So, I got into a back and forth with some folks who are totally against open carry of rifles. As justification for their position, they asserted Kyle Rittenhouse provoked his attackers simply by “brandishing” the S&W AR-15 he was carrying. They stated open carry of rifles should not be allowed due to the provocation aspect, that people automatically feared them and had negative reactions to someone displaying such a dangerous weapon.
The first, and perhaps the most obvious question that came to mind was this: Is it more rational to fear the seen or the unseen? Why would the open display of a long gun be more terrifying than not knowing whether someone was carrying a concealed handgun?
As to my personal experience, open carrying lets people know you are armed and immediately informs the public of the increased risk of negatively interacting with you. I’m not a fan of open carry of any firearm for reasons I’ll cover a bit later -but I personally wouldn’t carry a long gun for personal defense. I say that because most personal defensive actions occur in less that 25 feet or so and in those situations a long gun, especially a rifle, is much more cumbersome as it requires more time and physical space to bring on target.
An AR would not be the choice of anyone who knew he would be engaged in a fight inside 25 feet. It is a hell of a lot harder to deploy, accurately aim, and fire a long gun than it is a handgun in close quarters.
For close quarters combat, a handgun is much easier to quickly deploy, aim and fire. My skills aren’t as honed as they once were, but sheer muscle memory coupled with my carry weapon makes me (and people like me) fairly formattable if I were ever to be attacked.
Of course, when it comes to long guns (and shotguns), home defense is a little different because there is likely to be more space to operate, more time to prepare, and you are operating in a familiar environment. Long guns are appropriate tools for that application.
I thought it was interesting that AR platformed rifles generate far more concern than handguns. No agency keeps data on defensive use of firearms, so I looked to the FBI cataloging of the Uniform Crime Reporting statistics for homicides. The 2020 table reveals the latest data shows handguns are ten times more likely (3500 vs. 302) to be used in homicides than are rifles (of all types, the FBI doesn’t break out AR’s as a category).
So, I thought about comparing rifles (which, by their physical nature and dimensions are difficult to conceal on a person) to some other weapon that is commonly openly carried, but does not generate the hysteria of someone with an AR draped in a tactical sling. Knives came to mind. People openly carry tactical folding knives and fixed blade hunting knives in public all the time. Pretty much every day, I carry a Smith and Wesson Extreme Ops folding knife with a 3.4-inch blade clipped to my belt or pocket. I know a lot of people in the trades who carry similar cutting instruments as part of their daily dress code – the point being that when people see those knives in public, they never think twice about them.
But the fact is that lack of concern allows people to get close, much closer than most of the hysterics would get to someone with a visible long gun, and I can assure you that a 3.4-inch blade, one as sharp as I keep mine, could do some serious damage. Sliced across a jugular, stuck in a femoral or brachial artery, or simply plunged between the ribs into a lung could end a life in minutes.
According to the FBI homicide statistics, knives/cutting instruments accounted for 877 homicides in 2020, almost 3 times the rate of homicide by rifle.
The long and short of it is that people have been taught to fear AR-15’s in a way they do not fear knives, even though knives are used more often. Even shotguns do not engender the hysteria reserved for the AR platform. That weapon has been mythologized to be the embodiment of legendary and magical destructive powers rising to become the equivalent to Mjölnir, Thor’s mighty hammer.
So why are some more afraid of someone open carrying an AR than a knife when knives are clearly more deadly (statistics prove they are)?
The difference, if there is any, is in the eye of the observer.
From the earliest times of colonization, to the 1980's or so, people carried long guns wherever they went. It was not uncommon at my high school to see pickups in the parking lot with guns in gunracks. Maybe that is why there were not school shootings in the 60's, 70's and 80's - the presence of firearms was a deterrent.
Nobody was afraid of them until people were taught to be afraid.
Let me ask the question again - is it more rational to fear what you can see than what is unseen?
Personally, I think open carrying of an AR is a bit much, I’m not that guy, but at least it is an obvious sign that tells people that this person is ready to defend themselves. It gives people an opportunity to assess the risk according to their levels of tolerance.
I don’t open carry because I don’t like giving away the advantage of people not knowing I am armed. For me, that is an additional level of security, another step to take before the situation becomes kinetic. Many times, just letting a potential assailant know there is a weapon in play will dissolve the threat.
In my hands, my Ruger or Beretta is far more dangerous than my AR would be, especially in close combat.
And you would never know I was carrying unless I let you know.