OC with IWB holster?

I open carry in Lynchburg with my Crossbreed Supertuck because it is very comfortable. I ride it fairly high and at least 50% of my weapon is visible. Do you think I will run into problems with LEOs because some of my Walther is tucked in my pants? The horsehide is clearly visible and it is obvious I have a holster.

Thanks!

No.

Welcome aboard!

Roscoe

davestradamus said:

I open carry in Lynchburg with my Crossbreed Supertuck because it is very comfortable. I ride it fairly high and at least 50% of my weapon is visible. Do you think I will run into problems with LEOs because some of my Walther is tucked in my pants? The horsehide is clearly visible and it is obvious I have a holster.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

Welcome to OCDO.

Another "Welcome!" to OCDO.

Your carry method is half of the famous "Virginia Tuck" we had to go to when entering restaurants that served alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption and we were wearing a garment that covered the handgun. Thankfully we can now decide to have a CHP and carry (but not drink) or go OC (while not illegal it is recommended not to drink).

If you are not a member of VCDL www.vcdl.org then please remedy that as soon as possible. Check this forum for "stickies" about OC meet&greet/meet&eat events in the Lynchburg area - there are a number of folks who get together fairly often.

stay safe.

davestradamus said:

I open carry in Lynchburg with my Crossbreed Supertuck because it is very comfortable. I ride it fairly high and at least 50% of my weapon is visible. Do you think I will run into problems with LEOs because some of my Walther is tucked in my pants? The horsehide is clearly visible and it is obvious I have a holster.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

The fact you had to ask the question suggests you might benefit from reading Virginia code section 18.2-308, which begins:

"§ 18.2-308. Personal protection; carrying concealed weapons; when lawful to carry. A. If any person carries about his person, hidden from common observation, (i) any pistol, revolver, or other weapon designed or intended to propel a missile of any kind by action of an explosion of any combustible material; (ii) any dirk, bowie knife, switchblade knife, ballistic knife, machete, razor, slingshot, spring stick, metal knucks, or blackjack; (iii) any flailing instrument consisting of two or more rigid parts connected in such a manner as to allow them to swing freely, which may be known as a nun chahka, nun chuck, nunchaku, shuriken, or fighting chain; (iv) any disc, of whatever configuration, having at least two points or pointed blades which is designed to be thrown or propelled and which may be known as a throwing star or oriental dart; or (v) any weapon of like kind as those enumerated in this subsection, he shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A second violation of this section or a conviction under this section subsequent to any conviction under any substantially similar ordinance of any county, city, or town shall be punishable as a Class 6 felony, and a third or subsequent such violation shall be punishable as a Class 5 felony. For the purpose of this section, a weapon shall be deemed to be hidden from common observation when it is observable but is of such deceptive appearance as to disguise the weapon's true nature. "

I highlighted the relevant parts of this paragraph.

i have to say i am getting tired of these uppity ppl who post lawyer talk as if we regular folk can decipher it. The OP asked a question, and as usual for this place, he gets a few answers directly and then the smart ass answers. My advice is if you want to keep ppl here, stop acting like you are above everyone else.

Snazuolu said:

i have to say i am getting tired of these uppity ppl who post lawyer talk as if we regular folk can decipher it. The OP asked a question, and as usual for this place, he gets a few answers directly and then the smart ass answers. My advice is if you want to keep ppl here, stop acting like you are above everyone else.

Click to expand...

Talk about an uppity person, newcomer at that. 36 whole posts....Well, if you can't understand a detailed answer, I'll give you one even a slug can understand!



Y e s ... y o u ... c a n ... o p e n ...c a r r y ... i n ...a n ...I W B.

That answer was for you Snaz, not the OP. He's already been answered by people trying to give a good answer and welcomed here!

I could give a Rats Ass if you stay here or not.

Now why don't you talk tough for a while and impress the hell out of me!

OH...BTW...Welcome to the site davestradamus

peter nap said:

Talk about an uppity person, newcomer at that. 36 whole posts....Well, if you can't understand a detailed answer, I'll give you one even a slug can understand!

Click to expand...

Perhaps he'll enlighten us on his opinion of

(5) CITE TO AUTHORITY: If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

Click to expand...

ETA Yes, thank you. I meant his opinion of the lawyerly talk in the very rule requiring it.

Herr Heckler Koch said:

Perhaps he'll enlighten us on his opinion of

Click to expand...

Tess already cited it but since I see a fight starting, here it is again:

"§ 18.2-308. Personal protection; carrying concealed weapons; when lawful to carry. A. If any person carries about his person, hidden from common observation, (i) any pistol, revolver, or other weapon designed or intended to propel a missile of any kind by action of an explosion of any combustible material; (ii) any dirk, bowie knife, switchblade knife, ballistic knife, machete, razor, slingshot, spring stick, metal knucks, or blackjack; (iii) any flailing instrument consisting of two or more rigid parts connected in such a manner as to allow them to swing freely, which may be known as a nun chahka, nun chuck, nunchaku, shuriken, or fighting chain; (iv) any disc, of whatever configuration, having at least two points or pointed blades which is designed to be thrown or propelled and which may be known as a throwing star or oriental dart; or (v) any weapon of like kind as those enumerated in this subsection, he shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A second violation of this section or a conviction under this section subsequent to any conviction under any substantially similar ordinance of any county, city, or town shall be punishable as a Class 6 felony, and a third or subsequent such violation shall be punishable as a Class 5 felony. For the purpose of this section, a weapon shall be deemed to be hidden from common observation when it is observable but is of such deceptive appearance as to disguise the weapon's true nature. "

Click to expand...

There is no difference between an IWB and a belt holster except part of the holster is tucked inside the pants. As Skid said, it's the Va Tuck.
It's still easily recognizable as a handgun.



That shiny thing sticking out of his pants is a GUN!

The Va Tuck was done by hundreds of people, every day, for years.
Now stick it down further when it can't be seen, it's concealed.

This fellow could have a gun but thankfully, whatever he has is concealed and I'm sure he has a PERMIT:uhoh:

Herr Heckler Koch said:

Perhaps he'll enlighten us on his opinion of

ETA Yes, thank you. I meant his opinion of the lawyerly talk in the very rule requiring it.

Click to expand...

OOPS...sorry!

Snazuolu said:

i have to say i am getting tired of these uppity ppl who post lawyer talk as if we regular folk can decipher it. The OP asked a question, and as usual for this place, he gets a few answers directly and then the smart ass answers. My advice is if you want to keep ppl here, stop acting like you are above everyone else.

Click to expand...

As a new member of less than 6 mos maybe you need to read the rules:

(5) CITE TO AUTHORITY: If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

Click to expand...

We are mot being uppity posting lawyer talk. We are showing the cite to authority!

If you don't like the rules,:cuss: Bye Bye.

Snazuolu

Snazuolu said:

i have to say i am getting tired of these uppity ppl who post lawyer talk as if we regular folk can decipher it. The OP asked a question, and as usual for this place, he gets a few answers directly and then the smart ass answers. My advice is if you want to keep ppl here, stop acting like you are above everyone else.

Click to expand...

What non sense....

The OP got his question answered and was welcomed, and someone post the section of VA code so the OP can educate himself and you refer to that as being uppity.. Really...

Folks should be very familar with 18.2-308 and a few other VA laws regarding firearms if they choose to carry, OC or CC.. imho
If you can't understand the way a law is written call a VA attorney and ask them to explain it to you.
If you have issues with how the law is written please contact your elected rep. Whining here about it is foolish......


So, stay if you wish but know this, we don't serve cheese when folks whine and you might be asked to put a cork in it if you whine too much.



And before you scream internet tough guy.. I'm not anonymous.

peter nap said:

Tess already cited it but since I see a fight starting, here it is again:



There is no difference between an IWB and a belt holster except part of the holster is tucked inside the pants. As Skid said, it's the Va Tuck.
It's still easily recognizable as a handgun.

That shiny thing sticking out of his pants is a GUN!

The Va Tuck was done by hundreds of people, every day, for years.
Now stick it down further when it can't be seen, it's concealed.

This fellow could have a gun but thankfully, whatever he has is concealed and I'm sure he has a PERMIT:uhoh:

Click to expand...

No he could not have a gun, The Bundys lived in Chacago

peter nap said:

This fellow could have a gun but thankfully, whatever he has is concealed and I'm sure he has a PERMIT:uhoh:

Click to expand...

He's wearing Thunderwear, Peter. :lol:

Snazuolu said:

i have to say i am getting tired of these uppity ppl who post lawyer talk as if we regular folk can decipher it. The OP asked a question, and as usual for this place, he gets a few answers directly and then the smart ass answers. My advice is if you want to keep ppl here, stop acting like you are above everyone else.

Click to expand...

I looked back at all the posts before yours. The only one that would seem to even remotely resemble what you are talking about was one which simply provided a very small section of the CHP law, with what the author thought were the pertinent parts highlighted. I don't want to be condescending, but what do you want? Do you want a bunch of unknown people telling you their undocumented opinion on what they think laws mean, and do you really think it's wise to base your actions on what a bunch of internet folks tell you is OK or not OK?

The common references to laws and court cases and newspaper articles on these forums are by far one of its most valuable aspects. You can get an opinion from a bunch of nobodies anywhere. Those forums are a dime a dozen. We have a high standard here, and it's for your benefit, and nothing else.

Perhaps you find legal language challenging. I suspect most of us did at first. It's well worth the effort to take some time to read through some of the laws that are important to gun owners. What you learn may literally save you from jail some day.

I can't speak for every person who responds here, but I'd be willing to bet that if you read through a law and you didn't understand a part of what it said, you could almost certainly post a question about it and get lots of helpful answers.

For what it's worth, that's what we have to offer here.

TFred

TFred said:

...
I can speak for every person who responds here, and I'd be willing to bet that if you read through a law and you didn't understand a part of what it said, you should certainly post a question about it and get lots of helpful answers.

TFred

Click to expand...

there. i fixed it for you. ;-)

mk4 said:

there. i fixed it for you. ;-)

Click to expand...

Yes for the very vast majority of us... but we do have an occasional rabble rouser from time to time...

TFred

Thanks goes out to everyone that posted to answer my question. While I feel confident interpreting the Virginia Code on this issue, maybe some people do not. I always like to see the actual code to interpret it myself, or have somebody qualified interpret it for me. I will continue to OC with my Supertuck Deluxe esp. untill my CCW is approved or denied....

Thanks to all!

-David

davestradamus said:

Thanks goes out to everyone that posted to answer my question. While I feel confident interpreting the Virginia Code on this issue, maybe some people do not. I always like to see the actual code to interpret it myself, or have somebody qualified interpret it for me. I will continue to OC with my Supertuck Deluxe esp. untill my CCW is approved or denied....

Thanks to all!

-David

Click to expand...

It's CHP David and we don't need to talk about that on an OC board!:uhoh:

peter nap said:

It's CHP David and we don't need to talk about that on an OC board!:uhoh:

Click to expand...

I shall remember that sir!

Thanks,
David