Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Competition, Tactics & Training
Self Defense & Handgun Carry
Carry question..
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dave70968" data-source="post: 3099250" data-attributes="member: 13624"><p>Yup. You're missing where he <em>didn't</em> say the guy was arrested or charged, just that a lot of cops showed up to a "crazy man with a gun" call. If you were running the PD, wouldn't you want your officers to answer that call?</p><p></p><p>We're also missing what was the backlash for the crazy woman with a phone, who <em>should</em> have been charged with making a false police report, but probably couldn't be convicted because her vision just isn't that good, and she really believed it....</p><p></p><p></p><p>Seriously? It's a gray area.</p><p></p><p>On one hand, the previous version of the statute specifically said "belt or shoulder holster," and that was amended to the current version; that shows a clear intent to loosen the law. On the other hand, having it in your hand, but holstered, seems to miss the essential point of the holster...<em>maybe</em>. </p><p></p><p>One purpose of such statutes is to make it more difficult to ditch the gun; it's easy to toss a gun down the drain if carrying illegally and the cops get close, but a holster attached to your body is a lot harder to lose. If the purpose of the statute was to make that scenario less likely, then having it holstered but in your hand doesn't meet the purpose of the statute, and would be looked upon with disfavor.</p><p></p><p>If, however, the purpose was to ensure safe carry (i.e. covering the trigger, can't shift around, etc.), then the statute is <em>not</em> frustrated.</p><p></p><p>I favor the former interpretation, for a couple of reasons. First, if the latter were the case, the legislature would (should) have specified "a holster that covers the trigger, keeps the handgun secured," etc. It didn't; it specified "upon the person." Second, statutes aren't read in a vacuum; they're read holistically as part of a "comprehensive scheme of legislation," and courts will try to interpret them according to a common goal. The "concealed" portion of the statute has no such parallel requirement for a holster (likely to allow for pocket carry). If properly concealed, the "ditch the gun" scenario would be irrelevant, as the holster would also be concealed.</p><p></p><p>So, it's a gray area; how much of my time do you want to buy (in advance; I've made that mistake before!) being the guy who clears it up for the rest of us? Somebody sees you, calls the cops, you get arrested (if you're lucky and don't have a trigger-happy cop who shoots the man with a gun in his hand on sight because he was afraid for his safety; videos of this abound). Cuffed and stuffed, go to jail, make bail in a couple of days (probably). What cost, that? Not just the bail itself, but what cost to your life? Time in an 8x10 cell with no dignity, away from your family, with crappy food; the whole town now thinks you're a crazy guy who has to have a gun in his hand to check the mail (and, to be entirely fair, let it be said that <em>I</em> have gone out and walked my yard with an <em>un</em>holstered gun on a couple of occasions--the dog told me to. Possum once, raccoon the other time, but it was <em>definitely</em> his alert bark.). Your gun is kept as evidence, you get to spend weeks, months, maybe a year or more under indictment, shell out lots of money for legal fees, going to have to deal with friends and neighbors who now think you're crazy, wondering when you're going to snap, what you're so afraid of (I carry on my property too, having already evicted snakes from in the house on a few occasions--not all threats walk on two legs) and never being satisfied with the answer.</p><p></p><p>Oh, and don't make the mistake of assuming that you'll only be charged with improper carry; you'll likely catch paper for threatening. We don't have a brandishing statute, and we clarified that you can point a gun <em>to stop a threat</em>, but when the crazy phone lady calls it in because she felt threatened and you become the subject of a multi-jurisdictional pigpile, you're <em>going</em> to get charged with pointing. That's a felony. Now <em>all</em> of your guns are getting confiscated, your bail just got an extra "0" (maybe two extra) tacked to the end of it.</p><p></p><p>So, my legal advice is "I don't know; it's gray." My practical advice is "put on a damned belt." Get a comfortable one with a snap-type buckle and keep it by the door. Best twenty bucks you'll ever spend...and it'll leave your hands free if you need them for whatever reason.</p><p></p><p>--Dave, who has also carried firearms in <em>exactly the manner described</em> to take them out to the car, so he obviously doesn't always follow his own advice</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dave70968, post: 3099250, member: 13624"] Yup. You're missing where he [I]didn't[/I] say the guy was arrested or charged, just that a lot of cops showed up to a "crazy man with a gun" call. If you were running the PD, wouldn't you want your officers to answer that call? We're also missing what was the backlash for the crazy woman with a phone, who [I]should[/I] have been charged with making a false police report, but probably couldn't be convicted because her vision just isn't that good, and she really believed it.... Seriously? It's a gray area. On one hand, the previous version of the statute specifically said "belt or shoulder holster," and that was amended to the current version; that shows a clear intent to loosen the law. On the other hand, having it in your hand, but holstered, seems to miss the essential point of the holster...[I]maybe[/I]. One purpose of such statutes is to make it more difficult to ditch the gun; it's easy to toss a gun down the drain if carrying illegally and the cops get close, but a holster attached to your body is a lot harder to lose. If the purpose of the statute was to make that scenario less likely, then having it holstered but in your hand doesn't meet the purpose of the statute, and would be looked upon with disfavor. If, however, the purpose was to ensure safe carry (i.e. covering the trigger, can't shift around, etc.), then the statute is [I]not[/I] frustrated. I favor the former interpretation, for a couple of reasons. First, if the latter were the case, the legislature would (should) have specified "a holster that covers the trigger, keeps the handgun secured," etc. It didn't; it specified "upon the person." Second, statutes aren't read in a vacuum; they're read holistically as part of a "comprehensive scheme of legislation," and courts will try to interpret them according to a common goal. The "concealed" portion of the statute has no such parallel requirement for a holster (likely to allow for pocket carry). If properly concealed, the "ditch the gun" scenario would be irrelevant, as the holster would also be concealed. So, it's a gray area; how much of my time do you want to buy (in advance; I've made that mistake before!) being the guy who clears it up for the rest of us? Somebody sees you, calls the cops, you get arrested (if you're lucky and don't have a trigger-happy cop who shoots the man with a gun in his hand on sight because he was afraid for his safety; videos of this abound). Cuffed and stuffed, go to jail, make bail in a couple of days (probably). What cost, that? Not just the bail itself, but what cost to your life? Time in an 8x10 cell with no dignity, away from your family, with crappy food; the whole town now thinks you're a crazy guy who has to have a gun in his hand to check the mail (and, to be entirely fair, let it be said that [I]I[/I] have gone out and walked my yard with an [I]un[/I]holstered gun on a couple of occasions--the dog told me to. Possum once, raccoon the other time, but it was [I]definitely[/I] his alert bark.). Your gun is kept as evidence, you get to spend weeks, months, maybe a year or more under indictment, shell out lots of money for legal fees, going to have to deal with friends and neighbors who now think you're crazy, wondering when you're going to snap, what you're so afraid of (I carry on my property too, having already evicted snakes from in the house on a few occasions--not all threats walk on two legs) and never being satisfied with the answer. Oh, and don't make the mistake of assuming that you'll only be charged with improper carry; you'll likely catch paper for threatening. We don't have a brandishing statute, and we clarified that you can point a gun [I]to stop a threat[/I], but when the crazy phone lady calls it in because she felt threatened and you become the subject of a multi-jurisdictional pigpile, you're [I]going[/I] to get charged with pointing. That's a felony. Now [I]all[/I] of your guns are getting confiscated, your bail just got an extra "0" (maybe two extra) tacked to the end of it. So, my legal advice is "I don't know; it's gray." My practical advice is "put on a damned belt." Get a comfortable one with a snap-type buckle and keep it by the door. Best twenty bucks you'll ever spend...and it'll leave your hands free if you need them for whatever reason. --Dave, who has also carried firearms in [I]exactly the manner described[/I] to take them out to the car, so he obviously doesn't always follow his own advice [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
Competition, Tactics & Training
Self Defense & Handgun Carry
Carry question..
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom