Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Few OC Questions Concerning ID and Vehicles...

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    11

    Few OC Questions Concerning ID and Vehicles...

    I've been reading several forums, the state code, and what-not. But the information is quite saturated and I keep finding different views or opinions on the some areas of the law. Therefore, I'm left with the following questions:

    1. If open carrying a holstered firearm (not in a vehicle) and stopped by police, are you required by law to identify yourself when asked?
      (Assuming the firearm is the only reason they're questioning you)
    2. Additionally, if the police are responding to a call after someone reported you for having a holstered firearm, are you required by law to identify yourself when asked?
      (Assuming the 911 complaint stated only that you had a holstered firearm and not that you were acting recklessly with it)
    3. Is open carrying in a vehicle legal?
      1. If open carrying in a vehicle, what constitutes the difference between "open" and "concealed"?
      2. If open carrying in a vehicle, is the weapon allowed to be holstered or must it be, for example, in the passengers seat where it's more-easily visible?
      3. If open carrying in a vehicle, must one unload the firearm or is it legal to remain loaded?
        1. If open carrying in a vehicle and if the firearm must be unloaded, are there any other laws governing how or where the ammo must be? (locked in a box or bag, out of view, or out of reach)?


    Also, some of these questions may seems silly, but no; I'm not asking so that I can walk around like some arrogant activist looking for trouble and to sue a police officer like the many who've posted videos on YouTube. I'm simply asking so that I know the law, can avoid trouble, but yet protect myself and those around me.

    All questions assume the holder does not have their CCW license.

  2. #2
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon View Post
    no; I'm not asking so that I can walk around like some arrogant activist looking for trouble and to sue a police officer like the many who've posted videos on YouTube.
    Even though this statement is offensive and people have every right to video the cops and sue cops that violate their rights I'll gather what I know about these Q's
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    11
    I didn't mean it like that, I simply meant that some people go out looking to cause trouble. Yea, the police should be aware of the laws and respect your rights. However, there are better ways to exercise that right and to educate the police force than to intentionally cause a commotion. I'm all for open carry, exercising your rights, and what not - I just don't feel that intentionally parking in front of a police officer and walking past them flashing your OC, just to get a reaction is a very responsible thing to do, nor is it the best way to address the matter IMHO.

    If you're walking down the boardwalk with your girlfriend and are stopped by a police officer, that's one thing - exercise your rights and record the encounter so both sides are held accountable! Just don't go fishing for trouble. If you want to raise awareness - do it through the appropriate channels, attend city meetings and present a strong case, write letters to congress, create/sign petitions, ect. and get them to do mandatory training sessions for the officers on how to properly handle such matters.

    Anyway, to veer back on topic: I'd greatly appreciate the help/clarification on the questions I asked in my original post.
    Last edited by Devon; 09-12-2012 at 03:26 AM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon View Post
    I've been reading several forums, the state code, and what-not. But the information is quite saturated and I keep finding different views or opinions on the some areas of the law. Therefore, I'm left with the following questions:

    1. If open carrying a holstered firearm (not in a vehicle) and stopped by police, are you required by law to identify yourself when asked?
      (Assuming the firearm is the only reason they're questioning you)
    2. Additionally, if the police are responding to a call after someone reported you for having a holstered firearm, are you required by law to identify yourself when asked?
      (Assuming the 911 complaint stated only that you had a holstered firearm and not that you were acting recklessly with it)

      As far as IDing yourself to LEO, I believe there is no requirement to do so unless the LEO has given you a good reason why he needs it. What consitutes a good reason? I don't really know. Serving a warrant would be one. As the following case shows the LEO does have to tell you the reason he wants it.
      There are no WV laws explaining this but I did find a case (STATE v. SRNSKY http://caselaw.findlaw.com/wv-suprem...s/1482046.html) where the Supreme Court of Appeals overturned a conviction of Obstruction (among other irrelevant charges) where the conviction of Obstruction was gained because of the defendants refusal to identify himself to LEO. Here a snip from the reversal:

      "Consequently, we hold that refusal to identify oneself to a law enforcement officer does not, standing alone, form the basis for a charge of obstructing a law enforcement officer in performing official duties.   However, the charge of obstructing an officer may be substantiated when a citizen does not supply identification when required to do so by express statutory direction or when the refusal occurs after a law enforcement officer has communicated the reason why the citizen's name is being sought in relation to the officer's official duties."

      So do you have to provide ID? IANAL but my personal belief is no. I think the most probable path of conversation I would have with a LEO would not involve him telling me why he wants my ID because I would not ask him why.

      I would ask "I am being detained?" and keep asking it until I get a yes or no. No means I walk away.
      If yes..... He had better have reasonable articulable suspicion that I have commit a crime. In your scenarios he does not. So in your scenarios I would hold that I was being held illegally and needed a lawyer. I personally do not feel there is a requirement at this time to provide my ID. This is only my opinion.


    3. Is open carrying in a vehicle legal? Only for concealed weapons permit holders. This is based on DNR regulations not state law AFAIK.
      http://www.wvdnr.gov/hunting/laws.shtm


      1. If open carrying in a vehicle, what constitutes the difference between "open" and "concealed"? There is no law describing the definition of concealed. The Attorney General has published a document saying that "West Virginia law enforcement’s interpretation of “open carry” is that the handgun must be visible from three sides." AFAIK there is nothing to back this opinion what-so-ever and is not law.
        http://www.wvago.gov/pdf/BookletWVFirearmLaws.pdf

      2. If open carrying in a vehicle, is the weapon allowed to be holstered or must it be, for example, in the passengers seat where it's more-easily visible?
        Also this is not crystal clear, my opinion is that holstered, or lying in the seat are both legal OC if you have a Concealed Permit. Without the permit it is feasible to be tripped up by DNR hunting laws that are written to be used against poachers but could be used to screw LACs OCing.
      3. If open carrying in a vehicle, must one unload the firearm or is it legal to remain loaded? Same answer as above.
        1. If open carrying in a vehicle and if the firearm must be unloaded, are there any other laws governing how or where the ammo must be? (locked in a box or bag, out of view, or out of reach)? Using the same criteria (DNR regulations) You can have a loaded clip or magazine in the vehicle as long as it is not in or attached to the firearm. Again this does not apply to Concealed Permit carriers. Also this is a regulation meant for poachers with rifles but no distinction is being made for self-defense weapons so it's a crap shoot.


    Also, some of these questions may seems silly, but no; I'm not asking so that I can walk around like some arrogant activist looking for trouble and to sue a police officer like the many who've posted videos on YouTube. I'm simply asking so that I know the law, can avoid trouble, but yet protect myself and those around me.

    All questions assume the holder does not have their CCW license.

    I am not a lawyer these are all opinions.
    What it comes down to is OCing in a vehicle is illegal based on stupid, convoluted DNR regulations put in place to prevent poaching the governments game animals.....UNLESS you have a Concealed Pistol/Revolver Permit.

    BTW these convoluted DNR rules are the main reason I have a CPRP, as I mainly OC everywhere.

    I'm truly sorry the WV laws are so convoluted and unclear, I wish I could give more concise answers but the laws don't make it easy.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  5. #5
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon View Post
    I just don't feel that intentionally parking in front of a police officer and walking past them flashing your OC, just to get a reaction is a very responsible thing to do, nor is it the best way to address the matter IMHO.
    I'll go ahead an respond to this hoping we have have both conversations going at once.

    Which part do you not like? It is the act of parking next to a cop a walking past them? Is it the motivation to "get a reaction"?

    What legal behavior of yours might you stop doing if you thought it was probable you would get a negative reaction?

    I OC pretty much in the same places every week. If I hear a story that cops are hassling OCs in a place I go normally I now have a choice. Do I not go to that place? Do I change my life and behavior knowing it is probable I will get a negative reaction? Do I go anyway, not wanting to change my behavior to reinforce those negative reactions? If I decide I don't want to be bullied.... In your opinion I am now doing it just to "get a reaction".

    Please check your premise. If the cops are having a bad reaction to legal behavior who is at fault here? I applaud them for recording the inappropriate behavior!
    I also carry a recorder at all times I am armed in public.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    11
    Thanks for the response, I wish I knew for sure if the DNR laws applied to personal defense firearms too. Who could I contact to get this clarified?



    The mere fact that the whole incident is premeditated and that the individual (or group) was seeking a reaction from the police officer. As I stated:

    "If you're walking down the boardwalk with your girlfriend and are stopped by a police officer, that's one thing - exercise your rights and record the encounter so both sides are held accountable! Just don't go fishing for trouble. If you want to raise awareness - do it through the appropriate channels, attend city meetings and present a strong case, write letters to congress, create/sign petitions, ect. and get them to do mandatory training sessions for the officers on how to properly handle such matters."

    There is no reason to intentionally cause an incident or to waste an officers time by seeking them out nor is there any reason to hold them up when they could be responding to a more serious call. Part of carrying a firearm is to act responsibly, distracting officers intentionally and trying to prove them wrong while standing on the street-side is not a very responsible thing to do, IMHO.

    If people OC'ing are being harassed by officers, or if officers are not respecting your rights. File an official complaint or call their supervisor and advise them that they should remind XYZ of your rights to carry. Studies show that police officers are often overworked, sleep deprived, and are often dealing with very stressful situations. Unfortunately, police officers are not perfect - but that doesn't mean they are bad cops and deserve to be sued or suspended. It sounds to me like the government's training programs, their supervisors, and/or captains should me more to blame than anything else. Because obviously, the officers have not been trained to properly handle such circumstances or the tests/exams don't ensure that they do in-fact know the laws that they've sworn to protect.
    Last edited by Devon; 09-12-2012 at 11:12 PM.

  7. #7
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon View Post
    Thanks for the response, I wish I knew for sure if the DNR laws applied to personal defense firearms too. Who could I contact to get this clarified?
    Not really sure. The Attorney General has given his opinion (see the link in my previous post):

    "The West Virginia State Police strongly recommend that if one does not have a concealed handgun permit, all weapons transported in a motor vehicle should be unloaded with the ammunition stored separately. Lastly, West Virginia law requires that hunting weapons being transported in a vehicle be unloaded and in cases.
    It is important to note that while West Virginia is an “open carry” state the ability to carry openly is
    deemed by law enforcement to apply only to West Virginia residents. West Virginia law enforcement’s
    interpretation of “open carry” is that the handgun must be visible from three sides."

    If there is ever a test case we will find out.




    The mere fact that the whole incident is premeditated and that the individual (or group) was seeking a reaction from the police officer. As I stated:

    "If you're walking down the boardwalk with your girlfriend and are stopped by a police officer, that's one thing - exercise your rights and record the encounter so both sides are held accountable! Just don't go fishing for trouble. If you want to raise awareness - do it through the appropriate channels, attend city meetings and present a strong case, write letters to congress, create/sign petitions, ect. and get them to do mandatory training sessions for the officers on how to properly handle such matters."

    There is no reason to intentionally cause an incident or to waste an officers time by seeking them out nor is there any reason to hold them up when they could be responding to a more serious call. Part of carrying a firearm is to act responsibly, distracting officers intentionally and trying to prove them wrong while standing on the street-side is not a very responsible thing to do, IMHO.

    If people OC'ing are being harassed by officers, or if officers are not respecting your rights. File an official complaint or call their supervisor and advise them that they should remind XYZ of your rights to carry. Studies show that police officers are often overworked, sleep deprived, and are often dealing with very stressful situations. Unfortunately, police officers are not perfect - but that doesn't mean they are bad cops and deserve to be sued or suspended. It sounds to me like the government's training programs, their supervisors, and/or captains should me more to blame than anything else. Because obviously, the officers have not been trained to properly handle such circumstances or the tests/exams don't ensure that they do in-fact know the laws that they've sworn to protect.

    I guess we will have to disagree. How you can believe it is anyone's fault but the cop''s if he harasses someone without RAS or PC is beyond my comprehension.

    Maybe some other view points will help. There's been lots of threads.... Here's one
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ding-the-event
    Last edited by twoskinsonemanns; 09-13-2012 at 12:20 AM.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    11
    Lastly, West Virginia law requires that hunting weapons being transported in a vehicle be unloaded and in cases.

    Are there any specifications as to what would classify a firearm as a "hunting weapon"?



    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    I guess we will have to disagree. How you can believe it is anyone's fault but the cop''s if he harasses someone without RAS or PC is beyond my comprehension.

    Maybe some other view points will help. There's been lots of threads.... Here's one
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ding-the-event
    Well, in my personal opinion - and I realize not everyone will agree: I believe that they've not been properly trained if they don't realize that openly carrying does not constitute probably cause to ID, search, or seize. If one or two officers don't know the law, then yea - the officers are obviously doing something wrong. However, when 90% of the entire police force in an area are not familiar with firearm laws and what constitutes probable cause - then obviously there is an administrative error when it comes to training the law enforcement officers.

    If I'm in a school and I see a bunch of people being bullied - I'm not going to go argue with the bully and cause a fight that could result in me getting into trouble. I'll bring it to the attention of the principle, if they don't do anything, I'll go to the superintendent, school board, ect. I'll make suggestions that they put forth a warning, such as a seminar, and institute grounds for disciplinary action to those who continue to bully. Afterwards, I'd continue on my way; if someone decides to bully me, I'll record them and report them accordingly. They'd be punished or penalized through some form of suspension or expulsion and I'd have peacefully resolved the matter.

  9. #9
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon View Post
    Lastly, West Virginia law requires that hunting weapons being transported in a vehicle be unloaded and in cases.
    Are there any specifications as to what would classify a firearm as a "hunting weapon"?

    As I said that was an opinion issued by the Attorney General. AFAIK it has not been explained or clarified. So no, no specifications are offered.





    Well, in my personal opinion - and I realize not everyone will agree: I believe that they've not been properly trained if they don't realize that openly carrying does not constitute probably cause to ID, search, or seize. If one or two officers don't know the law, then yea - the officers are obviously doing something wrong. However, when 90% of the entire police force in an area are not familiar with firearm laws and what constitutes probable cause - then obviously there is an administrative error when it comes to training the law enforcement officers.

    If I'm in a school and I see a bunch of people being bullied - I'm not going to go argue with the bully and cause a fight that could result in me getting into trouble. I'll bring it to the attention of the principle, if they don't do anything, I'll go to the superintendent, school board, ect. I'll make suggestions that they put forth a warning, such as a seminar, and institute grounds for disciplinary action to those who continue to bully. Afterwards, I'd continue on my way; if someone decides to bully me, I'll record them and report them accordingly. They'd be punished or penalized through some form of suspension or expulsion and I'd have peacefully resolved the matter.
    It's sound advice. While your waiting for the principle to make things right, are you going to stop eating lunch in the cafeteria for fear of getting bullied?
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    It's sound advice. While your waiting for the principle to make things right, are you going to stop eating lunch in the cafeteria for fear of getting bullied?
    No, again - as I stated with my example "walking on the boardwalk with your gf". If you're required to exercise your rights when going about your daily business, do it; just don't go looking for confrontations. That's all I'm sayin'... :-/

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Uniontown, PA
    Posts
    37
    Careful with the hunting code Devon. Based on the above thread you are looking to the WV Attorney General's Handbook, which in not law. WV Code Chapter 20-2-5 does not specify hunting weapons, only "firearms". Please see WV Code Chapter 20-2-5, paragraph 8. WV Code Chapter 20-2-6 and 6a makes the only exceptions to carrying a firearms outside of a normal hunting season.

    With regards to hunting weapons, you can look in the WVDNR regulations, again regulations, not law, what is not suitable as a hunting weapon.

    Wish I had better news on the hunting code.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    58
    I get what you're saying Devon, but you have to understand the relationship between citizens and police and the way the Fourth Amendment works in this country has changed in the last few decades. Remember when the word "civilian" meant someone not in the military? Remember when small towns didn't have SWAT teams riding around in military vehicles?

    I'm not advocating provocation, but when cops change the way they look at and treat citizens, the reverse is inevitable.

    http://www.theagitator.com/2012/07/0...two-attitudes/

  13. #13
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon View Post
    No, again - as I stated with my example "walking on the boardwalk with your gf". If you're required to exercise your rights when going about your daily business, do it; just don't go looking for confrontations. That's all I'm sayin'... :-/
    I understand fully. But don't portray those who want to go about exercising their rights knowing it may cause a confrontation as evil.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    I understand fully. But don't portray those who want to go about exercising their rights knowing it may cause a confrontation as evil.
    There is a difference however, between eating candy in front of a baby and dangling it in his face. You can exercise your right to have and eat candy without causing an intentional disturbance. Yea, the infant may notice you eating it, but it also may not. If you dangle the candy in it's face though, there is sure to be a commotion.

    I'm not trying to say that people exercising their rights are "evil", simply that you don't have to bait the police force. Wear your firearm proud, and don't avoid places where it's legal to carry just because it may cause commotion. But at the same time, don't instigate a problem intentionally or go out of your way to stir something up. There is a difference between going to the store and parking at the closest spot like you normally would versus parking on the opposite side of the parking lot next to a police cruiser - trying to get their attention.

    Supporting organizations such as WVCDL would be a much more practical approach to supporting the 4th amendment or perhaps contacting news agencies and suggesting an interesting investigative report on local police forces and how they are trained to handle such matters in response to all of the breaches of our constitutional rights as shown in the dozens of videos posted on YouTube and the web.

  15. #15
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Sorry there is just not a practical point there to be made.
    You shouldn't park next to the cop if you can park closer?
    What if it's the only spot? Then is it okay?
    If so then it's only the motivation of the act and not the act itself?
    What is the practical difference?

    If you can bait someone to do something wrong it is still wrong. Then evil is not the bait-er but the baited.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  16. #16
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Y
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon View Post
    I didn't mean it like that, I simply meant that some people go out looking to cause trouble. Yea, the police should be aware of the laws and respect your rights. However, there are better ways to exercise that right and to educate the police force than to intentionally cause a commotion. I'm all for open carry, exercising your rights, and what not - I just don't feel that intentionally parking in front of a police officer and walking past them flashing your OC, just to get a reaction is a very responsible thing to do, nor is it the best way to address the matter IMHO.

    OK, some refer to this as "baiting" the LEO, but isn't that a tactic police use all the time to catch those among us inclined to commit crime? I mean ever watch "Bait Car"? How about all the times LEO poses as dealers to catch the drug buyers, or pose as buyers to catch dealers, or have attractive female officers pose as hookers to catch johns.......?

    Cops use "bait" all the time, you can't catch a fish that's not hungry, just as you can't bait a cop into abusing your rights unless he is already predisposed to be an abuser. You could leave a bag of cocaine in front of my house and I wouldn't touch it. Sure a lot of the You-Tube videos are posted by @holes, but if the LEO just let them be there would be no video to post.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    Sorry there is just not a practical point there to be made.
    You shouldn't park next to the cop if you can park closer?
    What if it's the only spot? Then is it okay?

    If so then it's only the motivation of the act and not the act itself?
    What is the practical difference?

    If you can bait someone to do something wrong it is still wrong. Then evil is not the bait-er but the baited.
    What I meant by the example you're referencing was that the police's presence shouldn't affect you're normal business. Yes, it is primarily the motivation for your action as I've explained in my previous posts.

    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Y


    OK, some refer to this as "baiting" the LEO, but isn't that a tactic police use all the time to catch those among us inclined to commit crime? I mean ever watch "Bait Car"? How about all the times LEO poses as dealers to catch the drug buyers, or pose as buyers to catch dealers, or have attractive female officers pose as hookers to catch johns.......?

    Cops use "bait" all the time, you can't catch a fish that's not hungry, just as you can't bait a cop into abusing your rights unless he is already predisposed to be an abuser. You could leave a bag of cocaine in front of my house and I wouldn't touch it. Sure a lot of the You-Tube videos are posted by @holes, but if the LEO just let them be there would be no video to post.
    Well, my take on the matter is that if an officer knows they're is being recorded - they're probably going to uphold the law and stick to protocol as best as they know how. (Provided that they don't get caught up in the moment or let their emotions get in the way) After all, their career is on the line...

    That being said, if an officer doesn't know what they are doing is wrong, then it's a little different than being baited by fake prostitutes where the other party obviously knows prostitution is illegal. This falls back on what I was saying before, there tends to be a grey area or lack of training when it comes to firearm laws (the way the laws are written doesn't help) and what constitutes probable cause or gives an officer the legal right to ID, search, and/or seize. If it were a select few officers who were abusing their power and violating our rights, then I'd bait them - absolutely! However, when it's more than 50% of a police force - I think a more effective approach should be attempted first, such as mandatory training.

    I know not everyone will agree with my logic, and I don't expect them to - thankfully, everyone has the right to their own opinion.

  18. #18
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon View Post
    What I meant by the example you're referencing was that the police's presence shouldn't affect you're normal business. Yes, it is primarily the motivation for your action as I've explained in my previous posts.



    Well, my take on the matter is that if an officer knows they're is being recorded - they're probably going to uphold the law and stick to protocol as best as they know how. (Provided that they don't get caught up in the moment or let their emotions get in the way) After all, their career is on the line...

    That being said, if an officer doesn't know what they are doing is wrong.....
    removed
    Last edited by twoskinsonemanns; 09-15-2012 at 06:21 PM. Reason: not sure where I was going
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  19. #19
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon View Post

    That being said, if an officer doesn't know what they are doing is wrong, then it's a little different than being baited by fake prostitutes where the other party obviously knows prostitution is illegal. This falls back on what I was saying before, there tends to be a grey area or lack of training when it comes to firearm laws (the way the laws are written doesn't help) and what constitutes probable cause or gives an officer the legal right to ID, search, and/or seize. If it were a select few officers who were abusing their power and violating our rights, then I'd bait them - absolutely! However, when it's more than 50% of a police force - I think a more effective approach should be attempted first, such as mandatory training.

    I know not everyone will agree with my logic, and I don't expect them to - thankfully, everyone has the right to their own opinion.
    If YOU violated a law you were unaware of what do you think the chances are YOU would be hearing IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE!!!! Why should professional law enforcement officers not be held to an even higher standard?!?!?!?!?

    With 10s and even 100s of thousands of carry permits being issued in a state the ONLY way a LEO can not know the law is willful ignorance in which case he gets to pay for his education the hard way.

    Also you said,,,
    gives an officer the legal right
    this is a not just a thorn but a whole rose bush in my side. CITIZENS have rights; unalienable rights endowed by their creator; government and their minions have AUTHORITY granted them by the citizens and subject to revocation.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    If YOU violated a law you were unaware of what do you think the chances are YOU would be hearing IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE!!!! Why should professional law enforcement officers not be held to an even higher standard?!?!?!?!?

    With 10s and even 100s of thousands of carry permits being issued in a state the ONLY way a LEO can not know the law is willful ignorance in which case he gets to pay for his education the hard way.

    Also you said,,, this is a not just a thorn but a whole rose bush in my side. CITIZENS have rights; unalienable rights endowed by their creator; government and their minions have AUTHORITY granted them by the citizens and subject to revocation.
    All very true, and I'm not saying anyone is in the wrong by holding them to such a standard. I'm simply saying there are better ways, ways that don't distract officers from their job, and ways that would impact more than single officer. Yes, police officers should be held to a higher standard, but there is also a difference between having to pay a $200 fine for not knowing the speed limit versus losing your career for something the academy should have trained you for but failed to do so. I agree, an officer should be held responsible but at the same time - it's a never ending battle if we were only targeting the individual officers.

    If you're manufacturing firearms and notice a defect that can be fixed by replacing a single piece, do you just keep manufacturing it the same way and sending the fix to customers who call in and complain, or do you change the manufacturing process so that all new firearms are manufactured properly and release a public notice of the defective product to correct everything? I'm not saying the officers are not partially to blame, I'm just saying that it seems a waste of time to bait individual officers when it could be half of the police force and there is a constant flow of new officers coming out of the academy with the same level of training.

    As for the "legal right" statement, note that I did in-fact say "legal right" and not "constitutional right". Rather you call it authority or what ever else, in a courtroom they go based on the law in place and the law gives them a legal right (when they have valid probable cause).
    Last edited by Devon; 09-15-2012 at 07:19 PM.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Martinsburg, West Virginia, USA
    Posts
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon View Post
    I've been reading several forums, the state code, and what-not. But the information is quite saturated and I keep finding different views or opinions on the some areas of the law. Therefore, I'm left with the following questions:

    1. If open carrying a holstered firearm (not in a vehicle) and stopped by police, are you required by law to identify yourself when asked?
      (Assuming the firearm is the only reason they're questioning you)
    2. Additionally, if the police are responding to a call after someone reported you for having a holstered firearm, are you required by law to identify yourself when asked?
      (Assuming the 911 complaint stated only that you had a holstered firearm and not that you were acting recklessly with it)
    3. Is open carrying in a vehicle legal?
      1. If open carrying in a vehicle, what constitutes the difference between "open" and "concealed"?
      2. If open carrying in a vehicle, is the weapon allowed to be holstered or must it be, for example, in the passengers seat where it's more-easily visible?
      3. If open carrying in a vehicle, must one unload the firearm or is it legal to remain loaded?
        1. If open carrying in a vehicle and if the firearm must be unloaded, are there any other laws governing how or where the ammo must be? (locked in a box or bag, out of view, or out of reach)?


    Also, some of these questions may seems silly, but no; I'm not asking so that I can walk around like some arrogant activist looking for trouble and to sue a police officer like the many who've posted videos on YouTube. I'm simply asking so that I know the law, can avoid trouble, but yet protect myself and those around me.

    All questions assume the holder does not have their CCW license.
    I can only help with the definition of what concealed is. I haven't been able to find anything relating to when you are compelled to identify yourself (that just means I haven't found it, not that it doesn't exist).

    See (10) for the definition of concealed, but since that section references "deadly weapons" I've included the entire section.

    §61-7-2. Definitions.
    As used in this article, unless the context otherwise requires:

    (1) "Blackjack" means a short bludgeon consisting, at the striking end, of an encased piece of lead or some other heavy substance and, at the handle end, a strap or springy shaft which increases the force of impact when a person or object is struck. The term "blackjack" shall include, but not be limited to, a billy, billy club, sand club, sandbag or slapjack.

    (2) "Gravity knife" means any knife that has a blade released from the handle by the force of gravity or the application of centrifugal force and when so released is locked in place by means of a button, spring, lever or other locking or catching device.

    (3) "Knife" means an instrument, intended to be used or readily adaptable to be used as a weapon, consisting of a sharp-edged or sharp-pointed blade, usually made of steel, attached to a handle which is capable of inflicting cutting, stabbing or tearing wounds. The term "knife" shall include, but not be limited to, any dagger, dirk, poniard or stiletto, with a blade over three and one-half inches in length, any switchblade knife or gravity knife and any other instrument capable of inflicting cutting, stabbing or tearing wounds. A pocket knife with a blade three and one-half inches or less in length, a hunting or fishing knife carried for hunting, fishing, sports or other recreational uses, or a knife designed for use as a tool or household implement shall not be included within the term "knife" as defined herein unless such knife is knowingly used or intended to be used to produce serious bodily injury or death.

    (4) "Switchblade knife" means any knife having a spring-operated blade which opens automatically upon pressure being applied to a button, catch or other releasing device in its handle.

    (5) "Nunchuka" means a flailing instrument consisting of two or more rigid parts, connected by a chain, cable, rope or other nonrigid, flexible or springy material, constructed in such a manner as to allow the rigid parts to swing freely so that one rigid part may be used as a handle and the other rigid part may be used as the striking end.

    (6) "Metallic or false knuckles" means a set of finger rings attached to a transverse piece to be worn over the front of the hand for use as a weapon and constructed in such a manner that, when striking another person with the fist or closed hand, considerable physical damage may be inflicted upon the person struck. The terms "metallic or false knuckles" shall include any such instrument without reference to the metal or other substance or substances from which the metallic or false knuckles are made.

    (7) "Pistol" means a short firearm having a chamber which is integral with the barrel, designed to be aimed and fired by the use of a single hand.

    (8) "Revolver" means a short firearm having a cylinder of several chambers that are brought successively into line with the barrel to be discharged, designed to be aimed and fired by the use of a single hand.

    (9) "Deadly weapon" means an instrument which is designed to be used to produce serious bodily injury or death or is readily adaptable to such use. The term "deadly weapon" shall include, but not be limited to, the instruments defined in subdivisions (1) through (8), inclusive, of this section or other deadly weapons of like kind or character which may be easily concealed on or about the person. For the purposes of section one-a, article five, chapter eighteen-a of this code and section eleven-a, article seven of this chapter, in addition to the definition of "knife" set forth in subdivision (3) of this section, the term "deadly weapon" also includes any instrument included within the definition of "knife" with a blade of three and one-half inches or less in length. Additionally, for the purposes of section one-a, article five, chapter eighteen-a of this code and section eleven-a, article seven of this chapter, the term "deadly weapon" includes explosive, chemical, biological and radiological materials. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the term "deadly weapon" does not include any item or material owned by the school or county board, intended for curricular use, and used by the student at the time of the alleged offense solely for curricular purposes.

    (10) "Concealed" means hidden from ordinary observation so as to prevent disclosure or recognition. A deadly weapon is concealed when it is carried on or about the person in such a manner that another person in the ordinary course of events would not be placed on notice that the deadly weapon was being carried.

    (11) "Firearm" means any weapon which will expel a projectile by action of an explosion.

    (12) "Controlled substance" has the same meaning as is ascribed to that term in subsection (d), section one hundred one, article one, chapter sixty-a of this code.

    (13) "Drug" has the same meaning as is ascribed to that term in subsection (1), section one hundred one, article one, chapter sixty-a of this code.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    11
    Shallnotbeinfringed,

    Thanks for that! I was actually looking at that part of West Virginia's code the other day, but I was skimming through and completely overlooked the part about concealment. That clarifies things a bit, but still leaves one to question rather keeping the firearm holstered when in a vehicles would consider it to be concealed or not - it also depends on which side of the vehicle the officer approaches you on, I suppose.

    Thanks again!

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Martinsburg, West Virginia, USA
    Posts
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon View Post
    Shallnotbeinfringed,

    Thanks for that! I was actually looking at that part of West Virginia's code the other day, but I was skimming through and completely overlooked the part about concealment. That clarifies things a bit, but still leaves one to question rather keeping the firearm holstered when in a vehicles would consider it to be concealed or not - it also depends on which side of the vehicle the officer approaches you on, I suppose.

    Thanks again!
    I would say that if you are sitting in your car, and your handgun is on your hip at 3:00 (for the sake of discussion), you would not be hiding it "from ordinary observation so as to prevent disclosure or recognition". You are open carrying in a car.

    However, it could be said that if the handgun (in a holster) in the glove box, center console, under the seat, in a door pocket/pouch could be considered concealed because "another person in the ordinary course of events would not be placed on notice that the deadly weapon was being carried". Then you can get into the whole definition of "carried", but I won't.

    I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, so please do not take this for anything more than conversation and discussion.

  24. #24
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Shallnotbeinfringed View Post
    I would say that if you are sitting in your car, and your handgun is on your hip at 3:00 (for the sake of discussion), you would not be hiding it "from ordinary observation so as to prevent disclosure or recognition". You are open carrying in a car.

    However, it could be said that if the handgun (in a holster) in the glove box, center console, under the seat, in a door pocket/pouch could be considered concealed because "another person in the ordinary course of events would not be placed on notice that the deadly weapon was being carried". Then you can get into the whole definition of "carried", but I won't.

    I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, so please do not take this for anything more than conversation and discussion.
    I agree with this. However, though it is not crystal clear, OC in a vehicle appears to be unlawful. Be careful.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  25. #25
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711
    Open carry of loaded holstered handguns at age 18 without a permit or ID is legal in West Virginia, in vehicles as well.

    Regardless if whether your state has a statute to require you to state your name to police when seized by police under certain circumstances, it's probably advantageous to you to state your name to help identify the suvbsequent police records about your seizure when you submit freedom if information act requests for ecods, discovery during law suits, etc.

    To hedge against a false charge of unlawful concealed carrying, especially in places like vehicles, consider obtaining a concealed handgun permit.

Posting Permissions

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