Liko81
Founder's Club Member
imported post
walrus wrote:
First mistake I think. Concealed means concealed, and open means open. A person carrying in a tuckable IWB holster, not printing, raises approximately zero alarms. A person carrying openly at 3:00 or 4:00, or "Virginia Open"in an IWB plainly visible, looks like he knows what he's doing, and though it may cause some alarm, most people even if they notice the gun will assume you are supposed to have it.
However, sticking your gun in a back pocket (even if it's also in a holster) and not making a conscious effort to plainly display or completely conceal, is a signal to others that you are not supposed to have that weapon, and are poorly trying to hide it. That just says "gangbanger" even to many gun carriers, and though legal, obviously does not project an image of a guy who knows what he's doing.
In addition, every disorderlyconduct law I have read (about a dozen sofar)requires intent. You must carry that weapon in a manner reasonably calculated and intended to intimidate or cause alarm. Again, the courts have ruled that a gun in its holster on the hip of a lawful individual is not by itself evidence of intent to cause alarm,nor is the gun carried in a manner calculated to do so,even if it does in fact cause alarm.
walrus wrote:
I have a ccw license. I had my pistol in its holster stuck in my back pocket. I would say it was covered up most of the time by my long shirt. I knew it was visible at times but didn't care one way or the other b/c of my ccw and Ky being an open carry state.
First mistake I think. Concealed means concealed, and open means open. A person carrying in a tuckable IWB holster, not printing, raises approximately zero alarms. A person carrying openly at 3:00 or 4:00, or "Virginia Open"in an IWB plainly visible, looks like he knows what he's doing, and though it may cause some alarm, most people even if they notice the gun will assume you are supposed to have it.
However, sticking your gun in a back pocket (even if it's also in a holster) and not making a conscious effort to plainly display or completely conceal, is a signal to others that you are not supposed to have that weapon, and are poorly trying to hide it. That just says "gangbanger" even to many gun carriers, and though legal, obviously does not project an image of a guy who knows what he's doing.
Sounds like you might have a convert. Even ifyou're still accosted, that manager will know you're good, andas she said she might feel safer with a gun owner around her, that sounds like a person who might consider carrying themselves (outside work of course, Wally World has a no-guns employee policy AFAIK)This is when the manager I had talked to earlier and two other workers walk up to me. She says she is sorry but she was doing her job with the safety of others in mind. Then she says she may feel safer knowing I legally have a gun.?
Welcome to OCDO. That's what we do; educate others around us thatopen carryis in fact legal, and not evidence of any other criminal impulse. Now, here in Texas it is in fact not legal to OC :banghead:. It is a de facto rural OC state; it's not a crime to OC a handgun when hunting or on your own property, and in rural communities this is extended; everyone has a gun, the sight of a gun is not alarming unless the person carrying it is alarming by himself, and even the sound of a gun being shot is an everyday thing; if you have a couple acres you haul some fill dirt to an out-of-the-way corner on your lot and target shoot. SoI think, for the most part, if Texas passed legal OC in some form, Texans would by and large be fine with it.Maybe if people knew their laws and libertiesI wouldn't have to go thru this.Maybe if she had asked me the first timeshe talked to me about my gun or to see a permit, or to keep it covered up because I wasmaking someone uncomfortable.
Disorderly conduct charges are a common intimidation tactic used by police who are against civilian OC. You may find yourself cooling your heels in a holding cell for it, but it would be a false arrest and malicious prosecution resulting in a nice addition to your retirement fund. There was a Supreme Court ruling that clarified some points of Terry v Ohio, including the fact that OCif legal in the jurisdiction does not constitutethe required RAS for a detention. Even if it is only legal when the individual is licensed to do so (i.e. Georgia), the officer must presume the individual is licensed unless there is evidence to the contrary.What do you think? Any thoughts on what the officer meant by disorderly conduct?
In addition, every disorderlyconduct law I have read (about a dozen sofar)requires intent. You must carry that weapon in a manner reasonably calculated and intended to intimidate or cause alarm. Again, the courts have ruled that a gun in its holster on the hip of a lawful individual is not by itself evidence of intent to cause alarm,nor is the gun carried in a manner calculated to do so,even if it does in fact cause alarm.