New carrier! disscusion about vehicle carry...

I am a recent open carrier and have spent many hours over the last few weeks researching and understanding the law. Which brings me to the subject that to have a loaded hand gun in your vehicle you must have a CCP. (RCW 9.41.050) Although to open carry loaded requires no permit.

Why do we have to unload our hand gun while we drive our vehicle but we can have it loaded while on our person otherwise?
This causes us to handle our hand gun every time we enter or exit our vehicle, which creates the opportunity to "cause alarm" or "brandishing" etc..

What is the difference between a loaded gun on your hip while walking around or while in a vehicle?

I have come to see this as an infringement of the 2A; because the act of having a loaded hand gun in a vehicle without a CCP is punishable by law. (RCW 9.41.050)

I do not have a CCP and I am also contemplating the possible infringement of the 2A that the process might be.

First, welcome to OCDO. Second in WA it is a Concealed Pistol Licence, (CPL) not a CCP. Conceal Carry Permit. Although I agree with you, the law does not. In/on the car/bus/motorcycle/ferry when loaded it is considered "concealed", which I somewhat agree since a LEO could not see it if on your hip. Just get a "CPL", so you don't have to worry about it, and can go either way with no worry. I mostly OC, but the CPL reduces a lot of hassle. It would be nice if WA was a Constitutional Carry state, but we have it pretty good compared to other states.

Welcome to OCDO dakatak87 - lots of good people on the forum from Washington.

Asking "why" is IMHO an exercise in futility and not likely in itself to change anything.

Could some of the statutes be determined to be unconstitutional? - sure, particularly by originalists. Consider that mounting a constitutional challenge is extremely expensive and there are no guarantees, it would seem better to work through the legislature to change the law(s).

Suggest you become familiar with the local people in your state, attend some of the meet n' greets, and then determine how you may be most effective.

... just...

just give the government one finger into my right to bear arms. I am currently contemplating the CPL and the necessity of it for me, as well as the constitutional infringement I currently perceive by it. Why should I just register myself and fingerprints to the government to allow continuation of perceived infringement?

Yes, asking "why" can seem futile, but understanding something fully can help make informed decisions toward changes.
If why is never asked, then anarchy will run rampant. I may tell the story of four monkeys and the banana.
Also, I bring up this topic to raise support and awareness amongst The People.

Again, WHY should we have to unload our pistol because we entered a vehicle?

Why?

Because we obey the law as written. We even have a Forum Rule that addresses that.

(15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules

Why? Because laws are written by legislators, i.e. idiots.

Grapeshot: 1st, I am not telling anyone to break the law. 2nd, If it were law that you have to cut off a finger in order to have weapon, would you do it?

kparker: Your response is the best one so far.


Is there anyone with other insight as to Why there is a difference between a loaded pistol on your hip while you stand next to your car, and the same loaded pistol on your hip while you sit in your car?

dakatak87 said:

Grapeshot: 1st, I am not telling anyone to break the law. 2nd, If it were law that you have to cut off a finger in order to have weapon, would you do it?

kparker: Your response is the best one so far.


Is there anyone with other insight as to Why there is a difference between a loaded pistol on your hip while you stand next to your car, and the same loaded pistol on your hip while you sit in your car?

Click to expand...

I think you are missing the point and appear to be positioning yourself as a provocateur.

If you want to debate the philosophical reasons of why people can be illogical, then the place to do that is in the Social Lounge. The individual state sub-forums are for conversing/reporting on OC/RKBA as applies to that state exclusively.

The character and standards of legislators, judges, prosecutors and LEOs shall not be subjected to group ridicule - again a Forum Rule. Might suggest that you read all of them before proceeding further.

NO PERSONAL ATTACKS: While you may disagree strongly with another poster based upon their opinion, we will NOT tolerate any personal attacks or general bashing of groups of people based upon race, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender-identity or choice of occupation (e.g., being a law enforcement officer, in the military, etc). NOTE THAT THIS RULE APPLIES TO PMs AS WELL AS FORUM POSTS!!!

Click to expand...

Further such insistence on continuing in this vein will likely result in a thread lock.

What's with the sudden injection of harsh moderation? Not something we're used to here at OCDO-WA.

He's not asking why the law should be obeyed, he's asking why it's there in the first place. <--- Not against the forum rules.

Perhaps you are missing my point.

Were else but a public forum is better to talk with The People about the laws that govern them.

I'll leave this discussion with the following until someone else adds more:
Who agrees that being able to have our pistol loaded in a vehicle while open carry should not require a CPL?
This may be the beginning that may cause the code to change.

deanf said:

What's with the sudden injection of harsh moderation? Not something we're used to here at OCDO-WA.

He's not asking why the law should be obeyed, he's asking why it's there in the first place. <--- Not against the forum rules.

Click to expand...

Sudden, harsh moderation? Really?

Think the "why" has been reasonably answered - there is no logical answer, but is is the law.

If anyone can offer a succinct answer, that does not attack/slander a group and is specific to Washington, I'll listen.

dakatak87 said:

Perhaps you are missing my point.

Were else but a public forum is better to talk with The People about the laws that govern them.

I'll leave this discussion with the following until someone else adds more:
Who agrees that being able to have our pistol loaded in a vehicle while open carry should not require a CPL?
This may be the beginning that may cause the code to change.

Click to expand...

On that we agree, as I think most everyone here would - Constitutional Carry is the Holy Grail

and is specific to Washington,

Click to expand...

How could it not be specific to Washington, given this is the Washington forum and he cited specific Washington law?

It is my opinion that your "specific to Washington" proviso is confrontational beyond necessity, as has been your whole presence in this thread.

As to the logic behind the law? Philosophers can't even agree what logic is - should we expect legislators to? The answer as to why someone, at some point, thought it was a good idea is out there. It might necessitate a trip to Olympia to look at old legislative records.

Grapeshot said:

Sudden, harsh moderation? Really?

Think the "why" has been reasonably answered - there is no logical answer, but is is the law.

If anyone can offer a succinct answer, that does not attack/slander a group and is specific to Washington, I'll listen.

Click to expand...

deanf said:

[/COLOR]

How could it not be specific to Washington, given this is the Washington forum and he cited specific Washington law?
It is my opinion that your "specific to Washington" proviso is confrontational beyond necessity, as has been your whole presence in this thread.

As to the logic behind the law? Philosophers can't even agree what logic is - should we expect legislators to? The answer as to why someone, at some point, thought it was a good idea is out there. It might necessitate a trip to Olympia to look at old legislative records.

Click to expand...

You take an adversarial position, even down to quoting part of what I said out of context.

What I said was clearly, "If anyone can offer a succinct answer, that does not attack/slander a group and is specific to Washington, I'll listen."

I'm not going to debate the point - that is not my purpose. Public disagreement and open objection to moderation does not benefit the forum in any way. There is a proper way to grieve a perceived wrong - use the exclamation triangle icon to the left bottom of each post.

That said - locking it with apologies to those not involved in this "discussion."