| Author | Post |
|---|
30 cal slut
Member
| Joined: | Mon Feb 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 165 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 30th, 2008 03:49 pm |
|
Just saw this posted at THR.
I must have slept through this one. 
http://www.ct.gov/bfpe/cwp/view.asp?a=1838&Q=418126&PM=1
GUN PERMIT-RELATED QUESTIONS
1. Is there any statute prescribing that firearms must be carried concealed?
The answer is no. The law does not address this issue. But, with limited exceptions, it is illegal to carry a handgun, whether concealed or openly, without a permit, except in one's home or place of business (CGS § 29-35(a)).
Last edited on Mon Jun 30th, 2008 03:51 pm by 30 cal slut
|
Lonnie Wilson
State Researcher
|
Posted: Mon Jun 30th, 2008 04:41 pm |
|
Hooray. It took them 40 years to acknowledge open carry's legality?
|
bradco
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | West Haven, CT |
| Posts: | 68 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 1st, 2008 01:23 am |
|
| Yes it does state that but on the other hand, they advise on concealment as to not cause alarm to public which in CT, can result in your permit being revoked, for Breach of peace, I dont remember the link but there is a case as such going on currently regarding a legal permit holder being harrassed in Chili's, I am sure someone else can point you to the link or article. So use discretion here in CT.
|
30 cal slut
Member
| Joined: | Mon Feb 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 165 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 1st, 2008 12:04 pm |
|
| I think you're referring to the state police FAQ link, which pre-dated the OLR opinion (April 2008).
|
bennor
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 21 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 1st, 2008 01:55 pm |
|
While it may be technically legal to OC in Connecticut you WILL be confronted by police if you do so outside of your home or a range. Unfortunately just because a lawyer says we can do so outside of a court room doesn't mean we won't be arrested for doing so. As we've seen in PA and other places, the police don't always know (or follow) the law. They may know its legal but they can and probably will stop you and ask questions. Now when someone calls in a "person with a gun" complaint on you as your OC'ing to 911 than you can expect to go to jail on a charge of disturbing the piece or some such thing. I've even been told by a police officer that your neighbors can even call the police to say they are in fear that you have guns, and the police will confiscate them (and possibly arrest you for a crime if they can make one stick). In the end OC may be perfectly legal but it will not prevent you from going to jail and having to spend some of your hard earned money to get your self out of jail and to pay for a lawyer to defend you at trial (if and when it goes that far) by an over zealous prosecutor and legal system.
The problem here isn't the police, they just uphold the laws, for better or worse. The real problem is A) our elected leaders who create these confusing gun laws and AWB laws. And B) our fellow citizens who panic when they see some one other than a police officer with a gun. Many people in this state don't think we need guns for self defense or any other reasons. And they wet their pants when they see someone other than a police officer with a gun on their hip and make the panicky call to 911 about a "man with a gun". Even someone who was CCW'ning (James Goldberg -
http://www.ourrockyhill.com/) in accordence with the law was arrested and is now in a legal battle for doing so. And unfortunately the politicians listen to this sizable number of people. Not to mention by pointing to guns they can scare people and show that they can do something about that which scares people. Heck, I've even been accosted by people asking why I was buying ammunition in Walmart for gods sake. 
This is going to be the next battle ground between those who want to remove the 2md Amendment and those of us who support and exorcise that right. Expect to see more people calling police if they see someone with a gun on their hip, more people arguing for more laws against OC and CCW, for placing restrictions on ammunition, and to campaign for the closing of gun ranges through cost prohibitive safety improvements like we are seeing with Blue Trail Range right now. Since they cannot ban the gun, they will advocate to ban how we can use it and what we can put into it.
|
bradco
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | West Haven, CT |
| Posts: | 68 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 1st, 2008 01:58 pm |
|
Thanks, exactly what needed to be said and written
bennor wrote:
While it may be technically legal to OC in Connecticut you WILL be confronted by police if you do so outside of your home or a range. Unfortunately just because a lawyer says we can do so outside of a court room doesn't mean we won't be arrested for doing so. As we've seen in PA and other places, the police don't always know (or follow) the law. They may know its legal but they can and probably will stop you and ask questions. Now when someone calls in a "person with a gun" complaint on you as your OC'ing to 911 than you can expect to go to jail on a charge of disturbing the piece or some such thing. I've even been told by a police officer that your neighbors can even call the police to say they are in fear that you have guns, and the police will confiscate them (and possibly arrest you for a crime if they can make one stick). In the end OC may be perfectly legal but it will not prevent you from going to jail and having to spend some of your hard earned money to get your self out of jail and to pay for a lawyer to defend you at trial (if and when it goes that far) by an over zealous prosecutor and legal system.
The problem here isn't the police, they just uphold the laws, for better or worse. The real problem is A) our elected leaders who create these confusing gun laws and AWB laws. And B) our fellow citizens who panic when they see some one other than a police officer with a gun. Many people in this state don't think we need guns for self defense or any other reasons. And they wet their pants when they see someone other than a police officer with a gun on their hip and make the panicky call to 911 about a "man with a gun". Even someone who was CCW'ning (James Goldberg -
http://www.ourrockyhill.com/) in accordence with the law was arrested and is now in a legal battle for doing so. And unfortunately the politicians listen to this sizable number of people. Not to mention by pointing to guns they can scare people and show that they can do something about that which scares people. Heck, I've even been accosted by people asking why I was buying ammunition in Walmart for gods sake.
This is going to be the next battle ground between those who want to remove the 2md Amendment and those of us who support and exorcise that right. Expect to see more people calling police if they see someone with a gun on their hip, more people arguing for more laws against OC and CCW, for placing restrictions on ammunition, and to campaign for the closing of gun ranges through cost prohibitive safety improvements like we are seeing with Blue Trail Range right now. Since they cannot ban the gun, they will advocate to ban how we can use it and what we can put into it.
|
GoldCoaster
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jun 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 34 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 1st, 2008 03:18 pm |
|
I'm waiting to see what the fallout from the SCOTUS decision on Heller versus DC winds up being.
Some people I've talked to are overjoyed by it, like the opinion was a complete restoration of 2nd amendment rights.
I don't see it that way myself. It's a start for sure but there are still onerous regulations, hoops to jump through, bans on certain weapons for what reason?, etc.
Until law enforcement can actually lock up the criminals and take THEIR guns off the street we are going to be painted with a very broad brush as a gun owner. What if it falls into the wrong hands? What if those wrong hands were locked up where they are supposed to be - that's my point.
Why do the police hassle law abiding citizens over stuff like this? because by their very nature - law abiding citizens don't risk the lives of the police when being dealt with unlike criminals who put up a hell of a fight if the prospect of being caught is a lengthy spell in the pokey.
GC
|
bennor
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 21 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 1st, 2008 03:52 pm |
|
Heller is in general a good decision. All it has done is say that a firearm is allowed to be owned by an individual. Now the race is on to figure out what that really means and what other restrictions other than criminals and the mentally ill are going to be placed on those who want to own a firearm. And to get it incorporated into the 14th. It will take many new cases and legal proceedings for that to happen.
Depending on your (and the lower court judges) point of view the decision could uphold many of the current laws, except the total bans in Chicago, San Fran, and DC. Or it may invalidate most gun restriction laws. The Brady bunch already came out and is trying to spin this decision into a positive light even though it removed their main argument about firearms are only for militia's. DC will head back to court with their insistence that no semi-auto are allowed (which Scalica already indicated couldn't be banned with his common use firearms comment) and the one registered revolver requirements. Also keep in mind that you must buy the gun in DC and since there are no gun stores and only ONE FFL dealer there good luck for DC folks to actually be able to own a handgun legally. There are some comments in the decision that could invalidate CT's existing cosmetic AWB law as well.
The very fact that four justices have difficult reading and comprehending what the 2nd actually says and or put their own rose colored glasses on and blatantly espoused (and that Scalia dismantled point by point) their anti gun views shows that this fight is far from over. So long as many feel that they can support ONLY those collective rights they like in the Bill of Right rather than all of the individual rights, the battle to preserve ALL of our rights will continue. What really bothers me is its the Democrats who claim to support the Constitution and Bill of Rights who are the one's leading the charge against guns and our individual right as set fourth in the Bill of Rights to own them. If one can find is so easy to change the meaning of one right how easy will it be for them to "re-interpret" the others when they don't like them?
On a side note, this article is a good one at explaining the uphill battle we confront when trying to get anti gun people to understand guns and by extension how it's a fundamental right.
Raging Against Self Defense:
A Psychiatrist Examines The Anti-Gun Mentality
By Sarah Thompson, M.D.
http://www.vcdl.org/new/raging.htm
|
LKB3rd
Member
| Joined: | Sat Nov 3rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 64 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 12:18 am |
|
bennor wrote:
The problem here isn't the police, they just uphold the laws, for better or worse. The real problem is A) our elected leaders who create these confusing gun laws and AWB laws. And B) our fellow citizens who panic when they see some one other than a police officer with a gun. Many people in this state don't think we need guns for self defense or any other reasons. And they wet their pants when they see someone other than a police officer with a gun on their hip and make the panicky call to 911 about a "man with a gun". Even someone who was CCW'ning (James Goldberg -
http://www.ourrockyhill.com/) in accordence with the law was arrested and is now in a legal battle for doing so. And unfortunately the politicians listen to this sizable number of people. Not to mention by pointing to guns they can scare people and show that they can do something about that which scares people. Heck, I've even been accosted by people asking why I was buying ammunition in Walmart for gods sake.
This is going to be the next battle ground between those who want to remove the 2md Amendment and those of us who support and exorcise that right. Expect to see more people calling police if they see someone with a gun on their hip, more people arguing for more laws against OC and CCW, for placing restrictions on ammunition, and to campaign for the closing of gun ranges through cost prohibitive safety improvements like we are seeing with Blue Trail Range right now. Since they cannot ban the gun, they will advocate to ban how we can use it and what we can put into it.
I am disappointed to see on a site dedicated to open carry that you would say that the police are "merely upholding the law" when we all know that there is no law against open carry. They are breaking the law if they arrest you for breach of peace. Breach of peace is not a lawful charge if someone reacts negatively to your lawful behavior. If it was, someone with long hair could be arrested for breach of peace if someone flipped out and created a disturbance because they hate hippies. Exact same thing.
|
GoldCoaster
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jun 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 34 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 01:47 am |
|
Police are merely "supposed" to uphold the law, they are also supposed to know what the laws are and not roll their own when they come up with something that wasn't covered in training.
I agree with Bennor though, it's not the police that make the laws it's the nutjobs in Hartford that want to make a name for themselves by being tough on crime. And being tough on crime means gun control. Only nobody calls BS on them since gun control only affects people that obey the law. The criminals never have, and one more law on the books won't make a scrap of difference in that regard.
It would be nice if CT adopted a page out of PA's book and allowed open carry w/o a permit IF you're not a person who is disqualified from having firearms for the shopping list of reasons.
I've only ever seen one guy with a Glock stuck in his waistband, not exactly open carry, more of a piss poor conceal job but perhaps I was paying attention and nobody else noticed. There wasn't mass hysteria though.
I'd be more afraid of someone walking around with a knife in their hand than someone walking around with a holstered pistol.
Hopefully as the weeks wear on, some trickledown from Heller will come to us and we will see more freedom in this regard.
|
bennor
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 21 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 10:07 am |
|
LKB3rd wrote: I am disappointed to see on a site dedicated to open carry that you would say that the police are "merely upholding the law" when we all know that there is no law against open carry. They are breaking the law if they arrest you for breach of peace. Breach of peace is not a lawful charge if someone reacts negatively to your lawful behavior. If it was, someone with long hair could be arrested for breach of peace if someone flipped out and created a disturbance because they hate hippies. Exact same thing.
I don't like it any more than you do but that's the truth whether we like it or not. Right now if you open carry you in all likely hood would would be confronted by the police and quite possibly arrested. Look if you want to OC, it's your choice, but as has been said, don't be surprised to wind up in handcuffs if you do so even though there's no specific gun law against it.
It's not the person's hair that is at issue, its the firearm. Many people are afraid of firearms and will call the police on anyone they see with one if out in public. Below is the Breach of the peace statue for Connecticut. Notice clause A. That is the one that will be used to charge an OC'er if a prosecutor so decides. They will say that because someone call 911 and reported a "man with a gun" that it will constitute threatening behavior. The police used this very statute against James Goldburg for CCW'ing legally and a Chilies employee pranicked when they saw it. Again like it or not, there it is.
We need to educate others who are fearful about firearms about our gun rights, not scare them. We should at this point in time us discretion to do so otherwise we will only hurt our efforts to educate others on gun rights, and the OC'er and other firearms owners could loose our own gun rights through arrest and new more restrictive laws.
http://law.justia.com/connecticut/codes/title53a/sec53a-181.html
Sec. 53a-181. Breach of the peace in the second degree: Class B misdemeanor.
(a) A person is guilty of breach of the peace in the second degree when, with intent to cause inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, such person:
(1) Engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior in a public place; or
(2) assaults or strikes another; or
(3) threatens to commit any crime against another person or such other person's property; or
(4) publicly exhibits, distributes, posts up or advertises any offensive, indecent or abusive matter concerning any person; or
(5) in a public place, uses abusive or obscene language or makes an obscene gesture; or
(6) creates a public and hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which such person is not licensed or privileged to do. For purposes of this section, "public place" means any area that is used or held out for use by the public whether owned or operated by public or private interests.
(b) Breach of the peace in the second degree is a class B misdemeanor.
|
LKB3rd
Member
| Joined: | Sat Nov 3rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 64 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 10:16 am |
|
I work for the phone company. Yesterday a dumptruck took out 7 phone wires on a street and we had police directing traffic while we fixed them. I took it as an opportunity to discuss the issue with one of them.
I asked him what he would do if he saw someone open carrying. I asked him to assume this person was minding his own business, and had a carry permit. He told me in CT it was required that it be concealed. I told him the reason I was asking was because of what had been posted on the firearms board web site. He was surprised, and unaware of that. He then said that he was concerned about retention, and I said well let's also assume that the person had bought a retention holster the same as his. We ended up having a discussion about gun laws, and he was actually pretty open to responsible people exercising their rights. I didn't get to the part where I was going to give my example about arresting a person with long hair for breach of peace because we both were busy with the traffic and the phone wires. I asked him what the charge would be if he arrested someone open carrying and he did say breach of peace.
I have been doing some thinking about the best way to approach a one man education program, starting with my town chief of police. I would like to be able to meet with him, or send him information regarding the law on open carry. I would also like to present him some case law showing that breach of peace cannot be charged if someone's lawful behavior causes a negative reaction from others.
What about if everyone reading this thread did the same in their town? We all say that the police are not educated about the law. Let's turn that into action, and do something positive for our rights here in CT?
|
LKB3rd
Member
| Joined: | Sat Nov 3rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 64 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 10:26 am |
|
bennor wrote:
[
(a) A person is guilty of breach of the peace in the second degree when, with intent to cause inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, such person:
(1) Engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior in a public place; or
Carrying a gun is not threatening, unless you do something besides let it sit in its holster. Like tell someone you will shoot them if they don't let you cut in line at McDonalds.
I have no intention to scare anyone. If they have an irrational fear of firearms, then that is on them. Not me.
People are afraid because they think only criminals carry guns, and if they see someone minding their own business, smiling and holding doors for old ladies, and going about their business, it is a chance for us to educate people in a positive way.
I am confused about why you visit opencarry.org if you don't think we should open carry. People do it all the time in other states, and it is 99% of the time totally uneventful. I do it in other states, and no one seems to notice most of the time, and if they do, they just shrug it off.
What about some sort of public education program, so that people will know it is legal? Instead of making up excuses for why we shouldn't do it, let's figure out ways to make it a positive thing for those of us who want to open carry, as well as the general public who may run into someone doing it.
I am just thinking here randomly, but what about if we got t-shirts made up that say that open carry by law abiding citizens with carry permits is legal. It could have information about the background checks and all that, so that people wouldn't have to wonder in their head what the hell we were doing. It would be spelled out on the shirt. we could do a group buy for members here on the forum. We could spend several months wearing the t-shirts around our towns, then at one point, start open carrying wearing them. I am sure we have some smart people here. Let's think together of things to do to get around this problem.
What about contacting news stations, and attempting to get them to do a story about it?Last edited on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 10:41 am by LKB3rd
|
bennor
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 21 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 10:42 am |
|
LKB3rd wrote: I work for the phone company. Yesterday a dumptruck took out 7 phone wires on a street and we had police directing traffic while we fixed them. I took it as an opportunity to discuss the issue with one of them.
I asked him what he would do if he saw someone open carrying. I asked him to assume this person was minding his own business, and had a carry permit. He told me in CT it was required that it be concealed. I told him the reason I was asking was because of what had been posted on the firearms board web site. He was surprised, and unaware of that. He then said that he was concerned about retention, and I said well let's also assume that the person had bought a retention holster the same as his. We ended up having a discussion about gun laws, and he was actually pretty open to responsible people exercising their rights. I didn't get to the part where I was going to give my example about arresting a person with long hair for breach of peace because we both were busy with the traffic and the phone wires. I asked him what the charge would be if he arrested someone open carrying and he did say breach of peace.
I have been doing some thinking about the best way to approach a one man education program, starting with my town chief of police. I would like to be able to meet with him, or send him information regarding the law on open carry. I would also like to present him some case law showing that breach of peace cannot be charged if someone's lawful behavior causes a negative reaction from others.
What about if everyone reading this thread did the same in their town? We all say that the police are not educated about the law. Let's turn that into action, and do something positive for our rights here in CT?
I too have discussed this issue with several different police officers. Some know that OC is legal others don't. Education police is only one part of the equation. The bigger problem is our fellow citizens out and about in CT. Once someone calls 911, that is where the problems start. Once the call is made, the police will respond. But think about how they will respond. The 911 operator is told by the caller that the "man has a gun", and they relay those four words to the responding officers. So those four words will cause the officer to respond differently than if they were walking buy and saw you OC'ing in a non threatening manner as you went about your daily business. What would help is for the 911 operator ask the caller if the person with a gun is using it in a threatening manner, or is the gun holstered and the wearing going about their business not disturbing anyone. If people were educated about guns and their lawful use then they wouldn't call 911 if they see someone OC'ing in a legal fashion. It would also help if the politicians up in Hartford put through a law that actually said OC is legal.
|
bennor
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 21 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 03:28 pm |
|
LKB3rd wrote: Carrying a gun is not threatening, unless you do something besides let it sit in its holster. Like tell someone you will shoot them if they don't let you cut in line at McDonalds.
I have no intention to scare anyone. If they have an irrational fear of firearms, then that is on them. Not me.
People are afraid because they think only criminals carry guns, and if they see someone minding their own business, smiling and holding doors for old ladies, and going about their business, it is a chance for us to educate people in a positive way.
I am confused about why you visit opencarry.org if you don't think we should open carry. People do it all the time in other states, and it is 99% of the time totally uneventful. I do it in other states, and no one seems to notice most of the time, and if they do, they just shrug it off.
What about some sort of public education program, so that people will know it is legal? Instead of making up excuses for why we shouldn't do it, let's figure out ways to make it a positive thing for those of us who want to open carry, as well as the general public who may run into someone doing it.
I am just thinking here randomly, but what about if we got t-shirts made up that say that open carry by law abiding citizens with carry permits is legal. It could have information about the background checks and all that, so that people wouldn't have to wonder in their head what the hell we were doing. It would be spelled out on the shirt. we could do a group buy for members here on the forum. We could spend several months wearing the t-shirts around our towns, then at one point, start open carrying wearing them. I am sure we have some smart people here. Let's think together of things to do to get around this problem.
What about contacting news stations, and attempting to get them to do a story about it?
LKB3rd, your first six words; "Carrying a guns is not threatening" is the key point I think your missing. Carrying a gun is not threatening - to you. Others will not see it that way and will call the police. I certainly don't see a holstered gun as a threat. But to someone who's anti gun they most certainly would.
I have NEVER said people shouldn't open carry (if I have please point it out to me). For some reason with these open carry discussions we have people like myself who think that while it's legal to do so we should use discretion if we decide to open carry (for many reasons), versus someone like yourself who, it appears, wants to open carry, and wants to disregard the reaction you will get from the police and public at large. As I've said before no one here (I hope) will stop you from open carrying. So long as it's legal, you and I are free to do so. Some of us gun owners just want other legal gun owners to understand that their open carry actions, while legal, may cause unintended fear among the general populous and may cause those who are anti gun to scream for a law prohibiting open carry. You could possibly, and quite unintentionally, get the very thing you want to do, banned by law.
We are lucky to have a choice in this state to either carry concealed or carry open so long as we have the pistol permit. For me I choose to carry concealed when I carry. It's my personal choice and I do so for various reasons. The unfortunate problem is, by wearing a gun on your hip openly you may reinforce the "anti gun" fear in others. I try to educate those who are against guns and against people legally carrying them. I try to educate them to know they have nothing to fear if they see me or others legally carrying a gun. That is what we all should strive to do with those who fear guns. You have pointed out many good ideas to try and spread the word on open carry. Personally I think the best thing for those who want to open carry is to have a law that makes it explicitly legal to open carry if one has a pistol permit. That way there is no doubt as to the law and we can point to this law if stopped by the police, or if questioned by someone in fear of the gun on our hip. My real concern is that people will recoil if they see a large number of people who open carry and they will get the lawmakers to further restrict guns here in CT.
Let me ask you this question. What is stopping you from open carrying since it's legal to do so here in CT?
|
GoldCoaster
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jun 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 34 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 03:55 pm |
|
You've hit the nail on the head. Because open carry is not ruled illegal, it is therefore legal. However! when the first 911 call goes out of "man with a gun" hits the airwaves the local PD is going to come down on you like a ton of bricks which really just emphasizes the anti-gunners perceptions of lawful handgun owners.
If we could ever get written into law that the "pistol and revolver carry permit" allows the holder to carry a pistol or revolver either concealed or in plan sight - then it's always going to be an arrest first, ask questions later.
A holstered pistol shouldn't cause any alarm, but the truth of the matter is that it will, and it's this alarm that will get you carted off with a breach of peace charge.
Do there exist any 2nd amendment friendly lawmakers in Hartford who could promote something like this? You'd think the state would have more of them since CT has been (and continues to be) a manufacturing base for firearms companies and defense industries as well (electric boat, sikorsky, etc).
|
minus
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 04:02 pm |
|
| What stops me from open carrying even though I know it is legal is the slfu and their ability to magically revoke permits. Also last time I checked breach was an offense they could revoke/not issue permits for.
|
minus
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 04:07 pm |
|
| I also believe that there would be a no questions asked revocation of the permit on arraignment of the charge alone. I would love to oc. I have done so in VA and WVA. It is very comfortable and uneventful. How ever the views on guns here are verry different.
|
bennor
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 24th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 21 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 05:28 pm |
|
Minus, thank you that's the exact type of answer I was expecting when I asked what is stopping people from open carrying. It's not a specific gun law that will get us arrested but a vague open ended open to interpretation law like breach. Once arrested you cannot undo that, it's like putting toothpaste back into the tube. Our permit could be revoked for life for open carrying. Heck earlier this week a guy was arrested for walking down I295 in a thong, wig and fake breasts. People in this state WILL call the police on anything they deem to be illegal even though there may not be a specific law against it. In that guys case, I don't know if he was even breaking any legal laws, he certainly was breaking a few fashion laws. I frankly couldn't care (besides laughing hysterically) if he wanted to wear that particular line of clothing, I would only call the police if he was a danger to other motorists. That arrest will now follow that guy for life.
A firearm is one of those things that instantly puts people into two camps. And the anti gun camp will call the police to complain about those of us in the pro gun camp if they think we are doing something "they think" is illegal. Once that 911 call is made the gun owner is already behind the eight ball and is in for, at the very least, wearing some bracelets for a little while while the situation is assessed. At the very worst jail time, lots of money spend on lawyers/legal fees, guns confiscated, and permit permanently revoked. Our problem as legal firearms owners is we cannot automatically assume since it's not "defined" as illegal we should run out and show to the world that we own guns. We have too much to loose if we are stopped and arrested. What we tend to forget is one person's actions with their firearms WILL reflect, good or bad, on EVERY law abiding gun owner in this country in the eyes of the anti gun folks and the politicians. They will use anything that can be remotely viewed as a bad thing that we do with our firearms in a legal fashion as ammunition to call for further restrictions on firearms with the politicians.
|
bradco
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | West Haven, CT |
| Posts: | 68 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 05:48 pm |
|
This is the exact reason why I do not,
We have too much to loose if we are stopped and arrested. Especially this part, and losing my permit for Life, is not appealing, besides, I am okay with carrying concealed.
|
Current time is 04:06 pm | Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ...   |
|
|
|