mikestilly wrote:
Id say you'd be safe within the definition unless you're waving it around like a person with anger management issues
the term brandishing is defined as: "1. To wave or flourish menacingly, as a weapon. 2. To display ostentatiously. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish." This definition comports with the meaning ascribed to this term by courts of other jurisdictions…the court recognized that in federal sentencing guidelines, "brandishing" a weapon is defined to mean "that the weapon was pointed or waved about, or displayed in a threatening manner." Applying these definitions to your question, it is clear that a reserve police officer, regardless whether he or she qualifies as a "peace officer," when carrying a handgun in a holster in plain view, is not waving or displaying the firearm in a threatening manner.
You are right, and it's something I never thought about much. This opinion defines brandishing, THEN goes on to clarify an example of what isn't brandishing. I suppose it doesn't require a holster like in the example any more than it requires someone to be a cop to open carry.
However, I still think it is more in line with the opinion if in a holster, and I think it would be a lot harder to convict someone of a brandishing charge if a holster is used. It's hard to wave something around if it's securely strapped to your leg or perhaps shoulder.
So I'm not saying don't do it, it is after all a free ish country, but I still think a holster is the best option.