so they can shoot them. Which is a coward's play. Besides, you have the gun that ONE time, but what happens if there are multiple shooters on you because you threatened one with a gun while he was unarmed? Hint: It won't play out like the movies. No Vigilante Charles Bronson final shoot out. You just get splatted and are removed from this life. Guns are a final resort if you are in fear of your safety against multiple or armed people. Shooting an unarmed man YOU started a fight with because you're a bitch should never be the play. I'm all for protecting yourself from armed threats or multiple threats using a firearm. But I'm not about to say it's right for a 60 year old man to go out looking for trouble because he thinks he can just shoot ya. Else gramps gonna be getting stuffed by some real strong dudes in the big house.
@@nunyabidness3429 you're %100 right, but this took place in Toledo Ohio which is becoming the heroin capital of the country and is a festering, ghetto stink hole that needs controlled burned to the ground so it can start over. Pretty much Detroit Junior where no one pays taxes and wannabe gang bangers (or actual gang bangers) run around acting like animals. I can't say for sure, but I bet the old guy from my story has killed at least few people in the military and was on the good side of the police - he seemed pretty confident it would have been just fine killing some piece of shit
That's a REALLY bad idea. Brandishing a firearm when it isn't justified can get a person sent to prison. And once you flash that gun and the person doesn't back down then you have to use it or possibly get it taken away.
Something that's always worked for me. Be physically fit and look like someone you wouldn't want to fuck with but also be very friendly and smile a lot.
works only on stupid bullies - which don't need any sort of weapon to be dealt with actual criminals...? they have superiority in weapons or numbers, and won't give a single fuck about how big you are (also because they very, very well know people able to defend themselves are basically nonexistent - americans especially)
Back when I was a student I remember seeing this guy in the library openly carrying a rambo knife on his hip. He was sitting in a crowded 300 seat study room, reading his book, wearing his camo and black tee and at least three seats were free in any direction from where he was sitting. Naturally, my first thought was “good for him for serving as a crime deterrent in this dangerous enviroment!”.
While you were sitting there thinking that the guy next to you could have been concealed carrying and thinking about shooting everyone starting with you and you'll never know.
@@kroanosm617 and that's blatant insecurity. Why view everyone as a possible enemy or threat? How does that help overall? Paranoia is only helpful in espionage
@@tylerward4386 Nothing wrong with being observant of your surroundings so you are ready. After a while it just becomes second nature. But it's stupid to think the guy openly carrying a weapon and minding his own business is the threat.
I work armed security and that's the only time I open carry. When I carry in public, I do not want people to know I have a gun. People today are nuts and they don't need to know I have a gun.
I don't mean to be disrespectful, but from the point of view where I am from, carrying a gun in public at all seems just totally nuts to me. Here you might get arrested and accused if you get caught carrying any kind of weapon. Might seem restricting to you but hey at least I don't have to worry much about getting shot in public since regulated or even unregulated guns are also reaally hard to come by for a civilian.
@@BlackBulletBeretta In america just assume everyone is armed, and on drugs and itchin for an excuse to use it!.. especially on the roads..! Here we even let kids go visibly armed to riots so they can play Dirty Harry for a day *cough Rittenhouse.. In this day and age I would almost want a gun in any country though. Even those ones that shoot pepper-spray balls are better than 'nothing'.. plus real guns have rubber bullets and pepperspray ammo if you want a 'less-lethal' option.. I load half my 9mm with non-lethal rounds and then the other half with deadly stuff.. you know incase any polar bears or meth heads jump out from that bush..
@@BlackBulletBeretta it only seems nuts within the cultural or legal context. If you knew being attacked with any kind of weapon was possible it is rational to arm oneself similarly in the interest of self prevention. If the mere possession of a weapon is viewed with criminal suspicion that is a issue of that culture or legal system. Wanting to preserve your life and the lives of those close to you isn't irrational and having a object or device to help you be a match for someone trying to harm you is a reasonable conclusion to that concern.
@@TheGreatOldOak what you prefer doesn't matter. What matters is what is available to you. Reality doesn't care about our preferences. And the weapon could be a means of preserving yourself until the plane tickets is acquired, so that is a false dichotomy.
I've known a few of those guys who were never in the military, never in law enforcement, didn't go hunting, but their entire wardrobe came from the Army Navy surplus store, and they'd just be walking around looking like an extra from a Steven Segall movie thinking they were blending in. I call it Dale Gribble syndrome.
sure, but that's not gray man. the maker of this video should actually do his research and understand what he's talking about and not misrepresent ideas. gray man is trying to disappear into the public, not wear army and tactical stuff to stand out
The difference between "physical harm" and "lethal force" is how many plates you put on the bar. You're basically saying it's only ok to appear dangerous if it's a complete lie. Actually being dangerous (an immutable trait/ civil right) is bad according to you. "I often laugh at the fool who thinks himself kind merely because he lacks claws and teeth" -Nietzsche.
Seems like under the same logic, being a physically imposing person is violent. Everyone is under threat of a beating. Violence is violence. That's all
Your body goes every where you go. Carrying a long sword on your back to Walmart makes you look like a sociopath. It's like walking into a crowd and shouting a threat. It's not the same as being muscular. You brought a lethal item with you and that item makes a statement. I wouldn't define it personally as violence but the point still stands.
@@markhendley5559 you bring a sword to walmart people will think you're a massive nerd. You bring a gun to walmart dressed like the punisher, people are gonna be worried. You bring a gun to walmart dressed like an off duty security guard, no one will care. Its all about communicating your intentions.
@@markhendley5559 I hear what you're saying but violence shouldn't be defined by subjective opinion. It's violence or it's not. And simply possessing something in a specific place is not violence
I'm a 21 year old girl who has been harassed, followed, and grabbed in public. If I have to go out at night, to work or the gas station or something, I will often open carry for my safety. Since i began doing that, i have never had a problem. Don't bash open carry entirely. I conceal most of the time, but open carry has its place, especially for single or unaccompanied women.
Yeah, laughing about it deterring people is really dumb. It 100% deters people, is easier to draw, and the only way it makes you "a target" is if they're 100% committed to doing some serious shit. If he can think that drawing a gun on someone is a deterrent I don't know how open carry isn't.
I love that subtle yet reasonably in your face reminder. You can do stuff for fun. Not because it's logical. Not because it will save your life or others. Just because humans LOVE pastimes. Exactly why we've created so many. Great video Mike!
You just gotta ignore the range Fudds that think they run the joint. You're allowed to enjoy firearms just for the pure fun of shooting. Don't let a buncha beer-guts in visors tell you how to enjoy your rights. After all, they're YOUR rights.
For many it has to do with convenience, comfort, and practicality. I mostly OC during the summer, and CC when the weather cools down. Some of us were duped into buying some big honking hand cannon by some LGS clerk desperately trying to offload his overstock, and now can't afford to buy something actually decent for CC. Others live in states where they can OC at 18 but can't get a CHP until 21. Others own or work in businesses such as pawn shops, liquor and jewelry stores where the "violence" of influencing other's behavior through open carry is absolutely justified.
Yeah, that's me. I open carry during the spring and summer, and then conceal when it's coat season. I prefer "duty-size" pistols for the recoil management, so that does limit concealment factor.
4:27 “You should look, walk, talk, and act like a bad mofo” Argument #1: -“Open carry” is form of “violence” -Violence is bad -Thus, “open carry” is bad Argument #2: -“Grey man” appears “unremarkable” -“Unremarkable” are “desirable targets” -“Desirable target” is bad -Thus, “grey man” is bad Argument #3: -Bad Mofo-appearance deters violence -Violent appearance is good -Thus, mofo-appearance is good Huh? Isn’t open-carry a form of bad mofo-appearance? Oh wait he labels “open-carry” as a “douche”. Oh wait, he labels “grey man” as “unremarkable”. But, to him a “bad-mofo” is a “less desirable target”. Lot of word play and nonsense. Furthermore, he says looking like a bad-mofo doesn’t make you susceptible to crime. It instead makes you susceptible to “ego fights” and can be prevented by “I’m sorry, you are right.” Assault/battery/mutual combat is no longer a crime? Apologizing stops street fights? More word play and nonsense. 1:54: Buy open carry holster! “Surely nobody would be a charlatan, who could afford to be sincere.” -Ralph Waldo Emerson “Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.” ― Isaac Asimov, Foundation “Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.” -Gen. Mattis
Exactly! You point out his hypocrisy perfectly! This wanna-be TH-cam gun expert tells people " Not" to train how you fight..Lmao..xD That's a sure way to die.
You're wrong g. Open carry is explicitly showing and demonstrating "I can fucking kill you now", without needing any physical proof for that (appearance). Looking like a badass (the way you walk/carry yourself), has been scientifically proven to deter possible criminals from seeing you as a target. The difference is that open carry induces fear and uneasiness all the time, while carrying yourself like a badass doesn't inherently do that; it only induces the feeling of "this guy isn't inherently dangerous to me, but if something were to go down, he would be"
Is this about the gray men who also drive the lifted pick up trucks with the 3%, punisher, and molon labe stickers? We don't have those in Utah. In every parking lot.
Utah is filled with them, and in Utah there is also the least amount of Veterans - uless they came from out of state or are active duty stationed in UT.
The thing that sealed open carry away in the "probably neat, but never gonna" area for me: watching videos of open carry security guards in bad areas being targeted for their firearm. In a lot of places, that $300 gun is worth more than you are.
This actually keeps making me think of the live action lupin from France. He's gray and easily ignored, yet confident in his motions and can take charge of situations. Being a thief, too, he's constantly scanning his environment, number one right there.
Influencing behavior is not violence. Smacking the shit out of some one or shooting them or stabbing them is. You could influence behavior by being 6'5 and 260lbs of solid muscle and that may intimidate people but it is not violence . Learn what words mean dude.
@@hard2hurt I have maybe you should. Anf even lawful definition only includes intimidation by exhibition of force . Displaying a weapon or tool is not force or violence. Many people may be uncomfortable with it and I'm not saying everyone should open carry, just that it 8n and of itself is not violence.
This story doesnt have anything to do with open or concealed carry, but him talking about carrying a gun on a hike reminded me of the day i learned why one should never go hiking unarmed. I like to tell the story when i get the chance to, it was terrifying at the time, but looking back at it now i just laugh at my own stupidity. I never ever go hiking without a gun on me. I learned my lesson at the age of 15. I went for a nice 8 mile hike on my own after school one day, it was one that i had done over a hundred times by that point, sometimes i would run it during the cross country season to get some extra training in. Well, it just so happened that the specific day i decided to go on a hike there was a mother brown bear and her two cubs with her about a half mile from the entrance from the trail. She turned around when she sensed me, and definitley saw me before i saw her. i heard the roar, looked over, and sawa big brown thing barreling towards me. Im no Olympian, but im pretty sure i gave Usain bolt a run for his money on that world record of his. I was lucky enough that the terrain was more difficult for the bear to get through (tight spaces between rocks and trees, and really dynamic terrain) than it was for myself. I sprinted a whole half mile to the camp site at the trail head, and started screaming for help. The bear was still coming after me. I heard 5 shots go off, i turned around and there was an old dude in a flannel and jeans holding a glock up and firing at the damn brown bear. The gunshots plus a now growing group of people who were exiting their tents and trailers to see what was happening was thankfully enough to scare the bear off. I thanked the guy profusely and then proceeded to puke my guts out into a trash can from sheer panick and fear. I genuinely thought i wasn't going to make it back home that day. Closest ive ever come to actually just pissing and shitting my pants out of fear.
Honestly bear spray might be better in such a situation and be kinder to the animal that doesn't know any better than try to eliminate or run what it perceives as a threat out of its territory. I'm all about being able to defend oneself, but there is an element of cruelty in going into an animal's home and then killing it in self-defense when your presence pisses it off. Not against hunting either, but killing an animal because _you_ fucked up is kind of wrong.
I'm a conceal carry guy myself but I also live in a city where 3 out of 10 people open carry.. It's a normal thing around here.. nobody cares.. I don't think there's even a brandishing law enforced around here.. Now, if you do something stupid that's gonna harm anyone, then yea, you'll have 4 different calibers entering your body.. I dont know.. I guess it depends on the area you live in..
This making the video just a hater and judgemental. He thinks he knows everything like he can read everyone mind or just look at a person and know exactly how they are sorry not possible.
God I wish I lived in a place where open carry was that normal. I mentioned the fact I wished I could carry a firearm at work and my boss said "that's a joke, right?" and everyone went all quiet and horrified when I didn't make out like it was a joke. Big cities in England are trash. I never felt safer shopping than in some bumblefuck nowhere Kentucky Wal-Mart.
@@AdamOwenBrowning England is one of the most dangerous cities on earth lol what a shit hole that place is. Even the cops can't carry guns while gangster are going around with them like wtf?
If those words make it easier to kill, They absolutely are violence you twit. Or do you think shitting on and dehumanizing entire groups of people doesn't have a logical conclusion that has virtually always ended in genocide?
By this logic, I am a form of violence myself. My 6'5", 320lb stature with cauliflower ears manipulates criminals and deters violence upon myself everywhere I go.
Your stature is not violence, but your comment explains exactly why the dude in this video sounds like an idiot. I've watched a dozen or so of his videos this week, and they were all kinda silly, entertaining, and harmless. But this one presents seriously dangerous ideas as his genuine opinion, which has turned me off of all future videos from this guy. For the record, I also think open carry is a bad idea, but it is not even remotely violent. Intimidation is not violence, but it can prevent violence. This video somehow argued both sides. This video: "Grey man is dumb. You should look intimidating so bad guys leave you alone" Also this video: "Open carry is Intimidation, which is literal violence, so don't do it." All paraphrased of course, but seriously, pick a lane dude. If we accept that intimidation (open carry and/or being tall) is a violent act on everybody who sees it, then where would we even draw the line legally? "Gaaaahhhh!" The defenders cry, "He didn't say legally!" Maybe not, but he redefined a word which is used in law, like all words. What do you think happens when definitions change over time but legal wording does not? You end up with people thinking "well regulated" means government restricted, "militia" means government soldiers, and "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" refers to government controlled soldiers holding weapons. Then you have a multigenerational, continent spanning argument on your hands...because definitions changed for se people. It's a huge mess. The ATF changed the definition of a bunch of words then used those new definitions to lable law abiding citizens felons overnight. They did it with pistol braces, they did it with forced reset triggers, they did it with pictures printed on a metal card, and they'll do it again. Right now the definition of "violence" is in the process of changing. Where might that lead I wonder? Changing definitions is always a legal issue eventually. You can't get around that. Emotional trauma (like intimidation) is not violence. When you pretend that it is violence then people get thrown in jail for hurt feelings. This is a real thing that really happens. This argument is currently taking place all over the world, and people are being dragged into court, off to jail, or put in front of human rights tribunals because of hurt feelings. You can look that shit up. It's real, even in the U.S. So, some people don't like seeing you carry guns in public (though they think it's fine if police do it). They think your gun is intimidating, and that makes you open carrying a violent act according to this video. Should you get arrested for assault just because you didn't affirm somebody's world view? This is where that argument leads. Dumb. Sorry if that makes folks emotional, but the silence/misgendering/intimidation/name calling is violence thing is a gateway to madness. Maybe I hurt your feelings, that isn't the same thing as smashing your frontbteeth in with a steel pipe. Trust me, I've experienced both. I know the difference. Actual violence is violence. Accept no substitutes.
(EDIT: Some dude asked me if the "evil leftists were in the room with me" , I responded with the sentence below this one, and then he deleted his comment.) Real leftists aren't evil, just painfully oblivious and/or short sighted.
The only support I've seen for open carry being a deterrent is from the survey of inmates convicted for violent crimes that the USCCA recently did -- which is worth a look if you haven't seen it. Something like 40% (?) of the felons they interviewed responded that knowing or believing that the person they were looking to attack was armed would make them reconsider. Not nearly enough to make me want to carry openly in most situations in light of the many issues with doing so, but I found it interesting all the same. That same survey *also* gave great credence to the idea you espoused in this video: that criminals actively avoid targeting those who walk, talk, and generally carry themselves with self-confidence.
My response to his stance is: "open carrying is not violence its coercion under the threat of potential violence, which no different than your advice of "walk talk and act like someone who knows how to fight" I could use that same logic and go "thats violence because of presence and intimidation". I can argue having really big muscles and being tall is violence because it's physically intimidating. Any man of physical stature for example could also be violence by your use of the definition. Violence is and needs to be performed to be an real not insinuated or hinted towards. Open carrying a gun in a holster vs pointing a gun in someones face are both open carry (by open in carry in this context i mean guns be clearly visible) yet have two entirely different meanings. Holstered open carry is not violence it's simply a non-verbal PERCEIVED threat. In a world with no guns people have all sorts of ways of silently proclaiming themselves as capable of a potential for violence. Your definition is "omg hes carrying a pistol so people interact differently thats hecking violence reeee." Then what do you call someone showing up to a business meeting dressed in very expensive clothing? Bribery? Or an attractive women wearing skimpy clothes? solicitation? You're stance on open carry being violence will NEVER be correct." I think his view on it is stupid and a spit in face of gun rights, he then tries to shame people who open carry by calling them d bags. He's ascribing a moral value to open carry which is inherently VERY anti gun.
@@seanbui2724 With all due respect, I suggest you post that under the primary video comment section because you clearly feel very strongly about it and would like Mike to see it and it seems unlikely that this will happen with it hidden under my own comment. My feelings about open carry can be generously described as "mixed".
I can offer a larger sample size that proves open carry is a deterrent to crime. Several studies have shown an average of 2.5 million times a year, a crime is stopped by a citizen with a gun and 80-93% of those are without firing a shot. 80% is 2,000,000. Whether the firearm is openly carried in a holster or brandishing, 2 million times a year, a crime in progress is stopped by displaying a firearm.
Not gonna lie was wondering if Being a Gray Man was a Wheel of Time reference. Turns out it’s just a thing. I do open carry mostly when I’m out in the desert pretending to be a cowboy. It’s for fun. There are some very rural communities around here where open carry is viewed as more normal. Guess that a gray area! Hahaha.
The gray man was "gray" because he faded into a crowd, was hard to identify and generally didn't stand out. Sorta the opposite of someone with a pistol visible on their belt.
Yes round here it is normal enough that the people who open carry in town are not seen as activists They are viewed as "that mechanic with the long beard who always wears a cowboy hat and open carries." or "the young guy at the auto parts store. the one who open carries not his brother." Both of this were said to me as a description. Open carry in this small town is viewed by the people I know who do not carry at all as a weird fashion choice like an earring or tattoo. But no more important then those. But for most of the country including the bigger towns around here I think Icy Mike is right on in his comments.
If open carrying a gun is violence, then isn't looking like the biggest badest mofo also violence? That will and does also influence other people's thoughts and behaviors.
I work at a gun shop that does concealed carry classes. Have to remember that not everyone can concealed carry. Ive met so many nice people that had issues in the military or normal lives that can prevent them from concealed carrying
@@davesdiversions8078 "should they be carrying in public at all?" That's a question the leftists, and Democrats LOVE to hear, because it implies uniformity of intention. Your intention is to be safe, or safe as possible. THEIR intention is (always) to use any and all complaints from the public, to totally disarm the population by disregarding the right to keep and BEAR arms. The elephant in the room is, life is dangerous, and most people are scared of *true* freedom. True freedom is dangerous, but perceived freedom is far worse. Somehow, simply SEEING a weapon carried by a normal looking person can strike fear into someone, but standing in line in a convenient store with several mean looking guys waiting to buy their 40 ounce beers isn't as intimidating as the first guy, as long as they aren't SHOWING any weapon. People are in Walmarts around the county EVERY day, along side of criminals with small firearms in their pockets, and they DO NOT CARE about firearm laws. Disarming normal people doesn't stop bad guys, and all the gun laws prove it. The cognitive dissonance is astounding.
@@davesdiversions8078 Yes. The answer is always yes. Some people have skin issues that prevent contact with synthetic or animal skins. I have eczema and I can only wear 100% cotton below the belt. I've used about all there is in IWB holsters and they all cause me issues. Since I switched to OWB cross draw (proper design that tucks grip in) - it's all good. Can still conceal under a t shirt. My skin issues come from burn pits in Iraq, just FYI.
Most predators want easy victims, if they see people open carrying the first thought is not the place! This is practical example of open carrying deterring predators!
Or.... the thief sees their next new gun, and they will be more likely to go straight to violence to get it. It's like wearing a big Rolex to some. So you may end up attracting what you're trying to repel.
You're playing REALLY fast and loose with the term "violence" - I think you mean that open carry is a kind of intimidation or coercion stemming from the unvoiced threat of potential deadly violence. That may be unacceptable in your eyes, but it's not the same as actual violence.
I've always thought that "the grey man" was for shtf scenarios and not just referring to your carry practice. Personally I just wear normal everyday clothes and conceal carry .
in a SHTF scenario, there wouldn't be any concept of gray, everyone would be rucking their plate carrier and nobody would want to even appear that they might be able to be jumped. SHTF = society gone. "gray man" ceases to exist if society has upended temporarily. Being unremarkable and unnoticeable in a place without any real laws or rule of society that you want to slip by just makes yourself a target because you look entirely defenseless.
This is a dilemma. In some states (not my home state), I can legally open carry but it’s illegal to conceal carry. Say I go hiking in Nevada (not my home state) and I can open carry legally, but it’s illegal to conceal carry since my CCW does not have reciprocity
If you're successfully concealed carrying, no one will know. Better to have it and not need it that need it and not have it. Better alive and dealing with the law than dead because of a bogus law
@@ArthurMorgansDeadHorse there should be no firearms allowed, open or concealed. Guns should be for hunting, and should be highly restricted and regulated
One of the reasons I stopped open carrying was I noticed clerks in stores were way too helpful when they could see the gun vs when they couldn't. I want people to be their actual self around me. My main reason for open carrying at the time was for advertising for the NRA basic pistol class I was teaching at the time. Open carrying was a decent conversation starter but once I started noticing people treating me more respectfully with it and my state switched to constitutional carry I went concealed carry all the time unless I'm hiking in the woods
I had a similar reason for going concealed. One of those watershed moments was going into Sports Authority to scope out the outdoor section. Unbeknownst to me at the time, they had quietly removed anything remotely firearm related without any big public announcement. The manager on duty made it a point to step right in my path and ask if there was anything he could help me with in the most awkward manner known to man, making it very clear he didn't actually want to help me at all and really wanted to know what I was doing in his store with a gun. Needless to say between that and the complete absence of anything related to what I was looking for, I left quickly and made it a point to get my concealed carry license ASAP.
I've worked armed security for a number of years. One of the things I've consistently worried about are those idiots who go get coffee or whatever with a plate carrier and a long gun just to demonstrate to a bunch of uncomfortable people (including me) that they technically have the right to do so. It's all fun and games until you waltz into my place of work and I have a quarter second to figure out whether you're an idiot or an active shooter. That mental exercise has always scared the crap out of me.
Yeah, THAT is why I am generally opposed to blatant open carry. Maybe at a demonstration or protest where the point is to demonstrate in favor of constitutional rights or NORMAL Americana (which makes you a target for "mostly peaceful" firebomb tossers and masked antifatards) but just going about a normal day? Nah...MAYBE a more understated open carry pistol setup sans tactical vest or plate carrier, etc, is OK now and again but let's not go overboard.
lmfao .... if you have a problem decerning a threat because of gear worn or not worn and are to the point of reacting immediately you are a piss poor guard with very little training in decerning what an actual threat is
@@maddogs1989 Action beats reaction keyboard warrior. Someone comes in knowing exactly what they're going to do and how far they are willing to go to do it so you're already a step behind. You're also uniformed and openly armed which means those first rounds are coming at you. If you aren't watching and ready to react at a moments notice and trouble comes through your door then people die. I wouldn't expect some jackoff on a TH-cam comments section to have thought about that though.
@@joshuaanderson1369 Oh please educate me some more with youre smuggness thinking you know more than myself. I have 16 years of military experience as an Infantryman directly providiing security against insurgents in plain cloths as well as working armed security in the states for 5 years. Your comment is nothing more than some untrained security guard over reacting at the smallest and simplest of things.
It makes you a soft target. The gray man concept applies to espionage so as to seem less threatening. It does not apply to standard human communication.
The one instance I thought open carry worked for someone was when we were travelling cross country and stopped at a mom-and-pop gas station in a rural area. The guy working the counter was open carrying a large revolver, and I imagine it may have given a predator or two some second thoughts about robbing the place. Ain't nothing wrong with going gray man! It's the tacticool operator wannabes sporting black and camis that scream douchebag.
I tend to agree with you that a store owner open carrying is a good deterrent. But I think your qualification was covered by Mike. He said that he can't think of anyone who isn't police, military or security e.g. a regular person who would benefit from open carrying. A store owner on the job is basically taking the role of security for his store.
I think people will hate no matter what, I Guarantees he's going to make a follow up video saying he was wrong about it. Things is if the state is rather peaceful it looks unnecessary, when things get more George Floyd riot and Ukraine war desperate it looks more appropriate. If you look around tent cities are popping up all over town, the world is starving with a terrible yield in food, there's no plan to fix anything, and I ask you if any of your friends including you know how to clean water from a river to make it safe to drink....water. lol For me in the south yes, carrying is handy when killing and robbing is frequent. If I go to the north, nah no need then I look like goofy guy. Here in south Texas the police are involved with the Mexican cartel, they sell drugs and order hits on people. I've seen it and if you call them to help...they won't, or if you report things they'll silence you. Homeland security is useless too, I would be very surprised if they didn't know. So here you live in a false government, you have no freedom to bare arms(police can use it as sus to jail you), speech (can be used to jail you), or 5th Amendment (will be used to jail you). If you choose to not talk to the police they throw you in jail to post bail, finding some nonsense on you or plant things, just to show your innocent 1 year later with thousands spent on a ankle bracelet and Bail bonds, all the judge will say, "okay your free to go" not even a sorry. It's a sad reality that Mexico was dealing with this century and not it's happening here too. Here you carry a gun, and if someone threatened you with jail or silence, or involves you in shady shit you don't want to be a part of, stick to you guns against any man, that includes men just following orders. Being it's not hard to be sent to jail, have a fight that's not your fault in jail and end up in prison for 5 or more years because you were pushed into a corner to fight like an animal as the guards just watch and cheer. As a prisoners you'll work as a slave with nobody carring why your there or the reason as you slave away working for $0.30 an hour. I'm not exaggerating these are real stories happening here, I wasn't aware of it intil i moved to the south side and noticed it all after college Nazi were just men following orders too, here it's no different.
@@oscarbear7498 ppl without a gun being violent requires a gun to deal with it??? Maybe if youre looking for a reason to shoot someone you shouldn't be open carrying
LOL the "Grey Man" example you used in this vid when I was in the Army we used to refer to as "contractor casual" or "tacticool Timmy." We sometimes would joke about it being the REI/5.11 OCIE/SPEAR issue for team guys since they'd all run out and buy the exact same stuff once they got their civilian clothing allowance. If you want to look more "grey man" then you want to dress like a NGO or someone who does outdoors stuff if you want to wear more "active" style of clothes. Otherwise you just look weird and stand out 9x out of 10. Whole point of being a "grey man" is you look like everyone around you and you don't stick out or are memorable.
Being fit and wearing tight clothes that show your muscles is a form of violence. You are trying to influence a situation by showing that you are fit. Also taller guys than me intimidate me so they're doing violence on me
Influencing other peoples thoughts and behaviors is not violence PERIOD Literally everybody does that all the time just by existing. Violence requires physical action being intentionally taken to causes physical harm to someone else.
@@hard2hurt Im not typically the type of guy to just sight a dictionary but since you havent given an alternative definition to what you call "violence" what about this definition seems wrong to you ? "behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something."
@@hard2hurt If you are referring to the alternate definition of "strength of emotion or an unpleasant or destructive natural force" then that is a completely different and separate type of "violence" which means something different and one which people dont use to refer to physical harm, which is why it is a grievous mistake to correlate these two definitions of violence. You cant charge people for "emotional violence". It honestly doesn't even deserve to be recognized with the word "violence" as it makes real violence mean less when it happens. If you are referring to the alternative lawful definition of "the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force" Then in that case open carrying still isn't violence since it isnt against the law and the fact that any perceived intimidation by an outside party isnt valid because they arent being intimidated by any sort of outward "exercise of physical force".
As a 31+ year uniformed police officer (military and federal), I've never been a fan of open-carry on my own time. I agree that open-carry is part of the "officer presence" that I don't want to convey when I'm off-duty. Also, I don't want to always have to have my head on a swivel like I do when I'm in uniform. That said, I always thought I was doing the "gray man" thing, but I think I have a different view of what "gray man" means. I don't think it means totally blending into the background, being completely non-descript, unnoticed or non-threatening. I always felt it meant that there's absolutely no way for the average fellow citizen to know whether or not I'm carrying a weapon, nor my threat level to a would-be attacker. I would hope that most people who are carrying concealed put up enough of a front that discourages attacks in the first place; I've barked my way out of a few potentially dangerous situations over the years, avoiding the fight and potential harm or legal issues that result. What I have come to really dislike - and mostly because this was me for a few years - is the "range instructor" guy. You know, the guy who runs his weekend errands in the 5.11 cargo pants and micro-fiber polo shirt (maybe with a Glock or Kimber logo on the chest) and the Under Armor side-zip tactical boots and hat like he's on his lunch break from teaching housewives how to find their sight picture at the local range while telling them about his exploits as an "operator" back in the day. I never instructed housewives and I still wear the hats, but I've learned to save the rest of that gear (in combination) for range days and clay shooting with the homies. Dressing "normal" with proper concealment is what "gray man" should be; not invisible, but also not intentionally drawing attention. My current search is for a few good pairs of joggers that will support my G48 in a kydex holster, without paying a fortune for the ones with an internal belt; I'm thinking I'll have to get something with the Ulti-clip to make that work. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Mike!
I've kinda been in the middle about all this and have opened carried and conceal carried for a long time. I will say that I think the word you should use instead of "violence" is "force." Definition of violence: "Violence is the *use* of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy" Definition of Force: "coercion or compulsion, especially with the use or threat of violence." Carrying a weapon openly does not mean it has been *used.* But it definitely has a coercive affect on those around you. People don't seem as interested in having normal conversations and just seem like they want you to go away. I would agree that open carrying makes people uncomfortable and draws a lot of unnecessary attention (at least in the US, certain countries its very normal to carry around weapons openly like in Israel, an M16 strapped on the back of an Israeli Commando at all times when they're just hanging out having fun in their civis is normal and no one bats an eye). So while I'm in favor of concealed carry i think there is a time and place for open carrying. Hence why cops open carry. Its a show of force and places them in a position of power and is why a cop will always try to disarm others around them, to maintain control of the situation and estab authority.
Yawn. He already addressed that. Force is official violence. If you aren’t an official gun carrying person, you have no claim to Force. Definition of douchebag: You.
Violence has more definitions than that, coercive force as violence is widely agreed as being true by academics in the field. See Zizek’s book ‘Violence’ for an in depth discussion
Yeah dude but you are no cop, this video is not about cops. Of course they have to open carry, if they don't, they would not survive a single day. In which country they don't open carry? They even do it here in Switzerland and they are about the only ones who are allowed to carry a gun. Almost no one else is allowed to, Security is not allowed to, just the cops and here there usually never happens so much bullshit, so it's ok. I'm not even allowed to have a gun at all, cause i once hurt someone who attacked me and you know what? I still feel more save that i would in the U.S.A. 🤣
Intimidation isn’t violence it’s a threat of violence at most, or, more often, the suggestion of the promise of violence. Scaring someone isn’t violence. Passive intimidation is passive. Active intimidation (suppressing fire) is violence. How you came to this understanding of violence is strange. Anyways, Mr P., it was an ok video. Wanted to butt punch you for your definition of violence, just to clarify, but overall not bad.
I'll second that. I'm a large bloke, and I look like I could terrify a bulldog. I am intimidating, despite being a gentle giant type. By this guy's logic, I am a violent person, just for looking like I could hurt you. Intimidation is intimidation. Violence is following through with physical harm.
I live in a very rural area, everyone open carries. Anything from coyotes, badgers, rabies raccoons, cougars, bears, etc. Open carry is the most common in my area. I would say that what I was told by the sheriff very much applies and is a good thing to live by. If you live in the sticks, fuck it, open carry. If you live in the city, go gray man. No need to draw excess attention to yourself. Fit in with your environment, go about your business, have and live a beautiful life. EDIT: Would also like to interject, there is a difference between aggression and violence. Open carrying is aggression, not violence. I CC, but don't mind others OC, not a hater, you do you bubby. EDIT: I'm so stupid, didn't realize this video was a year old, it just popped up in my recommendeds, sorry for commenting on a dead video.
I think the entire mood and setting is completely different in a rural area versus an urban area. Peoples stress levels and levels of paranoia is probably much lower in the countryside, where people are more in contact with nature and encounter much fewer people. Crime rates are much lower. And the purpose for carrying a gun is usually aimed more at wild game than people, so it less reason for paranoia. One big danger with open carrying guns (I think particularly for a city biome) is someone could mistake you for an active shooter. Maybe someone tries to stop you, you may not be the only one with a gun. It may or may not outweigh the potential for deterring other crime. It is about circumstance and can go both ways
The best advice I've been given........... 1 Use common sense in avoiding places and situations that could be dangerous. 2 Don't appear to be a great target for crime. Showing large amounts of money or valuables. 3 Don't act like a victim.......
I like the videos and the channel. Quick critique, I would argue open carry is force but not violence. I think the distinction is important. Having a forceful presence is much the same thing. Looking intimidating is a deterrent, but I wouldn’t call it violent. Granted carrying a gun has a different societal context; but I feel like the idea is the same. You aren’t making a direct threat or attack (violence) but you are making it clear you will engage in violence (force). Just a thought.
Potential force. Not actual force. Just like a guy with big muscles. And yeah, carrying a gun is different in socal context. In some places, if you Aren’t, you are the outsider. In cities, you need to stay concealed because people freak out when the veil of “safety” is lifted.
Yeah, I took issue with this. He seems to not be able to differentiate deterrence and violence. One of the main purposes of deterrence is prevent violence.
??? you can tell he isnt a gun guy, if you are going to carry a pistol. open carry.. if you have to "insert do anything but instantly draw" your gun is all but useless in a situation you would need it. also, them knowing you have a gun, is a deterrent. shops that open carry have less robberys... people who open carry get robbed less.... its pretty much the whole point of carrying a gun. for the off chance you are going to use it to protect somebody else, and kill somebody, chances are if your gun was showing, they wouldnt attempt to do whta they did.
I have never ever experienced this open carry violence you speak of, and I am around plenty of open carry people. Usually I just go "ok" and move on. But then, none of them ever acted weird.
@@hard2hurt I guess I am ok with people considering committing a crime being intimidated. I think that considering committing a crime invalidates any feelings you have about open carry. Since intimidation is something they feel, they could just as easily decide to not feel it. Or, you know, decide not to commit the crime. It just seems weird to me that you care about a potential criminals feelings. Especially with the likelihood that it is a violent crime (requiring someone to draw their pistol). Sure, they haven't committed a crime, but if the only thing stopping them is they are afraid of an open carry, well, good on open carry.
Who said I care about a criminal's feelings? (You're nearly there... you're so close... hint: your argument with this video was formed against something I never actually said)
@@hard2hurt You literally said open carry is violence, dude. 5:10 ish I would like to see the reasoning there. Nobody is committing a violent act merely by open carrying. I didn't say you cared about the criminals feelings, either. I just said it's ok for them to feel scared. But that doesn't mean violence is being committed on them. It's all in their head. I don't think open carry or grey man is self defense either. But you did say "Those will also be the people who will take issue that I (You) said "Open carry is violence". I guess if you think police presence is violence, then sure. But I don't see how merely the presence of an officer is violence either. Your rebuttal to this is that it feels violent to criminals. Well, aside from that being in their head and therefore not objective reality, I think it's ok if they imagine violence and are deterred.
Influencing the thoughts and behaviors of others isn't violence. If that were true every politician would be committing violence. Violence is using physical force to cause injury.
I mostly agree with your take on open carry. There's a time and a place. However, living in a constitutional carry state, the more the general public is exposed to guns, the more comfortable they become over time. There's a bbq place nearby that encourages carry ond offers a discount if you're packing. Safest place in town.
i agree that exposure helps normalize it, but i don't agree that carrying in places where it's not really wanted by the majority of the occupants is effective... right to do so aside, i think that mindset is no different than people who think that if you dont like "x" gender, sexuality, ethnicity, etc. then you are an oppressor... we need to incentivize people to want to work with guns; unfortunately, most people i know that attempt to have that conversation have giant egos and are condescending as hell, a problem that riddles the gun community, even within... forcing people to live in uncomfortable environments and being forced to accept someone elses opinion under the intimidation of violence via firearm is not a long term effective way to get people to like guns... the whole left vs right gun debate is where it is because both sides keep doubling down instead of actually opening up a conversation... just my two cents tho
Two problems with the "make them more comfortable" theory behind open carry: 1) It's rude. Deliberately and forcibly rubbing someone's nose in something they disapprove of isn't going to convince them to agree with you. 2) It's self-defeating. Reducing fear without also increasing understanding will reduce firearms' ability to deter while also increasing the risk of tragedy that comes with failing to respect the danger they present.
@irrelevantfish1978 So, it's rude and self defeating to follow the law as outlined by our constitution as well as the state of Tennessee? So be it. We should have never had the unconstitutional gun laws that prevented carry in the first place. Folks around here consider the establishments that encourage carry to be absolutely the safest places around.
@@codyway7424 Would it be polite or productive for the LGBTQ+ people in your town to exercise their legal and constitutional right to engage in flamboyant make-out sessions and loud discussions of the joys of non-standard sexual behavior while in public places? I mean, surely exposure to their views and practices would aid in normalizing them and reducing prejudice, right? All open-carry-as-political-expression is going to do is convince gun-haters that gun-owners are a bunch of inconsiderate douchebags, and I fail to see how any good could come from that.
@irrelevantfish1978 I don't think they are any lgbtq+ folks around here. Most kids are raised in church and have proper parenting. I still don't see how open carry is rubbing someone's nose in it. I am a Ga fan in Tn country and routinely wear a Ga hat. Is that rubbing someone's nose in it, lol? All I can say is that right here and now, folks are not concerned about open carry or ball caps. Generally, they are conversation starters. Never had a problem. Never had anyone indicate that they were uncomfortable. But, I have been carrying inside the wasteband lately just for a change. More grey man at the mall and such.
Yeah I was selling cars and this guy walks up to me with his shirt pulled up a little bit on top of his appendix carry firearm and he kept resting his hand on it. It just felt like he was trying to take control of the situation by use of his firearm instead of just talking to me like a normal person. Open carry for me is just the same idea where most people I've seen use it as a means for pushing conversations into their benefit. I think if somebody is crazy enough to start doing some bad shit they don't give af if you have a gun on your hip.
Yeah, I personally don't give a damn if I know someone has a firearm. Most of them have never used one in violence or had one used on them. I'll just think they're a douchebag and they'll have even less power in any conversation
@@stephen8996 I can't say if it can be called a better society, but back in the 1800s, open carry was typical. People walked around strapped like cowboys. Concealed was actually the suspicious thing to do, as only crooks had a reason to hide if they had a firearm on them to get an element of surprise or hide their intentions.
@@theyhateme8763 Agreed. I make it a point to keep my hand away from my firearm while out-and-about. If my hand goes toward it, it means I'm the one sensing a threat. Thankfully, that hasn't happened once in the twelve years I've been carrying.
So on one hand you claim open carry is violence because its meant to intimidate and therefore it is violence. On the other you also claim there is no way to know if it intimidates someone into not engaging in a crime? I need you to pick one boss.
Your wording is weird to me, should be: "So on one hand you claim open carry intimidates and therefore it is violence. On the other you claim there is no way to know if it(open carry, or oc) deters someone from engaging in a crime?" "I need you to pick one boss." Nah, there is no other hand, they aren't mutually exclusive, on one hand he made both claims. The first one can be argued, since lots of people are intimidated by lots of things other people don't think are intimidating and/or can't be helped(Like many women are intimidated by the mere presence of a man, just because he is slightly bigger/stronger than them and their heads are filled with stereotypes about men.), that such a definition is problematic, but if his definition of violence includes intimidation, then he's working within his definition. As for the second, you can't prove a negative, how would you determine how many crimes you deterred? You can't tell if a crime didn't happen because it wasn't going to happen or if a crime didn't happen because you were oc. Since a crime didn't happen, and you have no means of knowing everyone's intent, it's immeasurable. So to reiterate, there's no need to choose here.
he literally gives the example of it intimidating and affecting regular people and not just criminals alone and BECAUSE it affects regular people and because of crime rates and instances theres no way to know if its genuinely deterring crime. it all ties together for me
I open carry and prefer open carry I have a level 2 retention holsters. I’m usually with my wife and daughter, I never had no issue store managers or people in general. I’ve also Carried in a casino and ate in a casino restaurant no issues with out people freaking out. I prefer to open carry because it is comfortable I’m very aware of my surroundings I move a certain way in stores and I’m always watching who’s watching me but I’m also polite respectful and kind. I really don’t care what people prefer and How they Carry i’ve had a guy come into Walgreens one night very late while me and my wife were getting medicine and I honestly believe he was going to rob the store he looked at me second-guessed himself and walked out it was a weird situation and everybody felt it because we all looked at each other and we thought it was weird but I was watching him because I was aware of what he was doing and he saw me as well. I live in Vegas now. I don’t think I’m a bad ass I’m actually more respectful I don’t get into altercations I avoid the them at all cost and I believe if you open carry you have to conduct yourself in a certain way and not like an asshole. I’m humble and act nothing like a douche lol Anyways everyone stay safe and Godbless
@@neutrino78x "Hey brother, you protect your family how you see fit and I will protect myself and my family how I see fit. You are a man and you make your own decisions, and I am a man and I make my own decisions as well." My motto is "it's better to have one and not ever need it than to need one and not have one."
@@neutrino78xwhy does it matter to you how he chooses to protect himself? Also great to know that you are the next best thing and the love child of Chuck Norris, Bruce Lee, and every superior MMA fighter known to man, but not everyone is as bad ass as you, and a firearm is a great equalizer. For example it can give someone who is elderly, or disabled a fighting chance, or a superior advantage against someone who wishes to do them harm. On another note law enforcement doesn't have to protect you at all, they can sit by and do nothing while witness someone getting victimized. There are several court cases through out the time span of the 80s to present day where the victims of a crime, or the family of the victims tried suing law enforcement for their inaction, and the judge sided with law enforcement saying there was and is no legal obligation or constitutional duty for law enforcement to serve, and protect the public, and that their only duty is to enforce the law. Then there is the fact that law enforcement is mostly reactionary, and not proactive when it comes to enforcing laws, and most of the time when they do respond to a call, they show up after the fact. The chances of someone having a cop show up on the spot, in the nick of time, before any serious harm is done, and/or someone is victimized in some way, is very slim, to nil.
@@neutrino78x first off, firearms are just a mere tool, if somone has ill will, they will commit the act irregardless the tool. I have a firearm in the home, does it make it more violent here, just sitting there and collecting dust? Furthermore not everyone is like you, what may work for you may not work for say someone who is disabled, to add on to that, a firearm can have more of a guarantee of stopping a threat than any other type of tool used for self defense. And it also reduces the risk of the victim injuring themselves in the process of defending themselves, where as someone would risk breaking the small bones in their hand via punching someone in the face, or hyper extending their foot, via kicking someone the wrong way. A firearm can and is also generally a great deterrent, because no sane, rational thinking person is going to victimize someone else, that they know will put up a fight, and risk life or limb to do so either, this is a proven fact, which is why the majority of active shootings occur in gun free zones, where it is illegal for someone aside from law enforcement, and/or armed security to carry a firearm.
@@neutrino78x also the job of law enforcement is to enforce the law, not deter crime, that is going into pre crime territory, they can't act until a crime is in progress, or has been committed.
@@neutrino78x again LE can't do anything at all, until they suspect a crime is in progress, or already committed. The bare minimum they must have is reasonable suspicion that a crime is in progress, or has been committed. (Which in the legal grand scheme of themes isn't high of a standard, it is probably the lowest, the highest being guilt beyond a reasonable doubt). Also I doubt you were combat arms, I strongly doubt you were combat arms while you were in the USN. I am willing to bet you were some POG that only touched a rifle a small handful of times. You also care to back up that claim of urban environments having less crime? I would love to see the citation behind that claim, especially when you have a significant crime rate in NYC, and LA for example.
Not necessarily. We have to take into account that open carry is applicable to those that don't have there CCL and many states have a lot of BS to go through to get a CCL so depending on the circumstances, why not? Also, I think a better word to use is intimidation, which yes, open carry is used as a form of intimidation.
Wisconsin, for example, has constitutional open carry but permitted concealed carry. All you need to do is show the police your ID when they ask you to.
If open carry is violence, then walking around acting and looking like you shouldn't be fucked with is violence. I agree that in most cases it is not the best idea, but calling it "violence" makes you sound like one of those people with colored hair and a valley girl accent. Also, I think your definition of "grey man" is a bit off. Most people I hear talk about it want to just avoid looking like they are probably carying a gun or a big knife, and thus make normal interactions with oversensitive and/or average people less likely to cause issues. You are a grey man. As for more reasonable scenarios to open carry, I think it may make sense if you are on your own property away from others or hiking and camping in low population areas.
If threats from an aggressive idiot aren't violence, then someone threatening your family with a visible firearm isn't violence. Isn't grounds to fear for your life. Justifiable shootings couldn't exist by your own (stupid) logic.
I conceal 99% of the time. Recently I hiked a well known trail in a vacation area with friends, figuring I'd open carry just for comforts sake. I underestimated how populated the trail would be. While I think most people were paying more attention to their next step or the picture they were taking for instagram, I still felt a little self conscious carrying openly around so many people.
First time I completely disagree with h2h-Mike. Cool. As a EU citizen, so ZERO gun rights whatsoever, even for cops. They ARE NOT allowed to take their gun home. Firstoff it is not their gun, it is state property. Secondly, they are going home aka they are now civilians with zero gun rights. Carrying a gun (and a knife) should be a right, not an obligation. So if you decide not to carry, great, almost as great as if I were to carry my gun, if allowed here in the EU. It is NON of the other persons business that I make the choice of carrying a piece. Same could be said about people that train martial arts for self defence, way more than those competing in said martial art. Why? Not because we want to get into a fight, that's for competetors. It is to see danger ahead and avoid it and when it cannot be avoided, giving you a 'fighting chance'. When some folks attack you, you are already behind on the powercurve. No need to be any weaker than this. One does not learn martial arts by taking a beating and cosequently toughen up. You study the school of hard knocks for years turning into decades and then still hope, like with fire ensurance, it was never needed. But that dreadfull day comes knocking, your number is up and that 'guy over there' wants to share with you a 'can of whoopass' because reasons... If carrying a gun prevented 1 guy attacking me, it served it's purpose. You cannot handle me carrying a gun, you purple haired wokster? Well that is a 'you problem', not a 'me problem'. GET OVER IT. Indeed concealed carry is superior to oper carry 99% of the time. But I'd rather carry open than going in naked. Remember the old Murican saying: "The .22 you carry beats the .45 you left home in any firefight by being present." There is no martial art out there that can even the playing field against multiple attackers. You know what can? A trained shooter WITH his gun. And the you gota be the douchebag and pretent to be tough WILL get you in way more dangerous trouble than being grey. With being grey you also pretend to have ezro stuff of real value on you, so there is even less reason to have an idiot crackhead specificaly attacking you. When on the other hand, you just act tough, but are weak and you do get called out. Oh boy! You gonna get F**ed majorly. Because the one thing the real tough guts hate more than a weak anti-gunner, it is a poser in their ranks. Piece of advice, if the big fish comes for your general direction. Do not toughen up, pick up your kid, apologise for being in the way and MOVE OUT. If you cannot walk the walk, do not talk tough. You may get away with it once, maybe twice, but sooner or later, someone is gonna call you out for being tougher than you actualy are. ==> hospital time. (this is where it is far superior to be a EU citizen than a Murican, we have insurance that pays the medical bills, you do not.)
The only "gray men" I've seen talking about the "gray man" philosophy are basically the opposite of your gray man costume; they think that robbers immediately and indiscriminately shoot anyone wearing cargo pants or anything olive colored. I once even saw a gray man comment about how being in good shape breaks gray man philosophy, but I think he might have been just looking for an excuse not to exercise.
Probably. Yes, you might not want to look like a bodybuilder, but the better your cardio and explosive strength, the better chance you have of getting out of a bad situation, all other things being equal. Wiry is better than bulging, but strength is better than weakness, and keep in shape but don't def.
I agree with what you're saying but I think my idea, or at least how the way it was explained to me, of a grey man is a little different than yours. The way I understand it you're not necessarily trying to be unremarkable or go unnoticed the idea is for certain things to go unnoticed IE not advertising that you could be carrying by wearing gun shirts, hats, bumper stickers that advertise that youre pro gun or, wearing "tactical" clothing or whatever.
Your Grey Man impersonation was what I refer to as "tactical civilians" . When I am out with the family I am "REI Man" , comfortable clothes, trendy pack with a whole assortment of pocket litter and kit for kicking ass!
Violence is an act. Just because someone is intimidated doesn’t mean you committed an ACT of violence or assaulted them, deterrence ≠ violence. Again violence is an act. Now you said to just look like a bad MF to deter someone or influence their behavior, but by your own definition that is also violence. So you’re saying don’t be violent by open carrying, but to be violent by looking like a BMF. With all due our logic doesn’t hold up here, pal. P.S. Speech is also not violence.
You reminded me of a few years ago at work when my boss told me to watch out for the female employees because they found out I trained in martial arts, which resulted them being concerned I was some sort of violent psycho. I wish I was making that up, but it’s true. I’m an automatic unintentional gray man. I’ve trained for over 30 years , fought full contact for ten, but always looked like a chubby Dungeons and Dragons nerd.
yeah that goes into how men sorta subconsciously size eachother up. People who have been around the block whether it be fighting or training know what to look for. Unexperienced people assume it's about looking ripped and being ultra conditioned. When it comes to defense, you learn to use the tools you have. Other guys will sniff that out and recognize "this guy is setting his posture different/angling himself, he might know a thing or two about a thing or two"
Why are women afraid of anything that has to do physical self defense. Like the only way to defend yourself is physically. Women should learn more martial arts if they wanna protect themslves. Watch they're gonna start pushing to ban martial arts and having to make you get your hands registered because it's a "deadly weapon"
I have had a few women find out and they want to show me. What they learned in some self defense seminar they took once. Or they ask to see the one move that will stop every attack. I always decline both questions. I find the guys that have never trained,are the ones who really act different.
Really great video! Nice to see someone who recognizes what it is when somebody tries to make 'intimidating everybody around them, at all times, in public spaces' part of their identity.
H2H trying real hard for my first dislike with this one. That's like saying having cauliflower ear is violence. The fact that a criminal knows that the immediate consequences for his actions are more drastic than he intended is not violence. The fact that I know that enough sufficiently egregious acts of violence can get me a death penalty does not mean the State has committed an act of violence against me.
Sir, While I am not a proponent of open carry, I disagree with the fact that it is an act of violence. For me, it is similar to those that say, “ Words are violence.” They are not, just as open carry is not. It might be offensive to some, yet it is not violent. As you say, you do have the right to be a douchebag, whether it is to open carry, which actually is a right, or a variety of other things that are legal, but a bad idea. I appreciate your work.
@@mldouglasjr from the Oxford English Dictionary vi·o·lence /ˈvī(ə)ləns/ noun noun: violence behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something. Open carry does not fit any part of this definition. Is there another definition to which you’re referring?
@@blanehowell3869 Definitions of violence An overarching definition Violence is defined by the World Health Organization in the WRVH as “the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation”.4 This definition emphasises that a person or group must intend to use force or power against another person or group in order for an act to be classified as violent. Violence is thus distinguished from injury or harm that results from unintended actions and incidents. This definition also draws attention not only to the use of physical force but also to the use of threatened or actual power. Such power or force may be used against oneself, against an individual or against a group or community, as in gang violence or repression of ethnic groups. Violence is here defined not only as resulting in physical injury but as being present where psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation occurs; acts of omission or neglect, and not only of commission, can therefore be categorised as violent. From "Violence: a glossary" by Alison Rutherford, Anthony B Zwi, Natalie J Grove, and Alexander Butchart. vi·o·lence /ˈvī(ə)ləns/ Learn to pronounce noun behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something. strength of emotion or an unpleasant or destructive natural force. "I was surprised at the violence of my feelings" LAW the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force. From Oxford languages
@@mldouglasjr ok. I read that and still do not see how open carry satisfies that definition, flawed though it is. The WHO can play with the language all they want, but still the mere act of carrying a weapon does not satisfy the conditions above.
You lost me at your opening statement. I rarely open carry but there are certainly times where open carry is appropriate. There are state laws that, in some cases, require open carry unless licensed in that state or a state with which they reciprocate. Also, there is a difference between a conditional threat of violence and violence. When I see people open carrying, I thank them. Everything we do influences others in one way or another so by your definition, nearly anything we do is violence and that is just plane stupid. To be clear, I am not suggesting everyone open carry but I certainly do not equate open carry as violence.
I will say this about open carry, I have done it in public before, I have done it in several places, including walmart before they banned it. I have also open carried in 2 different states, and have also poorly concealed 5 firearms on my person in that same time frame. The firearms that I carried, were not some micro pocket rockets on the hip either, I have openly carried a glock 19, FN Hi Power, S&W 586 4 inch barrel, Sig Sauer p320 M17, Springfield SA 35, and a Girsan MC 35. And no one has noticed anything or said anything to me. Probably because most people lack situational awareness, and do not know where to look when it comes to threat assessments, and typically don't look at someone's waist out of fear of being called out or viewed as some pervert checking people out. Furthermore I don't buy the "open carry puts a target on your back" notion, and I am willing to bet if you or anyone who thinks like you reply, you will say something like "well people go for cops' guns all the time" I ask you this, which do you think the person noticed first, the police uniform, flashing lights, giant cruiser, or the 4 inch barrel glock on their hip? There are companies that make strobe lights that LE can put on their uniforms, to prevent them from getting hit by cars during traffic stops, or when they are conducting traffic. So if people don't notice the giant police cruiser, with flashing lights, while driving (the time where their situational awareness is supposed to be at an all time high) what makes you think the average joe is going to have enough situational awareness to notice the small black object on my hip? Edit: it is also beyond common knowledge that law enforcement carry firearms, it has been common knowledge for quite some time, long before anyone in this comment section has been alive. There are even jokes about law enforcement and them carrying firearms, every single tv show/movie also shows law enforcement carrying firearms, this isn't some secret, where the cat was just let out of the bag.
I originally thought Gray Man theory was about blending in and looking unassuming...then I kept seeing it referencing people who are tacticool and want people to think they are dangerous while hiding their weapon. It makes definitions difficult. I think the whole point of open carry is to have mutual respect. If everyone did it, it would not be violence. By your logic, police are violent all the time.
He actually alluded to it when he said police presence is an act of force (government approved violence). Some dude walking around minding his own business with open carry has no effect on me at all. I personally cc but oc is fine by me.
Yeah I'm on board with a bunch of what the guy's saying but I don't like his definition of violence at all. People can concoct all kinds of reasons to be afraid of others based on appearance and I don't see why it would be good to encourage that with open carriers (even if I agree most of them are douchebags). People have felt threatened of goths, punks, bikers, etc. for what they wear or how they alter their skin supposedly being an indication of willingness to be violent. Handguns (which are just self defense firearms, totally different to shotguns, smgs, etc.) being casually open carried is something I don't see being too meaningfully different from that because it requires an interpretation of dress and would let people feel threatened or outright violated by the presence of objects that aren't really a meaningful indication of violent intent. I don't like the idea of letting/enabling people to cry about not only feeling threatened by, but supposedly violently accosted by just.. the reasonable circumstances of somebody else's dress. That seems really counter productive.
Technically, he called open carry "intimidation" then called intimidation violence. Then he said you shouldn't do that. Theeenn he contradicted himself by saying should look like you know how to kick ass (i.e. look intimidating) so bad guys will leave you alone. Theeeeeeennnnn he expected us to take him seriously. Sure thing tough guy. We'll get right on that. lmao : )
I disagree with this video. I do not comment that much on his videos because I did not disagree. If I disagree then I might comment. And I disagree with this video. Firstly, open carry is better than no carry. Second, oppressive European politicians might ban concealed carry in some areas (I am talking about American politicians that act like anti-gun European politicians.) So open carry might be forced on people by politicians. Thirdly, open carry is not a form of violence, since it is not brandishing a weapon. Saying open carry is violence is like saying a bumper sticker is violence or a "Trespassers will be shot" sign is violence. At most it is disruptive, but it is not really violence. If someone has a bumper sticker about guns then anyone reading the bumper sticker assumes they have a gun in the car, and even the most hipster yuppie Californian gun banner on the planet wouldn't claim its an act of real violence. That brings me to my fourth point: imo the vast majority of people that would be bothered by open carry, also are vehement and rabid antigun types that want to legislate away people's right to self defense, and these people are committing an actual act of violence by using unjust laws as an act of violence. So in most cases its just karma. Because the vast majority of criminals are not going to open carry while commiting a crime. The only "criminal" that might open carry would probably be some law abiding citizen that gets into a road rage incident and commits a crime by accident. The vast majority of criminals actually trying to commit a crime aren't going to open carry, so the gun banners might as well just get paranoid around any vaguely suspicious looking person they see instead of open carry people who are by far statistically less likely to do a crimes while open carrying. Someone about to do a robbery isn't gonna walk around the parking lot open carrying with a gun in their holster. In summary, open carry is slightly disruptive, but through education people can begin to realize that open carry statistically means the person is not planning on committing a crime. It is slightly disruptive even to people who own guns, but not to the point where it should be that disruptive. For instance someone driving down the road with a loud motor is far more disruptive. And there are bumper stickers that are far more disruptive and offensive than just someone happening to open carry a gun. Should we legislate loud motors and bumper stickers? Yes perhaps we should. But we should also change the laws of concealed carry. Criminals are going to concealed carry no matter what the law says, so concealed carry should not be illegal. The laws should be changed so that concealed carrying while committing a crime carries stiffer penalties. But not that concealed carry should be illegal when not committing a crime. As for the gun banners, they need to stop treading on people, and if also open carry makes them feel uncomfortable, they can just assume the gun is a bb gun or a paintball gun, or they can assume vaguely suspicious characters in hoodies have guns also.
Also, the crime reduction rate of open carry can be determined, if there was enough statistics of how many crimes in public happened to people in the same crime region depending on if they were open carrying or not.
@@earthenscience Those stiffer penalties for crime while concealed carrying should only apply for crimes that *involve* the carried weapon, in my opinion. If you do some misdemeanor crime- perhaps on accident- while concealed carrying, it shouldn't be trumped up into something more severe.
I'd would so love to see your nation! I'm a big herper lol, your wildlife is amazing, hopefully within a few years I can come see for myself. The beauty over there is definitely something I want to experience, spend time with my wife in all your beautiful places and then go into the bush for a few days and experience the animals I love in their natural landscapes!
Agree. And if that's the case then "walking around like a badass" also fits into that "spectrum". I don't open carry, and don't advocate it, but, "form of violence"? Come on, now
@@neutrino78x You agree. haha. Do you also generally agree that violence is/should be a violation of the law? Ergo, simply "walking around like a badass" should be against the law?
Coming from military.. open carry is not a bad idea. It shows a would be criminal not here not now.. also if someone is trained they are going to handle the situation. It also is a right to open carry. It invites conversation as well when it comes to the 2a.
Thanks, Icicle Michael! I’m from Canada, have been mugged at gun point, but have and interest in pursuing law enforcement as a second career at age 29. My feelings about guns are very mixed. I love the way you define violence and treat things like intimidation as such. You’re someone who likes guns more than I do (which isn’t that much), and I still agreed with everything you said.
Every single time I've seen a guy open carrying, I naturally glance at the gun and damn near every time if he sees me glancing, he adjusts his pants in a "yeah... i know you see that gun, boy" kind of way. Eye roll inducing every time.
@@obcane3072 as you should,I proudly open carry my 40 everyday it's called rights anybody who has a problem has the right to go about there business it's holster not in my hand is all that matters
Open Carry argument from someone that doesn't like open carry. Its a right that we are losing because it has became so fringe to do it. 30 years ago open carry wasn't an issue. now (because we don't do it) it is looked like exactly the way you portrayed it. which just makes it easier to get our gun rights removed by politicians. imho
I definitely don't see it as frequently as I did even 10 years ago. I think that may be in part to proliferation of 'Constitutional Carry' and proliferation of shall issue carry licensure. I'm guessing that people are now concealing where at one point they didn't have that option. When I was carrying in the open regularly it was specifically because I didn't have a concealed carry permit.
@@hard2hurt Stop spreading lies. Police use of force does not define police presence as a form a violence. It serves as a deterrent, which is not the same thing. Source: I work in law enforcement If you want to prove your point, kindly show us where in any department’s use of force policy does it define police presence as a form of violence.
The very first form of control or force listed on every single police use of force ever written and taught formally. Every single one... ever. The very presence of an officer is an exertion of force by definition according to every police trainer and is recognized in court. What a silly thing to argue about.
@@hard2hurt Again, wrong. Use of force is applied for the following reasons Gain compliance Overcome resistance Effect arrest Stop an attacker Me simply standing there isn’t doing any of that. You’re gonna make the argument that by standing there, I’m making people comply, but that’s because you simply don’t understand what force is. The law defines it as follows. “Force .- The term “force” means- (A) the use of a weapon; (B) the use of such physical strength or violence as is sufficient to overcome, restrain, or injure a person; or (C) inflicting physical harm sufficient to coerce or compel submission by the victim.” Even in the context of violence being used here, it is clearly referring to a physical thing being done to someone else. So why don’t you actually give me something concrete instead of spewing more nonsense. Not once in my academy was physical presence called force. It’s a deterrent. Know the difference and stop misleading people.
Hi Mike! Love your content. Just a little correction regarding the “ gray man” from the movie and the books. The gray man Cort Gentry is called the gray man is because he is an unremarkable person, physically. Pretty much the opposite of Jack Reacher( 6ft 5” 250 lbs).The gray man is average height, not big nor skinny. Neither ugly or Ryan Gosling pretty. Pretty much a plain dude, plain feature. 5ft 10, 170 lbs , brown hair. Good books
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
You can check out the sponsor of this video at www.jxtactical.com/
If there's no evidence to support if open carrying prevents crimes would it not be better to assume that it does because of the potential situation that could be avoided? I also understand your last point of not getting involved in a potential active shooter situation because we all have families at the end of the day that we have to take care of, though that doesn't stop it from sounding bad in that you're letting people die that you could've potentially saved... overall I think people should carry however they want as long as they get training it doesn't matter.
"looking strong is being violent because you're influencing others' behaviour by looking as though if they tried to start a fight with you then you would win" -Icy mike logic. You're an dumdum bro stop misusing the word "violence"
Mike,
Do you have any idea how hard it is to listen to someone in the 2A community try to put down one method of carry over another? 🤔
To your point about open carry. If open carry is illogical, why do police prefer open carry? If it's training, then the operative issue is training, not the carry method. It amounts to no more than "I would never use xyz gun". It's not logical. The more logical approach is "how would I use xyz gun in xyz scenario". I prefer Clint Smith's approach to every firearm, I just need to know the most efficient use of every firearm.
Also, if you think influence is a use of violence, you're saying emotions are the equivalent of physical. It's not.
Lastly, if you are promoting people to carry themselves in a way that criminals don't want to attack them, while at the same time saying you shouldn't display the more disparaging tool to deter such crime, you're displaying your own personal bias and there is a cognitive disconnect between the two actions.
advocating for open carry: it's more comfortable than concealed. it normalizes constitutional rights. out in rural missouri it's totally normal, no one's intimidated by the gun on your hip, they've got a gun on their hip too. Open carry to deter the cougars and black bears?? Nah if we out here want to intimidate anyone, it's the ATF and any other petty tyrant.
Yeah but what if you wanna open Carrie to feel or look cool?
Because I know that when I walk into Starbucks with my golden tiger striped desert eagle on my hip a ballistic face-mask, body armor and Barrett strapped on my back I feel kind of like a bad ass.
However warning for whoever wants to try this, expect places like Starbucks and other places wear colorful haired people visit will typically smells like shit in peoples pants after seven or eight seconds of you kicking open the door of the building.
Warning don’t try this in an Alabaman Walmart. Bulletproof vests are not cheap or easy to replace and in all situations expect to be on the news
I'm sure we've all seen that guy who dresses like he desperately wants you to think he's not carrying a firearm. He usually arrived in a truck with a sticker on the back window that says he's carrying a firearm.
Hahaha
With a don't tread on me sticker under it. 😂
Don't forget the Molon Labe sticker too!
@@rootapt-getworld don’t tread on me has to be the most misused thing other than the punisher skull
The Gadsden flag/logo has a real historical context and meaning. Punisher skulls do not. Molon Labe sort of does but not in an American context.
I always thought the 'grey man' idea was exactly what you said to do - wear your *normal* clothes and just hide your f***in' gun. I think what you presented as 'grey man' is what happens when a tacticool mall ninja starts to exit their 'mall ninja' phase and tone it down so they're not sticking out like a sore thumb just to end up sticking out like a slightly less sore thumb. Baby steps. Have patience with them, they will get there eventually. Maybe.
Careful disagreeing or elaborating on his video....he may take it as you correcting him, and you'll get a tongue lashing 😑
@@aztechnology7996 lmfao do you know what channel ur on?
@@ShengFink lol, yes. I've watched and supported for over a year. He sure likes to be right!
@@aztechnology7996 he does like to be right but i feel like he’s usually receptive in the comments when people add something he might have missed or elaborate further on something. idk though i haven’t looked at all the comments.
@@ShengFink Yes. My original comment was just an elaboration/expansion of the term "gray man" which was coined somewhere in the 2000's by the prepper community. KGB/CIA personnel would gather information and their job was to *continue* gathering information, often from the same sources, so that meant not carrying weapons at all. (Having a gun at all would blow someone's cover completely.) Anyways, he took it the wrong way and thought I was "correcting" him, when in reality I agree and respect his entire video. Was just expanding on the subject, because I am nerdy that way and that's what the internet is for, sharing information. Oh well
Where I am from, noticing a side arm in public has the same affect as noticing someone's nice watch.
literally. saw someone carry a really nice looking .50 AE on their hip. I was half tempted to get their contact info to see if i could shoot it one day XD
This the best argument for open carry. It re-normalizes what used to be a normal thing. Can't normalize carrying if everybody hides it.
@@Great_Wall_of_Text I mean it really want that normal except in the west, and in most towns and what not you still couldn't open carry. you checked your gun at the sheriff's office and got it back when you left.
Yep. In my state (Louisiana) open carry has always been legal. And now Constitutional carry is also legal.
Soooo... you're saying that where you live, there's a lot of douche bags? It's like wearing a shirt that says shoot me first. Just like a light on a weapon in the dark says SHOOT HERE.
I conceal carry and stay as low key as possible. I don't care about not being remembered or identified, I'm just not trying to get into anything with anyone. Out here living my best life.
Thats how a lot of guys who conceal carry be. They're not trying to be grey men they just naturally don't want to be the center of attention.
Same my friend. Just trying to enjoy my wife and my daughter. Blend in and quietly in the back.
@@ATLZombie exactly 💯
You are confusing a gray man for a tacticool try hard based off your costume lol. That kid that shot that mall shooter from 40 yards away is pretty good example of a gray man.
Wasn't a kid but a grown man
Pretty much this. This guy is strawmanning grey man pretty hard.
@@kingkazuma2239 said by someone who is less than 40.
The gray man costume in the thumbnail is a joke though
Agreed, he doesn't understand greyman. That's is the opposite of greyman.
The concept of the "gray man" has been twisted up so bad recently that it's almost unrecognizable from what it was pitched to me as. The concept of the gray man, or someone who understands urban camouflage is actually quite logical and when done right it should allow you to slip away from a bad situation. But for some reason tactinerds have bastardized the concept.
Urban camouflage. Translation: WEAR WHAT NORMAL FRIGGIN PEOPLE WEAR lol
@@primaltactics6885 Depends where you live. Urban, suburban and rural “grey man” attire can look very different. And what region of the country you’re in for some cases.
@@jaredmackey4511 very true. There’s a big difference between how people dress at Walmart and Banana republic lol, and those could be right across from each other
@@primaltactics6885 lol didn’t think about that.
Yeah, being a "gray man" means conforming to your surroundings, wearing a gray hoodie on a beach tourist spot where everyone wears brightly colored shirts just makes you stand out like a sore thumb.
The owner of the bar i was a bouncer at was an older guy that would carry a pistol in the front of his waistband. When someone wanted to get rowdy, he'd just lift his shirt up and say
"I'm too old to fight you and I don't wanna kill you, so fuck off."
Worked every time lol
Similar things happen in the uk when tough bouncers threaten people by clearly stating that they can’t handle them as they’re a pro fighter. Often young hot headed guys will come back to the club and shoot said bouncer to death…
He also probably didn't want to deal with the HELLA legal repercussions he'd face. As someone whose family has worked generations in security, yeah... guns are the FINAL resort, and he hopefully retired before going to the big house.
Too many John Waynes hiding behind the big iron until they're in prison for baiting an unarmed person into physical contact so they can shoot them. Which is a coward's play. Besides, you have the gun that ONE time, but what happens if there are multiple shooters on you because you threatened one with a gun while he was unarmed?
Hint: It won't play out like the movies. No Vigilante Charles Bronson final shoot out. You just get splatted and are removed from this life.
Guns are a final resort if you are in fear of your safety against multiple or armed people. Shooting an unarmed man YOU started a fight with because you're a bitch should never be the play.
I'm all for protecting yourself from armed threats or multiple threats using a firearm. But I'm not about to say it's right for a 60 year old man to go out looking for trouble because he thinks he can just shoot ya. Else gramps gonna be getting stuffed by some real strong dudes in the big house.
@@nunyabidness3429 you're %100 right, but this took place in Toledo Ohio which is becoming the heroin capital of the country and is a festering, ghetto stink hole that needs controlled burned to the ground so it can start over. Pretty much Detroit Junior where no one pays taxes and wannabe gang bangers (or actual gang bangers) run around acting like animals. I can't say for sure, but I bet the old guy from my story has killed at least few people in the military and was on the good side of the police - he seemed pretty confident it would have been just fine killing some piece of shit
@@BlacksmithBets yup, that shit happens dude. Never happend to me or anyone I knew, but I've heard stories
That's a REALLY bad idea. Brandishing a firearm when it isn't justified can get a person sent to prison. And once you flash that gun and the person doesn't back down then you have to use it or possibly get it taken away.
Something that's always worked for me. Be physically fit and look like someone you wouldn't want to fuck with but also be very friendly and smile a lot.
Same here!
works only on stupid bullies - which don't need any sort of weapon to be dealt with
actual criminals...? they have superiority in weapons or numbers, and won't give a single fuck about how big you are (also because they very, very well know people able to defend themselves are basically nonexistent - americans especially)
Back when I was a student I remember seeing this guy in the library openly carrying a rambo knife on his hip. He was sitting in a crowded 300 seat study room, reading his book, wearing his camo and black tee and at least three seats were free in any direction from where he was sitting. Naturally, my first thought was “good for him for serving as a crime deterrent in this dangerous enviroment!”.
While you were sitting there thinking that the guy next to you could have been concealed carrying and thinking about shooting everyone starting with you and you'll never know.
Nah that was planned he wanted the space lmao
So the fictional character rambo designed the knife. That's the first time i ever heard of a fictional character designing something
@@kroanosm617 and that's blatant insecurity. Why view everyone as a possible enemy or threat? How does that help overall? Paranoia is only helpful in espionage
@@tylerward4386 Nothing wrong with being observant of your surroundings so you are ready. After a while it just becomes second nature. But it's stupid to think the guy openly carrying a weapon and minding his own business is the threat.
I work armed security and that's the only time I open carry. When I carry in public, I do not want people to know I have a gun. People today are nuts and they don't need to know I have a gun.
I don't mean to be disrespectful, but from the point of view where I am from, carrying a gun in public at all seems just totally nuts to me. Here you might get arrested and accused if you get caught carrying any kind of weapon. Might seem restricting to you but hey at least I don't have to worry much about getting shot in public since regulated or even unregulated guns are also reaally hard to come by for a civilian.
@@BlackBulletBeretta In america just assume everyone is armed, and on drugs and itchin for an excuse to use it!.. especially on the roads..!
Here we even let kids go visibly armed to riots so they can play Dirty Harry for a day *cough Rittenhouse..
In this day and age I would almost want a gun in any country though. Even those ones that shoot pepper-spray balls are better than 'nothing'.. plus real guns have rubber bullets and pepperspray ammo if you want a 'less-lethal' option.. I load half my 9mm with non-lethal rounds and then the other half with deadly stuff.. you know incase any polar bears or meth heads jump out from that bush..
@@BlackBulletBeretta it only seems nuts within the cultural or legal context. If you knew being attacked with any kind of weapon was possible it is rational to arm oneself similarly in the interest of self prevention. If the mere possession of a weapon is viewed with criminal suspicion that is a issue of that culture or legal system. Wanting to preserve your life and the lives of those close to you isn't irrational and having a object or device to help you be a match for someone trying to harm you is a reasonable conclusion to that concern.
@@ulf3303 If you are living in a hell hole would you rather have a gun or a plane ticket out of that hell hole.
@@TheGreatOldOak what you prefer doesn't matter. What matters is what is available to you. Reality doesn't care about our preferences. And the weapon could be a means of preserving yourself until the plane tickets is acquired, so that is a false dichotomy.
I've known a few of those guys who were never in the military, never in law enforcement, didn't go hunting, but their entire wardrobe came from the Army Navy surplus store, and they'd just be walking around looking like an extra from a Steven Segall movie thinking they were blending in. I call it Dale Gribble syndrome.
But then Dale's greatest weapon is pocket sand, so maybe he's a gray man?
If you want I can show you how to make a bomb out of a roll of toilet paper and a stick of dynamite! lololol
Dale Brown syndrome.
sure, but that's not gray man. the maker of this video should actually do his research and understand what he's talking about and not misrepresent ideas. gray man is trying to disappear into the public, not wear army and tactical stuff to stand out
Lol perfect name. Dale Gribble syndrome
"Open carry is an act of violence."
"You should carry yourself in such a way as people know you're dangerous and not to be messed with."
Yeah ok dude.
The difference between "physical harm" and "lethal force" is how many plates you put on the bar.
You're basically saying it's only ok to appear dangerous if it's a complete lie. Actually being dangerous (an immutable trait/ civil right) is bad according to you.
"I often laugh at the fool who thinks himself kind merely because he lacks claws and teeth" -Nietzsche.
“You have the right to be a douchebag.” Well played.
Seems like under the same logic, being a physically imposing person is violent. Everyone is under threat of a beating. Violence is violence. That's all
Dude literally said just being there is violence. This has got to be the stupidest argument I've ever heard.
My thoughts exactly
Your body goes every where you go. Carrying a long sword on your back to Walmart makes you look like a sociopath. It's like walking into a crowd and shouting a threat. It's not the same as being muscular. You brought a lethal item with you and that item makes a statement. I wouldn't define it personally as violence but the point still stands.
@@markhendley5559 you bring a sword to walmart people will think you're a massive nerd. You bring a gun to walmart dressed like the punisher, people are gonna be worried. You bring a gun to walmart dressed like an off duty security guard, no one will care. Its all about communicating your intentions.
@@markhendley5559 I hear what you're saying but violence shouldn't be defined by subjective opinion. It's violence or it's not. And simply possessing something in a specific place is not violence
I'm a 21 year old girl who has been harassed, followed, and grabbed in public. If I have to go out at night, to work or the gas station or something, I will often open carry for my safety. Since i began doing that, i have never had a problem. Don't bash open carry entirely. I conceal most of the time, but open carry has its place, especially for single or unaccompanied women.
Yea this dude deushy about open carry. I’m my state lots of elderly open carry. They’re also easy targets who can’t defend just like small women.
@@JohnWickBabaYaga556
Spelling error lil bro
Yeah, laughing about it deterring people is really dumb. It 100% deters people, is easier to draw, and the only way it makes you "a target" is if they're 100% committed to doing some serious shit.
If he can think that drawing a gun on someone is a deterrent I don't know how open carry isn't.
I love that subtle yet reasonably in your face reminder. You can do stuff for fun. Not because it's logical. Not because it will save your life or others. Just because humans LOVE pastimes. Exactly why we've created so many. Great video Mike!
You just gotta ignore the range Fudds that think they run the joint. You're allowed to enjoy firearms just for the pure fun of shooting. Don't let a buncha beer-guts in visors tell you how to enjoy your rights. After all, they're YOUR rights.
@@nunyabidness3429 Well said!
For many it has to do with convenience, comfort, and practicality.
I mostly OC during the summer, and CC when the weather cools down.
Some of us were duped into buying some big honking hand cannon by some LGS clerk desperately trying to offload his overstock, and now can't afford to buy something actually decent for CC.
Others live in states where they can OC at 18 but can't get a CHP until 21.
Others own or work in businesses such as pawn shops, liquor and jewelry stores where the "violence" of influencing other's behavior through open carry is absolutely justified.
Yeah, that's me. I open carry during the spring and summer, and then conceal when it's coat season. I prefer "duty-size" pistols for the recoil management, so that does limit concealment factor.
Mike takes a hard loss on this one. I’m really embarrassed for him. He had to be high as fuk while making this.
4:27
“You should look, walk, talk, and act like a bad mofo”
Argument #1:
-“Open carry” is form of “violence”
-Violence is bad
-Thus, “open carry” is bad
Argument #2:
-“Grey man” appears “unremarkable”
-“Unremarkable” are “desirable targets”
-“Desirable target” is bad
-Thus, “grey man” is bad
Argument #3:
-Bad Mofo-appearance deters violence
-Violent appearance is good
-Thus, mofo-appearance is good
Huh? Isn’t open-carry a form of bad mofo-appearance? Oh wait he labels “open-carry” as a “douche”. Oh wait, he labels “grey man” as “unremarkable”. But, to him a “bad-mofo” is a “less desirable target”. Lot of word play and nonsense.
Furthermore, he says looking like a bad-mofo doesn’t make you susceptible to crime. It instead makes you susceptible to “ego fights” and can be prevented by “I’m sorry, you are right.” Assault/battery/mutual combat is no longer a crime? Apologizing stops street fights? More word play and nonsense.
1:54: Buy open carry holster!
“Surely nobody would be a charlatan, who could afford to be sincere.”
-Ralph Waldo Emerson
“Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.”
― Isaac Asimov, Foundation
“Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.”
-Gen. Mattis
Exactly! You point out his hypocrisy perfectly!
This wanna-be TH-cam gun expert tells people " Not" to train how you fight..Lmao..xD
That's a sure way to die.
You're wrong g. Open carry is explicitly showing and demonstrating "I can fucking kill you now", without needing any physical proof for that (appearance). Looking like a badass (the way you walk/carry yourself), has been scientifically proven to deter possible criminals from seeing you as a target. The difference is that open carry induces fear and uneasiness all the time, while carrying yourself like a badass doesn't inherently do that; it only induces the feeling of "this guy isn't inherently dangerous to me, but if something were to go down, he would be"
@@avor14 the bad mofo is in the eye of the beholder
@@avor14
Lmao..xD
@@avor14 Big L take.
Is this about the gray men who also drive the lifted pick up trucks with the 3%, punisher, and molon labe stickers? We don't have those in Utah. In every parking lot.
Lol. Yeah, thanks for letting every dirtbag know which truck to break into if he's looking for a free gun.
Utah is filled with them, and in Utah there is also the least amount of Veterans - uless they came from out of state or are active duty stationed in UT.
The thing that sealed open carry away in the "probably neat, but never gonna" area for me: watching videos of open carry security guards in bad areas being targeted for their firearm.
In a lot of places, that $300 gun is worth more than you are.
$300 for a handgun? what year is it?
@@roadhouse6999 I was wondering the same thing. WTF are you carrying for $300? Stop buying zip guns from pawn shops.
The price of the gun isn't really the point here is it, guys?
@@negativeionz I was using the absolute cheapest handgun I could think of. The kind that would be issued to a security guard in a bad area.
@@roadhouse6999 You can get a HiPoint .380 for about $150.
This actually keeps making me think of the live action lupin from France. He's gray and easily ignored, yet confident in his motions and can take charge of situations. Being a thief, too, he's constantly scanning his environment, number one right there.
This is a really important point for anyone carrying a weapon as well, and doubly so if you're a thief carrying a weapon LOL
Influencing behavior is not violence. Smacking the shit out of some one or shooting them or stabbing them is. You could influence behavior by being 6'5 and 260lbs of solid muscle and that may intimidate people but it is not violence . Learn what words mean dude.
Hahaha maybe look up the word before insinuating someone else doesn't know it?
@@hard2hurt I have maybe you should. Anf even lawful definition only includes intimidation by exhibition of force . Displaying a weapon or tool is not force or violence. Many people may be uncomfortable with it and I'm not saying everyone should open carry, just that it 8n and of itself is not violence.
@@hard2hurt Also I really enjoy your videos and the collaborations with other youtubers .
I'm just happy when anyone is carrying. IDC how
This story doesnt have anything to do with open or concealed carry, but him talking about carrying a gun on a hike reminded me of the day i learned why one should never go hiking unarmed. I like to tell the story when i get the chance to, it was terrifying at the time, but looking back at it now i just laugh at my own stupidity.
I never ever go hiking without a gun on me. I learned my lesson at the age of 15.
I went for a nice 8 mile hike on my own after school one day, it was one that i had done over a hundred times by that point, sometimes i would run it during the cross country season to get some extra training in.
Well, it just so happened that the specific day i decided to go on a hike there was a mother brown bear and her two cubs with her about a half mile from the entrance from the trail.
She turned around when she sensed me, and definitley saw me before i saw her. i heard the roar, looked over, and sawa big brown thing barreling towards me. Im no Olympian, but im pretty sure i gave Usain bolt a run for his money on that world record of his. I was lucky enough that the terrain was more difficult for the bear to get through (tight spaces between rocks and trees, and really dynamic terrain) than it was for myself. I sprinted a whole half mile to the camp site at the trail head, and started screaming for help. The bear was still coming after me. I heard 5 shots go off, i turned around and there was an old dude in a flannel and jeans holding a glock up and firing at the damn brown bear.
The gunshots plus a now growing group of people who were exiting their tents and trailers to see what was happening was thankfully enough to scare the bear off.
I thanked the guy profusely and then proceeded to puke my guts out into a trash can from sheer panick and fear. I genuinely thought i wasn't going to make it back home that day. Closest ive ever come to actually just pissing and shitting my pants out of fear.
Honestly bear spray might be better in such a situation and be kinder to the animal that doesn't know any better than try to eliminate or run what it perceives as a threat out of its territory. I'm all about being able to defend oneself, but there is an element of cruelty in going into an animal's home and then killing it in self-defense when your presence pisses it off. Not against hunting either, but killing an animal because _you_ fucked up is kind of wrong.
@@brainmind4070alotta bears will just run thru bear spray if they're pissed off
I'm a conceal carry guy myself but I also live in a city where 3 out of 10 people open carry.. It's a normal thing around here.. nobody cares.. I don't think there's even a brandishing law enforced around here..
Now, if you do something stupid that's gonna harm anyone, then yea, you'll have 4 different calibers entering your body..
I dont know.. I guess it depends on the area you live in..
Very true
This making the video just a hater and judgemental. He thinks he knows everything like he can read everyone mind or just look at a person and know exactly how they are sorry not possible.
I was going to say the exact same thing to him
God I wish I lived in a place where open carry was that normal. I mentioned the fact I wished I could carry a firearm at work and my boss said "that's a joke, right?" and everyone went all quiet and horrified when I didn't make out like it was a joke. Big cities in England are trash. I never felt safer shopping than in some bumblefuck nowhere Kentucky Wal-Mart.
@@AdamOwenBrowning England is one of the most dangerous cities on earth lol what a shit hole that place is. Even the cops can't carry guns while gangster are going around with them like wtf?
NO, violence is violence. Appearance is not, just like words are not violence. BIG difference.
^
|
Found one…
Lol
If those words make it easier to kill, They absolutely are violence you twit. Or do you think shitting on and dehumanizing entire groups of people doesn't have a logical conclusion that has virtually always ended in genocide?
By this logic, I am a form of violence myself. My 6'5", 320lb stature with cauliflower ears manipulates criminals and deters violence upon myself everywhere I go.
Your stature is not violence, but your comment explains exactly why the dude in this video sounds like an idiot.
I've watched a dozen or so of his videos this week, and they were all kinda silly, entertaining, and harmless. But this one presents seriously dangerous ideas as his genuine opinion, which has turned me off of all future videos from this guy.
For the record, I also think open carry is a bad idea, but it is not even remotely violent.
Intimidation is not violence, but it can prevent violence. This video somehow argued both sides.
This video:
"Grey man is dumb. You should look intimidating so bad guys leave you alone"
Also this video:
"Open carry is Intimidation, which is literal violence, so don't do it."
All paraphrased of course, but seriously, pick a lane dude.
If we accept that intimidation (open carry and/or being tall) is a violent act on everybody who sees it, then where would we even draw the line legally?
"Gaaaahhhh!" The defenders cry, "He didn't say legally!"
Maybe not, but he redefined a word which is used in law, like all words. What do you think happens when definitions change over time but legal wording does not?
You end up with people thinking "well regulated" means government restricted, "militia" means government soldiers, and "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" refers to government controlled soldiers holding weapons.
Then you have a multigenerational, continent spanning argument on your hands...because definitions changed for se people. It's a huge mess.
The ATF changed the definition of a bunch of words then used those new definitions to lable law abiding citizens felons overnight. They did it with pistol braces, they did it with forced reset triggers, they did it with pictures printed on a metal card, and they'll do it again.
Right now the definition of "violence" is in the process of changing. Where might that lead I wonder?
Changing definitions is always a legal issue eventually. You can't get around that.
Emotional trauma (like intimidation) is not violence. When you pretend that it is violence then people get thrown in jail for hurt feelings. This is a real thing that really happens.
This argument is currently taking place all over the world, and people are being dragged into court, off to jail, or put in front of human rights tribunals because of hurt feelings. You can look that shit up. It's real, even in the U.S.
So, some people don't like seeing you carry guns in public (though they think it's fine if police do it). They think your gun is intimidating, and that makes you open carrying a violent act according to this video. Should you get arrested for assault just because you didn't affirm somebody's world view? This is where that argument leads.
Dumb.
Sorry if that makes folks emotional, but the silence/misgendering/intimidation/name calling is violence thing is a gateway to madness.
Maybe I hurt your feelings, that isn't the same thing as smashing your frontbteeth in with a steel pipe. Trust me, I've experienced both. I know the difference.
Actual violence is violence. Accept no substitutes.
@@Great_Wall_of_Text Are the evil leftists in the room with you right now?
It really seems like you just did not understand this video.
(EDIT: Some dude asked me if the "evil leftists were in the room with me" , I responded with the sentence below this one, and then he deleted his comment.)
Real leftists aren't evil, just painfully oblivious and/or short sighted.
@@Great_Wall_of_Text I know this is a months old comment, but thank you for this.
@@Mightylcanis No problem. Some people need to hear it for one reason or another : )
The only support I've seen for open carry being a deterrent is from the survey of inmates convicted for violent crimes that the USCCA recently did -- which is worth a look if you haven't seen it. Something like 40% (?) of the felons they interviewed responded that knowing or believing that the person they were looking to attack was armed would make them reconsider. Not nearly enough to make me want to carry openly in most situations in light of the many issues with doing so, but I found it interesting all the same.
That same survey *also* gave great credence to the idea you espoused in this video: that criminals actively avoid targeting those who walk, talk, and generally carry themselves with self-confidence.
My response to his stance is: "open carrying is not violence its coercion under the threat of potential violence, which no different than your advice of "walk talk and act like someone who knows how to fight" I could use that same logic and go "thats violence because of presence and intimidation". I can argue having really big muscles and being tall is violence because it's physically intimidating. Any man of physical stature for example could also be violence by your use of the definition. Violence is and needs to be performed to be an real not insinuated or hinted towards. Open carrying a gun in a holster vs pointing a gun in someones face are both open carry (by open in carry in this context i mean guns be clearly visible) yet have two entirely different meanings. Holstered open carry is not violence it's simply a non-verbal PERCEIVED threat. In a world with no guns people have all sorts of ways of silently proclaiming themselves as capable of a potential for violence. Your definition is "omg hes carrying a pistol so people interact differently thats hecking violence reeee." Then what do you call someone showing up to a business meeting dressed in very expensive clothing? Bribery? Or an attractive women wearing skimpy clothes? solicitation? You're stance on open carry being violence will NEVER be correct." I think his view on it is stupid and a spit in face of gun rights, he then tries to shame people who open carry by calling them d bags. He's ascribing a moral value to open carry which is inherently VERY anti gun.
@@seanbui2724 With all due respect, I suggest you post that under the primary video comment section because you clearly feel very strongly about it and would like Mike to see it and it seems unlikely that this will happen with it hidden under my own comment.
My feelings about open carry can be generously described as "mixed".
@@SaftonYT i did. and if he reads this he wont respond because he knows its not VIOWENTZ
@@seanbui2724 you posted it as a reply.
I can offer a larger sample size that proves open carry is a deterrent to crime. Several studies have shown an average of 2.5 million times a year, a crime is stopped by a citizen with a gun and 80-93% of those are without firing a shot. 80% is 2,000,000. Whether the firearm is openly carried in a holster or brandishing, 2 million times a year, a crime in progress is stopped by displaying a firearm.
Not gonna lie was wondering if Being a Gray Man was a Wheel of Time reference. Turns out it’s just a thing. I do open carry mostly when I’m out in the desert pretending to be a cowboy. It’s for fun. There are some very rural communities around here where open carry is viewed as more normal. Guess that a gray area! Hahaha.
Man I love this comment
I also open carry out on the prairie (north dakota) and while on any wilderness situation. Its a great idea
Gray man was Alfred Fish's nickname two centuries ago
The gray man was "gray" because he faded into a crowd, was hard to identify and generally didn't stand out. Sorta the opposite of someone with a pistol visible on their belt.
Yes round here it is normal enough that the people who open carry in town are not seen as activists They are viewed as "that mechanic with the long beard who always wears a cowboy hat and open carries." or "the young guy at the auto parts store. the one who open carries not his brother." Both of this were said to me as a description. Open carry in this small town is viewed by the people I know who do not carry at all as a weird fashion choice like an earring or tattoo. But no more important then those. But for most of the country including the bigger towns around here I think Icy Mike is right on in his comments.
If open carrying a gun is violence, then isn't looking like the biggest badest mofo also violence? That will and does also influence other people's thoughts and behaviors.
I work at a gun shop that does concealed carry classes. Have to remember that not everyone can concealed carry. Ive met so many nice people that had issues in the military or normal lives that can prevent them from concealed carrying
conceal carry is hard for me during warmer months- I switch to a sling for that- guess I am a gray man??? IDK, I am comfortable LOL
When you say "Issues that prevent (Legal) Concealed Carry", should they be carrying in public at all?
@@davesdiversions8078
"should they be carrying in public at all?"
That's a question the leftists, and Democrats LOVE to hear, because it implies uniformity of intention.
Your intention is to be safe, or safe as possible.
THEIR intention is (always) to use any and all complaints from the public, to totally disarm the population by disregarding the right to keep and BEAR arms.
The elephant in the room is, life is dangerous, and most people are scared of *true* freedom.
True freedom is dangerous, but perceived freedom is far worse.
Somehow, simply SEEING a weapon carried by a normal looking person can strike fear into someone, but standing in line in a convenient store with several mean looking guys waiting to buy their 40 ounce beers isn't as intimidating as the first guy, as long as they aren't SHOWING any weapon.
People are in Walmarts around the county EVERY day, along side of criminals with small firearms in their pockets, and they DO NOT CARE about firearm laws.
Disarming normal people doesn't stop bad guys, and all the gun laws prove it.
The cognitive dissonance is astounding.
@@davesdiversions8078 Yes. The answer is always yes. Some people have skin issues that prevent contact with synthetic or animal skins. I have eczema and I can only wear 100% cotton below the belt. I've used about all there is in IWB holsters and they all cause me issues. Since I switched to OWB cross draw (proper design that tucks grip in) - it's all good. Can still conceal under a t shirt. My skin issues come from burn pits in Iraq, just FYI.
Most predators want easy victims, if they see people open carrying the first thought is not the place! This is practical example of open carrying deterring predators!
I mean its a fair guess... but nothing more.
Or.... the thief sees their next new gun, and they will be more likely to go straight to violence to get it.
It's like wearing a big Rolex to some.
So you may end up attracting what you're trying to repel.
@@brianhayford8320Is this why so many gun stores are robbed during regular business hours?
You're playing REALLY fast and loose with the term "violence" - I think you mean that open carry is a kind of intimidation or coercion stemming from the unvoiced threat of potential deadly violence. That may be unacceptable in your eyes, but it's not the same as actual violence.
Yeah? You're playing fast and loose with the terms "playing" "fast" and "loose" but that is the "cool" part about language.
I've always thought that "the grey man" was for shtf scenarios and not just referring to your carry practice. Personally I just wear normal everyday clothes and conceal carry .
in a SHTF scenario, there wouldn't be any concept of gray, everyone would be rucking their plate carrier and nobody would want to even appear that they might be able to be jumped. SHTF = society gone. "gray man" ceases to exist if society has upended temporarily.
Being unremarkable and unnoticeable in a place without any real laws or rule of society that you want to slip by just makes yourself a target because you look entirely defenseless.
This is a dilemma. In some states (not my home state), I can legally open carry but it’s illegal to conceal carry. Say I go hiking in Nevada (not my home state) and I can open carry legally, but it’s illegal to conceal carry since my CCW does not have reciprocity
If you're successfully concealed carrying, no one will know. Better to have it and not need it that need it and not have it. Better alive and dealing with the law than dead because of a bogus law
@@ArthurMorgansDeadHorse there should be no firearms allowed, open or concealed. Guns should be for hunting, and should be highly restricted and regulated
@@nathanbateman4255 The opinions of spiritual slaves like you can be disregarded offhand.
@@ArthurMorgansDeadHorse That's a class C felony in Nevada.
No dilemma, if you open carry because it's the only way you legally can, than I'd say your exempt from douchery
lmao. I mean I always thought gray man was just being like everyone else to go unnoticed while carrying you know actually blending in
One of the reasons I stopped open carrying was I noticed clerks in stores were way too helpful when they could see the gun vs when they couldn't. I want people to be their actual self around me.
My main reason for open carrying at the time was for advertising for the NRA basic pistol class I was teaching at the time. Open carrying was a decent conversation starter but once I started noticing people treating me more respectfully with it and my state switched to constitutional carry I went concealed carry all the time unless I'm hiking in the woods
That’s not respect. That was not your main reason for carrying. You are the dick he was talking about. Lol.
I had a similar reason for going concealed. One of those watershed moments was going into Sports Authority to scope out the outdoor section. Unbeknownst to me at the time, they had quietly removed anything remotely firearm related without any big public announcement. The manager on duty made it a point to step right in my path and ask if there was anything he could help me with in the most awkward manner known to man, making it very clear he didn't actually want to help me at all and really wanted to know what I was doing in his store with a gun. Needless to say between that and the complete absence of anything related to what I was looking for, I left quickly and made it a point to get my concealed carry license ASAP.
Wanna hear some bassackward foolishness? It is concealed carry only in NC state parks.
Armed society is a polite society as they say. The real solution is everyone open carrying.
@@mlm_academyofficial2041 they tried it. in the far west, still people killed each other for nothing...weapons aren't a deterrent...
"The more holes the better." Icy Mike, 2022
I've worked armed security for a number of years. One of the things I've consistently worried about are those idiots who go get coffee or whatever with a plate carrier and a long gun just to demonstrate to a bunch of uncomfortable people (including me) that they technically have the right to do so. It's all fun and games until you waltz into my place of work and I have a quarter second to figure out whether you're an idiot or an active shooter. That mental exercise has always scared the crap out of me.
Yeah, THAT is why I am generally opposed to blatant open carry. Maybe at a demonstration or protest where the point is to demonstrate in favor of constitutional rights or NORMAL Americana (which makes you a target for "mostly peaceful" firebomb tossers and masked antifatards) but just going about a normal day? Nah...MAYBE a more understated open carry pistol setup sans tactical vest or plate carrier, etc, is OK now and again but let's not go overboard.
Bingo! And when I see idiots like that approaching a gun store......I wait to see if they actually read the warning sign on the door.
lmfao .... if you have a problem decerning a threat because of gear worn or not worn and are to the point of reacting immediately you are a piss poor guard with very little training in decerning what an actual threat is
@@maddogs1989 Action beats reaction keyboard warrior. Someone comes in knowing exactly what they're going to do and how far they are willing to go to do it so you're already a step behind. You're also uniformed and openly armed which means those first rounds are coming at you. If you aren't watching and ready to react at a moments notice and trouble comes through your door then people die. I wouldn't expect some jackoff on a TH-cam comments section to have thought about that though.
@@joshuaanderson1369 Oh please educate me some more with youre smuggness thinking you know more than myself. I have 16 years of military experience as an Infantryman directly providiing security against insurgents in plain cloths as well as working armed security in the states for 5 years.
Your comment is nothing more than some untrained security guard over reacting at the smallest and simplest of things.
I like the idea of being a gray man and blending in as an introvert tactic. Less about violence and more about not having people come talk to me
Clearly you live in a very rural area because on the west coast and east coast people always try and make stupid basic conversation it just happens
It makes you a soft target. The gray man concept applies to espionage so as to seem less threatening. It does not apply to standard human communication.
The one instance I thought open carry worked for someone was when we were travelling cross country and stopped at a mom-and-pop gas station in a rural area. The guy working the counter was open carrying a large revolver, and I imagine it may have given a predator or two some second thoughts about robbing the place.
Ain't nothing wrong with going gray man! It's the tacticool operator wannabes sporting black and camis that scream douchebag.
I tend to agree with you that a store owner open carrying is a good deterrent. But I think your qualification was covered by Mike. He said that he can't think of anyone who isn't police, military or security e.g. a regular person who would benefit from open carrying. A store owner on the job is basically taking the role of security for his store.
I think people will hate no matter what, I Guarantees he's going to make a follow up video saying he was wrong about it.
Things is if the state is rather peaceful it looks unnecessary, when things get more George Floyd riot and Ukraine war desperate it looks more appropriate.
If you look around tent cities are popping up all over town, the world is starving with a terrible yield in food, there's no plan to fix anything, and I ask you if any of your friends including you know how to clean water from a river to make it safe to drink....water. lol
For me in the south yes, carrying is handy when killing and robbing is frequent. If I go to the north, nah no need then I look like goofy guy.
Here in south Texas the police are involved with the Mexican cartel, they sell drugs and order hits on people. I've seen it and if you call them to help...they won't, or if you report things they'll silence you. Homeland security is useless too, I would be very surprised if they didn't know.
So here you live in a false government, you have no freedom to bare arms(police can use it as sus to jail you), speech (can be used to jail you), or 5th Amendment (will be used to jail you).
If you choose to not talk to the police they throw you in jail to post bail, finding some nonsense on you or plant things, just to show your innocent 1 year later with thousands spent on a ankle bracelet and Bail bonds, all the judge will say, "okay your free to go" not even a sorry. It's a sad reality that Mexico was dealing with this century and not it's happening here too.
Here you carry a gun, and if someone threatened you with jail or silence, or involves you in shady shit you don't want to be a part of, stick to you guns against any man, that includes men just following orders. Being it's not hard to be sent to jail, have a fight that's not your fault in jail and end up in prison for 5 or more years because you were pushed into a corner to fight like an animal as the guards just watch and cheer. As a prisoners you'll work as a slave with nobody carring why your there or the reason as you slave away working for $0.30 an hour.
I'm not exaggerating these are real stories happening here, I wasn't aware of it intil i moved to the south side and noticed it all after college
Nazi were just men following orders too, here it's no different.
@@oscarbear7498 ppl without a gun being violent requires a gun to deal with it???
Maybe if youre looking for a reason to shoot someone you shouldn't be open carrying
@@oscarbear7498bear arms*
Bare arms is when you where your tank top in the summer, which is 9-11 months in south Texas.
LOL the "Grey Man" example you used in this vid when I was in the Army we used to refer to as "contractor casual" or "tacticool Timmy." We sometimes would joke about it being the REI/5.11 OCIE/SPEAR issue for team guys since they'd all run out and buy the exact same stuff once they got their civilian clothing allowance.
If you want to look more "grey man" then you want to dress like a NGO or someone who does outdoors stuff if you want to wear more "active" style of clothes. Otherwise you just look weird and stand out 9x out of 10. Whole point of being a "grey man" is you look like everyone around you and you don't stick out or are memorable.
I am a retired Texas LEO and open carry regularly.
You're a loudmouthed fool.
This is more about stereotypes than actually when it's the right time and place to open carry
Being fit and wearing tight clothes that show your muscles is a form of violence. You are trying to influence a situation by showing that you are fit. Also taller guys than me intimidate me so they're doing violence on me
I know it's tough... but try to follow: this video is about guns.
You said it, not us.
Influencing other peoples thoughts and behaviors is not violence PERIOD Literally everybody does that all the time just by existing. Violence requires physical action being intentionally taken to causes physical harm to someone else.
No it doesn't
@@hard2hurt Im not typically the type of guy to just sight a dictionary but since you havent given an alternative definition to what you call "violence" what about this definition seems wrong to you ?
"behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something."
Keep reading...
@@hard2hurt If you are referring to the alternate definition of "strength of emotion or an unpleasant or destructive natural force" then that is a completely different and separate type of "violence" which means something different and one which people dont use to refer to physical harm, which is why it is a grievous mistake to correlate these two definitions of violence. You cant charge people for "emotional violence". It honestly doesn't even deserve to be recognized with the word "violence" as it makes real violence mean less when it happens.
If you are referring to the alternative lawful definition of "the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force" Then in that case open carrying still isn't violence since it isnt against the law and the fact that any perceived intimidation by an outside party isnt valid because they arent being intimidated by any sort of outward "exercise of physical force".
Who said that something had to be against the law to be violence? Wtf?
By your logic walking a large dog can be considered violence.
Also called the 'Scary Dog Privilege'
Yeah i want to look like a hard target at certain times. Big dog and a headlamp at night. Head always on a swivel.
I have two small dogs that will rip your ankles apart.
@@hereweare9011 Dogs are one of the only reasons i carry pepper spray.
It absolutely can. There are groups of people who buy certain breeds for that express purpose.
As a 31+ year uniformed police officer (military and federal), I've never been a fan of open-carry on my own time. I agree that open-carry is part of the "officer presence" that I don't want to convey when I'm off-duty. Also, I don't want to always have to have my head on a swivel like I do when I'm in uniform. That said, I always thought I was doing the "gray man" thing, but I think I have a different view of what "gray man" means. I don't think it means totally blending into the background, being completely non-descript, unnoticed or non-threatening. I always felt it meant that there's absolutely no way for the average fellow citizen to know whether or not I'm carrying a weapon, nor my threat level to a would-be attacker. I would hope that most people who are carrying concealed put up enough of a front that discourages attacks in the first place; I've barked my way out of a few potentially dangerous situations over the years, avoiding the fight and potential harm or legal issues that result. What I have come to really dislike - and mostly because this was me for a few years - is the "range instructor" guy. You know, the guy who runs his weekend errands in the 5.11 cargo pants and micro-fiber polo shirt (maybe with a Glock or Kimber logo on the chest) and the Under Armor side-zip tactical boots and hat like he's on his lunch break from teaching housewives how to find their sight picture at the local range while telling them about his exploits as an "operator" back in the day. I never instructed housewives and I still wear the hats, but I've learned to save the rest of that gear (in combination) for range days and clay shooting with the homies. Dressing "normal" with proper concealment is what "gray man" should be; not invisible, but also not intentionally drawing attention. My current search is for a few good pairs of joggers that will support my G48 in a kydex holster, without paying a fortune for the ones with an internal belt; I'm thinking I'll have to get something with the Ulti-clip to make that work. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Mike!
I've kinda been in the middle about all this and have opened carried and conceal carried for a long time. I will say that I think the word you should use instead of "violence" is "force."
Definition of violence:
"Violence is the *use* of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy"
Definition of Force:
"coercion or compulsion, especially with the use or threat of violence."
Carrying a weapon openly does not mean it has been *used.* But it definitely has a coercive affect on those around you. People don't seem as interested in having normal conversations and just seem like they want you to go away.
I would agree that open carrying makes people uncomfortable and draws a lot of unnecessary attention (at least in the US, certain countries its very normal to carry around weapons openly like in Israel, an M16 strapped on the back of an Israeli Commando at all times when they're just hanging out having fun in their civis is normal and no one bats an eye).
So while I'm in favor of concealed carry i think there is a time and place for open carrying. Hence why cops open carry. Its a show of force and places them in a position of power and is why a cop will always try to disarm others around them, to maintain control of the situation and estab authority.
Tl;dr
Yawn. He already addressed that. Force is official violence. If you aren’t an official gun carrying person, you have no claim to Force.
Definition of douchebag:
You.
Violence has more definitions than that, coercive force as violence is widely agreed as being true by academics in the field. See Zizek’s book ‘Violence’ for an in depth discussion
Yeah dude but you are no cop, this video is not about cops. Of course they have to open carry, if they don't, they would not survive a single day. In which country they don't open carry? They even do it here in Switzerland and they are about the only ones who are allowed to carry a gun. Almost no one else is allowed to, Security is not allowed to, just the cops and here there usually never happens so much bullshit, so it's ok. I'm not even allowed to have a gun at all, cause i once hurt someone who attacked me and you know what? I still feel more save that i would in the U.S.A. 🤣
Why did you just use the definition that you liked... this is so embarrassing for you.
Intimidation isn’t violence it’s a threat of violence at most, or, more often, the suggestion of the promise of violence. Scaring someone isn’t violence. Passive intimidation is passive. Active intimidation (suppressing fire) is violence. How you came to this understanding of violence is strange. Anyways, Mr P., it was an ok video. Wanted to butt punch you for your definition of violence, just to clarify, but overall not bad.
Correct, here is the definition of violence: Violence is the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy.
That last sentence was hilarious mate
I'll second that. I'm a large bloke, and I look like I could terrify a bulldog. I am intimidating, despite being a gentle giant type. By this guy's logic, I am a violent person, just for looking like I could hurt you. Intimidation is intimidation. Violence is following through with physical harm.
@@Graytail shame on you, walking around committing acts of violence by your mere presence. Vile criminal!
Deterring crime is violence, and no idea what grayman is.
I live in a very rural area, everyone open carries. Anything from coyotes, badgers, rabies raccoons, cougars, bears, etc. Open carry is the most common in my area. I would say that what I was told by the sheriff very much applies and is a good thing to live by. If you live in the sticks, fuck it, open carry. If you live in the city, go gray man. No need to draw excess attention to yourself. Fit in with your environment, go about your business, have and live a beautiful life.
EDIT: Would also like to interject, there is a difference between aggression and violence. Open carrying is aggression, not violence. I CC, but don't mind others OC, not a hater, you do you bubby.
EDIT: I'm so stupid, didn't realize this video was a year old, it just popped up in my recommendeds, sorry for commenting on a dead video.
I think the entire mood and setting is completely different in a rural area versus an urban area. Peoples stress levels and levels of paranoia is probably much lower in the countryside, where people are more in contact with nature and encounter much fewer people. Crime rates are much lower. And the purpose for carrying a gun is usually aimed more at wild game than people, so it less reason for paranoia.
One big danger with open carrying guns (I think particularly for a city biome) is someone could mistake you for an active shooter. Maybe someone tries to stop you, you may not be the only one with a gun. It may or may not outweigh the potential for deterring other crime. It is about circumstance and can go both ways
The best advice I've been given...........
1 Use common sense in avoiding places and situations that could be dangerous.
2 Don't appear to be a great target for crime. Showing large amounts of money or valuables.
3 Don't act like a victim.......
I like the videos and the channel. Quick critique, I would argue open carry is force but not violence. I think the distinction is important. Having a forceful presence is much the same thing. Looking intimidating is a deterrent, but I wouldn’t call it violent.
Granted carrying a gun has a different societal context; but I feel like the idea is the same. You aren’t making a direct threat or attack (violence) but you are making it clear you will engage in violence (force). Just a thought.
Potential force. Not actual force. Just like a guy with big muscles.
And yeah, carrying a gun is different in socal context. In some places, if you Aren’t, you are the outsider. In cities, you need to stay concealed because people freak out when the veil of “safety” is lifted.
If rather noone know what level of violence in willing to engage in.
Yeah, I took issue with this. He seems to not be able to differentiate deterrence and violence. One of the main purposes of deterrence is prevent violence.
I tried making this point to him but he’s too arrogant to admit he’s wrong.
??? you can tell he isnt a gun guy, if you are going to carry a pistol. open carry..
if you have to "insert do anything but instantly draw" your gun is all but useless in a situation you would need it.
also, them knowing you have a gun, is a deterrent. shops that open carry have less robberys...
people who open carry get robbed less....
its pretty much the whole point of carrying a gun.
for the off chance you are going to use it to protect somebody else, and kill somebody, chances are if your gun was showing, they wouldnt attempt to do whta they did.
I have never ever experienced this open carry violence you speak of, and I am around plenty of open carry people. Usually I just go "ok" and move on. But then, none of them ever acted weird.
You didn't experience it because you weren't considering committing a crime.
@@hard2hurt I guess I am ok with people considering committing a crime being intimidated. I think that considering committing a crime invalidates any feelings you have about open carry. Since intimidation is something they feel, they could just as easily decide to not feel it. Or, you know, decide not to commit the crime.
It just seems weird to me that you care about a potential criminals feelings. Especially with the likelihood that it is a violent crime (requiring someone to draw their pistol). Sure, they haven't committed a crime, but if the only thing stopping them is they are afraid of an open carry, well, good on open carry.
Who said I care about a criminal's feelings? (You're nearly there... you're so close... hint: your argument with this video was formed against something I never actually said)
@@hard2hurt You literally said open carry is violence, dude. 5:10 ish I would like to see the reasoning there. Nobody is committing a violent act merely by open carrying. I didn't say you cared about the criminals feelings, either. I just said it's ok for them to feel scared. But that doesn't mean violence is being committed on them. It's all in their head.
I don't think open carry or grey man is self defense either.
But you did say "Those will also be the people who will take issue that I (You) said "Open carry is violence". I guess if you think police presence is violence, then sure. But I don't see how merely the presence of an officer is violence either.
Your rebuttal to this is that it feels violent to criminals. Well, aside from that being in their head and therefore not objective reality, I think it's ok if they imagine violence and are deterred.
@@Fwibos "It just seems weird to me that you care about potential criminals feelings." Maybe I misunderstood that.
So is wearing that martial arts shirt an act of violence too? Yes.
Influencing the thoughts and behaviors of others isn't violence. If that were true every politician would be committing violence. Violence is using physical force to cause injury.
I mostly agree with your take on open carry. There's a time and a place.
However, living in a constitutional carry state, the more the general public is exposed to guns, the more comfortable they become over time.
There's a bbq place nearby that encourages carry ond offers a discount if you're packing. Safest place in town.
i agree that exposure helps normalize it, but i don't agree that carrying in places where it's not really wanted by the majority of the occupants is effective... right to do so aside, i think that mindset is no different than people who think that if you dont like "x" gender, sexuality, ethnicity, etc. then you are an oppressor... we need to incentivize people to want to work with guns; unfortunately, most people i know that attempt to have that conversation have giant egos and are condescending as hell, a problem that riddles the gun community, even within... forcing people to live in uncomfortable environments and being forced to accept someone elses opinion under the intimidation of violence via firearm is not a long term effective way to get people to like guns... the whole left vs right gun debate is where it is because both sides keep doubling down instead of actually opening up a conversation... just my two cents tho
Two problems with the "make them more comfortable" theory behind open carry:
1) It's rude. Deliberately and forcibly rubbing someone's nose in something they disapprove of isn't going to convince them to agree with you.
2) It's self-defeating. Reducing fear without also increasing understanding will reduce firearms' ability to deter while also increasing the risk of tragedy that comes with failing to respect the danger they present.
@irrelevantfish1978
So, it's rude and self defeating to follow the law as outlined by our constitution as well as the state of Tennessee? So be it. We should have never had the unconstitutional gun laws that prevented carry in the first place. Folks around here consider the establishments that encourage carry to be absolutely the safest places around.
@@codyway7424 Would it be polite or productive for the LGBTQ+ people in your town to exercise their legal and constitutional right to engage in flamboyant make-out sessions and loud discussions of the joys of non-standard sexual behavior while in public places? I mean, surely exposure to their views and practices would aid in normalizing them and reducing prejudice, right?
All open-carry-as-political-expression is going to do is convince gun-haters that gun-owners are a bunch of inconsiderate douchebags, and I fail to see how any good could come from that.
@irrelevantfish1978
I don't think they are any lgbtq+ folks around here. Most kids are raised in church and have proper parenting.
I still don't see how open carry is rubbing someone's nose in it. I am a Ga fan in Tn country and routinely wear a Ga hat. Is that rubbing someone's nose in it, lol?
All I can say is that right here and now, folks are not concerned about open carry or ball caps. Generally, they are conversation starters. Never had a problem. Never had anyone indicate that they were uncomfortable. But, I have been carrying inside the wasteband lately just for a change. More grey man at the mall and such.
Yeah I was selling cars and this guy walks up to me with his shirt pulled up a little bit on top of his appendix carry firearm and he kept resting his hand on it. It just felt like he was trying to take control of the situation by use of his firearm instead of just talking to me like a normal person. Open carry for me is just the same idea where most people I've seen use it as a means for pushing conversations into their benefit. I think if somebody is crazy enough to start doing some bad shit they don't give af if you have a gun on your hip.
Yeah, I personally don't give a damn if I know someone has a firearm. Most of them have never used one in violence or had one used on them. I'll just think they're a douchebag and they'll have even less power in any conversation
@Paul Martin how so
@@stephen8996 I can't say if it can be called a better society, but back in the 1800s, open carry was typical. People walked around strapped like cowboys. Concealed was actually the suspicious thing to do, as only crooks had a reason to hide if they had a firearm on them to get an element of surprise or hide their intentions.
once they put their hand on the firearm I would consider that a threat..
@@theyhateme8763 Agreed. I make it a point to keep my hand away from my firearm while out-and-about. If my hand goes toward it, it means I'm the one sensing a threat. Thankfully, that hasn't happened once in the twelve years I've been carrying.
So on one hand you claim open carry is violence because its meant to intimidate and therefore it is violence. On the other you also claim there is no way to know if it intimidates someone into not engaging in a crime?
I need you to pick one boss.
Your wording is weird to me, should be:
"So on one hand you claim open carry intimidates and therefore it is violence. On the other you claim there is no way to know if it(open carry, or oc) deters someone from engaging in a crime?"
"I need you to pick one boss."
Nah, there is no other hand, they aren't mutually exclusive, on one hand he made both claims. The first one can be argued, since lots of people are intimidated by lots of things other people don't think are intimidating and/or can't be helped(Like many women are intimidated by the mere presence of a man, just because he is slightly bigger/stronger than them and their heads are filled with stereotypes about men.), that such a definition is problematic, but if his definition of violence includes intimidation, then he's working within his definition. As for the second, you can't prove a negative, how would you determine how many crimes you deterred? You can't tell if a crime didn't happen because it wasn't going to happen or if a crime didn't happen because you were oc. Since a crime didn't happen, and you have no means of knowing everyone's intent, it's immeasurable. So to reiterate, there's no need to choose here.
he literally gives the example of it intimidating and affecting regular people and not just criminals alone and BECAUSE it affects regular people and because of crime rates and instances theres no way to know if its genuinely deterring crime. it all ties together for me
This was one of the stupidest things I have ever sat through. In fact, I am pretty sure I lost brain cells by sitting through it.
When he said "being yourself is important too." That's when I knew we had a connection.
I open carry and prefer open carry I have a level 2 retention holsters. I’m usually with my wife and daughter, I never had no issue store managers or people in general. I’ve also Carried in a casino and ate in a casino restaurant no issues with out people freaking out. I prefer to open carry because it is comfortable I’m very aware of my surroundings I move a certain way in stores and I’m always watching who’s watching me but I’m also polite respectful and kind. I really don’t care what people prefer and How they Carry i’ve had a guy come into Walgreens one night very late while me and my wife were getting medicine and I honestly believe he was going to rob the store he looked at me second-guessed himself and walked out it was a weird situation and everybody felt it because we all looked at each other and we thought it was weird but I was watching him because I was aware of what he was doing and he saw me as well. I live in Vegas now. I don’t think I’m a bad ass I’m actually more respectful I don’t get into altercations I avoid the them at all cost and I believe if you open carry you have to conduct yourself in a certain way and not like an asshole. I’m humble and act nothing like a douche lol Anyways everyone stay safe and Godbless
@@neutrino78x "Hey brother, you protect your family how you see fit and I will protect myself and my family how I see fit. You are a man and you make your own decisions, and I am a man and I make my own decisions as well." My motto is "it's better to have one and not ever need it than to need one and not have one."
@@neutrino78xwhy does it matter to you how he chooses to protect himself? Also great to know that you are the next best thing and the love child of Chuck Norris, Bruce Lee, and every superior MMA fighter known to man, but not everyone is as bad ass as you, and a firearm is a great equalizer. For example it can give someone who is elderly, or disabled a fighting chance, or a superior advantage against someone who wishes to do them harm. On another note law enforcement doesn't have to protect you at all, they can sit by and do nothing while witness someone getting victimized. There are several court cases through out the time span of the 80s to present day where the victims of a crime, or the family of the victims tried suing law enforcement for their inaction, and the judge sided with law enforcement saying there was and is no legal obligation or constitutional duty for law enforcement to serve, and protect the public, and that their only duty is to enforce the law. Then there is the fact that law enforcement is mostly reactionary, and not proactive when it comes to enforcing laws, and most of the time when they do respond to a call, they show up after the fact. The chances of someone having a cop show up on the spot, in the nick of time, before any serious harm is done, and/or someone is victimized in some way, is very slim, to nil.
@@neutrino78x first off, firearms are just a mere tool, if somone has ill will, they will commit the act irregardless the tool. I have a firearm in the home, does it make it more violent here, just sitting there and collecting dust? Furthermore not everyone is like you, what may work for you may not work for say someone who is disabled, to add on to that, a firearm can have more of a guarantee of stopping a threat than any other type of tool used for self defense. And it also reduces the risk of the victim injuring themselves in the process of defending themselves, where as someone would risk breaking the small bones in their hand via punching someone in the face, or hyper extending their foot, via kicking someone the wrong way. A firearm can and is also generally a great deterrent, because no sane, rational thinking person is going to victimize someone else, that they know will put up a fight, and risk life or limb to do so either, this is a proven fact, which is why the majority of active shootings occur in gun free zones, where it is illegal for someone aside from law enforcement, and/or armed security to carry a firearm.
@@neutrino78x also the job of law enforcement is to enforce the law, not deter crime, that is going into pre crime territory, they can't act until a crime is in progress, or has been committed.
@@neutrino78x again LE can't do anything at all, until they suspect a crime is in progress, or already committed. The bare minimum they must have is reasonable suspicion that a crime is in progress, or has been committed. (Which in the legal grand scheme of themes isn't high of a standard, it is probably the lowest, the highest being guilt beyond a reasonable doubt). Also I doubt you were combat arms, I strongly doubt you were combat arms while you were in the USN. I am willing to bet you were some POG that only touched a rifle a small handful of times. You also care to back up that claim of urban environments having less crime? I would love to see the citation behind that claim, especially when you have a significant crime rate in NYC, and LA for example.
Not necessarily. We have to take into account that open carry is applicable to those that don't have there CCL and many states have a lot of BS to go through to get a CCL so depending on the circumstances, why not? Also, I think a better word to use is intimidation, which yes, open carry is used as a form of intimidation.
Wisconsin, for example, has constitutional open carry but permitted concealed carry. All you need to do is show the police your ID when they ask you to.
If open carry is violence, then walking around acting and looking like you shouldn't be fucked with is violence. I agree that in most cases it is not the best idea, but calling it "violence" makes you sound like one of those people with colored hair and a valley girl accent.
Also, I think your definition of "grey man" is a bit off. Most people I hear talk about it want to just avoid looking like they are probably carying a gun or a big knife, and thus make normal interactions with oversensitive and/or average people less likely to cause issues. You are a grey man.
As for more reasonable scenarios to open carry, I think it may make sense if you are on your own property away from others or hiking and camping in low population areas.
lol
If threats from an aggressive idiot aren't violence, then someone threatening your family with a visible firearm isn't violence. Isn't grounds to fear for your life. Justifiable shootings couldn't exist by your own (stupid) logic.
I conceal 99% of the time. Recently I hiked a well known trail in a vacation area with friends, figuring I'd open carry just for comforts sake. I underestimated how populated the trail would be. While I think most people were paying more attention to their next step or the picture they were taking for instagram, I still felt a little self conscious carrying openly around so many people.
Would you have felt that way if about a third of the hikers were also open carrying?
@@Argonnosi probably not
Seems to me then that you just have to get over what others might think
@@sith1986 I wasn't worried about what they think. I just don't like drawing attention.
@@WarMachine550 in my mind that's the same thing
First time I completely disagree with h2h-Mike. Cool.
As a EU citizen, so ZERO gun rights whatsoever, even for cops. They ARE NOT allowed to take their gun home. Firstoff it is not their gun, it is state property. Secondly, they are going home aka they are now civilians with zero gun rights.
Carrying a gun (and a knife) should be a right, not an obligation. So if you decide not to carry, great, almost as great as if I were to carry my gun, if allowed here in the EU. It is NON of the other persons business that I make the choice of carrying a piece. Same could be said about people that train martial arts for self defence, way more than those competing in said martial art. Why? Not because we want to get into a fight, that's for competetors. It is to see danger ahead and avoid it and when it cannot be avoided, giving you a 'fighting chance'. When some folks attack you, you are already behind on the powercurve. No need to be any weaker than this. One does not learn martial arts by taking a beating and cosequently toughen up. You study the school of hard knocks for years turning into decades and then still hope, like with fire ensurance, it was never needed. But that dreadfull day comes knocking, your number is up and that 'guy over there' wants to share with you a 'can of whoopass' because reasons...
If carrying a gun prevented 1 guy attacking me, it served it's purpose. You cannot handle me carrying a gun, you purple haired wokster? Well that is a 'you problem', not a 'me problem'. GET OVER IT. Indeed concealed carry is superior to oper carry 99% of the time. But I'd rather carry open than going in naked. Remember the old Murican saying: "The .22 you carry beats the .45 you left home in any firefight by being present."
There is no martial art out there that can even the playing field against multiple attackers. You know what can? A trained shooter WITH his gun.
And the you gota be the douchebag and pretent to be tough WILL get you in way more dangerous trouble than being grey. With being grey you also pretend to have ezro stuff of real value on you, so there is even less reason to have an idiot crackhead specificaly attacking you. When on the other hand, you just act tough, but are weak and you do get called out. Oh boy! You gonna get F**ed majorly. Because the one thing the real tough guts hate more than a weak anti-gunner, it is a poser in their ranks.
Piece of advice, if the big fish comes for your general direction. Do not toughen up, pick up your kid, apologise for being in the way and MOVE OUT. If you cannot walk the walk, do not talk tough. You may get away with it once, maybe twice, but sooner or later, someone is gonna call you out for being tougher than you actualy are. ==> hospital time. (this is where it is far superior to be a EU citizen than a Murican, we have insurance that pays the medical bills, you do not.)
"its ok to have fun,... its important to be yourself" - Hard2hurt lol great video!
The only "gray men" I've seen talking about the "gray man" philosophy are basically the opposite of your gray man costume; they think that robbers immediately and indiscriminately shoot anyone wearing cargo pants or anything olive colored. I once even saw a gray man comment about how being in good shape breaks gray man philosophy, but I think he might have been just looking for an excuse not to exercise.
Probably. Yes, you might not want to look like a bodybuilder, but the better your cardio and explosive strength, the better chance you have of getting out of a bad situation, all other things being equal. Wiry is better than bulging, but strength is better than weakness, and keep in shape but don't def.
@Icy Mike 1,000,000%, my man! I got more quotes out of this 13 minute piece than out of “The Princess Bride”
I agree with what you're saying but I think my idea, or at least how the way it was explained to me, of a grey man is a little different than yours. The way I understand it you're not necessarily trying to be unremarkable or go unnoticed the idea is for certain things to go unnoticed IE not advertising that you could be carrying by wearing gun shirts, hats, bumper stickers that advertise that youre pro gun or, wearing "tactical" clothing or whatever.
Your Grey Man impersonation was what I refer to as "tactical civilians" . When I am out with the family I am "REI Man" , comfortable clothes, trendy pack with a whole assortment of pocket litter and kit for kicking ass!
Sounds like an Alaskan
Violence is an act. Just because someone is intimidated doesn’t mean you committed an ACT of violence or assaulted them, deterrence ≠ violence. Again violence is an act. Now you said to just look like a bad MF to deter someone or influence their behavior, but by your own definition that is also violence. So you’re saying don’t be violent by open carrying, but to be violent by looking like a BMF. With all due our logic doesn’t hold up here, pal. P.S. Speech is also not violence.
You reminded me of a few years ago at work when my boss told me to watch out for the female employees because they found out I trained in martial arts, which resulted them being concerned I was some sort of violent psycho.
I wish I was making that up, but it’s true.
I’m an automatic unintentional gray man. I’ve trained for over 30 years , fought full contact for ten, but always looked like a chubby Dungeons and Dragons nerd.
yeah that goes into how men sorta subconsciously size eachother up. People who have been around the block whether it be fighting or training know what to look for. Unexperienced people assume it's about looking ripped and being ultra conditioned.
When it comes to defense, you learn to use the tools you have. Other guys will sniff that out and recognize "this guy is setting his posture different/angling himself, he might know a thing or two about a thing or two"
Thank you for your service........nerd........jk about the nerd part lol
People knowing my background of martial arts seems to influence their behavior minimally from what I can see.
What sorts of changes do you see?
Why are women afraid of anything that has to do physical self defense. Like the only way to defend yourself is physically. Women should learn more martial arts if they wanna protect themslves. Watch they're gonna start pushing to ban martial arts and having to make you get your hands registered because it's a "deadly weapon"
I have had a few women find out and they want to show me. What they learned in some self defense seminar they took once. Or they ask to see the one move that will stop every attack.
I always decline both questions. I find the guys that have never trained,are the ones who really act different.
Really great video! Nice to see someone who recognizes what it is when somebody tries to make 'intimidating everybody around them, at all times, in public spaces' part of their identity.
People's feelings shouldn't affect the way you carry tbh
H2H trying real hard for my first dislike with this one.
That's like saying having cauliflower ear is violence. The fact that a criminal knows that the immediate consequences for his actions are more drastic than he intended is not violence. The fact that I know that enough sufficiently egregious acts of violence can get me a death penalty does not mean the State has committed an act of violence against me.
Not an ankle lock.
Sir,
While I am not a proponent of open carry, I disagree with the fact that it is an act of violence. For me, it is similar to those that say, “ Words are violence.” They are not, just as open carry is not. It might be offensive to some, yet it is not violent. As you say, you do have the right to be a douchebag, whether it is to open carry, which actually is a right, or a variety of other things that are legal, but a bad idea. I appreciate your work.
Sir,
Please look up the definitions of the word "violence." It most certainly is.
@@mldouglasjr from the Oxford English Dictionary
vi·o·lence
/ˈvī(ə)ləns/
noun
noun: violence
behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
Open carry does not fit any part of this definition. Is there another definition to which you’re referring?
@@blanehowell3869 Definitions of violence
An overarching definition
Violence is defined by the World Health Organization in the WRVH as “the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation”.4
This definition emphasises that a person or group must intend to use force or power against another person or group in order for an act to be classified as violent. Violence is thus distinguished from injury or harm that results from unintended actions and incidents. This definition also draws attention not only to the use of physical force but also to the use of threatened or actual power. Such power or force may be used against oneself, against an individual or against a group or community, as in gang violence or repression of ethnic groups. Violence is here defined not only as resulting in physical injury but as being present where psychological harm, maldevelopment or deprivation occurs; acts of omission or neglect, and not only of commission, can therefore be categorised as violent.
From "Violence: a glossary" by
Alison Rutherford, Anthony B Zwi, Natalie J Grove, and Alexander Butchart.
vi·o·lence
/ˈvī(ə)ləns/
Learn to pronounce
noun
behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
strength of emotion or an unpleasant or destructive natural force.
"I was surprised at the violence of my feelings"
LAW
the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force.
From Oxford languages
@@mldouglasjr ok. I read that and still do not see how open carry satisfies that definition, flawed though it is.
The WHO can play with the language all they want, but still the mere act of carrying a weapon does not satisfy the conditions above.
@@blanehowell3869 K
You lost me at your opening statement. I rarely open carry but there are certainly times where open carry is appropriate. There are state laws that, in some cases, require open carry unless licensed in that state or a state with which they reciprocate.
Also, there is a difference between a conditional threat of violence and violence. When I see people open carrying, I thank them. Everything we do influences others in one way or another so by your definition, nearly anything we do is violence and that is just plane stupid.
To be clear, I am not suggesting everyone open carry but I certainly do not equate open carry as violence.
"When I see people open carrying, I thank them."
🤣🤣🤣
That's the great thing about America we're all allowed our own opinions .
Open carry is NOT violence. It is open acknowledgment that violence is a possibility. These are VERY different things.
That's weird. I thought the idea of "gray man" WAS to wear regular clothes and keep your concealed firearm... well, concealed.
I will say this about open carry, I have done it in public before, I have done it in several places, including walmart before they banned it. I have also open carried in 2 different states, and have also poorly concealed 5 firearms on my person in that same time frame. The firearms that I carried, were not some micro pocket rockets on the hip either, I have openly carried a glock 19, FN Hi Power, S&W 586 4 inch barrel, Sig Sauer p320 M17, Springfield SA 35, and a Girsan MC 35. And no one has noticed anything or said anything to me. Probably because most people lack situational awareness, and do not know where to look when it comes to threat assessments, and typically don't look at someone's waist out of fear of being called out or viewed as some pervert checking people out. Furthermore I don't buy the "open carry puts a target on your back" notion, and I am willing to bet if you or anyone who thinks like you reply, you will say something like "well people go for cops' guns all the time" I ask you this, which do you think the person noticed first, the police uniform, flashing lights, giant cruiser, or the 4 inch barrel glock on their hip? There are companies that make strobe lights that LE can put on their uniforms, to prevent them from getting hit by cars during traffic stops, or when they are conducting traffic. So if people don't notice the giant police cruiser, with flashing lights, while driving (the time where their situational awareness is supposed to be at an all time high) what makes you think the average joe is going to have enough situational awareness to notice the small black object on my hip?
Edit: it is also beyond common knowledge that law enforcement carry firearms, it has been common knowledge for quite some time, long before anyone in this comment section has been alive. There are even jokes about law enforcement and them carrying firearms, every single tv show/movie also shows law enforcement carrying firearms, this isn't some secret, where the cat was just let out of the bag.
Don't take this dude seriously his thought process is shallow
I originally thought Gray Man theory was about blending in and looking unassuming...then I kept seeing it referencing people who are tacticool and want people to think they are dangerous while hiding their weapon. It makes definitions difficult.
I think the whole point of open carry is to have mutual respect. If everyone did it, it would not be violence. By your logic, police are violent all the time.
He actually alluded to it when he said police presence is an act of force (government approved violence).
Some dude walking around minding his own business with open carry has no effect on me at all. I personally cc but oc is fine by me.
Open carry or die.
They are
Yeah I'm on board with a bunch of what the guy's saying but I don't like his definition of violence at all. People can concoct all kinds of reasons to be afraid of others based on appearance and I don't see why it would be good to encourage that with open carriers (even if I agree most of them are douchebags).
People have felt threatened of goths, punks, bikers, etc. for what they wear or how they alter their skin supposedly being an indication of willingness to be violent. Handguns (which are just self defense firearms, totally different to shotguns, smgs, etc.) being casually open carried is something I don't see being too meaningfully different from that because it requires an interpretation of dress and would let people feel threatened or outright violated by the presence of objects that aren't really a meaningful indication of violent intent.
I don't like the idea of letting/enabling people to cry about not only feeling threatened by, but supposedly violently accosted by just.. the reasonable circumstances of somebody else's dress. That seems really counter productive.
@@PhyreI3ird That is so true!
Bro called open carrying in public a form of violence and then expected us to take him seriously.
Technically, he called open carry "intimidation" then called intimidation violence. Then he said you shouldn't do that.
Theeenn he contradicted himself by saying should look like you know how to kick ass (i.e. look intimidating) so bad guys will leave you alone.
Theeeeeeennnnn he expected us to take him seriously.
Sure thing tough guy. We'll get right on that. lmao : )
I disagree with this video. I do not comment that much on his videos because I did not disagree. If I disagree then I might comment. And I disagree with this video. Firstly, open carry is better than no carry. Second, oppressive European politicians might ban concealed carry in some areas (I am talking about American politicians that act like anti-gun European politicians.) So open carry might be forced on people by politicians.
Thirdly, open carry is not a form of violence, since it is not brandishing a weapon. Saying open carry is violence is like saying a bumper sticker is violence or a "Trespassers will be shot" sign is violence. At most it is disruptive, but it is not really violence. If someone has a bumper sticker about guns then anyone reading the bumper sticker assumes they have a gun in the car, and even the most hipster yuppie Californian gun banner on the planet wouldn't claim its an act of real violence.
That brings me to my fourth point: imo the vast majority of people that would be bothered by open carry, also are vehement and rabid antigun types that want to legislate away people's right to self defense, and these people are committing an actual act of violence by using unjust laws as an act of violence. So in most cases its just karma. Because the vast majority of criminals are not going to open carry while commiting a crime. The only "criminal" that might open carry would probably be some law abiding citizen that gets into a road rage incident and commits a crime by accident. The vast majority of criminals actually trying to commit a crime aren't going to open carry, so the gun banners might as well just get paranoid around any vaguely suspicious looking person they see instead of open carry people who are by far statistically less likely to do a crimes while open carrying. Someone about to do a robbery isn't gonna walk around the parking lot open carrying with a gun in their holster.
In summary, open carry is slightly disruptive, but through education people can begin to realize that open carry statistically means the person is not planning on committing a crime. It is slightly disruptive even to people who own guns, but not to the point where it should be that disruptive. For instance someone driving down the road with a loud motor is far more disruptive. And there are bumper stickers that are far more disruptive and offensive than just someone happening to open carry a gun. Should we legislate loud motors and bumper stickers? Yes perhaps we should. But we should also change the laws of concealed carry. Criminals are going to concealed carry no matter what the law says, so concealed carry should not be illegal. The laws should be changed so that concealed carrying while committing a crime carries stiffer penalties. But not that concealed carry should be illegal when not committing a crime. As for the gun banners, they need to stop treading on people, and if also open carry makes them feel uncomfortable, they can just assume the gun is a bb gun or a paintball gun, or they can assume vaguely suspicious characters in hoodies have guns also.
Also, the crime reduction rate of open carry can be determined, if there was enough statistics of how many crimes in public happened to people in the same crime region depending on if they were open carrying or not.
@@earthenscience Those stiffer penalties for crime while concealed carrying should only apply for crimes that *involve* the carried weapon, in my opinion. If you do some misdemeanor crime- perhaps on accident- while concealed carrying, it shouldn't be trumped up into something more severe.
Manipulation is wrong but it definitely is NOT violence. Violence is violence. AOC says stuff like this about speech and its extremely flawed logic.
Ahh yes as an australian I find this incredibly useful information. Jokes aside I find your videos super interesting and just cool.
I'd would so love to see your nation! I'm a big herper lol, your wildlife is amazing, hopefully within a few years I can come see for myself. The beauty over there is definitely something I want to experience, spend time with my wife in all your beautiful places and then go into the bush for a few days and experience the animals I love in their natural landscapes!
"Open carrying a pistol is a form of violence."
lmao
Watch out, he might also think hurt feelings are violence, then you're in big trouble : )
Agree. And if that's the case then "walking around like a badass" also fits into that "spectrum". I don't open carry, and don't advocate it, but, "form of violence"? Come on, now
@@neutrino78x You agree. haha. Do you also generally agree that violence is/should be a violation of the law? Ergo, simply "walking around like a badass" should be against the law?
Coming from military.. open carry is not a bad idea. It shows a would be criminal not here not now.. also if someone is trained they are going to handle the situation. It also is a right to open carry. It invites conversation as well when it comes to the 2a.
Thanks, Icicle Michael!
I’m from Canada, have been mugged at gun point, but have and interest in pursuing law enforcement as a second career at age 29.
My feelings about guns are very mixed.
I love the way you define violence and treat things like intimidation as such. You’re someone who likes guns more than I do (which isn’t that much), and I still agreed with everything you said.
Geoff, also from Canada here. Guns are just a tool my man. Nothing more. It's the operator that matters.
Icicle Michael lmao
@@ReubenPastrami do you prefer shooting people, or just threatening others with violence?
@@ReubenPastrami the only reason you would open carry a firearm is for intimidation purposes. Intimidation is violence, just not physical violence
Every single time I've seen a guy open carrying, I naturally glance at the gun and damn near every time if he sees me glancing, he adjusts his pants in a "yeah... i know you see that gun, boy" kind of way. Eye roll inducing every time.
Every single time I see a guy with open carry, I just go about my life.
@@obcane3072 as you should,I proudly open carry my 40 everyday it's called rights anybody who has a problem has the right to go about there business it's holster not in my hand is all that matters
Gray-man and tacti-turd are two VASTLY different things. Thought you would know that.
I... do..? You're confused lol.
I’m a former Daytona Beach LEO and have always been in support of Open Carry.
^Proof that you don't have to be intelligent to be an LEO
Or that he believes in The Bill of Rights and has integrity; took his oath seriously to uphold The Constitution.
This is one of the moments when I know.... I'm not getting this time back.
I feel like the point of open carry is to get a community to do it that way would be criminals would know they couldn't fuck with anyone
Open Carry argument from someone that doesn't like open carry. Its a right that we are losing because it has became so fringe to do it. 30 years ago open carry wasn't an issue. now (because we don't do it) it is looked like exactly the way you portrayed it. which just makes it easier to get our gun rights removed by politicians. imho
I definitely don't see it as frequently as I did even 10 years ago. I think that may be in part to proliferation of 'Constitutional Carry' and proliferation of shall issue carry licensure. I'm guessing that people are now concealing where at one point they didn't have that option. When I was carrying in the open regularly it was specifically because I didn't have a concealed carry permit.
How is open carry not a form of deterring bad behavior?
Open carry isn’t violence. It’s not brandishing. It’s not menacing. Saying crazy things doesn’t make them so.
"Crazy" huh?
Thank you for talking about the police presence as a form of violence. Most people won't admit that.
I don't think there are people who don't "admit" it. Maybe people who don't know that? It is in every police use of force training curriculum.
Great point. Lol
@@hard2hurt Stop spreading lies. Police use of force does not define police presence as a form a violence. It serves as a deterrent, which is not the same thing.
Source: I work in law enforcement
If you want to prove your point, kindly show us where in any department’s use of force policy does it define police presence as a form of violence.
The very first form of control or force listed on every single police use of force ever written and taught formally. Every single one... ever. The very presence of an officer is an exertion of force by definition according to every police trainer and is recognized in court. What a silly thing to argue about.
@@hard2hurt Again, wrong. Use of force is applied for the following reasons
Gain compliance
Overcome resistance
Effect arrest
Stop an attacker
Me simply standing there isn’t doing any of that. You’re gonna make the argument that by standing there, I’m making people comply, but that’s because you simply don’t understand what force is. The law defines it as follows.
“Force .- The term “force” means- (A) the use of a weapon; (B) the use of such physical strength or violence as is sufficient to overcome, restrain, or injure a person; or (C) inflicting physical harm sufficient to coerce or compel submission by the victim.”
Even in the context of violence being used here, it is clearly referring to a physical thing being done to someone else. So why don’t you actually give me something concrete instead of spewing more nonsense. Not once in my academy was physical presence called force. It’s a deterrent. Know the difference and stop misleading people.
Hi Mike!
Love your content.
Just a little correction regarding the “ gray man” from the movie and the books. The gray man Cort Gentry is called the gray man is because he is an unremarkable person, physically. Pretty much the opposite of Jack Reacher( 6ft 5” 250 lbs).The gray man is average height, not big nor skinny. Neither ugly or Ryan Gosling pretty. Pretty much a plain dude, plain feature. 5ft 10, 170 lbs , brown hair.
Good books
>says open carry is stupid
>says the opposite of open carry is stupid
>refuses to give a superior option
>ends the video
Is this a Chad?
You didn't watch the whole video... or you didn't understand it.
@@hard2hurt I quite possibly didn't understand it, I'm not a gun owner yet, just enjoy watching gun content.