ConditionThree
State Pioneer
imported post
It seems detractors seek any means possible to discourage open carry, including promises that anyone who open carries would be charged with various violations of the law. I will attempt to examine them here.
PC 417 Brandishing.
Detractors assert that all that needs to occur for a procecutable offense is for someone to 'feel threatened' by the open carry (ie; 'exhibition') of a firearm. I contend that the action of exhibiting a firearm must be executed in a 'rude, angry, or threatening manner' and the violation cannot rely on someone's averse reaction or fear of a firearm. An inanimate object cannot be rude, angry, or threatening, but the conduct of a person carrying it can.
Edited to add;
I've thought of another absurdity to this contention that ALL exhibitions of firearms constitute brandishing. On another forum where I participate my signature line includes a photo of me holding my firearm. It occured to me that if what these people are saying is true, that if someone felt "threatened" by the photo of me holding my pistol, that too would constitute brandishing-as a photo is another means of 'exhibiting' a firearm.
If what the detractors were saying were completely true, it would be possible to be arrested for open carry of a BB gun or a realistic squirtgun in a belt holsterif someone 'felt threatened' by it. The concept isn't wholly preposterous, but I doubt even police would entertain an arrest, when no immediate threat is established.
PC 245 Assault with a deadly weapon
Detractors have also forwarded that open carry would constitute a charge of ADW. This is nothing less than a scare tactic as PC 240 defines an assaultas an attempt to commit a violent injury. This would require an action taken against another person by a perpetrator- not the mere presense of an inanimate object such as a firearm. Imagine a 'victim' falling face first on the exposed grip of a pistol and receiving an injury-- is the person who is carrying the pistol guilty ofADW? No. There was no 'attempt' or 'commission'.Look at it this way; a simple assault (violation ofPC 240) could be commited by a person using only their hands- and that person could be carrying concealed or exposed, without being guilty of ADW.
It seems detractors seek any means possible to discourage open carry, including promises that anyone who open carries would be charged with various violations of the law. I will attempt to examine them here.
PC 417 Brandishing.
Detractors assert that all that needs to occur for a procecutable offense is for someone to 'feel threatened' by the open carry (ie; 'exhibition') of a firearm. I contend that the action of exhibiting a firearm must be executed in a 'rude, angry, or threatening manner' and the violation cannot rely on someone's averse reaction or fear of a firearm. An inanimate object cannot be rude, angry, or threatening, but the conduct of a person carrying it can.
Edited to add;
I've thought of another absurdity to this contention that ALL exhibitions of firearms constitute brandishing. On another forum where I participate my signature line includes a photo of me holding my firearm. It occured to me that if what these people are saying is true, that if someone felt "threatened" by the photo of me holding my pistol, that too would constitute brandishing-as a photo is another means of 'exhibiting' a firearm.
If what the detractors were saying were completely true, it would be possible to be arrested for open carry of a BB gun or a realistic squirtgun in a belt holsterif someone 'felt threatened' by it. The concept isn't wholly preposterous, but I doubt even police would entertain an arrest, when no immediate threat is established.
PC 245 Assault with a deadly weapon
Detractors have also forwarded that open carry would constitute a charge of ADW. This is nothing less than a scare tactic as PC 240 defines an assaultas an attempt to commit a violent injury. This would require an action taken against another person by a perpetrator- not the mere presense of an inanimate object such as a firearm. Imagine a 'victim' falling face first on the exposed grip of a pistol and receiving an injury-- is the person who is carrying the pistol guilty ofADW? No. There was no 'attempt' or 'commission'.Look at it this way; a simple assault (violation ofPC 240) could be commited by a person using only their hands- and that person could be carrying concealed or exposed, without being guilty of ADW.
