Seeking guidance

Grapeshot · Feb 25, 2012

45 Fan said:
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.

WOD · Feb 25, 2012

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.

45 Fan · Feb 25, 2012

WOD said:
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...

Fallschirjmäger · Feb 25, 2012

45 Fan said:
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%.

RioDio · Feb 25, 2012

WOD said:
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.

Fallschirjmäger · Feb 25, 2012

Five elements of the crime required to violate that RCW, as noted here.

Elements of the crime -
1) Mens rea
2) manner,
3) circumstances,
4) time and
5) place
Without all Five being present no violation.

The only defense required is
(3) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to or affect the following:
(c) Any person acting for the purpose of protecting himself.

"I'm carrying (paragraph (1)) purpose of protecting myself."
How is one to protect himself without first possessing/carrying the necessary instrument with which to do so? It ain't gonna magically levitate itself from my house to my hand now, is it?

45 Fan · Feb 25, 2012

I think he says it right, it was just an example.

http://youtu.be/4XyK5Qa9m_w

MAC702 · Feb 26, 2012

RioDio said:
...(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....

And since it is illegal (I ASSume) for police officers to intimidate people, then OC clearly cannot be considered an intimidation.

1245A Defender · Feb 26, 2012

Well,,,

RioDio said:
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.

Since you have your own legal team!
Why have you got your OC information from the other side?
If youve studied 9.41.270 well enough to explore its vagarities,
why havent you studied the only major conviction under that RCW? state v. spencer

I do not belive that you are here to learn anything.
If you are, you should read the FAQ of open carry thread, near the top of the washington section.
you could also read the gun rights pamphlet, also near the top of the washington section.

Dreamer · Feb 26, 2012

45 Fan said:
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.

If this were true, then please explain to me why there are so many bank security guards who are still alive after their banks were robbed, and were able to give statements to the police?

In the history of bank robbery in the US, I am not aware of a SINGLE instance of an openly armed person in a bank that was "popped first thing" by bank robbers entering the bank. Every armed guard who has been shot that I know of was shot by BGs AFTER he tried to overpower a robber, or attempted to stop their crime. And MANY robbers try to avoid banks without armed guards in the first place.

Criminals generally don't like to work for their "take"--that is why they are ciminals. If they were willing to work for their keep, they would have real jobs. Criminals are, for the most part, sociopaths and psychopaths, who's ONLY motivation is self-preservation. Putting themselves in a situation where they may well not emerge successful (like attempting to rob an obviously armed victim) is something that most criminals go to tremendous lenghts to avoid.

This idea that "OCers will be the first one shot" is absurd. It has not historically happened. There is no proof it has happened in the past, and no indications that it will begin occuring in the future. In fact, all research done by criminologists and psychologists interviewing criminals shows that criminals try to avoid potential victims who may be armed AT ALL COSTS. Most criminals who have participated in such studies admit that they are actually MORE fearful of armed citizens than they are of the police--because police focus on apprehension, where as armed citizens tend to focus on self-preservation an self-defense.

Please, please, please, stop repeating this "old wives tale", because it has no basis in historical, empirical, or criminological fact.

Verd · Feb 26, 2012

45 Fan said:
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.

Completely untrue. According to criminals, seeing someone with an openly carried firearm will cause them to need to leave the scene and get their head back into the game (might take a few minutes, hours, or days even), and even then, you cannot trust a criminal to even SEE the firearm on your hip. Hell, there is at least one news story that I know of where a cop payed for his gas and drink at a gas station and the guy right behind him moved up to the cashier and attempted to rob the place WITH the cop no less than 10 feet away from him.

Criminals, when they do crinimal things, also get tunnel vision.

Another story that was on the news recently was of a guy in a store that was being robbed. Yes, he was conceal carrying, but he had enough time to draw his weapon, pull the slide back to load it, make contact with another victim standing behind the robber and who would be in his line of fire, motion to the other victim to get out of the way, then bring his firearm up and shoot all without the robber ever realizing what was going on.

The FALSE position that OCing makes you a target also means that the moment someone who is CCing makes their weapon visible, i.e. drawing it, makes them the very first target that the badguy will automatically kill. As you can see, it is absurd to even consider such false logic to be anything but that.

Grapeshot · Feb 26, 2012

45 Fan said:
---snip---

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 a lot to do with where I CC and OC...and weather...cant forget the weather...

First, I am not trying to alter your personal choice of how you individually carry. What I object to is the perpetuation of the ill conceived notion that OC puts a LAC at any realistic measure of additional risk. It emphatically does not.

The introduction of LEOs to the mix is an apples to grapes comparison. LEOs, like active duty military, go into harms way by design and are glaringly obvious by their uniforms - they are not merely of a defensive posture and do not have the choice of how they carry. Would they be safer CCing or not carrying? Doubt it.

To clarify the comparison to a LAC, consider the original challenge made many, many years ago which stands untainted to this day.

Show me one (1) instance of an LAC OCing anywhere in the United States in modern times wherein such LAC was preemptively taken out (shot) by a criminal. Law enforcement and security personnel together with the military are excluded. Verifiable cite required.

Will it happen some day, somewhere? Most likely, even probably as nothing is deemed impossible, but in this case the exception will prove the rule. When it does occur the resultant numerical comparison will be one of millions (billions?) of OC events - the ratio of which may look similar to .0000001% or less. Those are odds very much in our favor. Please do not obfuscate the issue - a legally armed OCer is decidedly safe.

I rest my case in favor of OC.

SouthernBoy · Feb 26, 2012

45 Fan said:
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...

Remember, police wear uniforms and are easily identified whereas the OC'er looks pretty much like anyone else from a number of angles and heights until you might happen to notice what's hanging on his side. So one cannot compare the deadly assaults against police officers to any (imagined) such assaults on private citizens. Comparing oranges to apples never works.

To prove this, go to a store of some sort and walk around in the isles looking for stuff.. a grocery store is a good example. Most people are preoccupied and will never notice your sidearm. Now do this when an LEO is in the store in uniform and it's quite obvious what you're seeing with him.

j4l · Feb 26, 2012

Odd, these perceptions of criminals are going to "do this, or do that" in a given situation.
One cannot know either way, ahead of time, how any given person-criminal or otherwise- is going to conduct themselves, beyond generalities, or "most people" type perceptions.

Too often we try to project our own ways of viewing things, as opposed to the infinite ways that potential, violent opponents view things. Unless your opponent ends up being someone already known to you, and short of having the potential opponent's resume/rap sheet prior to the commencement of armed hostilities, you have no bloody idea how he is going to act/react, or the how's/why's of said action/reactions. Nor will it matter in the least at the moment you end up having to pull that trigger.

Carry by your chosen,preferred, or legally-limited option, have some situational-awareness, and go on about the day, and deal with each situation that comes your way as it comes-not as how you would expect/think/percieve -it ahead of time.

SouthernBoy · Feb 26, 2012

RioDio said:
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.

"PERMANENT RIGHTS EXIST ONLY FOR MILITARY, LAW ENFORCEMENT, OR THE ASSISTANCE TO THEM."

Well this part is wrong right away. Neither government nor any of its agencies have rights. They have power, authority, and privilege which they only receive from We the People and it IS temporary whether they like it or not.

SouthernBoy · Feb 26, 2012

To address the OP, I live in Virginia which is perhaps the most lenient and gun-friendly state in the South. There still remains in much of Virginia that traditional spirit of liberty and a basic and necessary distrust of government and authority. This is the essence of freedom and the absolute foundation of our liberties.

Open carrying in Virginia is the normal/standard/default mode of carrying a defensive arm whereas carrying that arm concealed is the exception requiring permission from our employees (read that as our public servants). We can carry pretty much anywhere with few exceptions and restrictions to this freedom. And while there have been incidences with law enforcement and other members of the public at large, they have been pretty rare. When we see them happen, we tend to galvanize and support our fellow carriers. More than once carriers have flooded council meetings demanding to have their grievances be heard about some misuse of police authority, and often the attendees have been openly armed when doing this.

The matter of whether or not people decide to go open armed or to conceal their arms is and should remain with the people. Most OC'ers I know do CC when they perceive it to be in their better interests at the time. I do this myself. And as for the Second Amendment, here in Virginia it is Section 13 of our state Constitution which is most important to Virginians;

"Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power.

That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power."

William Fisher · Feb 26, 2012

That FREEDOM OF SPEECH THING. Can we only speak in an audible level when on private property? When we speak in pubic must it be in whispered levels that can't be heard by others who would disagree? The 2nd gives us the right to open carry, even if some disagree.

SouthernBoy · Feb 26, 2012

William Fisher said:
That FREEDOM OF SPEECH THING. Can we only speak in an audible level when on private property? When we speak in pubic must it be in whispered levels that can't be heard by others who would disagree? The 2nd gives us the right to open carry, even if some disagree.

Neither the Second Amendment nor any other part of the Bill of Rights gives us anything. What it does to is twofold. It recognizes rights which pre-exist these documents as being fundamental to liberty and sets in stone their protection.

GhostOfJefferson · Feb 27, 2012

RioDio said:
Governments typically don't issue open carry permits and private citizens generally do not have the legal right to carry openly in public.

If you're going across the entire 50 states, then you'll find that there is a whole swath, the bulk even, of states where open carry is a legal right without requirement of "permit" or license. Ohio, my state, has traditional open carry, and I open carry proudly and often. So do a lot of other states, and there are some that require a license for open carry but those exist too (hence, the legal right for them as well), for example, Indiana.

There's a set of maps at the front of the site (not forum, the main Open Carry site) that show open carry status. You'll find your perception about "no legal right to carry openly in public" challenged by the map that shows where it *is* recognized as a legal right.

The remainder of your post/beliefs instruct me that you use the paradigm created by the statists in the late 19th century that tells us that somehow your rights diminish if you walk outside your home. A rather alien concept in these united States, but clearly the notion has gained traction, unfortunately.

WOD · Feb 27, 2012

RioDio, I can understand the concern you have regarding RCW 9.41.270, and the "vague language" it uses. The key to putting this concern to rest, is in the very first paragraph. "(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.

Subsection (c) and (d) EXEMPT private citizens, IF/WHEN they have to draw their weapon in defense of self or others, if the reasons set forth within (c) and (d), accurately describe the circumstances for drawing their weapon. A firearm in a holster is NOT an intent to intimidate another, nor should it be considered to warrant alarm. In some states the display of a weapon in a menacing, or intimidating posture, is actually a crime called Brandishing. The conditions for what is Brandishing are set forth within the statutes, that describe the act, circumstances, and intent. RCW 9.41.270 only describes what would be considered unsafe and unlawful, and the parameters used to decide whether someones actions warranted a charge for "unlawful carrying,etc." Nowhere in this language does it say.. "any weapon in a holster, sheath, scabbard, retaining loop", so a firearm in a holster IS not an UNLAWFUL DISPLAY.

Are you seeing now how WA law is written by not only WHAT it says, but also, by WHAT IT DOESN'T say?

Seeking guidance

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Active member

Regular Member

Active member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member