Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Open Carry with Rifle Caliber Pistol

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Asheville, NC
    Posts
    39

    Open Carry with Rifle Caliber Pistol

    Anybody do this or know of anybody who has? More thinking out loud here than considering actually doing it.

    I was thinking of pistols such as the Kel-Tec PLR-16, chambered in 5.56 NATO, accepts standard 30-round mags, and does not have a buffer tube protruding out the back of it. I've got my concealed carry permit, so I technically could conceal carry it, but it's large enough to be very prohibitive of that, not to mention that it just doesn't make a lot of sense. That is a terrible cartridge for carrying due to massive overpenetration and risk to innocent people if you ever did decide to use it. But, it is technically a pistol, so I could OC the damn thing just like my Glock 19 if I felt so inclined. I'm sure it would garner some unwanted attention, though.

    Anyways, just wondering about the legalities of a pistol chambered for rifle cartridges and if anybody has seen or heard of carrying one on a regular basis.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    north carolina
    Posts
    63
    you can only carry something that was made to be fired with one hand

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by chris829 View Post
    you can only carry something that was made to be fired with one hand
    I rarely shoot any gun with one hand ... does any gun manufacture even discuss this issue?

    If something CAN be shot with 1 hand (I saw Rambo III yesterday, he shot an AK with one hand - and very well -- haha Hollywood) does not mean its the recommended method of shooting the gun.

    The manufacturer's recommendation should rule. And I think that any that produce a 9mm handgun would recommend 2 hands if they make any recommendation at all.

    Now there maybe law or case law discussing a design of a gun that allows a person to place his/her 2nd hand to support the barrel. I think that I have seen that sometime in the past. Don't recall where though.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 09-25-2012 at 12:04 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    north carolina
    Posts
    63
    its the same as carrying a mares leg. you can't do it. a hand gun in nc is a weapon that was meant to be fierd with one hand, i.e. a pistol. we don;t have a CCW in nc, we have a CHP
    Last edited by chris829; 09-25-2012 at 12:09 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member razor_baghdad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    CONUS ~for now~
    Posts
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by chris829 View Post
    you can only carry something that was made to be fired with one hand
    Chris, as per forum rules, please cite that statement with laws or statutes.

    IANAL, but I am a shooter and that statement just sounds ridiculous.....but that's just my opinion.

  6. #6
    Regular Member ncwabbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    rural religious usa
    Posts
    670
    IAW with NC statutes handgun is defined in chapter 14, article 54B(1a); 14-415.10; 14-269.7; etc,. : Handgun. – A firearm that has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand.

    wabbit
    But who prays for Satan? Who in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most...
    A person who has for untold centuries maintained the imposing position of spiritual head of four-fifths of the human race...
    All religions issue bibles against him, and say the most injurious things about him, but we never hear his side. (twain)

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    north carolina
    Posts
    63
    thanks wabbit

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Asheville, NC
    Posts
    39
    I'm feeling that you are saying a 5.56 pistol is not a handgun because it is not designed to be fired with one hand? It is legally a pistol, the same as my Glock 19. I always fire my Glock with two hands because it is safer and I have more control over it. Wouldn't it be the same with a 5.56 pistol? Can be fired with one hand but much better to use two? I can shoot my 16" heavy barreled AR-15 with one hand, and I can easily shoot a true M4 with one hand, so I feel confident that I could also shoot an even smaller 5.56 chambered weapon with one hand, but I would prefer to use two hands because it is safer. Since I don't think many pistols are truly designed to be shot one-handed, what makes a 5.56 pistol any different? I shoot my issued M16 with one hand during tac reloads when needed, and it is certainly not a handgun, but I can do it.

    I guess for me, it boils down to what is legally defined as a pistol, and what I am legally allowed to carry. I am legally allowed to carry my Glock 19. My Glock 19 is a pistol. I am legally allowed to carry a pistol. The Kel-Tec PLR-16 is a pistol. I am legally allowed to carry a Kel-Tec PLR-16.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    http://www.keltecweapons.com/uploade...s%20manual.pdf

    The manual ... odd, it says in one line its a rifle ... but other than that; the manual does not indicate it requires 2 hands...and that burden is upon the state to prove


    http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore...ver_Manual.pdf

    But S&W says to shoot their revolvers with 2 hands ... so are these not allowed to be carried?

    It would be hard for the state to say that a S&W revolver is OK while the other is not given the manufacturer's recommendation differences and testimony from the state that would say that a S&W revolver is OK to carry.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 09-25-2012 at 03:08 PM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,508
    Quote Originally Posted by TDFbound View Post
    Anybody do this or know of anybody who has?
    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=leonard+embody

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    http://stevespages.com/pdf/century_draco-pistol.pdf

    Manual for his pistol .. has a forearm, ie 2 handed operation. The OP's firearm is different design. Have to look at design I think.

    Plus the case cited only deals with a 42 USC 1983 claim .. the court declined to review the 2nd amend because it really was not in issue.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 09-25-2012 at 07:22 PM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member razor_baghdad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    CONUS ~for now~
    Posts
    279
    Thanks wabbit! Good info.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by TDFbound View Post
    Anybody do this or know of anybody who has? More thinking out loud here than considering actually doing it.

    I was thinking of pistols such as the Kel-Tec PLR-16, chambered in 5.56 NATO, accepts standard 30-round mags, and does not have a buffer tube protruding out the back of it. I've got my concealed carry permit, so I technically could conceal carry it, but it's large enough to be very prohibitive of that, not to mention that it just doesn't make a lot of sense. That is a terrible cartridge for carrying due to massive overpenetration and risk to innocent people if you ever did decide to use it. But, it is technically a pistol, so I could OC the damn thing just like my Glock 19 if I felt so inclined. I'm sure it would garner some unwanted attention, though.

    Anyways, just wondering about the legalities of a pistol chambered for rifle cartridges and if anybody has seen or heard of carrying one on a regular basis.
    There was this guy in Tenn. that took an AK pistol to the park.....






    Do a search of the Tenn. section for kwikrnu. Lots of reading and emotion.
    Last edited by Thundar; 09-26-2012 at 09:12 AM.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  14. #14
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    None of this is consistent with the path on which OCDO has been directed. The desire is to foster confidence/support from a majority of the voting public. The means is demonstrating that properly carried normal handguns by LACs are not a threat to public safety and welfare. The goal is to be free and capable of defending ourselves and our loved ones as the need might arise.

    Neither the 2nd Amendment nor G*d given rights are in question to this regard. It is public perception that we must influence and being cognizant of how these things are presently accepted is part of the equation.

    Rifle caliber handguns are not viewed as normal, everyday tools - they are unusual, awkward to carry holstered and unnecessarily raise the level of resistance from the general public. They tend to be much more "in your face." Rifle caliber handguns, rifles/carbines and shotguns are not normal, everyday carry - such is perceived very differently and generally in a negative fashion.

    We have made great strides in recent years following a proven format. I see no reason to deviate from that course.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

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

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    None of this is consistent with the path on which OCDO has been directed. The desire is to foster confidence/support from a majority of the voting public. The means is demonstrating that properly carried normal handguns by LACs are not a threat to public safety and welfare. The goal is to be free and capable of defending ourselves and our loved ones as the need might arise.

    Neither the 2nd Amendment nor G*d given rights are in question to this regard. It is public perception that we must influence and being cognizant of how these things are presently accepted is part of the equation.

    Rifle caliber handguns are not viewed as normal, everyday tools - they are unusual, awkward to carry holstered and unnecessarily raise the level of resistance from the general public. They tend to be much more "in your face." Rifle caliber handguns, rifles/carbines and shotguns are not normal, everyday carry - such is perceived very differently and generally in a negative fashion.

    We have made great strides in recent years following a proven format. I see no reason to deviate from that course.
    Are you saying that the OP's pistol is not suitable for carry Grapeshot? That is the question the OP posed. I would rather be shot by a .223 round from the OP's gun as opposed to S&W's .500 caliber in their revolver. And if the cartridge is something to consider in the context of the 2nd amendment backdrop, then why not ban .50's,.45's, 9mm, and .380s? After all you can likely defend your self with a 22 right? And many rifles shoot .45's so the .45 is not exclusive to handguns; same with .50, 9mm, and .22 (the OP's gun can be chambered for this).

    I have kept my postings' information specific to the characterization of the OP's specific pistol. From what I have read and discovered, I think its may be allowable as a carry pistol. But I would advise the OP to seek further opinion from a lawyer specializing in such areas of law. If it is not available for carry just due to the ammo it uses then I would find that a very surprising and scary conclusion but not a conclusion a judge might not come to rest upon. Heck, the IL Supreme court ruled that the handgun ban in Chicago was OK, so anything is possible.

    Public perception can be swayed through rational discussion and information sharing. What I can or should I carry is a basic question, one of the first, a person would ask when deciding to carry.

  16. #16
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    None of this is consistent with the path on which OCDO has been directed. The desire is to foster confidence/support from a majority of the voting public. The means is demonstrating that properly carried normal handguns by LACs are not a threat to public safety and welfare. The goal is to be free and capable of defending ourselves and our loved ones as the need might arise.

    Neither the 2nd Amendment nor G*d given rights are in question
    to this regard. It is public perception that we must influence and being cognizant of how these things are presently accepted is part of the equation.

    Rifle caliber handguns are not viewed as normal, everyday tools - they are unusual, awkward to carry holstered and unnecessarily raise the level of resistance from the general public. They tend to be much more "in your face." Rifle caliber handguns, rifles/carbines and shotguns are not normal, everyday carry - such is perceived very differently and generally in a negative fashion.

    We have made great strides in recent years following a proven format. I see no reason to deviate from that course.
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Are you saying that the OP's pistol is not suitable for carry Grapeshot? That is the question the OP posed. I would rather be shot by a .223 round from the OP's gun as opposed to S&W's .500 caliber in their revolver. And if the cartridge is something to consider in the context of the 2nd amendment backdrop, then why not ban .50's,.45's, 9mm, and .380s? After all you can likely defend your self with a 22 right? And many rifles shoot .45's so the .45 is not exclusive to handguns; same with .50, 9mm, and .22 (the OP's gun can be chambered for this).

    I have kept my postings' information specific to the characterization of the OP's specific pistol. From what I have read and discovered, I think its may be allowable as a carry pistol. But I would advise the OP to seek further opinion from a lawyer specializing in such areas of law. If it is not available for carry just due to the ammo it uses then I would find that a very surprising and scary conclusion but not a conclusion a judge might not come to rest upon. Heck, the IL Supreme court ruled that the handgun ban in Chicago was OK, so anything is possible.

    Public perception can be swayed through rational discussion and information sharing. What I can or should I carry is a basic question, one of the first, a person would ask when deciding to carry.
    Few others miss the point that this is NOT about what is legal or what caliber/style of gun is effective for self-defense.

    I did not state it was not suitable for carry, I indicated it was outside the parameters selected by the site/forum owners.

    All posts are subject to scrutiny. Those that post here do so not as a right but with the permission of the owners. That permission can be limited or denied. OCDO is still private property.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

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

Posting Permissions

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