| Author | Post |
|---|
vmaxanarchist
Activist Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | Naperville, Il |
| Posts: | 103 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 24th, 2007 12:12 am |
|
A permit is required to open carry a handgun on a motorcycle. So, shouldn't SD be anomalous brown? Even though it appears the law might have been intended to apply to off-road vehicles. It appears to apply to on-road motorcycles too.
32-20-6.6. Carrying firearm on motorcycle or off-road vehicle--Exception for holder of concealed pistol permit or disabled hunter permit--Enforcement--Violation as misdemeanor. No person, other than a law enforcement officer or conservation officer, or any person on the person's own land or land leased by the person, may operate or ride on any motorcycle or off-road vehicle with any firearm in the person's possession unless the firearm is completely unloaded and within a carrying case which encloses the entire firearm. However, this section does not apply to any person who is carrying a pistol and possesses a permit to carry a concealed pistol issued pursuant to chapter 23-7. This section does not apply to any person who holds a permit issued pursuant to § 41-8-37 while engaged in hunting from an off-road vehicle in accordance with the provisions of the permit. This section shall be enforced by all law enforcement officers including conservation officers. A violation of this section is a Class 2 misdemeanor.
Source: SL 1972, ch 178; SL 1989, ch 255, § 99; SL 1996, ch 203; SL 1999, ch 160, § 1; SL 2003, ch 224, § 2.
|
gsh341
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 30th, 2007 07:20 am |
|
| No, this is just an extension of the law that considers a gun concealed in a vehicle. While it is tough to conceal on a motorcycle or ATV, I can see how this got on the books.
|
vmaxanarchist
Activist Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | Naperville, Il |
| Posts: | 103 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 30th, 2007 07:58 am |
|
gsh341 wrote: No, this is just an extension of the law that considers a gun concealed in a vehicle. While it is tough to conceal on a motorcycle or ATV, I can see how this got on the books
According to the attorney generals opinion open carry inside a vehicle is not considered concealment. So, no permit is required. If this were not true than OCDO would list SD as anomalous like other states that require a permit to OC in a vehicle. My problem is that someone can assume this applies to a motorcycle considering it is a licensed highway vehicle just like any car and OC without a permit on a motorcycle. So this exception should be noted on OCDO and the status for SD changed to anomalous.
|
gsh341
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 30th, 2007 08:14 am |
|
The Attorney General's opinion is NOT law.
The Attorney General gave an Unofficial Opinion on Car Carry on September 17, 2004. The Attorney General Stated that South Dakota Law allowed anyone to carry a loaded Firearm inside a vehicle without a permit as long as the firearm was visible.
The actual statute reads;
22-14-9. Carrying pistol or revolver without a permit--Misdemeanor. Any person, other than a law enforcement officer acting under color of authority, who:
(1) Carries a pistol or revolver, loaded or unloaded, concealed on or about his or her person without a permit as provided in chapter 23-7; or
(2) Carries a pistol or revolver, loaded or unloaded, concealed in any vehicle while operating the vehicle, without a permit as provided in chapter 23-7;
is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
If the pistol is NOT observable and in plain view from the outside of the vehicle it is considered concealed. I have been asked if I have a concealed permit by State Troopers before when they realize I have a pistol on me in my car. So basically, unless it's sitting on the dash (which would be a poor place for ANY weapon) it would be considered concealed.
And I see no reason for this to change South Dakota's Status to anomalous. Anytime a weapon is not plainly visible it is considered concealed, thus concealed carry law is in effect.
This law is actually VERY similar to Virginia's Car law, which reads;
Based on the statute and decisions rendered by the Supreme Court, a weapon is considered to be concealed at anytime it is placed in a location as to be within reach of the person, without the person being required to make an overt act to retrieve such weapon, when such weapon is hidden from common observation. Placing a weapon under the seat, on the seat hidden from common observation, or at any location from which the weapon can readily be retrieved is considered to be concealed. A person carrying a weapon in the glove compartment of an automobile, if the person does not have a permit or otherwise fall within any statutory exemption, is a violation of §18.2-308(A),unless some particular fact or circumstance renders the weapon inaccessible.
Does this mean that Virginia should also be changed to anomlous?
Last edited on Sat Jun 30th, 2007 08:18 am by gsh341
|
vmaxanarchist
Activist Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | Naperville, Il |
| Posts: | 103 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 30th, 2007 08:47 am |
|
Alabama, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire and Ohio are states that would be gold star status except that they require a permit to carry in a vehicle. If a permit is required in South Dakota to OC in a vehicle then SD should definitely be anomalous brown.
However SD has had a gold star status because the law says the firearm must be clearly visible just like Virgina which clearly doesn't require a permit to OC in a vehicle. However Virgina doesn't have a exemption that makes OC illegal if you happen to drive one particular type of vehicle. Imagine if the law said that OC without a permit was not allowed in trucks. Then OC in pickups or SUVs without a permit would be illegal. This would defiantly change the status to anomalous.
Also I want to make it clear that I am referring to open carry on the person. So, that while standing by the vehicle anyone can clearly see the weapon. Is that not legal in SD just like VA in any vehicle but not while on a motorcycle?
Last edited on Sat Jun 30th, 2007 10:27 am by vmaxanarchist
|
Falcon118
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jul 9th, 2007 02:40 am |
|
vmaxanarchist wrote: Alabama, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire and Ohio are states that would be gold star status except that they require a permit to carry in a vehicle. If a permit is required in South Dakota to OC in a vehicle then SD should definitely be anomalous brown.
However SD has had a gold star status because the law says the firearm must be clearly visible just like Virgina which clearly doesn't require a permit to OC in a vehicle. However Virgina doesn't have a exemption that makes OC illegal if you happen to drive one particular type of vehicle. Imagine if the law said that OC without a permit was not allowed in trucks. Then OC in pickups or SUVs without a permit would be illegal. This would defiantly change the status to anomalous.
Also I want to make it clear that I am referring to open carry on the person. So, that while standing by the vehicle anyone can clearly see the weapon. Is that not legal in SD just like VA in any vehicle but not while on a motorcycle?
Dont forget to add PA to your list.. sigh 
|
4sooth
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Oct 7th, 2006 |
| Location: | Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 30 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 21st, 2007 03:45 am |
|
Vmax---Louisiana does not require a permit to carry a firearm in any form(concealed or open)within an automobile as a car is considered an extension of one's domicile and you may perform any state or federal constitutionally protected activity within your personal vehicle.
I have encountered some young state troopers who have no idea what the law is and one of my friends had one tell him he could not carry a firearm in his car without a CCW.This is not correct and required a supervisor to straighten him out.
The local police here in Slidell do not lilke open carry and have tried to intimidate some into not carying but as it is not illegal can not actually do anything about it.
|
4sooth
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sat Oct 7th, 2006 |
| Location: | Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 30 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 21st, 2007 03:45 am |
|
Vmax---Louisiana does not require a permit to carry a firearm in any form(concealed or open)within an automobile as a car is considered an extension of one's domicile and you may perform any state or federal constitutionally protected activity within your personal vehicle.
I have encountered some young state troopers who have no idea what the law is and one of my friends had one tell him he could not carry a firearm in his car without a CCW.This is not correct and required a supervisor to straighten him out.
The local police here in Slidell do not lilke open carry and have tried to intimidate some into not carying but as it is not illegal can not actually do anything about it.
|
M Magnum
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 13th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 09:47 am |
|
I have never been to Sturgis (motorcycle rally), but my brother has talked me into making the trip this year. I have a Concealed Handgun License in Texas and was not looking forward to open carry in South Dakota . I don’t like drawing attention to myself so concealment is my preference. But reading your postings, I have learned that I am not required to open carry but should be concealed.
There is a group in Texas that is trying to make Texas an open carry state.
|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 11:29 am |
|
gsh341 wrote: No, this is just an extension of the law that considers a gun concealed in a vehicle. While it is tough to conceal on a motorcycle or ATV, I can see how this got on the books.
No state except Wisconsin (one appeals ct. decision) considers all guns carried in veicles concelaed so there is no reason to believe the SD AG was wrong.
we will note this on the SD page but I am leaning against down grading state from Gold Star.
|
Shotgun
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Sun Jul 6th, 2008 01:13 am |
|
| Wisconsin law requires all firearms to be concealed while transporting in a vehicle, i.e. in a case "with no part of the firearm exposed."
|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Sun Jul 6th, 2008 02:59 am |
|
Shotgun wrote: Wisconsin law requires all firearms to be concealed while transporting in a vehicle, i.e. in a case "with no part of the firearm exposed."
Yes, though arguably the concealed carry ban statute operates separately from the unloaded/encased statute such that possessing the case within arms reach would still be illgeal in the instance of handguns.
|
Shotgun
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Sun Jul 6th, 2008 03:24 am |
|
That seems to be a view held by only very few here. If the legislature intended a transported firearm to be unload, encased AND out of reach they could have easily included that in the law.
Even the generally gun-unfriendly Madison police have acknowledged to me that they consider it perfectly legal for my gun to sit on the seat next to me, to be on my lap or under my seat as long as it is encased and unloaded while in a vehicle. They added they "prefer" it not to be within reach, but hell, they probably prefer that I do not have a gun at all.
My practice when transporting is to have it on the seat next to me, or, if that seat is occupied it's between the door and my seat. Anyone who has a problem with that mode of transportation will find it impossible to point to something that says I need to have it out of reach when I am legally obliged to have it concealed. The Wisconsin State Patrol website says in it's FAQ:
"What is the legal method of carrying a weapon in my vehicle in Wisconsin?
With the weapon cased and unloaded. Applies to firearms and bow hunting equipment."
I'll add that I consider changing the current WI statute ought to be a priority. When I spent a week in SD last year, I certainly enjoyed the freedom to conceal AND open carry while there!Last edited on Sun Jul 6th, 2008 03:29 am by Shotgun
|
Current time is 07:21 am | |
|
