Motorcycle OC

imported post

Hey all, I may be moving from Colorado to Phoenix, and am thinking about riding the bike down there to do some job and house hunting. I never travel without the ol' sidearm, and was wondering about the legality of carrying on a motorcycle.

It would be in a belt holster over my chaps, plainly visible. And if it rained or got otherwise nasty, I have a locking glove box on the bike big enough for my gun.

I've read the pertinent AZ laws on guns (I think), and they seem very straightforward and clear to me. I don't care about some 1994 court case which muddied everything up; I doubt any LEO would know about it anyways. Besides, courts cannot make or change law, they can only decide on the Constitutionality of them, and as far as I can tell, those laws still stand. So plainly, I don't give a crap about some court's interpretation of the law - ifa copwants to charge me with something, then they can damn well be bothered to prove that I had knowledge of and intent to breakthe law.

So, aside from the usual 'Arizona is weird about OC, so get a CCW' advice, does anybody know if bike OC is legal, or have any experience with it?

I apologize for being brusque, it's just that I seriously dislike hearing people tell me to tiptoe around absurd court cases and laws to excercise my rights. Which I've heard many, many times over.

imported post

yes it is and i have seen ALOT of people do it..quite a few 1911's but the funny thing is mostly 45lc i guess the whole modern cowboy on a steel horse thing but whatever its cool,one thing for sure though if you look like a grungy outlaw the LEOs will look for any infraction just to make sure your not a prohibited possessor...You can call it profiling if you want but you cant prove it and Arizona law says an officer can take possession of your firearm during any interaction..if your clean cool and not disturbing the peace shouldnt be a prob...then again what do i know..

imported post

OC while riding a motorcycle in Arizona is legal. I do it often.

I suggest a good retention holster......and go for it.

Beware Indian Reservations however, not a good idea to OC on tribal lands.

imported post

I'm with you on the court case mess. I have yet to hear of a single incident where someone ran afoul of the law because of those cases. To me, it's much like the mythical, "Don't open carry because someone might take your gun away." Yeah, sure, they MIGHT. It's just that it never happens.

At any rate, I've open carried and seen numerous others open carry on a motorcycle. I've never heard of any issues with it. (I also OC regularly in my vehicle and have yet to hear of any issues with it. Still, I'll lose that last bit of nagging doubt once the Constitutional Carry bills pass, which is another great reason for supporting them.)

imported post

Alamo Jack wrote:

ifa copwants to charge me with something, then they can damn well be bothered to prove that I had knowledge of and intent to breakthe law.

Click to expand...

Just a little note, but no court ever has to prove that one 'had knowledge of' a law to charge them with breaking it. Ignorance is no defense. Never has been, and never will be.

That said, welcome to AZ, and carry away =) OC is 100% legal. I'm not familiar with anything regarding carrying on a motorcycle in a lockable saddle bag or the like, but I'd think of that as being similar to a cars center console or glovebox. Both of which I believe one is fine to carry in. If you have CCW permit for your state, AZ recognizes permits from all other states, even if they don't recognzie ours, so you would DEFINITELY be covered in any carry mode you choose, open or concealed, or in a box, etc.

+1 on GWBiker's notation of tribal lands. It can be a pain to figure out when you're on it, but yeah, open carry is ENTIRELY up to the whim of whatever tribal police you encounter. Remember, when you're on a reservation you are NOT in the United States anymore, you're in a soverign nation's land.

imported post

Thanks for all the input, sounds like I'm good to go. I almost forgot about the tribal lands issue, I'll have to pay attention to where I am.

As far as my comment about cops needing to prove I had knowledge of and intent to break the law, that was my mistake. I was up way too late and was getting rather grouchy and couldn't remember what it was I was going to post. I think what I was trying to say is that isn't the burden ofproving that the law is clear, concise, constitutional, and not worded in such a way as to elicit radically different interpretations and therefore cabable of getting people wrongfully indicted, upon the courtsand the prosecution?

Sorry, run-on sentence. But again guys, thanks for the advice, I really appreciate it.