Open carry concealed?

I was wondering if anyone had some insight either pro or con.

On Doomsday, 12, 21 2012 I sent in my app for my CWL. Recieved it this past Friday.

I am an advocate of open carry and much more of an advocate about comfortable carry be it open or concealed - something I believe should be an individual choice and not somehting that should be mandated by some moron legislator.

Anyway, given my history with the local SD about how I carry as well as where and when carry I think I have found the perfect solution for me, personally.

If I stick my .380 into this holster which seemingly is quite benign
View attachment 10072
and carry openly on my belt I am thinking I am good to go.

My thoughts are that the weapon is 100% concealed so I meet the statutory and case law requirements for concealment and if some LEO argues that seeing a 'holster" makes it no longer concealed (good luck with that) then my right to open carry while hunting (coyotes) takes are of any "open carry" issues.

Thoughts?

Talesman said:

I was wondering if anyone had some insight either pro or con.

On Doomsday, 12, 21 2012 I sent in my app for my CWL. Recieved it this past Friday.

I am an advocate of open carry and much more of an advocate about comfortable carry be it open or concealed - something I believe should be an individual choice and not somehting that should be mandated by some moron legislator.

Anyway, given my history with the local SD about how I carry as well as where and when carry I think I have found the perfect solution for me, personally.

If I stick my .380 into this holster which seemingly is quite benign
View attachment 10072
and carry openly on my belt I am thinking I am good to go.

My thoughts are that the weapon is 100% concealed so I meet the statutory and case law requirements for concealment and if some LEO argues that seeing a 'holster" makes it no longer concealed (good luck with that) then my right to open carry while hunting (coyotes) takes are of any "open carry" issues.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

That's a great idea! To promote open carry you should open carry with the actual gun visible and do it whenever you can when hunting,fishing,or camping or going to/from hunting,fishing,or camping.

IANAL - but you might need one to help answer your question in the court!

I, personally, do not even see a weapon pouch in your attached photo. It is just a leather pouch, so I can't see how it could be any more "open carry" than having it in a fanny pack. Holster, not even close, it is a pouch. Best of luck if you and the LEOs ever chat about it.

IANAL so with my understanding of the law it would be ok. Just like a sneaky Pete holster.

Ok, someone explain to me what IANAL is? You dirty people...

Definition

shastadude17 said:

Ok, someone explain to me what IANAL is? You dirty people...

Click to expand...

IANAL- I Am Not A Lawyer

Talesman said:

...Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Not only am I not a lawyer, but I am not a resident of, nor an expert in Florida, though I will be there next week for Daytona Bike Week.

But I am an open carrier in a few states where it is legal (and concealing requires a permit). We would very quickly argue in these states that this was openly carrying that did not require a permit. It is a holster, even if the gun cannot be seen inside of it.

Granted, that is a non-holster-looking holster, but I would still argue it as a holster, like the full-flap holster that came with my Yugoslavian Tokarev, as opposed to something like the almost similar SafePacker, that was designed for concealing: http://www.thewilderness.com/index.php?p=catalog&parent=171&pg=1

To summarize my thoughts: I think you have found the dead center of the gray area...

I will be very curious in others' thoughts.

Here is an example of a full-flap holster, of which I would consider yours to be, even without the more-gunnish outline:

No different than having it in a purse, back pack, fanny pack, pocket, or under a shirt. Concealed = Perfectly legal with a CWFL.

I have wondered if it would be considered oc if the holster is exposed. I have a similar holster for my 1911, the gun is completely covered but its pretty clear its a holster. I always thought LEO's would take it as open carry. Does anyone have any case law or something more than a personal interpretation of the law. I would love to carry my 1911 on my side but don't want to be the test case for the law. I know the sheriff's in my area won't harass me but local pd will.

conandan said:

I have wondered if it would be considered oc if the holster is exposed. I have a similar holster for my 1911, the gun is completely covered but its pretty clear its a holster. I always thought LEO's would take it as open carry. Does anyone have any case law or something more than a personal interpretation of the law. I would love to carry my 1911 on my side but don't want to be the test case for the law. I know the sheriff's in my area won't harass me but local pd will.

Click to expand...

Is it OC if a purse, backpack, fanny pack is exposed?

notalawyer said:

Is it OC if a purse, backpack, fanny pack is exposed?

Click to expand...

No but those types of carry don't show that you are carrying a firearm. At least no where the same as a holster even it the gun is completely covered. Most people know the difference as does LEO's. Don't get me wrong I do agree with you just not sure how it would play out if stopped and charged with oc. I don't have that kind or money to fight it but the law does seem to be in our favor as I read it.

It has always intrigued me as to what, EXACTLY, what the definition of "concealed" was....by law.

The statutes are plain. "“Concealed firearm” means any firearm, as defined in subsection (6), which is carried on or about a person in such a manner as to conceal the firearm from the ordinary sight of another person.

But long before the latest revison to the statutes there were dozens of court cases about folks carrying concealed. Some courts have said it isn't necessary to totally conceal a weapon in order for it to be "concealed." That's really helpful if you catch my drift.

Many a current Florida lawyer website cite Dorelus v. State as being one of the controlling cases. In it the court stated "t]he critical question turns on whether an individual, standing near a person with a firearm or beside a vehicle in which a person with a firearm is seated, may by ordinary observation know the questioned object to be a firearm..." emphasis mine.

While one may wear a visible holster or partially visible holster it seems to me the court did state that knowledge of its contents was important. While seeing a holster may connotate thoughts of a firearm, it is mere speculation or conjecture that it contains a firearm but not actual knowledge unless the wearer was observed actually placing a firearm in the holster prior to covering the top half (where parts such as a grip or hammer may be visible) with outer clothing.

The court went on to say: "The focus should remain on whether the weapon was carried in such a manner as to conceal it from ordinary sight."

I guess that is why "printing" isn't a problem in Florida (yet). You may recognize that someone is carrying from your world experience knowledge and years of observation but since it was "concealed" from ordinary sight that is all that matters. A exposed or semi-exposed holster, in and of itself, could be empty or contain anything from a cell phone to a roll of Canada Mints. Direct knowledge of the contents has to be the deciding factor

I am standing by to learn if a visible or partially visible holster with nothing more leads to a court-affirmed RAS or PC in our state.

I guess I'll send a letter to my local states attorneys office and see if I can get there opinion. If they view it similarly at least then I will have something in writing to show LE if stopped. I will post the response if I get one.

conandan said:

I guess I'll send a letter to my local states attorneys office and see if I can get there opinion. If they view it similarly at least then I will have something in writing to show LE if stopped. I will post the response if I get one.

Click to expand...

Never known states attorneys or Attorneys General to give a legal opinion to citizens. Formal opinions from the AG are typically given in response to a query from a legislator or judge and are generally not binding on courts in any event.

That and I seriously doubt than at officer is going to read something during a stop that will change his opinion - I never attempt to "hold court" in the street. ymmv

Well, I see plenty of "fanny packs" and similar "European Man Purses" that scream "I've got a gun in here" but nobody seems to be pulling them over for open carry.

The original poster's photo does not even look like a holster so I would have to side with it not being a problem, at least it that case.

AD

Grapeshot said:

Never known states attorneys or Attorneys General to give a legal opinion to citizens. Formal opinions from the AG are typically given in response to a query from a legislator or judge and are generally not binding on courts in any event.

That and I seriously doubt than at officer is going to read something during a stop that will change his opinion - I never attempt to "hold court" in the street. ymmv

Click to expand...

As I am new to this. And by your comment grapshot I guess I would be wasting my time with the state attorney's office. I thought it would be the best place to get a straight answer. I guess I could where my holster around for a while with nothing in it and see how that goes.

conandan said:

As I am new to this. And by your comment grapshot I guess I would be wasting my time with the state attorney's office. I thought it would be the best place to get a straight answer. I guess I could where my holster around for a while with nothing in it and see how that goes.

Click to expand...

Yeah, the SA or AG will not respond to questions from us mere mortals.

Now, we are not saying that you will not draw attention of local LEO. Will a gun-shaped holster provide sufficient RAS to stop you? doubtful. But a LEO may still ask you about it.

Talesman posted the controlling Florida Supreme Court case law on the topic of 'concealed'.


Plus, we should have a ruling this year from the Supreme Court on the whole topic of firearms being RAS for a legal Terry stop.

conandan said:

As I am new to this. And by your comment grapshot I guess I would be wasting my time with the state attorney's office. I thought it would be the best place to get a straight answer. I guess I could where my holster around for a while with nothing in it and see how that goes.

Click to expand...

The state AG (Ms Bondi) cannot, by law, render an opinion to taxpaying civilians. She is limited to advising the elected elite. Not to say that your state senator or house member can't ask the question(s) on your behalf. Some local SA's have neen known to dispense answers if the question is properly phrased or, perhaps, you were a contributor to his or her last campaign.