I have studied all the principles which come up in our open carry "debates" (for lack of an accurate characterization,) for years now. I call this one the deterrence argument. I think it is a valid consideration, but you should understand we take it on faith.
1) Anecdote- If people tell a story where it didn't go well they consider the argument falsified.
2) Survivorship Bias- Nobody is keeping track of successful deterrence incidents. We know it really happens but only from a few anecdotes related by criminals who admitted that they avoided someone who was carrying. You cannot count incidents that never happened and were never reported.
3) Complexity- All social interactions are complex including this kind of deterrence. It is an over-simplification to say the visible gun alone is the factor in deterrence, just as it is equally invalid to say that the presence of the gun alone makes you a target.
4) Motivation- We accept an argument for reasons which may not be clear to us. Confirmation bias has become a buzzword now, but it is good if you assume you are susceptible to it and take care. If you are not convincing anyone with an argument which you consider to be decisive, it is good to figure out why.
My purpose here is to have my ideas tested and challenged. Writing on the forum for me is a great way to learn. I have no need to justify myself to anyone here, though I don't mind anyone who does. BTW, I believe that if I ever go on trial, everything I have written here will be read out and used against me in court.
Correction and contradiction is heartily welcome! My friend Rockquarry has told me I am wordy and pedantic. This is true. I am grateful if you bear with me as I impose upon your patience.
Kind Regards,
BrianD