Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 52

Thread: Seeking guidance

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    13

    Seeking guidance

    Carrie Moats infers in her forum posts and interviews that she enjoys the shock value of OC and she likes it when people think she's law enforcement. But such sketchy remarks reflects poorly on rational, responsible gun owners. It makes people reluctant to have a serious discussion on gun rights. At a high level, open carry removes a significant crime deterrent and that’s the implicit fear that anyone could be carrying concealed. Concealment prevents avoidable challenge - nobody attempts to disarm the seemingly unarmed. The second amendment is endowed upon the private citizen to keep and bear arms and it guarantees the right to private gun ownership. The government cannot require a permit for anyone legally allowed to possess a firearm, to be in possession of a firearm when on their private property - this aligns with the right to privacy - when in private. Call that "gun privacy". There is however, no such thing as the right to privacy when in public. When you're in public, you have the right to "public". The government absolutely has the right - and responsibility - to require a permit (but may not refuse to issue such a permit if the individual is legally allowed to possess a firearm) for an individual to be in private possession of a firearm when in public. Governments typically don't issue open carry permits and private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public. This is usually a privilege restricted to law enforcement who need ready access to their weapon as a normal requirement of their daily duties. It's difficult to argue the justification for a private citizen having that same requirement. I seek the open carry community's wisdom in helping me to understand these issues. Thanks for taking the time.
    Last edited by RioDio; 02-25-2012 at 05:06 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,929
    Quote Originally Posted by RioDio View Post
    The government absolutely has the right - and responsibility - to require a permit (but may not refuse to issue such a permit if the individual is legally allowed to possess a firearm) for an individual to be in private possession of a firearm when in public. Governments typically don't issue open carry permits and private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public. This is usually a privilege restricted to law enforcement who need ready access to their weapon as a normal requirement of their daily duties. It's difficult to argue the justification for a private citizen having that same requirement.
    You believe this?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by PistolPackingMomma View Post
    You believe this?
    Hi. "private possession of a firearm in public" means concealment - sorry if that wasn't clear. I absolutely agree with the permit requirements for concealment. "Private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public" is a fact. You cannot generally travel while openly carrying. OC is prohibited by law in states such as Texas (surprised me too!), Florida and Illinois. And finally, do you really expect the private citizen to be purposefully engaged in situations requiring the same frequent access to and visibility of their weapon? Thanks for helping me to better understand OC!

  4. #4
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,446
    Quote Originally Posted by RioDio View Post
    Carrie Moats infers in her forum posts and interviews that she enjoys the shock value of OC and she likes it when people think she's law enforcement. But such sketchy remarks reflects poorly on rational, responsible gun owners. It makes people reluctant to have a serious discussion on gun rights. At a high level, open carry removes a significant crime deterrent and that’s the implicit fear that anyone could be carrying concealed. Concealment prevents avoidable challenge - nobody attempts to disarm the seemingly unarmed. The second amendment is endowed upon the private citizen to keep and bear arms and it guarantees the right to private gun ownership. The government cannot require a permit for anyone legally allowed to possess a firearm, to be in possession of a firearm when on their private property - this aligns with the right to privacy - when in private. Call that "gun privacy". There is however, no such thing as the right to privacy when in public. When you're in public, you have the right to "public". The government absolutely has the right - and responsibility - to require a permit (but may not refuse to issue such a permit if the individual is legally allowed to possess a firearm) for an individual to be in private possession of a firearm when in public. Governments typically don't issue open carry permits and private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public. This is usually a privilege restricted to law enforcement who need ready access to their weapon as a normal requirement of their daily duties. It's difficult to argue the justification for a private citizen having that same requirement. I seek the open carry community's wisdom in helping me to understand these issues. Thanks for taking the time.
    You have a serious misunderstanding of the 2nd Amendment. Keep doing research on the original intent of the amendment and don't believe the revisionists twist.
    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran MSG Laigaie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Philipsburg, Montana
    Posts
    3,137
    RioDio said "And finally, do you really expect the private citizen to be purposefully engaged in situations requiring the same frequent access to and visibility of their weapon?"

    No, that is why I wear my weapon. I OC to prevent contact with BGs. I see you are in Washington and new here. Welcome to OCDO. We meet for coffee and conversation in Bellingham, Sunday, 1000, Bakerview Starbucks. Come on down, we should talk.

    Do you Open Carry or are you just looking for information?
    "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference .When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." -- George Washington

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Venator View Post
    You have a serious misunderstanding of the 2nd Amendment. Keep doing research on the original intent of the amendment and don't believe the revisionists twist.
    Hi. I appreciate that you have taken the time, and while I'm trying to learn from the experienced community, I'm not sure how helpful are replies that are basically like 'You're wrong, go away and read more'. The mere fact that the 2nd Amendment does not explicitly address carry and concealment and leaves it up to continual judicial reinterpretation and that OC is outright banned in seven states makes your suggestion rather insulting. The very point that this is confusing is precisely the reason I'm seeking information from the experts in OC - those who live with it every day. I graciously approached this forum with my questions and would appreciate insightful responses. Thanks.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,929
    Quote Originally Posted by RioDio View Post
    Hi. "private possession of a firearm in public" means concealment - sorry if that wasn't clear. I absolutely agree with the permit requirements for concealment. "Private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public" is a fact. You cannot generally travel while openly carrying. OC is prohibited by law in states such as Texas (surprised me too!), Florida and Illinois. And finally, do you really expect the private citizen to be purposefully engaged in situations requiring the same frequent access to and visibility of their weapon? Thanks for helping me to better understand OC!
    The second Amendment specifically states "Shall not be infringed" which basically means the Government shall make no provision that interferes with how one CHOOSES to carry.

    I'm truly glad you are seeking education on Open Carry, but if you really want to understand it, I recommend you check all the notions you have regarding it at the door, because they conflict with facts.

    Open is legal in 43 states.

    You CAN travel while openly carrying; my husband and I have done it many times through several states.

    A private citizen carrying a gun and encountering a bad guy should have all the same convenience and access to their self defense firearm as any police officer. Why are cops special?

    I'm (asking and stating) all of the above calmly, respectfully and sincerely.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    127
    While I do not OC all time, I do always carry. I do have a CHL (Concealed Handgun License - I am in Oregon) and concealed carry often. The 2nd Amendment does not include OC or CC because that is the right of any person legally allowed to own a gun; it is a personal preference and should be left up to a legal gun owner.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    The idea that law-abiding citizens during the Colonial era who were armed in their daily lives were all walking around with a Brown Bess slung over their shoulders and a brace of flintlock pistols in their belts is absurd. The archeological and historical record show that "pocket pistols" were incredibly common in that era, and the archeology of clothing shows that many topcoats of the era has specially-designed pockets in them for carrying small arms.

    Carrying concealed was just the NORMAL way to carry small guns for years. Most gentlemen and businessmen of the time carried concealed--for many reasons. One, having guns hanging all over you wasn't "fashionable". Two, it made sense to have a small handgun somewhere on your person, because without ANY kind of organized police forces, citizens were LITERALLY on their own with regards to personal safety and crime prevention. Third, most street criminals didn't use guns back then because small handguns were expensive--they used knives, swords, bats and bludgeons. A handgun--even a small single-shot gun--could be a POWERFUL deterrent...

    The government has no more right to require a permit to CC than it does to require a license to buy a laser printer, printers ink, or a religious text.

    What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not get?
    Last edited by Dreamer; 02-26-2012 at 10:28 PM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie View Post
    RioDio said "And finally, do you really expect the private citizen to be purposefully engaged in situations requiring the same frequent access to and visibility of their weapon?"

    No, that is why I wear my weapon. I OC to prevent contact with BGs. I see you are in Washington and new here. Welcome to OCDO. We meet for coffee and conversation in Bellingham, Sunday, 1000, Bakerview Starbucks. Come on down, we should talk.

    Do you Open Carry or are you just looking for information?
    Hi. I have real concerns. As you may know well, in many gun shops in WA, they sell the 'Workman' booklet ("Washington State Gun Rights and Responsibilities" by Dave Workman). My copy is the latest 2011 revision. In chapter 4, 'Concealed and Open Carry', the book, in no uncertain terms, claims that an individual may be arrested and 'rightfully so' for OC or even 'printing' while CC and charged with 'public menace' under RCW 9.41.270 AND have their CPL revoked! Either Workman is a liar, or I actually do 'roll the dice' each and every time I may accidentally show a portion of my holster or even weapon - let alone wear openly - that somebody may get nervous and call the police. Now, I actually do in fact have a legal team that could essentially string somebody up if this became a real issue for me. But why should I have to live with this anxiety every day of my life? I'm not trying to be crude, but this effectively puts the only true concealment - 'Where the sun don't shine' - if you catch my drift.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    127
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    he idea that law-abiding citizens during the Colonial era who were armed in their daily lives were all walking around with a Brown Bess slung over their shoulders and a brace of flintlock pistols in their belts is absurd. The archeological and historical record show that "pocket pistols" were incredibly common in that era, and the archeology of clothing shows that many topcoats of the era has specially-designed pockets in them for carrying small arms.

    Carrying concealed was just the NORMAL way to carry small guns for years. Most gentlemen and businessmen of the time carried concealed--for many reasons. One, having guns hanging all over you wasn't "fashionable". Two, it made sense to have a small handgun somewhere on your person, because without ANY kind of organized police forces, citizens were LITERALLY on their own with regards to personal safety and crime prevention. Third, most street criminals didn't use guns back then because small handguns were expensive--they used knives, swords, bats and bludgeons. A handgun--even a small single-shot gun--could be a POWERFUL deterrent...

    The government has no more right to require a permit to CC than it does to require a license to buy a laser printer, printers ink, or a religious text.

    What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not get?

    ^Seems most of us are in agreement...

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by PistolPackingMomma View Post
    The second Amendment specifically states "Shall not be infringed" which basically means the Government shall make no provision that interferes with how one CHOOSES to carry.

    I'm truly glad you are seeking education on Open Carry, but if you really want to understand it, I recommend you check all the notions you have regarding it at the door, because they conflict with facts.

    Open is legal in 43 states.

    You CAN travel while openly carrying; my husband and I have done it many times through several states.

    A private citizen carrying a gun and encountering a bad guy should have all the same convenience and access to their self defense firearm as any police officer. Why are cops special?

    I'm (asking and stating) all of the above calmly, respectfully and sincerely.
    I am open to real facts - I am here to learn. The reason I'm so confused is I keep hearing that things 'should be this way' or 'those laws violate the 2nd amendment', etc. I'm seeking reality. Hoping for an ideal world won't keep me from getting arrested, today. See my other post for context. Thanks for your help!

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    127
    If you scroll down to your state area, there should be more information concerning your physical location

    but just because some guy writes a book, doesnt mean it isnt fiction....

  14. #14
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,622
    RioDio - Are these your opinions or are you just quoting Carrie Moats?

    If you claim ownership, it would seem that your thread title "Seeking Guidance" is somewhat misleading. You seem to be seeking contention and make numerous openly challenging remarks not supported by facts.

    You challenge the right to open carry - the OP states that (1) "private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public and "It's difficult to argue the justification for a private citizen having that same requirement."

    .....
    (1) Private citizens do have the right to OC in public in a vast majority of states.

    .....(2) It is very easy to argue that a private citizen's life has the same value as a LEO's.

    All in all a strange posting for someone that implies they are an advocate.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    RioDio - Are these your opinions or are you just quoting Carrie Moats?

    If you claim ownership, it would seem that your thread title "Seeking Guidance" is somewhat misleading. You seem to be seeking contention and make numerous openly challenging remarks not supported by facts.

    You challenge the right to open carry - the OP states that (1) "private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public and "It's difficult to argue the justification for a private citizen having that same requirement."

    .....
    (1) Private citizens do have the right to OC in public in a vast majority of states.

    .....(2) It is very easy to argue that a private citizen's life has the same value as a LEO's.

    All in all a strange posting for someone that implies they are an advocate.
    I've presented all of my current understanding to the forum, which is admittedly lacking and includes the results of numerous conversations I've had with 'the other side' of this issue. I probably should have included my immediate underlying concerns in my original posting, so as to avoid any confusion. But I didn't yet know the temperature of the forum and how it would have been received. I'm not yet certain that I don't regret my decision to ask here.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    127
    Hey rio, noone here is going to insult your ideas (unless they are trolls)...this forums is for you to connect to other gun owners across the country/globe and share ideas. As I said earlier, you should read around the 'Washington' area of the forums for a better idea in your state. we all should be friends and support each other in this endeavor to preserve the rights of our fellow countrymen by working within the laws and exercising our rights.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by 45 Fan View Post
    Hey rio, noone here is going to insult your ideas (unless they are trolls)...this forums is for you to connect to other gun owners across the country/globe and share ideas. As I said earlier, you should read around the 'Washington' area of the forums for a better idea in your state. we all should be friends and support each other in this endeavor to preserve the rights of our fellow countrymen by working within the laws and exercising our rights.
    Thank you. I wonder if there are those who really make day-to-day decisions for themselves based upon what they believe is-or-is-not / should-or-should-not-be legal, or if they really give advice based upon such opinions. If I think I have the moral right to something, I'd better be willing to bet that I can explain my rationale well enough to the police or to a judge to get me out of a jam. Otherwise, such opinions can only be relevant in the context of legislative activism - actually starting a movement and working with my district's rep to get a proposition going. That's the very place I find myself now. Unanswered questions - assumptions and unnecessary risk. Thank you for the suggestion - I will certainly repost in the appropriate State forum. Take care.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    127
    im just here to make friends and to learn a bit about the states...i do like to be in the 'know'...

  19. #19
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Quote Originally Posted by RioDio View Post
    At a high level, open carry removes a significant crime deterrent and that’s the implicit fear that anyone could be carrying concealed. Concealment prevents avoidable challenge - nobody attempts to disarm the seemingly unarmed.
    I would posit that quite the opposite is true.
    It's been suggested that there are about 6-million people licensed to carry firearms throughout the United States. For the sake of argument and because some states do not require licensing, let's wildly inflate that by three times, and suppose that there are 18-million firearm carriers in the USA. Currently the population of the country is in the neighborhood of 311-million. That's right around 2% of the population if my wild exaggerations of how many people carry arms on a daily basis are correct.
    Given those figures, I think it can safely be said that unarmed citizens vastly outnumber the number of citizens carrying firearms.

    I think we may reasonably draw a parallel between a mugger who wishes to avoid encountering an armed citizen and say, a bigot who wishes to avoid green-skinned people.
    Let us also assume that, like concealed carriers, the green-skinned may hide among the non-colored population? I'm imagining that little scene in Blazing Saddles with the Klan meeting....


    Now imagine that you're a mugger/bigot who wishes to avoid confronting the armed/green-skinned individual in the above photo.
    You can either....
    1) approach one of the people on the left who could be armed/green-skinned; but you can't be sure
    .... or
    2) approach one of the people on the right, both of whom there is no doubt about being armed and without a doubt not green-skinned.

    Avoiding which group will maximize your chances of avoiding the armed or green-skinned?

    With concealed arms, there is about a 2% chance that anyone you don't see carrying a firearm will turn out to be carrying arms; with open carry the odds that anyone you see carrying arms is unarmed is probably..... a bit less than 0%. If I was a mugger that wanted to go home alive and unperforated at the end of the day, I'd definitely chose to mug the people I couldn't see were carrying a pistol, the odds are quite high that they are unarmed.

    With concealed arms, there is about a 2% chance that anyone encountered will be armed, with openly carried arms there is probably somewhere in the 100% range that anyone seen with a firearm is armed.
    Since the majority of citizens are unarmed, carrying concealed only Increases the possibility that one will be confronted in the belief that 98% of those encountered will be unarmed.
    With visible arms, there is about a 100% chance that you a
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 02-25-2012 at 08:55 PM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    127
    Just remember, open carrying a firearm also marks you out. If i was robbing a bank and saw a gun on a hip, you would be the first one popped to gain control...just saying...CC does have its own advantage/disadvantage.

  21. #21
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,622
    Quote Originally Posted by 45 Fan View Post
    Just remember, open carrying a firearm also marks you out. If i was robbing a bank and saw a gun on a hip, you would be the first one popped to gain control...just saying...CC does have its own advantage/disadvantage.
    NO, no, not these old wives tales again!

    There has been one (1) confirmed case of an OC gun snatch out of the millions of such events.

    The OCer that is preemptively taken out hasn't been found yet - no cited event ever in these United States in modern times.
    You odds are better of being struck by lightening twice in the same place at high noon.

    Don't care whether you OC, CC or noC, but please don't repeat imagined incidents as if they were reality - they're fairy tales.

    What is much more likely to happen and has been reported on OCDO is that the BG seeing the armed citizen, decides to quickly depart w/o completing his crime(s). Not likely to happen with CC because you cannot see any difference between an unarmed man and a CCer.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  22. #22
    Regular Member WOD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Onalaska WA
    Posts
    225
    When a regular Joe/Joan Citizen goes to a Federal Firearm Licensed dealer in WA state, before Joe/Jean Citizen can take legal possession of any handgun, he/she fills out paperwork. This paperwork gets sent to several agencies, some local, some federal, to determine if Joe/Joan is legally allowed to own a handgun, set forth by the laws regulating him/her in their home state. When he/she is cleared by those agencies, he/she can return to the store where the handgun was purchased, to accept possession of the weapon. WA state is an Open Carry state, therefore, it IS legal to openly carry a non-concealled handgun, anywhere allowable by the laws of their home state. WA state does NOT have a law saying it is ILLEGAL to openly carry a handgun, thereby making it LEGAL, to do so. Unless of course, there are laws in the RCW's describing where handguns are NOT allowed; IE - school zones, jails, mental facilities, court houses, and bars where alcohol is consumed on the premises, and in vehicles. Even some of these laws have 'exceptions', which are described in the Firearms Safety, The Law & You booklet, that you can obtain at the Sheriffs' Dept., whether applying for a CHL or not. The way WA law is written, is that if it isn't described as ILLEGAL, then it IS LEGAL.

    When I bought my handgun, I did everything listed above, paperwork and purchase, ( I then went right to the courthouse/sheriffs to apply for my CHL ) waited, took possession. At that time, I didn't know WA state was an Open Carry state! I didn't find out about Open Carry for several days after I started the entire process. To be completely honest, I wasn't sure I would be allowed to own a handgun. I was pleased when I got the call that my paperwork came in, and I was able to pick up my handgun. A few weeks later I received my (CCL/CHL/CPL) license. I found out about Open Carry by accident, when I was researching Reciprocity, and saw the two maps. One map showed Open Carry states, and the other showed states that had a Reciprocity agreement with WA. Forget Illinois completely, they suck for everyone, so, citing Ill. as a non OC state holds no water with this discussion.

    Now, for myself, I enjoy the best of both worlds, and I don't have to disarm/unload in the course of my daily activities (unless specified by law, or private policies that business's have - which is THEIR right to adopt ). I don't worry about whether someone sees my handgun in its holster, when I'm out and about. I have the option to choose HOW I carry, and I will carry openly, or concealed, but the choice is determined by the time and place. If I'm around home, or in the company of people I trust, then I'll OC. If I'm in unfamiliar territory, and I get the vibe to conceal, then I will CC. If in the same unfamiliar area, I may also choose not to CC, I'm flexible and thoughtful about the situation at hand. First and foremost though, is the fact that my firearm will NEVER leave its holster in public, until it is required. I will guess that 100% of the folks who post here, feel the same way. As for the person you brought up in your OP, that's his/her OPINION, there are many folks who say and do dumb things, which, reflect poorly on themselves. I try not to lump people into categories, unless they give me the insight to do so themselves. Not all 2nd Amendment supporters are people I agree with (the president of the NRA comes to mind), moderation in deed and language is prudent, in most situations.
    Be safe, be prepared, and carry on!

    Alle Ihre Basisstation jetzt zu uns gehören

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    127
    Quote Originally Posted by WOD View Post
    When a regular Joe/Joan Citizen goes to a Federal Firearm Licensed dealer in WA state, before Joe/Jean Citizen can take legal possession of any handgun, he/she fills out paperwork. This paperwork gets sent to several agencies, some local, some federal, to determine if Joe/Joan is legally allowed to own a handgun, set forth by the laws regulating him/her in their home state. When he/she is cleared by those agencies, he/she can return to the store where the handgun was purchased, to accept possession of the weapon. WA state is an Open Carry state, therefore, it IS legal to openly carry a non-concealled handgun, anywhere allowable by the laws of their home state. WA state does NOT have a law saying it is ILLEGAL to openly carry a handgun, thereby making it LEGAL, to do so. Unless of course, there are laws in the RCW's describing where handguns are NOT allowed; IE - school zones, jails, mental facilities, court houses, and bars where alcohol is consumed on the premises, and in vehicles. Even some of these laws have 'exceptions', which are described in the Firearms Safety, The Law & You booklet, that you can obtain at the Sheriffs' Dept., whether applying for a CHL or not. The way WA law is written, is that if it isn't described as ILLEGAL, then it IS LEGAL.

    When I bought my handgun, I did everything listed above, paperwork and purchase, ( I then went right to the courthouse/sheriffs to apply for my CHL ) waited, took possession. At that time, I didn't know WA state was an Open Carry state! I didn't find out about Open Carry for several days after I started the entire process. To be completely honest, I wasn't sure I would be allowed to own a handgun. I was pleased when I got the call that my paperwork came in, and I was able to pick up my handgun. A few weeks later I received my (CCL/CHL/CPL) license. I found out about Open Carry by accident, when I was researching Reciprocity, and saw the two maps. One map showed Open Carry states, and the other showed states that had a Reciprocity agreement with WA. Forget Illinois completely, they suck for everyone, so, citing Ill. as a non OC state holds no water with this discussion.

    Now, for myself, I enjoy the best of both worlds, and I don't have to disarm/unload in the course of my daily activities (unless specified by law, or private policies that business's have - which is THEIR right to adopt ). I don't worry about whether someone sees my handgun in its holster, when I'm out and about. I have the option to choose HOW I carry, and I will carry openly, or concealed, but the choice is determined by the time and place. If I'm around home, or in the company of people I trust, then I'll OC. If I'm in unfamiliar territory, and I get the vibe to conceal, then I will CC. If in the same unfamiliar area, I may also choose not to CC, I'm flexible and thoughtful about the situation at hand. First and foremost though, is the fact that my firearm will NEVER leave its holster in public, until it is required. I will guess that 100% of the folks who post here, feel the same way. As for the person you brought up in your OP, that's his/her OPINION, there are many folks who say and do dumb things, which, reflect poorly on themselves. I try not to lump people into categories, unless they give me the insight to do so themselves. Not all 2nd Amendment supporters are people I agree with (the president of the NRA comes to mind), moderation in deed and language is prudent, in most situations.
    Honestly, i am with him, it depends on time and place.

    As for 'no case of OC'er popped'; look at all the police shot by someone just seeing them. Claim what you will, but police are some of the biggest OCers around, and are involved with criminal activity way more than any ordinary citizen legally allowed to carry. As I said, claim what you will, but time and place have alot to do with where I CC and OC...and weather...cant forget the weather...

  24. #24
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Quote Originally Posted by 45 Fan View Post
    Just remember, open carrying a firearm also marks you out. If i was robbing a bank and saw a gun on a hip, you would be the first one popped to gain control...just saying...CC does have its own advantage/disadvantage.


    Driving an expensive car marks you as a target
    Living in an expensive house marks you as a target
    Wearing expensive clothing marks you as a target
    Paying in cash marks you as a target

    Life is too short to drive shatty cars, live in poverty, and dress in rags.
    It's been my observation, as an open carrier who's Very aware of other people that......
    the average person doesn't look three steps beyond their nose.

    I banked at the same bank, wearing a pistol openly every week when I make deposits and it was three years before the teller even noticed.
    "IF" means a lot and most people don't look for what they're not expecting. There is less than 2% of the population that carries, and the open carriers are a small sub-set of that 2%.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by WOD View Post
    When a regular Joe/Joan Citizen goes to a Federal Firearm Licensed dealer in WA state, before Joe/Jean Citizen can take legal possession of any handgun, he/she fills out paperwork. This paperwork gets sent to several agencies, some local, some federal, to determine if Joe/Joan is legally allowed to own a handgun, set forth by the laws regulating him/her in their home state. When he/she is cleared by those agencies, he/she can return to the store where the handgun was purchased, to accept possession of the weapon. WA state is an Open Carry state, therefore, it IS legal to openly carry a non-concealled handgun, anywhere allowable by the laws of their home state. WA state does NOT have a law saying it is ILLEGAL to openly carry a handgun, thereby making it LEGAL, to do so. Unless of course, there are laws in the RCW's describing where handguns are NOT allowed; IE - school zones, jails, mental facilities, court houses, and bars where alcohol is consumed on the premises, and in vehicles. Even some of these laws have 'exceptions', which are described in the Firearms Safety, The Law & You booklet, that you can obtain at the Sheriffs' Dept., whether applying for a CHL or not. The way WA law is written, is that if it isn't described as ILLEGAL, then it IS LEGAL.

    When I bought my handgun, I did everything listed above, paperwork and purchase, ( I then went right to the courthouse/sheriffs to apply for my CHL ) waited, took possession. At that time, I didn't know WA state was an Open Carry state! I didn't find out about Open Carry for several days after I started the entire process. To be completely honest, I wasn't sure I would be allowed to own a handgun. I was pleased when I got the call that my paperwork came in, and I was able to pick up my handgun. A few weeks later I received my (CCL/CHL/CPL) license. I found out about Open Carry by accident, when I was researching Reciprocity, and saw the two maps. One map showed Open Carry states, and the other showed states that had a Reciprocity agreement with WA. Forget Illinois completely, they suck for everyone, so, citing Ill. as a non OC state holds no water with this discussion.

    Now, for myself, I enjoy the best of both worlds, and I don't have to disarm/unload in the course of my daily activities (unless specified by law, or private policies that business's have - which is THEIR right to adopt ). I don't worry about whether someone sees my handgun in its holster, when I'm out and about. I have the option to choose HOW I carry, and I will carry openly, or concealed, but the choice is determined by the time and place. If I'm around home, or in the company of people I trust, then I'll OC. If I'm in unfamiliar territory, and I get the vibe to conceal, then I will CC. If in the same unfamiliar area, I may also choose not to CC, I'm flexible and thoughtful about the situation at hand. First and foremost though, is the fact that my firearm will NEVER leave its holster in public, until it is required. I will guess that 100% of the folks who post here, feel the same way. As for the person you brought up in your OP, that's his/her OPINION, there are many folks who say and do dumb things, which, reflect poorly on themselves. I try not to lump people into categories, unless they give me the insight to do so themselves. Not all 2nd Amendment supporters are people I agree with (the president of the NRA comes to mind), moderation in deed and language is prudent, in most situations.
    That was certainly a considered post. Thank you.

    But if you review RCW 9.41.270, it contains vague language - which is the recipe requiring judicial interpretation. Thanks to the legislature, your rights are again subject to one person's opinion and on a case-by-case basis. In other words, not all outcomes of separate challenges to the law can be expected to be alike. It makes you wonder if the assembly intentionally affected the wording to expose it to potential judicial activism. WA being one of the most liberal of the States - this would not be a surprise to me. And upon actual reading of the law as-is, it appears it is in fact worded such that YOUR CITIZEN RIGHTS ARE TEMPORARY - THEY ONLY EXIST UNTIL SOMEBODY PROTESTS AND YOUR PERMIT SHALL BE REVOKED. PERMANENT RIGHTS EXIST ONLY FOR MILITARY, LAW ENFORCEMENT, OR THE ASSISTANCE TO THEM.


    "RCW 9.41.270: Weapons apparently capable of producing bodily harm...
    (1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.

    (2) Any person violating the provisions of subsection (1) above shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor. If any person is convicted of a violation of subsection (1) of this section, the person shall lose his or her concealed pistol license, if any. The court shall send notice of the revocation to the department of licensing, and the city, town, or county which issued the license.

    (3) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to or affect the following:

    (a) Any act committed by a person while in his or her place of abode or fixed place of business;

    (b) Any person who by virtue of his or her office or public employment is vested by law with a duty to preserve public safety, maintain public order, or to make arrests for offenses, while in the performance of such duty;

    (c) Any person acting for the purpose of protecting himself or herself against the use of presently threatened unlawful force by another, or for the purpose of protecting another against the use of such unlawful force by a third person;

    (d) Any person making or assisting in making a lawful arrest for the commission of a felony; or

    (e) Any person engaged in military activities sponsored by the federal or state governments.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •