Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Open Holster Carry

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    I am posting this here, because South Carolina is a state in which only concealed carry is allowed. Please discuss the idea for its feasibility in South Carolina. If your laws concerning what is "concealed" are similar to Florida's, this manner of carry might be a middle ground between concealed and full open.

    In Florida, we are somewhat limited in our ability to show this reminder of force to power, as we cannot openly display our guns:

    790.053 Open carrying of weapons.
    --

    (1)Except as otherwise provided by law and in subsection (2), it is unlawful for any person to openly carry on or about his or her person any firearm or electric weapon or device.

    Our weapons must be concealed:

    790.001 Definitions.--As used in this chapter, except where the context otherwise requires: (2)"Concealed firearm" means any firearm, as defined in subsection (6), which is carried on or about a person in such a manner as to conceal the firearm from the ordinary sight of another person.

    Since I can't openly carry the gun, the next best course is to openly carry a holster, but the holster must "conceal
    the firearm from the ordinary sight of another person." With cops being what they are, you are well advised to ensure that not a single atom from the gun is visible to the ordinary sight of another person.

    To this end, I've purchased this holster:



    It's a hard-shell holster for a Walther P38, but I'll see what else fits in it. It completely conceals and encases the gun, and it could as easily contain a cell phone and a hairbrush as it would a gun.

    I'm planning on wearing it on a nylon duty belt, completely openly. If we can't have open carry, open holster carry might be the next best thing.

    Now, I'm not going to stuff a gun down it, right away. I'm going to wear it a while and document the interactions with police here. I want to create a database of police interaction that evidences that police made a fuss about these holsters and found nothing in them but cell phones so that when we decide to switch over to carrying, there will be abundant documentation that a holster worn openly is not proof that the gun is not concealed from the ordinary view of another.

  2. #2
    Regular Member hp-hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Manchester State Forest, SC
    Posts
    399

    Post imported post

    This subject has been covered quite a few timesamongst people in South Carolina. While we all agree that a holster of this type meets the letter of the law, it certainly doesn't meet the intent of the law. Just the shape of it will draw the attention of the cops, and it probably won't be good attention. More importantly, none of us need to take Barney on a fishing expedition or can afford to pay for some lawyer's new yacht.

    I have few of these samestyle of holsters for my trio of Eastern European 9x18's... A PA-63, a P-64 and a CZ-82 although mine are surplus items, not new like yours. I've tried carrying on my property, in my house, at the rangeand while driving with them strapped onjust to see how they worked. I've also practiced presenting a firearm out of them. I can honestly say that I can carry more comfortably and draw faster from a concealment holster than from one of these. They're big and slow to open, but you can carry extra stuff in them.

    I'm 100% behind OC and can't wait till the day when I can do it legally without going to another state. But in my opinion this is not the way to try to move toward doing so. For me the cons outweight the pros. Your results may vary.
    "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun."

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    hp-hobo wrote:
    This subject has been covered quite a few timesamongst people in South Carolina. While we all agree that a holster of this type meets the letter of the law, it certainly doesn't meet the intent of the law.
    Well, they don't print the intent in the statute books, and I flunked mind reading.

    It wasn't too many years ago that Congress passed an Assault Weapons Ban that the antis thought was going to keep AKs and ARs out of citizen hands. Thankfully, those gun guys read those laws real close and did things with bayonet mounts and muzzle brakes so we could keep buying these guns.

    If they want to ban an open holster, they can pass a law. Until such time, all I can do is read their laws and see what they've actually said, not intended.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    smoking357 wrote
    Well, they don't print the intent in the statute books, and I flunked mind reading.
    True, but legislative intent is a well established legal doctrine.

    In South Carolina the legislative intent is maintained in the House and Senate Journals. In Wisconsin the legislative intent is maintained in the drafting records.

    A moment with your favorite search engine might be illuminating.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    smoking357 wrote
    Well, they don't print the intent in the statute books, and I flunked mind reading.
    True, but legislative intent is a well established legal doctrine.

    In South Carolina the legislative intent is maintained in the House and Senate Journals. In Wisconsin the legislative intent is maintained in the drafting records.

    A moment with your favorite search engine might be illuminating.
    Not in criminal law to allow the manufacture of a charge where no such law explicitly exists.

    Research a term called "lenity." You can find the proper reference materials in your local law library. Let me know if you need help learning how to use the references therein contained.

    You'd also be well advised to spend some time learning the difference between the common law and the criminal law. In America, common law crimes are explicitly forbidden as a denial of due process.

    See, and I'm now lecturing for free, in America, we adhere to the maxim "ignorance of the law is no excuse." Our courts have said "fair, enough," but the law must be explicit.

    Otherwise, we'd have a Soviet system where each cop could dream up the "intent" of the law and make spontaneous arrests for conduct that displeased him.

    Let me know if you need anything further.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    smoking357 wrote:
    Let me know if you need anything further.
    Nope. You're done.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pierce is a Coward, ,
    Posts
    1,100

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    smoking357 wrote:
    Let me know if you need anything further.
    Nope. You're done.
    Glad I could help you out.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •