First day of OC - Warren County

Just thought I'd share todays events.

While leaving lowes today (unarmed) I stopped a county officer and picked his brain. His name was Deputy Bates. He was very friendly and willing to help. While we all know "secured" container could be just about anything, he informed me that some officers will charge citizens with concealed for firearms in the glove box or other compartment that DOES NOT LOCK (yours might, not ALL do). I know, i know: this is not news to anyone. Both of my glove boxes in both vehicles do not lock. He explained that usually the charge is reserved for the exceptionally dick headed, it could happen to anyone, and that everything (read LAW) is open to interpretation. Youd probably beat the charge, but a terrible experience nonetheless. HE suggested immediately informing any officer that a firearm is in the vehicle since some officers get very uncomfortable at the sight of a firearm. I am not law enforcement and I am not in any way suggesting what YOU should do. I am merely sharing with you what he shared with me. You have every right to hamdle the situation however youd like, considering the dynamic your experience may take on.

Carried from my home to 7-11. Held the door for a lady whose eyes went straight for the Sig. She kept to herself and went about her business. Im pretty sure nobody inside even noticed.

Grabbed a bite at spelunkers and the only people that noticed were the kids who were beating the bathroom door down as I was washing up. They quickly apologized as their eyes exploded at the sight of the piece.

People, for the most part, either dont care or have no idea whats going on. Or they think im plain clothes police. Not a bad first day

The law about containers is this. You may put your handgun in a secured container within your vehicle (think glove box or console) without needing to have a CHP. The former attorney general issued an opinion on this law stating that the container did not have to be locked; only secured (think a door or cover of some kind).

To avoid this entirely, just have the gun on your person in a quality and appropriate holster. Of course, if you have not been issued a CHP, that firearm must be visible. Sitting in a vehicle while openly carrying your sidearm does not constitute concealment. If you were to place something over it, such as a shirt tail or magazine, you would be intentionally concealing it and opening yourself up to a charge.

If you want to hit Melting Pot Pizza sometime while carrying, send me a PM. Best pizza going and worth the 37 mile trip.

SouthernBoy said:

The law about containers is this. You may put your handgun in a secured container within your vehicle (think glove box or console) without needing to have a CHP. The former attorney general issued an opinion on this law stating that the container did not have to be locked; only secured (think a door or cover of some kind).

To avoid this entirely, just have the gun on your person in a quality and appropriate holster. Of course, if you have not been issued a CHP, that firearm must be visible. Sitting in a vehicle while openly carrying your sidearm does not constitute concealment. If you were to place something over it, such as a shirt tail or magazine, you would be intentionally concealing it and opening yourself up to a charge.

If you want to hit Melting Pot Pizza sometime while carrying, send me a PM. Best pizza going and worth the 37 mile trip.

Click to expand...

Yep its pretty good. I sure will. Not a fan of canned mushrooms though. That's the ONE thing they could do better!

Much more important than the AG opinion is the PUBLISHED opinion of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.

As we have already seen, any politically motivated public official may disregard the opinion of the Attorney General. What cannot be so easily dismissed is a published opinion from a court of record, which in this case has upheld the AG's opinion, and is much more valuable to cite.

ELIAS P. DOULGERAKIS vs. Commonwealth of Virginia

TFred

ETA: Something I just now noticed in re-reading the opinion, the position of the Commonwealth changed between the Circuit Court of Henrico, and the Appeals Court:

TFred said:

Much more important than the AG opinion is the PUBLISHED opinion of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.

As we have already seen, any politically motivated public official may disregard the opinion of the Attorney General. What cannot be so easily dismissed is a published opinion from a court of record, which in this case has upheld the AG's opinion, and is much more valuable to cite.

ELIAS P. DOULGERAKIS vs. Commonwealth of Virginia

TFred

ETA: Something I just now noticed in re-reading the opinion, the position of the Commonwealth changed between the Circuit Court of Henrico, and the Appeals Court:

ANALYSIS

The sole issue on appeal is whether a firearm in an unlocked, but latched, glove box of a private vehicle is “secured in a container or compartment” within the meaning of Code §18.2-308(B)(10). Appellant argues that it is, and the Commonwealth agrees, conceding error.​

Click to expand...

Good points... thank you.

TFred said:

Much more important than the AG opinion is the PUBLISHED opinion of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.

As we have already seen, any politically motivated public official may disregard the opinion of the Attorney General. What cannot be so easily dismissed is a published opinion from a court of record, which in this case has upheld the AG's opinion, and is much more valuable to cite.

ELIAS P. DOULGERAKIS vs. Commonwealth of Virginia

TFred

ETA: Something I just now noticed in re-reading the opinion, the position of the Commonwealth changed between the Circuit Court of Henrico, and the Appeals Court:

ANALYSIS

The sole issue on appeal is whether a firearm in an unlocked, but latched, glove box of a private vehicle is “secured in a container or compartment” within the meaning of Code §18.2-308(B)(10). Appellant argues that it is, and the Commonwealth agrees, conceding error.​

Click to expand...

Like I said, we all know what a secured container is. Just sharing what he told me.

Unfortunately the police arent lawyers. They can charge someone with just about anything and be a major PITA at a moments notice. Does not mean it will stick, but who wants to go through it? I personally dont have a bank account large enough to find out the hard way.

Good reading though. I know where to point should I ever get into that situation!

I guess what im trying to say is the the LAW isnt enough to stop leo from charging you. They SHOULD know, but some dont, and other do but dont care. Some just wanna be a pita.

Front Royalty said:

I guess what im trying to say is the the LAW isnt enough to stop leo from charging you. They SHOULD know, but some dont, and other do but dont care. Some just wanna be a pita.

Click to expand...

Qualified immunity is not supposed to cover a LEO in circumstances where s/he "should have known" what the law is. The problem with that is that one has to first suffer the arrest and everything that follows, and then find an attorney willing to take on a civil lawsuit against the LEO and their agency. That's time, money, damage to reputation, and a lot of inconvenience just to get a few bucks as compensation for everything.

stay safe.