Why does open carry without a permit stop at the automobile?

Makarov · May 2, 2011

I just thought I would start this interesting post. Open carry is the natural right. In my perspective, no license should be required period; the State of Ohio affirms this along with it being an individual right. On the other hand, some judge ruled that Concealed Carry was a privilege. Because it is, it requires a license. So one could conclude that it is illegal to deny the right of open carry without a permit in an automobile, because to open carry does not require a license and the right don’t stop at the car door. Does that sound like a good defense?

parker64 · May 2, 2011

Operating a vehicle is a privilage, not a right. Unlike walking, and being in a public place is a right. Therefore the Liberal Web gets tangled very quickly as far as vehicles are concerned, even if you are a passenger in said vehicle. But I do agree with your point.

Mike

Stryker · May 2, 2011

gutshot said:
Some states have ruled that placing a firearm into an vehicle obscures the firearm from view from outside the vehicle and is, therefore, an act of concealment that requires a license.

Continuing their line of logic, I am impressed that they do not require a license to carry in the stalls of public restrooms. Plenty of potential mayhem there.

usamarshal · May 2, 2011

Yea, if you have a car, a drivers license, and insurance you should be able to OC in your vehicle...drinking and driving is more dangerous to a cop than someone legally OCing. I've already writting my congressman about it. Hopefully he'll look into it for us.

parker64 said:
Operating a vehicle is a privilage, not a right. Unlike walking, and being in a public place is a right. Therefore the Liberal Web gets tangled very quickly as far as vehicles are concerned, even if you are a passenger in said vehicle. But I do agree with your point.

Mike

aadvark · May 3, 2011

Under Law, Operating a Motor Vehicle is a Privilege.

This Act, to Operate a Motor Vehicle, Requires a Drivers License, Insurance, a Tag (which is a State Imposed Taxation upon such Privilege), and Normally, a Certificate of Title as a Foramlity to Prove Ones Ownership of said Vehicle.

Under Ohio Law, Openly Carrying a Handgun, or any other Firearm, is a Right, under Ohio Revised Code 9.68.

Ohio Law only Enumerates Concealed Carry as a Crime, under Ohio Revised Code 2923.12.

Since Open Carry is a Right, under Ohio Revised Code 9.68, then, The Ohio Legislature cannot have it both ways to Prohibit Open Carry then Prohibit Concealed Carry as well.

*** Of Note, MANY Northern States, North of The Ohio River, Prohibit Carrying a Firearm, or at least a Pistol, in a Motor Vehicle, unless; such Person is so Licensed to do so. With The Exception of Kentucky, EVERY State that Ohio Shares a Border has such Prohibition. ***

jmelvin · May 3, 2011

Even if driving a vehicles on public roads is considered a privilege it has no bearing on one's inherent right to protect him/herself in any way. By driving a car one does not expect to lose the protection of one's right to peacably assemble, or speak one's mind, or to pray to one's god. Because Ohio has existing Ohio Supreme Court decisions which underpin the idea that open carry is a right, I believe that the restrictions on unlicensed open carry in cars and in restaurants serving alcohol could fall under the right court challenge. Even if you wanted to apply the US Supreme Court's "sensitive places" potential for restrictions into the case I don't think either of these qualify as places that are "sensitive places".

* I started the response before aardvark 's response, but it looks like we're thinking along similar lines.

Makarov · May 4, 2011

The Bill of Rights applies to all who ride in automobiles, thats a privileged act.

Privilege Verses Rights Analogy; a perspective.

The nature right should never be excluded when performing an act of a privilege; if you can open carrying walking on public sidewalk why not in an automobile. Walking on a public sidewalk can be considered privileged act, it’s surely isn’t a right. No License needed to open carry there.

For instance, the mere act of sitting in the vehicle doesn’t make you an operator requiring a license unless the key is in the ignition. So if you sit in the driver’s seat of an automobile parked on the side of the street, with no keys in the ignition, and open carry a fire arm, then you need a CCW. You’re not driving the car, just sitting. Where is the sanity!

The Bill of Rights is considered branded to my body. Anywhere I go, it goes. So why is my right regulated differently because of where I go? The intent always remains the same for the action, but the back drop changes for the license.

parker64 · May 4, 2011

Makarov said:
Privilege Verses Rights Analogy; a perspective.

The nature right should never be excluded when performing an act of a privilege; if you can open carrying walking on public sidewalk why not in an automobile. Walking on a public sidewalk can be considered privileged act, it’s surely isn’t a right. No License needed to open carry there.

For instance, the mere act of sitting in the vehicle doesn’t make you an operator requiring a license unless the key is in the ignition. So if you sit in the driver’s seat of an automobile parked on the side of the street, with no keys in the ignition, and open carry a fire arm, then you need a CCW. You’re not driving the car, just sitting. Where is the sanity!

The Bill of Rights is considered branded to my body. Anywhere I go, it goes. So why is my right regulated differently because of where I go? The intent always remains the same for the action, but the back drop changes for the license.

Agree 100%!!!

Why does open carry without a permit stop at the automobile?

Makarov

Regular Member

parker64

Regular Member

Stryker

Regular Member

usamarshal

Regular Member

aadvark

Regular Member

jmelvin

Founder's Club Member

Makarov

Regular Member

parker64

Regular Member