imported post
I want to begin by thanking the assistant DA who spoke with me for his time yesterday. We spent the best part of an hour discussing OC. He was courteous, curious and helpful. I'd also like to thank the investagator with this office (9th District, Dekalb and Cherokee counties) who last week was every bit as courteous and helpful. (I'm withholding names, I didn't ask if I could use thier name, and I've no desire to make enemies of apparent friends)
At the beginning of our conversation, it was made quite plain that open carry is in fact legal in Alabama, there is no question on that. I asked about a strict reading of the law which would seem to imply that one could walk down the street with an unconcealed handgun, but couldn't enter a store as that is private property. He replied that -52 is modified by -73. He also suggested keeping the CC permit on the person. My impression was that at least in his thinking, the license mitigates the "property of other persons" clause of -52. That was my impression from how the conversation unfolded and his reference to the code book. He didn't say as much. (An interesting interpretation, it has the effect of turning a license to carry concealed into a license to carry. Opinions?)
It was also obvious as he read from the code, that there being no code against open carry makes it legal, (If it is not illegal then it is legal) that interpreting -73 to mean that only concealed carry is permissable is wrong. -73 only makes concealed carry, with a license to do so, permissable.
I didn't press on unlicensed carry as I didn't think that going into an area of law that even the courts seem to conflict on at times, during the first meeting was appropriate or nessicary. My intention in the disscussion was to simply find out how the DA's office is going to percieve the legality of open carry.
Overall, the conversation was very congenial. He was quite impressed with the trifold, and with the research of court cases that went into it. He asked where I got the info, and I gave him
www.alabamaopencarry.com
www.opencarry.org
He said he'd check us out.
He was impressed that I could speak to Heller v DC and to McDonald v Chicago as well. The conversation touched breifly on those, and he made reference to Heller v DC and McDonald v Chicago, but he didn't know where the later stood. I told him that Heller tested two things, whether the 2nd protected an individual right, and if DC's gun bam was legal under the 2nd. I told him that many think the decision on the right to keep and bear arms was split, but it is not. 9 Justices agree the 2nd protects an individual right to arms. The 5-4 split was over striking down the DC gun ban. Heller is correct, if a ban has the effect of rendering useless the free exercise of a right, it is infringement (If only our state constitution included a "shall not be infringed" clause, State v Reid actually speaks to this) On McDonald he was impressed that I knew what incorporation was, and that the court was hesitant about overruling Slaughterhouse and using the "privledges and immunities" clause of the 14th, rather than due process to incorporate.
Knowledge is key guys, knowledge is key. It reinforces the relationships with those who may be on our side, and it has a disarming effect on those who are against.
He said it is not his place to enforce municipal or county laws. I pointed out that no one but the legislature can make law about handguns. (He smiled)
He said if I choose to OC I should be prepared to explain myself. I replied "That's why I'm here, and why I'm going to speak the with all those LEA's where I may be open carrying, and those places I normally go to. I prefer not to have to explain myself while being detained.
He asked why I wanted to open carry. I replied, "It's June. In another month it is going to be 98 degrees, 120% humidity and not a drop of rain in sight. It is more comfortable to open carry. Besides, if it is a legal option, why should I not use?"
He replied "The heat does make carrying a gun concealed uncomfortable doesn't it." He told me that he is normally asked what is illegal, that it was a first time to be asked what is legal.
My bottom line gut feeling from this conversation is that unless one is being totally stupid, this DA's office is not going to persue charges on an OC. (can;t speak to city or county as yet) I also think that this is an area of law which remains ambiguous, as the code says one thing and the courts another. LEO's are going to uphold the code, without a full knowledge of what the courts say those codes mean. -52 needs to go.
I want to begin by thanking the assistant DA who spoke with me for his time yesterday. We spent the best part of an hour discussing OC. He was courteous, curious and helpful. I'd also like to thank the investagator with this office (9th District, Dekalb and Cherokee counties) who last week was every bit as courteous and helpful. (I'm withholding names, I didn't ask if I could use thier name, and I've no desire to make enemies of apparent friends)
At the beginning of our conversation, it was made quite plain that open carry is in fact legal in Alabama, there is no question on that. I asked about a strict reading of the law which would seem to imply that one could walk down the street with an unconcealed handgun, but couldn't enter a store as that is private property. He replied that -52 is modified by -73. He also suggested keeping the CC permit on the person. My impression was that at least in his thinking, the license mitigates the "property of other persons" clause of -52. That was my impression from how the conversation unfolded and his reference to the code book. He didn't say as much. (An interesting interpretation, it has the effect of turning a license to carry concealed into a license to carry. Opinions?)
It was also obvious as he read from the code, that there being no code against open carry makes it legal, (If it is not illegal then it is legal) that interpreting -73 to mean that only concealed carry is permissable is wrong. -73 only makes concealed carry, with a license to do so, permissable.
I didn't press on unlicensed carry as I didn't think that going into an area of law that even the courts seem to conflict on at times, during the first meeting was appropriate or nessicary. My intention in the disscussion was to simply find out how the DA's office is going to percieve the legality of open carry.
Overall, the conversation was very congenial. He was quite impressed with the trifold, and with the research of court cases that went into it. He asked where I got the info, and I gave him
www.alabamaopencarry.com
www.opencarry.org
He said he'd check us out.
He was impressed that I could speak to Heller v DC and to McDonald v Chicago as well. The conversation touched breifly on those, and he made reference to Heller v DC and McDonald v Chicago, but he didn't know where the later stood. I told him that Heller tested two things, whether the 2nd protected an individual right, and if DC's gun bam was legal under the 2nd. I told him that many think the decision on the right to keep and bear arms was split, but it is not. 9 Justices agree the 2nd protects an individual right to arms. The 5-4 split was over striking down the DC gun ban. Heller is correct, if a ban has the effect of rendering useless the free exercise of a right, it is infringement (If only our state constitution included a "shall not be infringed" clause, State v Reid actually speaks to this) On McDonald he was impressed that I knew what incorporation was, and that the court was hesitant about overruling Slaughterhouse and using the "privledges and immunities" clause of the 14th, rather than due process to incorporate.
Knowledge is key guys, knowledge is key. It reinforces the relationships with those who may be on our side, and it has a disarming effect on those who are against.
He said it is not his place to enforce municipal or county laws. I pointed out that no one but the legislature can make law about handguns. (He smiled)
He said if I choose to OC I should be prepared to explain myself. I replied "That's why I'm here, and why I'm going to speak the with all those LEA's where I may be open carrying, and those places I normally go to. I prefer not to have to explain myself while being detained.
He asked why I wanted to open carry. I replied, "It's June. In another month it is going to be 98 degrees, 120% humidity and not a drop of rain in sight. It is more comfortable to open carry. Besides, if it is a legal option, why should I not use?"
He replied "The heat does make carrying a gun concealed uncomfortable doesn't it." He told me that he is normally asked what is illegal, that it was a first time to be asked what is legal.
My bottom line gut feeling from this conversation is that unless one is being totally stupid, this DA's office is not going to persue charges on an OC. (can;t speak to city or county as yet) I also think that this is an area of law which remains ambiguous, as the code says one thing and the courts another. LEO's are going to uphold the code, without a full knowledge of what the courts say those codes mean. -52 needs to go.
