State info on open carry site

pkbites said:

It is only a recommendation. There is nothing in the law itself that requires you to inform unless you are asked.

Click to expand...

Would you recommend it too?

Law abider said:

Would you recommend it too?

Click to expand...

My first recommendation is to not do anything that would invite authorities to make contact with you in the first place. "Flying under the radar" really isn't that hard.

If it were me and contact was made, I would only advise I was armed if there was a chance they'd find out anyway. Like, say, if I had to reach back for my wallet and doing so would have a chance to expose a concealed weapon. Otherwise I wouldn't. But that's just me.

Like I posted before, I always ask even though I assume they are armed.

pkbites said:

My first recommendation is to not do anything that would invite authorities to make contact with you in the first place. "Flying under the radar" really isn't that hard.

If it were me and contact was made, I would only advise I was armed if there was a chance they'd find out anyway. Like, say, if I had to reach back for my wallet and doing so would have a chance to expose a concealed weapon. Otherwise I wouldn't. But that's just me.

Like I posted before, I always ask even though I assume they are armed.

Click to expand...

I'll take the advice. You are in law enforcement and know how other leos think and are trained. My admission to or not to will depend on the situation, as to weather I am asked to step out or not. My gun is opposite of wallet, so they will not see it if I am not to step out. Good advice!

Different Issues

pkbites said:

How can a court case take precedent over a law that's been changed? The law no longer says what it said when the ruling was made. Case law only affect those laws while they are actually law. The law has been changed, that ruling is moot.

Click to expand...

How? To the extent that the decision deals with an aspect of carry that the law did not address. The change I mentioned added handguns as an exemption to the general rule about carrying firearms in vehicles. However, it did not change what constitutes "concealed carry" in such situations. While a non-licensed individual may carry a loaded, uncased, within reach handgun in a vehicle, it cannot be "concealed." As the relevant cases show, what appears to be open carry can be found to be "concealed." That is why I suggested a CWL or OOSL as a safeguard against a shortsighted LEO or a weapon that slides into a dark recess. Otherwise I would recommend securely affixing your handgun to the dash with bright, flashing neon lights that say "Handgun Here!" Is there anything in the statutes that overruled how the prior decisions defined "concealed"?