Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: OK just a bit confused.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    3

    OK just a bit confused.

    Excuse me if this has been covered before but I couldn't really find a answer to my question during a search.
    If a Ohio resident who has a valid Ohio CCW permit inadvertently has his weapon exposed during concealed carry would that now constitute open carry?
    Or would brandishing laws take effect in this situation?
    Thanks

  2. #2
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Isn't Ohio a "traditional Open Carry State", in that no license or permit is required to openly carry?

    Let me put it this way...
    An Ohio permit to carry concealed (by whatever name) permits one to carry a concealed firearm.
    An Ohio permit to drive permits one to drive an automobile.

    Should someone with an Ohio driver's permit decide to exit his car and (gasp!) walk, ... has an illegality occurred?
    Are Ohioans required to drive everywhere once they've obtained a driver's license?
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 01-05-2012 at 10:34 PM.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    3
    Well you make sense but I have heard that if you have a Ohio CCW and your weapon is exposed for whatever reason you are subject to some sort of brandishing citation.
    Doesn't make too much sense to me, but we are dealing with the lowest common denominator as far as LE understanding the correct state gun laws.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    2941.145 Firearm displayed, brandished, indicated that offender possessed the firearm, or used it to facilitate offense specification.
    "... (A) Imposition of a three-year mandatory prison term upon an offender under division (B)(1)(a) of section 2929.14 of the Revised Code is precluded unless the indictment, count in the indictment, or information charging the offense specifies that the offender had a firearm on or about the offender’s person or under the offender’s control while committing the offense and displayed the firearm, brandished the firearm, indicated that the offender possessed the firearm, or used it to facilitate the offense. The specification shall be stated at the end of the body of the indictment, count, or information, and shall be stated in substantially the following form:..."
    (edited for brevity)

    [2929.14 is a definition of prison terms for offenses.]

    2911.01 Aggravated robbery. (Well obviously Do NOT be robbing nobody, but you know that)
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 01-05-2012 at 10:43 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    (sigh)... Sadly, people can tell you a lot of things.
    I had someone the other day tell me it was against Federal Law for a person under 21 to purchase a handgun.

    err.. not so much. It's against Federal Law for a FFL holder to [s]sell[/s] Correction: Furnish Any firearm to Anyone under the age of 21 unless it is a rifle or shotgun.
    The astute reader will note it does not mention private sales to someone under 21.
    The lazy reader will note '21' and not note "FFL"
    And yes the distinction between sell and furnish is Very important.

    Next time someone says "... the law says it's illegal to..." Make Him Provide The Citation or else use your common sense until you can find it. If someone Knows the law, they can point out the citation, or at least where it can be found. Someone who does Not know the law will Never, Ever be able to give a citation that does not exist.

    If it's a law enforcement officer that gave the 'it's brandishing' BS advice, please note that an officer is subject to absolutely NO legal requirement to tell you the truth.
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 01-05-2012 at 10:58 PM. Reason: just had to go there

  6. #6
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    In light of my "cops aren't required to tell the truth" post, allow me please to illustrate.
    Here is a poor schmuck asking Did I Brandish My Weapon on Officer.com in a forum exclusively reserved for sworn law enforcement officers to give answers.

    It took 13 posts for the Correct answer to be posted, with 3 posts saying "Yes, you brandished" and only 1 "No, you didn't"
    It took until the 16th post for the correct citation to be given and it took the original poster to provide the correct information.

    Did any of the officers who gave incorrect answers say "Oops, my mistake, I've learned something?"
    Sure, every single one of them. You believe me, don't you?
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 01-06-2012 at 12:54 AM.

  7. #7
    Regular Member ADulay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Punta Gorda, Florida, USA
    Posts
    466
    Quote Originally Posted by SSZ-V View Post
    Excuse me if this has been covered before but I couldn't really find a answer to my question during a search.
    If a Ohio resident who has a valid Ohio CCW permit inadvertently has his weapon exposed during concealed carry would that now constitute open carry?
    Or would brandishing laws take effect in this situation?
    Thanks
    As open carry is legal in Ohio, you can't be arrested or accused of "brandishing" unless you've physically put the gun in your hand and waved it around.

    Accidental exposure might get you a question from an LEO that actually observed it (highly unlikely) but brandishing is not what is being described here.

    AD (open carry advocate)
    NRA Life - AMA Life - ABATE Life
    Viet-Nam Helicopters Pilots Assn - Life
    IDPA, ICORE and USPSA carry gun shooter - Glock Armorer
    NRA Certified Instructor

  8. #8
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Of course, all that's necessary is to say "I've got a gun in my pocket. Give me a nickle." to warrant a brandishing charge, there isn't even a need for a gun to actually be in the offender's possession or in his hand.
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 01-07-2012 at 12:03 AM.

  9. #9
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,737
    2911.01 Aggravated robbery.

    (A) No person, in attempting or committing a theft offense, as defined in section 2913.01 of the Revised Code, or in fleeing immediately after the attempt or offense, shall do any of the following:

    (1) Have a deadly weapon on or about the offender’s person or under the offender’s control and either display the weapon, brandish it, indicate that the offender possesses it, or use it;
    The ORC does not define the term Brandish. Therefore, the general definition would apply. "Brandish" to shake or wave (as a weapon) menacingly, or to exhibit in an ostentatious or aggressive manner.

    Not that I recommend it, but just carrying a gun in your hand at your side would not meet the general definition of brandishing. Open carry does not mandate that the gun be carried in a holster.

  10. #10
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Quote Originally Posted by color of law View Post
    The ORC does not define the term Brandish. Therefore, the general definition would apply. "Brandish" to shake or wave (as a weapon) menacingly, or to exhibit in an ostentatious or aggressive manner.

    Not that I recommend it, but just carrying a gun in your hand at your side would not meet the general definition of brandishing. Open carry does not mandate that the gun be carried in a holster.
    First things first.

    Before we (the collective "we") spend a lot of time discussing whether a hand-carried handgun is or is not "brandishing", I suggest we work on clearly establishing, by various means, that a holstered handgun, in the absence of other information/justification is not a) reason enough for a Terry stop, b) sufficient reason for a citation of disorderly conduct or inducing panic.

    Ohio's gun rights organizations have failed to do so, for various reasons, IMHO leaving the matter for others to handle. Come spring the collective "we" needs to work harder on such issues.
    Last edited by BB62; 01-08-2012 at 02:28 PM.

Posting Permissions

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