Handgun Open Carry- Where Do You Stand

[hellishhorses]

The days of the wild west are long gone. The days where daddy taught his sons firearm safety and use are long gone. Urbanization, demographics, and mere population numbers dictate reasonable and prudent decisions and behaviors.

Pure OC will not happen in Texas. Licensed CHL having the option to OC will occur I believe with this caveat. Required basic course completion in firearm safety and utilization Wil be required for CHL and renewals, and would be retroactive to include all CHL who wish to open carry. The CHL will have an endorsement certifying completion of basic firearm safety completion noted on the license before one could OC.

Mark it down. You have heard it first.

Translation: People today are not smart enough to responsibly carry a firearm without the government [thinking they need to] set reasonable limitations.

As ugly as that is, it's true. Think of a person with average intelligence — half of everyone is dumber than that.

ETA: Added verbiage for clarity. Still doesn't change my stance on constitutional carry.

 

[diveRN]

Didn't vote. Even though I wouldn't open carry personally, from the standpoint of law, Constitutional Carry a-la Arizona, Alaska, Wyoming, Arkansas, and Vermont would be my preference.

 

[MPA1988]

Constitutional carry? Where does the constitution mention "carry"?

Another thought. Does the constitution define for us "bearing arms"? If not, has SCOTUS defined it for us? Has anyone defined it for us?

 

[Big Dipper]

Not really. I'm hard pressed to see it. Funny thing is that open carry has been that way for a long time, never regulated. Concealed carry is regulated but only costs about $40 and a few hours of class and this is only the 2nd year with open carry shall issue laws in WI.

Open or concealed you can carry many of the same places except within 1000 ft of school grounds.

Although not "regulated", open carriers were hassled and subject to significant Disorderly Conduct charges by the police until the AG, J.B. Van Hollen, issued an advisory memorandum on April 20, 2009, which said in part:

Under Article I, § 25 of the Wisconsin Constitution, a person has the right to openly carry a firearm for any of the purposes enumerated in that Section, subject to reasonable regulation as discussed herein. The Wisconsin Department of Justice (the Department) believes that the mere open carrying of a firearm by a person, absent additional facts and circumstances, should not result in a disorderly conduct charge from a prosecutor.

The entire letter can be found at - http://www.doj.state.wi.us/sites/default/files/2009-news/final-open-carry-memo-2009.pdf

Texas is one of the very few states that has NO provision for open carry (just like Illinois -- a rather sorry group to be included in). If you are interested in reading about the issues (and lack of problems) in other states, this forum OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum can be quite informative.

The one thing that is commonly noted about OC in those states that recognize it as a legitimate right is almost no one notices. Mostly just kids because the holster is at eye level for them. Then they say "Mommy, look that man has a gun."

 

[diveRN]

Constitutional carry? Where does the constitution mention "carry"?

Another thought. Does the constitution define for us "bearing arms"? If not, has SCOTUS defined it for us? Has anyone defined it for us?

"Constitutional Carry" is a modern term that means one can carry a gun openly or concealed with out a permit such as is the law in the 5 states I mentioned. Per the Constitution, a permit isn't required of a person to keep and bear arms, thus the name.

For someone as educated as you claim to be, you're a bit behind the times, especially for a Californian. The definition of "bearing arms" has yet to be defined by SCOTUS. They haven't decided yet whether or not they're going to hear the waiting cases.

 

[Koinonia]

Constitutional carry? Where does the constitution mention "carry"?

Another thought. Does the constitution define for us "bearing arms"? If not, has SCOTUS defined it for us? Has anyone defined it for us?

Common definition of bear in the founders time, was: to carry.

 

[verge]

Voted Open Carry No Restrictions it is our right and it ought to be recognized as such. That said, in my opinion, even though it is your right and you should be able to, I don't think we should open carry. Just like we have the right to free speech, it shouldn't be rude or obscene speech.

I know a lot of you don't want to hear it but open carry makes some people nervous and it is arguably less safe than concealed carry ... just because it is a right does not mean it is a good idea. Like carrying an ARs into Starbucks ... legal yes, but what did it get us? It forced Starbucks into a position of choosing between opposing groups of customers. That was a dumb thing for us to do.

Smoking is another example, anyone could smoke anywhere then as smoking because less acceptable smokers became more belligerent. Can't smoke in the office, fine I will smoke by the front door. Sitting in the smoking section fine, I will blow smoke into the non-smoking section or how about when someone complains I will just blow smoke directly in their face. Yes, I saw multiple examples of every one of these behaviors. What it got was whole cities turned into virtual no-smoking zones. To be clear, I don't agree with this but it happened and most of the reason was smokers not being polite and respecting of non-smokers.

 

[Vaquero]

13 so far disappoint me.

 

[MPA1988]

Common definition of bear in the founders time, was: to carry.

I CC, so I am bearing arms then right?

 

[MPA1988]

13 so far disappoint me.

Because the militia group think on OC unrestricted is a minority opinion on this site, if they all would vote, and definitely in the state of Texas.

 

[MPA1988]

Does the constitution prohibit the use of a permit to bear arms?

 

[Blind Sniper]

13 so far disappoint me.

To be fair, I mis-clicked. Meant to vote for Option 1, not 2.

Because the militia group think on OC unrestricted is a minority opinion on this site, if they all would vote, and definitely in the state of Texas.

Check your math, dude. 26 votes for restriction/license-free OC, compared to 13 -combined- for the other options. Hardly seems like a minority opinion to me.

ETA: The Constitution itself only limits the power of the federal government. There is nothing in there in favor of nor in opposition to the .fed mandating permits - however, general consensus is that if it isn't explicitly outlined in the Constitution, then the power doesn't exist at the Federal level, and is deferred to the individual states.

Now, at the state level, it varies state by state. I know up here in Michigan, OC of handguns is legal if you have a CCW - has been for years. That law is at the state level, which, when combined with a preemption clause in the state Constitution, means that OC is legal state-wide.

 

[Koinonia]

I CC, so I am bearing arms then right?

You carry concealed, great. I carry rifles openly. Id like to carry handguns open as they are easier to manage.

And originally there were not restrictions or licensing to carry. It was considered bad form leaving home without a firearm.

 

[Big Dipper]

Does the constitution prohibit the use of a permit to bear arms?

I haven't seen a "written" prohibition against a "use of permit" to exercise one's first, fourth or fifth amendment rights either, nor one's right to vote.

Do you also think that those should be "permitted" rights.

If not, what do you think is the difference? They are all inherent rights that the government is prohibited from limiting.

 

[locke_n_load]

Does the constitution prohibit the use of a permit to bear arms?

Yes. Shall not be infringed.

 

[V-Tach]

What is "Militia Group Think"?

The "Militia" is the Citizens of the United States, not some group...

Isn't it?

 

[franzas]

The reason open carry works is for the following reasons:
-competent citizens
-competent police
-state preemption laws

First, don't act like an idiot. Don't be the jackass calling attention to yourself because you have a handgun. Don't be touching it either.

Police know the law; they won't hassle you.

Preemption laws are your friend. I can OC everywhere I can CC, unless prohibited by a property owner. Since it is legal statewide, there is no bullshit 911 'man with a gun' call. If there was, the police will know how to deal with it. Take a state like NC, you can be arrested for disturbing the peace if someone calls 911 because you OC. This is what no firearm preemption gets you.

Now the argument that people have to be 'trained,' 'certified,' 'licensed' or 'qualified'-
In VA, anyone legal to posses can open carry over 18 (ie option 1 on the poll). To get a CHP, you need $50 and an 8 hour hunter's safety class. I have never read anywhere that having to go through all the extra red tape prevents negligence with a firearm. This should apply to open carry as well. As long as you use your brain, carrying ain't that hard.

 

[franzas]

Id like to carry handguns open as they are easier to manage.

Just today-
shirt tucked in = open carry.

Open carry is way easier in a lot of scenarios. One reason why I'm for it

 

[franzas]

Didn't vote. Even though I wouldn't open carry personally, from the standpoint of law, Constitutional Carry a-la Arizona, Alaska, Wyoming, Arkansas, and Vermont would be my preference.

When it comes to open carry specifically, this is option 1 in the poll

 

[winchster]

Constitutional carry? Where does the constitution mention "carry"?

Another thought. Does the constitution define for us "bearing arms"? If not, has SCOTUS defined it for us? Has anyone defined it for us?

I suppose you need the definition of "is" as well?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk