Is this correcrt?

I live in North Mobile county close to Saraland and have had a cc permit since I was 21, just recently found out that there is oc in Alabama with out special permits, and havent done so because I wasnt sure I had the facts straight so if you guys wouldnt mind let me know if this is correct please.

1. I can open carry on foot properly holstered and loaded with the mag in the gun,in public(examples.....Walmart,Target, Bestbuy, the mall , movie theater etc...as long as there are no signs on the door of said buisness that prohibit guns on the premises?)


2. I can walk the streets of mobile as long as there are no political or public event(mardi gras) properly holsterd loaded mag in gun?

3. I can NOT have a oc in my vehicle with out my cc permit ?


I would greatly like the feed back to let me know if I am 100% correct in this, and also anyone that is in Saraland let me know please the attitude of SPD on open carry because they, some of them have a rep has a hard case. Thanks

If you read through 13A-11-50 through 13A-11-76 I think you will find your assumptions correct. Be careful in your reading and interpretation of -52 and -55, for clarification of -52 and -50 read Braxton vs state and C.D.J. vs state.

Don't ask a police officer or sheriff's deputy if it is legal to open carry. If you feel the compulsive need to ask, call an attorney or the DA. Don't *tell* a police officer or sheriff's deputy that it is legal to open carry. If you openly carry, you do so at your own risk.

That being said... The following cases are interesting:

US v Ubilies
Terry v Ohio (THE Terry case)
Braxton v State (AL 1997).
Andulsia v Mathis
State v Reid (1840)

And so on.

More cases cited here:
http://alabamaopencarry.com/index-1.html

In a nutshell, US v Ubilies says that an unconcealed pistol, the possession of which is not a crime, is not a reason to initiate a Terry stop. In AL, 15-5-30 provides the basis of "stop and question", and 15-5-31 allows a police officer to disarm a person. However, to initiate a stop, it must meet the Terry criteria.

The three questions to know are: "Am I being detained?" "Am I free to go?" "What crime have I committed?"

To secure one's rights, one must actively protect them. If you're not free to go, you're being detained. If you're being detained, you must have committed a crime, were about to commit a crime, or were stopped in the process of committing such a crime. If you're not being detained you a free to go. And Miranda has been expanded with the expectation that everyone is aware that they have the right to remain silent; if you lack such an ability, find something else to talk about. Remember, it is a crime to lie to a LEO, even if his question is remarkably absurd (and you're being detained).

Kirbinator said:

That being said... The following cases are interesting:

US v Ubilies

In a nutshell, US v Ubilies says that an unconcealed pistol, the possession of which is not a crime, is not a reason to initiate a Terry stop.

In AL 15-5-31 allows a police officer to disarm a person. However, to initiate a stop, it must meet the Terry criteria.

Click to expand...

INAL. Using US v. Ubilies and other OC cases where there was no basis for a Terry Stop I do not believe COA 15-5-31 could be used lawfully....I do not believe they would have a winnable case if you refused to hand over weapon....

COA Title 15. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.

Section 15-5-31
Search for dangerous weapon; procedure if weapon or other thing found.
When a sheriff or other officer acting as sheriff, his deputy or any constable, acting within their respective counties, any marshal, deputy marshal or policeman of any incorporated city or town within the limits of the county or any highway patrolman or state trooper has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this article ( Article 2 Searches, etc., of Persons in Public Places. ) and reasonably suspects that he is in danger of life or limb, he may search such person for a dangerous weapon. If such officer finds such a weapon or any other thing, the possession of which may constitute a crime, 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.

COA Title 15. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.

Article 1
Article 1 Search Warrants.
Section 15-5-1 "Search warrant" defined.
Section 15-5-2 Grounds for issuance.
Section 15-5-3 Probable cause and affidavit required.
Section 15-5-4 Examination of complainant and witnesses; contents of depositions.
Section 15-5-5 Issuance of warrant.
Section 15-5-6 Form.
Section 15-5-7 By whom executed.
Section 15-5-8 When executed; time of execution to be stated.
Section 15-5-9 Authority of serving officer to break into house.
Section 15-5-10 Taking of property.
Section 15-5-11 Receipt for property taken.
Section 15-5-12 Warrant to be executed and returned within 10 days.
Section 15-5-13 Contents of return; copies to be furnished.
Section 15-5-14 Disposition of taken property by court if property stolen or embezzled.
Section 15-5-15 Hearing on controverted grounds; authentication of testimony as to such facts.
Section 15-5-16 Restoration of taken property to defendant; property to be forwarded to court if not restored.
Section 15-5-17 Searching of person charged with felony for weapon or evidence in judge's or magistrate's presence.
Section 15-5-18 Payment of fees and costs.
Section 15-5-19 Penalty for procuring maliciously and without probable cause.

Article 2 Searches, etc., of Persons in Public Places.
Section 15-5-30 Authority of peace officer to stop and question.
Section 15-5-31 Search for dangerous weapon; procedure if weapon or other thing found.

Treborfoot said:

INAL. Using US v. Ubilies and other OC cases where there was no basis for a Terry Stop I do not believe COA 15-5-31 could be used lawfully....I do not believe they would have a winnable case if you refused to hand over weapon....

Click to expand...

I think there's one thing that I need to mention here, because it's a point of confusion. When I say "stop", I mean "detainment". Terry V Ohio also allows for a "conversation" -- which would not be a detainment. This would be the part where a police officer walks up and just starts asking questions. It may look like a detainment, but you are free to go. If the officer chooses to pursue you, badger you, follow you... one would have to be up on the harassment laws and point those out: "I do not want to talk to you, I am leaving (or you should leave, you are harassing me). If one IS being detained, would be answered with "Bring me a lawyer."

I am also not a lawyer.

I do agree with Treb's commentary. It's entirely possible that an officer might attempt to grab for a weapon, but without a crime having taken place, there's no reason to seize the weapon. And as Treb said, the case would not be winnable. (Unless it's a 1983 lawsuit under 18 USC 241 & friends).