Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: I dont see a lot of appetite for changing Louisiana's laws for open carry ??

  1. #1
    Regular Member Operator_223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    50

    I dont see a lot of appetite for changing Louisiana's laws for open carry ??

    Hi There,

    Correct me if I am wrong, but I have been all over the open carry websites such as this one, LOCAL, etc.... and I dont seem to find much talk about serious organized efforts towards making the Louisiana legislature affirm our right to open carry. It would be great to have a state SB passed that positively, absolutely says that open carry is legal.

    As it is, cops, lawyers, etc. all have different intrepretations of the state constitution. One cop says yes no problem and another one will slam you face down on the sidewalk.

    I believe the state constitution clearly says it's ok, but apparently we need something more.

    When / where is the next open carry rally/demonstration in Louisiana ? We have lots of parades in New Orleans, why cant we organize and have one ?

    Just saying..... I know a lot of Louisianans want open carry, but I dont see much activity.

    Maybe there is and I just am looking in the wrong place?................... wondering.

  2. #2
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711
    You are never going to see a lot of open carry generally - the numbe of gun cariers is like 1-2% of the population, and only a small fraction open carry regularly.

    If police violate the law and seize open carriers merely for open carrying, then they should be sued.

    Only by open carry becoming more common, and police getting sued if they violate the law, does police harassment of open carriers get addresses.

  3. #3
    Regular Member 4angrybadgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Hattiesburg, Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    411
    I fail to see how passing another law affirming OC would help any. The right to bear arms is already clearly stated in the state Constitution. If an LEO is ignorant of that right, or refuses to acknowledge it, how will yet another law in the already bloated Revised Statutes change that?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by Operator_223 View Post
    Hi There,

    Correct me if I am wrong, but I have been all over the open carry websites such as this one, LOCAL, etc.... and I dont seem to find much talk about serious organized efforts towards making the Louisiana legislature affirm our right to open carry. It would be great to have a state SB passed that positively, absolutely says that open carry is legal.

    As it is, cops, lawyers, etc. all have different intrepretations of the state constitution. One cop says yes no problem and another one will slam you face down on the sidewalk.

    I believe the state constitution clearly says it's ok, but apparently we need something more.

    When / where is the next open carry rally/demonstration in Louisiana ? We have lots of parades in New Orleans, why cant we organize and have one ?

    Just saying..... I know a lot of Louisianans want open carry, but I dont see much activity.

    Maybe there is and I just am looking in the wrong place?................... wondering.
    More than the La. Const clause??? Ok... people need to understand something. The Constitution is where the legislature gets ITS power from. There IS NOTHING MORE!!!!

    The legislature is PROHIBITED from regulating open carry. If we let the legislature "affirm" then we allow it to assume the power that it CAN regulate... like we have done with so many of our other rights.

    What has been happening lately is that the terms “abridged” and “infringed” are being legally watered down by bad precedent at the state and federal levels.

    In any case, the issue of OCing in La. at the state level is settled. The law IS CLEAR. It’s just a matter of citizens learning to use the tools available to enforce the law on those that may transgress.

    What IS an issue to La. is the federal “gun free school zone” law. This needs to be dealt with at a national level as it affects some states more than others… depending on state law.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Anywhere but here.
    Posts
    523
    I think maybe what the op means ( correct me if I'm wrong) is he would like to see some kind of resolution come from the legislature requiring Le agencies formally acknowledge the legality of oc and impliment training to assure that LEO's are aware of and obey the law. That's what I'd like to see.
    This site has been hijacked by leftists who attack opposition to further their own ends. Those who have never served this country and attack those who do are no longer worthy of my time or attention.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Syntax Error's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    West Monroe, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by NRAMARINE View Post
    I think maybe what the op means ( correct me if I'm wrong) is he would like to see some kind of resolution come from the legislature requiring Le agencies formally acknowledge the legality of oc and impliment training to assure that LEO's are aware of and obey the law. That's what I'd like to see.

    Read Jetson's reply again. The laws state what we can't do, not what we are allowed to do.
    Would you ask that they pass legislature saying it is alright to speak? There is enough stuff to sort through already.

    R/
    Matt

  7. #7
    Regular Member Operator_223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    50

    Yes, that's what I really mean !!

    Quote Originally Posted by NRAMARINE View Post
    I think maybe what the op means ( correct me if I'm wrong) is he would like to see some kind of resolution come from the legislature requiring Le agencies formally acknowledge the legality of oc and impliment training to assure that LEO's are aware of and obey the law. That's what I'd like to see.
    Yes, that's what I really meant. I want to OC and not have to be concerned about getting hassled. that's all.

    THANK YOU.

  8. #8
    Regular Member estcrh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    365
    Quote Originally Posted by georg jetson View Post

    In any case, the issue of OCing in La. at the state level is settled. The law IS CLEAR. It’s just a matter of citizens learning to use the tools available to enforce the law on those that may transgress.

    What IS an issue to La. is the federal “gun free school zone” law. This needs to be dealt with at a national level as it affects some states more than others… depending on state law.
    I agree with this completely....the 2 most important issues confronting La. open carry advocates is the abuse of law enforcement agencies ability to stop and harass anyone they see open carrying a gun in a LEGAL MANNER and the Federal school gun zone laws.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by Operator_223 View Post
    Yes, that's what I really meant. I want to OC and not have to be concerned about getting hassled. that's all.

    THANK YOU.
    The price of liberty is eternal vigilance... ya can't be lazy and expect someone else to defend your rights, even it's the state legislature. Learn the law and apply it accordingly.

    Can anyone give ONE example of the legislature doing this for any of our other rights???

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Anywhere but here.
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by georg jetson View Post
    The price of liberty is eternal vigilance... ya can't be lazy and expect someone else to defend your rights, even it's the state legislature. Learn the law and apply it accordingly.

    Can anyone give ONE example of the legislature doing this for any of our other rights???
    Arizona with their " Constitutional carry" is a good model I think. I believe also Alaska, and vermont have similar laws. Eventually I'd like to see this nationwide. Is there anything in the recent SCOTUS decisions that state the second ammendment applies to the states that can be used to push this particular idea? I mean if the 2nd applies to the states as written and say, Louisiana's constitution states the legislature can regulate cc, should this ( or more importantly, can this) be ammended or that specific language regarding cc be deleted or ammended to bring it more in line with their decision and the constitution? Or should we leave this alone?

    I'm not saying get rid of permits completely, again if you use the Arizona model, they still issue cc permits for reciprocity purposes, and as a kind of bypass to the background check when purchasing firearms ( the theory being if you have a cc permit it's acknowledged that you can legally buy a firearm.) It also gives them the legal ability to cc in school zones and state buildings with some restrictions) Should this type of model be something we pursue?
    Last edited by NRAMARINE; 09-12-2010 at 10:09 AM. Reason: spelling
    This site has been hijacked by leftists who attack opposition to further their own ends. Those who have never served this country and attack those who do are no longer worthy of my time or attention.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by NRAMARINE View Post
    Arizona with their " Constitutional carry" is a good model I think. I believe also Alaska, and vermont have similar laws. Eventually I'd like to see this nationwide. Is there anything in the recent SCOTUS decisions that state the second ammendment applies to the states that can be used to push this particular idea? I mean if the nd applies to the states as written and say, Louisiana's constitution states the legislature can regulate cc, should this ( or more importantly, can this) be ammended or that specific language regarding cc be deleted or ammended to bring it more in line with their decision and the constitution? Or should we leave this alone?

    I'm not saying get rid of permits completely, again if you use the Arizona model, they still issue cc permits for reciprocity purposes, and as a kind of bypass to the background check when purchasing firearms ( the theory being if you have a cc permit it's acknowledged that you can legally buy a firearm.) It also gives them the legal ability to cc in school zones and state buildings with some restrictions) Should this type of model be something we pursue?
    Model for what??? If you're gonna discuss law then post, at least, a link...

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Anywhere but here.
    Posts
    523
    Removing the requirement to have a permit to carry concealed. In other words applying the second ammendment directly to the states as written. ( Constitutional carry) I must not have explained my thought properly, apologies.
    Last edited by NRAMARINE; 09-12-2010 at 10:15 AM.
    This site has been hijacked by leftists who attack opposition to further their own ends. Those who have never served this country and attack those who do are no longer worthy of my time or attention.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,508
    I can understand the desire for a resolution, which isn't legally binding but proclaims the "sense of the legislature" in reminding people that carry is a constitutional right.

    Given the horrible abomination of the legislature's "fix" of the ban on carrying in churches, I have little confidence in their ability to put forth something our members here would agree with.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by NRAMARINE View Post
    Removing the requirement to have a permit to carry concealed. In other words applying the second ammendment directly to the states as written. ( Constitutional carry) I must not have explained my thought properly, apologies.

    It's all good... still no link????

  15. #15
    Regular Member estcrh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    365
    Quote Originally Posted by georg jetson View Post
    It's all good... still no link????
    http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=...oB-8IyR3HR_KnA

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Sulphur, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    100
    Thanks estcrh. I've been looking for something just like that to use as a model for LoUiSiAna.

    I've been emailing my local Rep. Mike Danahy on this very issue. So far no response.

    How many of you have been emailing your State Rep. State Sen. ?
    It wont happen if you don't tell them to do it!

  17. #17
    Regular Member estcrh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    365
    Quote Originally Posted by oldgoat View Post
    Thanks estcrh. I've been looking for something just like that to use as a model for LoUiSiAna.

    I've been emailing my local Rep. Mike Danahy on this very issue. So far no response.

    How many of you have been emailing your State Rep. State Sen. ?
    It wont happen if you don't tell them to do it!
    I agree that something needs to be done here before law enforcement agencies convince politicians to go the other way like what almost happened in California. The problem that police have with open carry is that they really are not allowed to question someone who is carrying a gun out in the open in a legal manner. In their minds that means that even a convicted felon could open carry a gun and the police have no right to check someone out and to them this is not acceptable.

    In California when people suddenly started to open carry after many years of not doing so the police could not handle it, the same thing could to be happening here. I see all these cases of police harassing open carry advocates as a test of their ability to stop and question anyone at any time who just happens to be open carrying. If this continues here we could see legislation proposed trying to stop open carry or to hinder it in some way. People say its their right to open carry but as we have seen, lawmakers can and do enact laws (school zone laws) which seem to be in violation of our rights.

    Having legislation which clearly spells out out rights with no doubt at all would be the way to go here, I have heard people say...just dont rock the boat...as they are afraid of attracting negative attention but nationwide politicians are beginning to see (as in Az and even California) the being seen as anti gun rights is bad for politicians and now would be a good time to take advantage of this current trend with our state politicians.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by estcrh View Post
    I agree that something needs to be done here before law enforcement agencies convince politicians to go the other way like what almost happened in California. The problem that police have with open carry is that they really are not allowed to question someone who is carrying a gun out in the open in a legal manner. In their minds that means that even a convicted felon could open carry a gun and the police have no right to check someone out and to them this is not acceptable.
    Be carefull... true, the courts have found that open carry in and of itself is not reasonable suspision as required by La. CCRP 215.1. http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=112364

    However, other circumstances, some not apparent to the OCer at the time, combined with ocing may meet the requirements.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by NRAMARINE View Post
    Arizona with their " Constitutional carry" is a good model I think. I believe also Alaska, and vermont have similar laws. Eventually I'd like to see this nationwide. Is there anything in the recent SCOTUS decisions that state the second ammendment applies to the states that can be used to push this particular idea? I mean if the 2nd applies to the states as written and say, Louisiana's constitution states the legislature can regulate cc, should this ( or more importantly, can this) be ammended or that specific language regarding cc be deleted or ammended to bring it more in line with their decision and the constitution? Or should we leave this alone?

    I'm not saying get rid of permits completely, again if you use the Arizona model, they still issue cc permits for reciprocity purposes, and as a kind of bypass to the background check when purchasing firearms ( the theory being if you have a cc permit it's acknowledged that you can legally buy a firearm.) It also gives them the legal ability to cc in school zones and state buildings with some restrictions) Should this type of model be something we pursue?
    Now that someone has done you a favor and posted a link, would you care to show me what the Arizona legislation has to do with our discussion... I can't see the relevance to OCing.

  20. #20
    Regular Member estcrh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    365
    Quote Originally Posted by georg jetson View Post
    Be carefull... true, the courts have found that open carry in and of itself is not reasonable suspision as required by La. CCRP 215.1. http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=112364

    However, other circumstances, some not apparent to the OCer at the time, combined with ocing may meet the requirements.
    CCRP 215.1
    Art. 215.1. Temporary questioning of persons in public places; frisk and search for weapons

    A. A law enforcement officer may stop a person in a public place whom he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit an offense and may demand of him his name, address, and an explanation of his actions.

    B. When a law enforcement officer has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this Article and reasonably suspects that he is in danger, he may frisk the outer clothing of such person for a dangerous weapon. If the law enforcement officer reasonably suspects the person possesses a dangerous weapon, he may search the person.

    C. If the law enforcement officer finds a dangerous weapon, he may take and keep it until the completion of the questioning, at which time he shall either return it, if lawfully possessed, or arrest such person.

    D. During detention of an alleged violator of any provision of the motor vehicle laws of this state, an officer may not detain a motorist for a period of time longer than reasonably necessary to complete the investigation of the violation and issuance of a citation for the violation, absent reasonable suspicion of additional criminal activity. However, nothing herein shall prohibit a peace officer from compelling or instructing the motorist to comply with administrative or other legal requirements of Title 32 or Title 47 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950.

    Added by Acts 1968, No. 305, §1. Amended by Acts 1982, No. 686, §1; Acts 1983, 1st Ex. Sess., No. 32, §1; Acts 1997, No. 759, §3, eff. July 10, 1997.
    So the question is (whom he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit an offense and may demand of him his name, address, and an explanation of his actions.) what is the basis for reasonable suspicion? Are the recent open carry harassments using this as the method of legalizing their actions....they are on thin ice if so.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    shreveport
    Posts
    57
    Are the recent open carry harassments using this as the method of legalizing their actions....they are on thin ice if so. They may be on thin ice but....The last 2 or 3 people on this forum who had the opportunity to file charges against the offending department DIDN'T do it. Instead they accepted an OPPS .we made a mistake.As long as there isn't a financial penalty placed on a police dept. they will carry on business as usual.. As long as they can do it they will do it.

  22. #22
    Regular Member estcrh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    365
    Quote Originally Posted by 55bowtie View Post
    Are the recent open carry harassments using this as the method of legalizing their actions....they are on thin ice if so. They may be on thin ice but....The last 2 or 3 people on this forum who had the opportunity to file charges against the offending department DIDN'T do it. Instead they accepted an OPPS .we made a mistake.As long as there isn't a financial penalty placed on a police dept. they will carry on business as usual.. As long as they can do it they will do it.
    I agree with your statement but you can not tell people how to handle their encounters with a law enforcement entity. If this happens to me I would insist at least with a face to face meeting with the head of the agency who's officers harassed me and then go from there.

Posting Permissions

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