Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Two tricky questions

  1. #1
    Regular Member TheSzerdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Melvindale, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    290

    Post imported post

    Is there any law against carrying a loaded handgun in hand while just walking down the street? (Don't cite brandishing, we're assuming the person does NOT fall under that definition.)

    Would it be legal for a CPL holder to OC into an otherwise prohibited area (bank, liquor store, etc) WITHOUT any ID? (You are only required to have your CPL on you when CC'ing and merely being a CPL holder gives you the option to OC in otherwise restricted areas if I read the law correctly.)

    Any thoughts?

  2. #2
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830

    Post imported post

    I am unaware of any law that specifically bans either.

    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    TheSzerdi wrote:
    Is there any law against carrying a loaded handgun in hand while just walking down the street? (Don't cite brandishing, we're assuming the person does NOT fall under that definition.)

    Would it be legal for a CPL holder to OC into an otherwise prohibited area (bank, liquor store, etc) WITHOUT any ID? (You are only required to have your CPL on you when CC'ing and merely being a CPL holder gives you the option to OC in otherwise restricted areas if I read the law correctly.)

    Any thoughts?
    I would equate the second one to driving without your driver's license, except that one's got a law on the books.

    Either way, both of these things are envelopes I'm not gonna push.

  4. #4
    Regular Member autosurgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lawrence, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    3,845

    Post imported post

    I assume you are asking BC of some of the crap DD has been posting over on MGO... I feel the same about it as Zig.. it is not place I am prepared to go.
    Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

    Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

  5. #5
    Regular Member ISMOID's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    MOC Charter Member - Dearborn Heights, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    237

    Post imported post

    TheSzerdi wrote:
    (Don't cite brandishing, we're assuming the person does NOT fall under that definition.)

    Any thoughts?
    Here's a thought:
    brandishing is defined as: "1. To wave or flourish menacingly, as a weapon. 2. To display ostentatiously. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish."

    ostentatious
    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dicti...Ostentatiously
    Main Entry: os·ten·ta·tious
    Function: adjective
    Date: 1673
    : marked by or fond of conspicuous or vainglorious and sometimes pretentious display
    synonyms see showy
    — os·ten·ta·tious·ly adverb
    — os·ten·ta·tious·ness noun

    With that as part of the definition can a conspicuous display of a firearm then be brandishing?

    Main Entry: con·spic·u·ous
    Function: adjective
    Etymology: Latin conspicuus, from conspicere to get sight of, from com- + specere to look — more at spy
    Date: circa 1534
    1 : obvious to the eye or mind <conspicuous changes>
    2 : attracting attention : striking <a conspicuous success>
    3 : marked by a noticeable violation of good taste

    synonyms see noticeable
    — con·spic·u·ous·ly adverb
    — con·spic·u·ous·ness \-nəs\ noun

  6. #6
    Regular Member TheSzerdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Melvindale, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    290

    Post imported post

    A good thought ISMOID. Some would argue merely OC'ing is displaying ostentatiously. I think one would need to examine the person's intent in any such argument. It is certainly not an OC'er's intent to display their weapon ostentatiously and for the sake of this discussion I would think it safe to assume that the person with pistol in hand does not intend to display ostentatiously.

    An example: You notice your pistol is in danger of falling out of your waistband (or holster or wherever it was) and you have it in hand in public for whatever amount of time it takes to adjust your belt (or holster, etc) before replacing it.

    Arguably this may be such a short time that no one notices, but all it takes is an officer driving by to glance in your direction. I sometimes carry my 1911 tucked into my waistband and while driving I'll set it on the floor beside me as it is uncomfortable to sit on in the car. Since it's difficult to put back while sitting I often stand with my back toward the open door of my vehicle while replacing it in my waistband.

    (Edited to strike out: "While getting out of a vehicle" from the beginning of the example "You notice...")

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    625

    Post imported post

    Venator kinda hit on this a few weeks ago on another post.

    A cop cannot pull you over to just check if you have a drivers license.

    A cop cannot ask you for ID unless you are doing something suspicious.
    so to speak.

  8. #8
    Regular Member TheSzerdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Melvindale, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    290

    Post imported post

    conservative85 wrote:
    Venator kinda hit on this a few weeks ago on another post.

    A cop cannot pull you over to just check if you have a drivers license.

    A cop cannot ask you for ID unless you are doing something suspicious.
    so to speak.
    I understand this, however, the questions are more specific than that. The first asks if there is a law on the books against carrying a loaded pistol in-hand. The second refers to the legality of OC in a restricted area while not carrying ID / CPL (person has CPL, just not on him/her). The way the law reads you shouldn't need to have CPL on person while OC'ing in an otherwise restricted area, but this could be arguable, or I may have missed a relevant subsection of law. Hence the question.

    Just for the sake of the debate let's say a man with a gun matching your description robbed a store and you happen to be OC'ing in a nearby store that sells alcohol (said store would be off limits to an OC'er without a CPL). The officer then has RAS, but you have no ID / CPL on your person. Could you be cited for anything? (Other than the robbery; we'll assume you have an ironclad alibi for the time that it was committed.)

    (You can see I'm obviously more interested in the 2nd question as it is much more likely to happen in some form to an average OC'er as we are not required to carry ID.)

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    625

    Post imported post

    TheSzerdi wrote:
    Is there any law against carrying a loaded handgun in hand while just walking down the street? (Don't cite brandishing, we're assuming the person does NOT fall under that definition.)

    Would it be legal for a CPL holder to OC into an otherwise prohibited area (bank, liquor store, etc) WITHOUT any ID? (You are only required to have your CPL on you when CC'ing and merely being a CPL holder gives you the option to OC in otherwise restricted areas if I read the law correctly.)

    Any thoughts?
    I did not answer the first because I am sure you wil be charged with brandishing.

    I was replying to your second question.

    ID is not required to oc. now if you mean oc in prohibited areas without a CPL, well then the LEO has grounds to ID you.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Not on this website, USA
    Posts
    2,482

    Post imported post

    TheSzerdi wrote:
    Just for the sake of the debate let's say a man with a gun matching your description robbed a store and you happen to be OC'ing in a nearby store that sells alcohol (said store would be off limits to an OC'er without a CPL). The officer then has RAS, but you have no ID / CPL on your person. Could you be cited for anything? (Other than the robbery; we'll assume you have an ironclad alibi for the time that it was committed.) If this incident was to occur, they would possibly arrest you regardless (if you had a gun and matched the description). But not neccesarily. I know someone who was OCing and stopped shortly after a store he was near was robbed at gun point. He did match the description of the robber too (in some ways). He was detained, then let go, and not cited for anything. He also does not have his CPL. Now I'm sure if this happened it is possible that you could be charged with something, as an LEO could charge anyone with any type of crime, and it is up to that person to prove they are innocent.

    (You can see I'm obviously more interested in the 2nd question as it is much more likely to happen in some form to an average OC'er as we are not required to carry ID.)

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    conservative85 wrote:

    ID is not required to oc. now if you mean oc in prohibited areas without a CPL, well then the LEO has* grounds to ID you.
    No, he doesn't.

    He has to have reason to believe you don't have a CPL to ID you. Just like driving - he has to have reason you don't have a DL to pull you over, or obviously, another infraction.

    In short- I don't recommend carrying in a PFZ without a CPL on you - because they'll either find something to nail you with, or they'll take your ID illegally, and then make something up after the fact.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    625

    Post imported post

    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    conservative85 wrote:

    ID is not required to oc. now if you mean oc in prohibited areas without a CPL, well then the LEO has grounds to ID you.
    No, he doesn't.

    He has to have reason to believe you don't have a CPL to ID you. Just like driving - he has to have reason you don't have a DL to pull you over, or obviously, another infraction.

    In short- I don't recommend carrying in a PFZ without a CPL on you - because they'll either find something to nail you with, or they'll take your ID illegally, and then make something up after the fact.
    Thats true your not concealing so you don't have to disclose, there for no RS.
    Still don't know if I'd try it but something to think about.

    Wait to legally O.C. in a PFZ you have to have your CPL on you so i think you'd have to disclose regardless of ID or not. so I think you would still have trouble with Bubba LEO

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Not on this website, USA
    Posts
    2,482

    Post imported post

    conservative85 wrote:
    Wait to legally O.C. in a PFZ you have to have your CPL on you so i think you'd have to disclose regardless of ID or not. so I think you would still have trouble with Bubba LEO
    You would still have to disclose (I would think anyway), but they would still need a reason to detain you.

  14. #14
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    Post imported post

    conservative85 wrote:
    Thats true your not concealing so you don't have to disclose, there for no RS.
    Still don't know if I'd try it but something to think about.

    Wait to legally O.C. in a PFZ you have to have your CPL on you so i think you'd have to disclose regardless of ID or not. so I think you would still have trouble with Bubba LEO
    Why would you have to disclose unless the officer has RAS? If you were stopped because you fit the description of a bank robber, then he MAY have RAS. (But why would a person OC after robbing a bank? Just wondering about that.) If the stop is illegal then any information derived from that stop is inadmissible.

    If the Officer has NO RAS, he can't demand anything from you, let alone demand ID or aCPL. He can't say his RAS is because you have a gun in a restricted zone. Firearms are allowed in restricted zones under certain lawful exemptions. His RAS can't be to see if you are or are not exempt from that zone.

    Like the driving example, he can't just stop and ask for a DL without some other reason.
    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  15. #15
    Regular Member TheSzerdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Melvindale, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    290

    Post imported post

    conservative85 wrote:
    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    conservative85 wrote:

    ID is not required to oc. now if you mean oc in prohibited areas without a CPL, well then the LEO has grounds to ID you.
    No, he doesn't.

    He has to have reason to believe you don't have a CPL to ID you. Just like driving - he has to have reason you don't have a DL to pull you over, or obviously, another infraction.

    In short- I don't recommend carrying in a PFZ without a CPL on you - because they'll either find something to nail you with, or they'll take your ID illegally, and then make something up after the fact.
    Thats true your not concealing so you don't have to disclose, there for no RS.
    Still don't know if I'd try it but something to think about.

    Wait to legally O.C. in a PFZ you have to have your CPL on you so i think you'd have to disclose regardless of ID or not. so I think you would still have trouble with Bubba LEO
    Cite the law please. Exactly where does it say you must EVER have your CPL on you while OC'ing?

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Near Lapeer (Hadley), Michigan, USA
    Posts
    932

    Post imported post

    I just read the entire mcl on disclosure and carrying your cpl, and i can find nothing that says you are required to carry your cpl, or disclose that you have a cpl, or disclose that you are carrying a pistol, as long as you are oc'ing, regardless of location ie: cez.

    Ocing in a pfz without your cpl does however, sound like a good way to get your head bashed in or tazed by a crazed leo. Many officers can't even wrap their head around the concept that OC is legal, let alone OC in a PFZ.
    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (who will watch the watchmen?)

    I am not a lawyer. Nothing in any of posts should be construed as legal advice.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    625

    Post imported post

    TheSzerdi wrote:
    conservative85 wrote:
    zigziggityzoo wrote:
    conservative85 wrote:

    ID is not required to oc. now if you mean oc in prohibited areas without a CPL, well then the LEO has grounds to ID you.
    No, he doesn't.

    He has to have reason to believe you don't have a CPL to ID you. Just like driving - he has to have reason you don't have a DL to pull you over, or obviously, another infraction.

    In short- I don't recommend carrying in a PFZ without a CPL on you - because they'll either find something to nail you with, or they'll take your ID illegally, and then make something up after the fact.
    Thats true your not concealing so you don't have to disclose, there for no RS.
    Still don't know if I'd try it but something to think about.

    Wait to legally O.C. in a PFZ you have to have your CPL on you so i think you'd have to disclose regardless of ID or not. so I think you would still have trouble with Bubba LEO
    Cite the law please. Exactly where does it say you must EVER have your CPL on you while OC'ing?
    :shock: Well know I know why your asking , good luck! hope everything turns out well.

  18. #18
    Regular Member TheSzerdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Melvindale, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    290

    Post imported post

    lapeer20m wrote:
    I just read the entire mcl on disclosure and carrying your cpl, and i can find nothing that says you are required to carry your cpl, or disclose that you have a cpl, or disclose that you are carrying a pistol, as long as you are oc'ing, regardless of location ie: cez.

    Ocing in a pfz without your cpl does however, sound like a good way to get your head bashed in or tazed by a crazed leo. Many officers can't even wrap their head around the concept that OC is legal, let alone OC in a PFZ.
    This is why I'm asking these questions. I've read the entire law and as far as I can see, the questions should be totally legal, however, I may have misread a word, skipped a line, or missed an entire section of law. More eyes to spot a possible hiccup in the legality and more thoughts to look for loopholes or ways the law could be misinterpreted to bust you is what I'm mostly asking for. Find something I missed or think of something I didn't, no one is infallible.

    Edited to thank lapeer! I share your burning eyeball pain. Staring at laws sucks.

Posting Permissions

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