• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Check out the new maps on the main page of OCDO: machine guns, gun transfers, college carry, etc.

AbNo

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
3,805
Location
Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
imported post

vermonter wrote:
why not make a map?

Well, you could make the map yourself.

Remember, it takes TIME to double-check all the information, color in the states, and make a legend.

You could get the ball rolling by compiling an initial list, even a partial one.
 

imperialism2024

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
3,047
Location
Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

vermonter wrote:
I don't see why you can't do a state map for "stand your ground" states. That isNOT giving legal advice, just stating the facts about the situation in that state. Some states have statutory stand your ground, some have case law, some are unclear, and some have retreat required. I think that is more important than where you can and cannot carry. What good is carrying if you cannot defend yourself. The following links are not worried about "legal advice", why not make a map?
The truth of the matter is that each state would need a different color. There's a pretty decent range of permissiveness between "you better have a damn good reason to shoot at all to defend yourself" and "you can shoot anything that moves... and a few things that don't move".

On a more subjective note, it shouldn't be all that necessary to know how permissive self-defense laws are in a location in the United States. If you do everything you can do in order to de-escalate a situation, if you attempt to retreat if possible, and if you life is truly put in grave danger, there are very few jurisdictions that will hold you criminally liable for this.

Not to mention that your self-defense response should be the same regardless of laws in the area you find yourself. Why, ethically, would it be justifiable to use deadly force in one situation, but not justifiable to use it in the exact same situation, but where you might face legal problems? Or the information on the self-defense laws instead used to decide whether or not one gets to shoot a "bad" person? To me, self-defense is self-defense, and if you have to question whether a shoot is good or not, chances are that you shouldn't be making that shoot.

But anyhow, going back to the topic at hand, it would just be very difficult to properly classify states' self-defense laws because they're so varied. It would be like making a map rating how "pro-gun" or "anti-gun" the various states are.
 

TheEggman

Regular Member
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
174
Location
, Virginia, USA
imported post

Utah Campus Carry ... obviously a bad idea. Look at all of the school shootings happening in Utah!

Oh ... there aren't any?

Never mind ...
 

Sa45auto

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
387
Location
, , USA
imported post

imperialism2024 wrote:
AbNo wrote:
imperialism2024 wrote:
It would be like making a map rating how "pro-gun" or "anti-gun" the various states are.


Now now, let's not be like the Brady Bunch. :lol:

Well if they were making the list, then all states would be "pro-gun" except DC...
I am not sure that they would not even include DC as "pro-gun" :what:
 

imperialism2024

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
3,047
Location
Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

Sa45auto wrote:
imperialism2024 wrote:
AbNo wrote:
imperialism2024 wrote:
It would be like making a map rating how "pro-gun" or "anti-gun" the various states are.


Now now, let's not be like the Brady Bunch. :lol:

Well if they were making the list, then all states would be "pro-gun" except DC...
I am not sure that they would not even include DC as "pro-gun" :what:
Hmm yeah, I was thinking about how they let cops have guns in DC. Definitely pro-gun, er, as they would put it, pro-child-killing.
 

bobcat

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
167
Location
Great Lakes, , USA
imported post

FIRST: Great job on the map enhancements. Most interesting and helpful.

A map depicting whether or not a state has some type of "Castle Doctrine" would be helpful. Yes, I recognize these laws have considerable variability, but it would be helpful to see such a map. And of course, it is up to each of us to understand those variabilities.

Second, I would like to see a map that indicates which states allow carry of any kind in State Parks. This is an issue that has really heated up over the last several years. And we have seen several states change to allow legal firearms carry in State Parks/preserves/refuges. Colorado and Indiana come to mind.

Again, great job on the map enhancements and thanks for considering my suggestions.
 

desert-prospector

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
72
Location
(City of the Crosses), Las Cruces New Mexico, USA
imported post

You might update the NM part...
You have:
Bill of Rights, Article II, Section 6

No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons.


But have forgotten this part:
No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms.

It should read as this in entirety:

Bill of Rights, Article II, Section 6

No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons.
No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms.

To me the underlined part is very important!!!

 

just_a_car

Regular Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
2,558
Location
Auburn, Washington, USA
imported post

The Age to Open Carry map is incorrect for WA State. The age is 18, not 21.

See RCW 9.41.040:

(2)(a) A person, whether an adult or juvenile, is guilty of the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the second degree, if the person does not qualify under subsection (1) of this section for the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree and the person owns, has in his or her possession, or has in his or her control any firearm:
...
(iii) If the person is under eighteen years of age, except as provided in RCW 9.41.042;

And, if you also follow the link for 9.41.042, you will see that there are many activities where even under-18 juveniles (mostly without age limit - 14 for hunters {subsection 5}) are permitted to possess firearms.

You do have to, however be 21 to purchase a handgun, but certainly not to OC it. Plus, you have to be 21 to get a WA CPL to conceal... so the only viable option for someone of age 18-20 is to OC (which, as the vehicle carry map shows, limits them to unloaded carry in vehicles... as you must have a CPL).
 

just_a_car

Regular Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
2,558
Location
Auburn, Washington, USA
imported post

AbNo wrote:
Wait, purchase, or purchase from an FFL holder?
That's Federal law: http://www.nraila.org/GunLaws/Federal/Read.aspx?id=60
The following classes of people are ineligible to possess, receive, ship, or transport firearms or ammunition:
...
Persons less than 21 years of age for the purchase of a firearm that is other than a shotgun or rifle.

I also found this, which may contradict what I had previously thought was the case for 18-21 OC:
------------------------------
RCW 9.41.240: Possession of pistol by person from eighteen to twenty-one
Unless an exception under RCW 9.41.042, 9.41.050, or 9.41.060 applies, a person at least eighteen years of age, but less than twenty-one years of age, may possess a pistol only:

(1) In the person's place of abode;

(2) At the person's fixed place of business; or

(3) On real property under his or her control.
------------------------------
So, unless you're doing one of the things mentioned in the three links there, you're NO-GO for OC as a 18-21 year old. But, oddly enough, that does include travel to and from many of those activities that excludes one from the vehicular requirement of a CPL.

So, there are few instances where it is permissable, but it's almost the same instances that would allow you not to need a CPL. Unfortunately, not nearly as permissable as I had once thought it was.
 
Top