Travelling by vehicle while OCing...

ep0k said:

Legal solution: Possess a CFP (unacceptable from an ideological standpoint because it is basically a tax on a natural right)

Common-sense solution (for an LEO): don't detain/arrest/prosecute an individual for moving a gun from holster to containment simply because they have technically violated a law while attempting to comply with two or more other laws.

Common-sense solution for the individual: Move the gun from holster to container where you won't be observed. Normally not a problem, but there is always the possibility for unexpected surreptitious observation.

Real-world implications: Somewhere, there is an LEO who will arrest you for this. Its a real, legitimate, legal problem. Every cop I know understands that you are technically breaking the law when (without a Maine or reciprocal out of state CWP) you put a gun into a container, and every cop I know wouldn't think about actually pursuing this. It doesn't mean there isn't someone in their department who wouldn't run with it for whatever reason.

My thinking (personal opinion) is that if someone actually tried to arrest you and press charges for this, they would be laughed out of the courtroom, and if they weren't, you could probably push it at least as far as the state supreme court and secure some form of minor victory for carry rights on state constitutional grounds.

Of course in the meantime you would be out on bail conditions, stripped of your 2A rights, and suffer all the other consequences of trying to live a normal life with criminal charges pending. No one wants to be that guy because, hey, it ******* sucks.

Click to expand...

Claytron said:

im not sure i really see the predicament here, can someone recite the exact portion of the law they are referring to and exactly how they feel its being broken by placing a firearm into a locked car trunk in order to transport it?

Once you close the trunk door i would imagine that would be considered innaccessible and out of reach seeing as how you would need to unlock it in order to retrieve it, as opposed to just lifting your shirt or pant leg to retrieve a pistol concealed there.

Is the locked trunk area of a car you are driving considered your "person's person"?

Click to expand...

boyscout399 said:

Once it's locked in the trunk you're legal. How do you get it into the trunk though? If you place the gun in the locked container, then place the container in the trunk, you've broken the law from the time you concealed the gun until the time you remove yourself from access. There is no possible way to get it locked in the trunk without breaking the law to get it there.

Click to expand...

Claytron said:

So you are saying that putting your firearm inside a locked container, similar to the box you would get when buying the gun, and carrying it to the car is considered concealing it? If so how are we able to buy a gun and walk to our car from the store to transport it?

At which point are you considering a person to "have access" and likewise what dictates "not having access"?

Also, are you talking about putting it into a locked container while the gun is loaded or unloaded?

Click to expand...

boyscout399 said:

The way the Title 25 Sec 2001-A is written, there is no exception for a firearm being transported from a dealer, so yes, walking from the store to our car with an encased firearm is violating Title 25 Sec 2001-A if you don't have a CCW permit recognized in Maine. I'm not saying that there is any LEO in Maine that would be dumb enough to sit outside of Cabelas and arrest anyone coming out with a gun case for carrying a concealed weapon, I'm only saying that it does in fact break the letter of the law.

As far as loaded or unloaded is concerned, it doesn't matter. Loaded in a vehicle would be unlawful under Title 12 Sec 11212, but Title 25 Sec 2001-A has no distinction between loaded and unloaded and that's the statute that's violated every time someone carries a cased gun to their car.

Case law would dictate where the border of "having access" and "not having access" would fall. I am not fluent in where case law has determined this line to be. Title 25 Sec 2001-A doesn't mention "having access" it mentions "about the person's person" and I believe that a case in your hand would definitely constitute "about the person's person"

Click to expand...

Claytron said:

i guess we really do need a better definition of "about a person's person", i couldnt find one good enough to help me understand exactly what it means.

Heres a situation: You open carry your pistol on your hip while carrying your lockable gun case to your car, you open the trunk and put the gun case in. You then open the gun case while its sitting in the trunk and proceed to put the gun into the case, shut it an lock it, then shut the trunk. Seeing how you were never holding the case while the gun was inside of it, would that still be considered "about the person's person"?

Click to expand...

boyscout399 said:

You were touching it while you closed it. Even if for a fraction of a second, you broke the law.

I'm not positive, but I believe "about your person" means within reach.

Click to expand...

Claytron said:

you may be touching it but you are not carrying it, if the law says you cannot have something "about your person's person" id take that to mean that it cant be on your body, as "person" has a legal definition in this case to mean your actual literal self. Like most of these laws they arent written very clearly and its easy to get hung up on a phrase like "about the person's person", and i think the word that really needs to be defined is "about".

In my eyes "about the person's person" means to have something on your physical body(your person's person) that is "owned" or controlled by your legal identity (your person), which is confusing as hell but thats how i interpret it.

Click to expand...

boyscout399 said:

"On your person" would be on your physical body. "about" is defined by Princeton on Google as "in the area or vicinity." Cambridge defines "about your person" as "in a pocket, bag, or something else that you are holding" If you're touching the case, you're holding it... I can't find any case law in Maine, but Texas courts have ruled that "about your person" includes areas within your immediate reach including the passenger compartments of vehicles. source

Click to expand...

Claytron said:

so with more than one definition of a word, which do you go with? How do you find the right one? And when you say that touching something is considered holding somethiing, is that your assumption or is that the definition by law?

it seems like, even if a cop knew about this law and decided to arrest you or fine you for it, he would have to dig pretty deep in order to make it seem like you did anything wrong. even though it seems pretty clear its not something most people would be risking anything by doing, it still should be better defined.

Click to expand...

Butch00 said:

The only thing I look at is: The U.S. Constitution says " Your right to bear arms shall not be infringed"
and The Maine Constitution says "Your right to bear arms shall never be questioned"
The Constitutions are the Law...any thing the state does has to be in line with that or its void.

Click to expand...