Another Idiot Gun Owner

[4thPoint]

Ahem.....
If one were to take a look at the statutes posted in the Wikipedia article, I believe he would see that in each and every case where identity may be demanded it is only in concert with a reasonable articulable suspicion of illegal activity.

"... The Supreme court has upheld stop and identify laws. Basically in the states that have such a law the police can arrest you for not showing them ID. Georgia does have such laws.

Err, your pardon again, but no, we do not have such laws. The closest Georgia comes is OCGA 16-11-136 - Loitering and Prowling which provides that among the circumstances which may be considered that the charge is warranted is that

• the person takes flight upon the appearance of a law enforcement officer,
• refuses to identify himself, or
• manifestly endeavors to conceal himself or any object.

Nowhere does GA Code mandate that anyone identify himself, nor that failure to do so is prima facie evidence of guilt.

There is NO law in Georgia that mandates anyone carry identification, the closet we get to that is sub-paragraph (b) of OCGA 40-5-29 which mandates that one must have in his/her immediate possession and display a driver's license upon request by law enforcement. But reading sub-paragraph (a) reveals that it only applies when operating a motor vehicle.

And being the Traffic Code it only applies when operating on publicly accessible highways and byways. You can drive off-road or on a race track all way long without a license.

 

[buckhorn_cortez]

Basically in the states that have such a law the police can arrest you for not showing them ID.

Not true in many states with identification laws. The way a number of the laws read, the police can ask for identification; however, if you do not have a government issued ID of some type, you can verbally provide them with a name and address as identification.

In the state of New Mexico, the statute reads as follows:

30-22-3. Concealing identity.

Concealing identity consists of concealing one's true name or identity, or disguising oneself with intent to obstruct the due execution of the law or with intent to intimidate, hinder or interrupt any public officer or any other person in a legal performance of his duty or the exercise of his rights under the laws of the United States or of this state.

Whoever commits concealing identity is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.

You will notice, that nowhere in the statute do you have to "show them an ID."

 

[4thPoint]

Depends on who defines curiosity. Stop and Identify Statutes
The Supreme court has upheld stop and identify laws. Basically in the states that have such a law the police can arrest you for not showing them ID. Georgia does have such laws.

Since Wikipedia was mentioned, let's look at those stop and identify statutes, shall we?

Alabama

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...may demand of him his name, address and an explanation of his actions..."

Arizona

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...A person detained under this section shall state the person's true full name, but shall not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of a peace officer..."

Arkansas
Loitering statute; not giving identity is a circumstance that may be used in considering whether or not a charge is warranted

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to identify
• No requirement to present any document.

Colorado

• RAS required to detain
• "...may require him to give his name and address, identification if available, and an explanation of his actions..."

Delaware

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...may demand the person's name, address, business abroad and destination..."

Florida

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to identify or give any explanation of actions
• No requirement to present any document

Georgia

• Loitering statute; not giving identity is a circumstance that may be used in considering whether or not a charge is warranted
• No requirement to identify or give any explanation of actions
• No requirement to present any document

Illinois

• No requirement to identify
• No requirement to present any document
• "...may demand the name and address of the person and an explanation of his actions..."

Indiana

• No requirement to identify
• No requirement to present any document
• "...A person who knowingly or intentionally refuses to provide either the person's:
  [*](1) name, address, and date of birth; or
  [*](2) driver's license, if in the person's possession;
  [*]to a law enforcement officer who has stopped the person for an infraction or ordinance violation commits a Class C misdemeanor..."

Kansas

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...may demand of the name, address of such suspect and an explanation of such suspect's actions..."

Louisianna

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...may demand of him his name, address, and an explanation of his actions..."
• "...Refusal by the arrested or detained party to give his name and make his identity known to the arresting or detaining officer or providing false information regarding the identity of such party to the officer..." is an offense.

Missouri (Kansas City and St Louis only)

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...demand of him his name, address, business abroad and whither he is going..."

Montana

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document (unless performing a licensed activity (driving), which is much under any state's motor vehicle laws.)
• "...(a) request the person's name and present address and an explanation of the person's actions and, if the person is the driver of a vehicle, demand the person's driver's license and the vehicle's registration and proof of insurance...;"

Nebraska

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...may demand of him his name, address and an explanation of his actions..."

Nevada

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...The officer may detain the person pursuant to this section only to ascertain the person’s identity and the suspicious circumstances surrounding the person’s presence abroad. Any person so detained shall identify himself or herself, but may not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of any peace officer..."

New Hampshire

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...may demand of him his name, address, business abroad and where he is going..."
• NH also has an anti-loitering statute similar to Arkansas and Georgia which says that giving a name may be used to dispel alarm. However, "... Failure to identify or account for oneself, absent other circumstances, however, shall not be grounds for arrest..."

New Mexico

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...Concealing identity consists of concealing one's true name or identity, or disguising oneself with intent to obstruct the due execution of the law or with intent to intimidate, hinder or interrupt any public officer or any other person in a legal performance of his duty or the exercise of his rights under the laws of the United States or of this state..."

New York

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...may demand of him his name, address and an explanation of his conduct.."

North Dakota

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...may demand of such person the person's name, address, and an explanation of the person's actions..."

Ohio

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...No person who is in a public place shall refuse to disclose the person's name, address, or date of birth, when requested by a law enforcement officer who reasonably suspects either of the following: ..."

Rhode Island

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...may demand of the person his or her name, address, business abroad, and destination; and any person who fails to identify himself or herself and explain his or her actions to the satisfaction of the peace officer may be further detained and further questioned and investigated by any peace officer..."

Utah

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...may demand his name, address and an explanation of his actions...."

Vermont

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...(a) A law enforcement officer is authorized to detain a person if:
  [*](1) the officer has reasonable grounds to believe the person has violated a municipal ordinance; and
  [*](2) the person refuses to identify himself or herself satisfactorily to the officer when requested by the officer.
  [*](b) The person may be detained only until the person identifies himself or herself satisfactorily to the officer. If the officer is unable to obtain the identification information, the person shall forthwith be brought before a Criminal Division of the Superior Court judge for that purpose. A person who refuses to identify himself or herself to the Court on request shall immediately and without service of an order on the person be subject to civil contempt proceedings..."

Wisconsin

• RAS required to detain
• No requirement to present any document
• "...may demand the name and address of the person and an explanation of the person's conduct..."

 

[ljnowell]

If I'm a store owner and some idiot customer comes up to me complaining about somebody's incompletely concealed concealed-carry gun, I would appreciate the ability to politely take the CCW carrier aside and politely ask to see his/her permit to make sure for the sake of my customers and staff that the carry was legit.

There's a polite and apologetic way to do this that I'm sure most CCW carriers would be happy to comply with, and there's a way that would make most rightly stand their ground and decline.

The polite and apologetic way includes the concluding words "And if anyone else gives you grief about carrying a gun in my store, send them to me and I'll sort them out."

Just out of curiosity, what do you do if they aren't licensed in that scenario? None of us want people illegally carrying guns but I could see that situation going sideways if the person was illegal. In my opinion you would be better off saying in a low tone something along the lines of "you seem to be exposed" or possibly "your second amendment is showing."

I can't agree with even a shop owner asking to see a permit. I know I wouldn't produce it if asked.

 

[Tom Servo]

I can't agree with even a shop owner asking to see a permit. I know I wouldn't produce it if asked.

There's a difference between the powers delegated to law enforcement and the rights of a property owner.

Don't expect everyone to have the same knowledge and support of the RKBA that we do. If the proprietor has one customer complaining about a behavior and the other customer being uncooperative about it, the choice is often clear in the proprietor's eyes.

 

[buckhorn_cortez]

If the proprietor has one customer complaining about a behavior and the other customer being uncooperative about it, the choice is often clear in the proprietor's eyes.

...ask the tire kicker to leave the premises and sell something to the one who's a buyer...?

Don't see much difference between them in this scenario. One's a whiner and causing the problem while the other is being judged "uncooperative" about his right to concealed carry.

No where in the concealed carry statutes of the state where I live does it say I have to cooperate with a store owner, or answer any store owner's questions.

In fact, I don't even have to inform a police officer I'm carrying if stopped by one - doesn't give the store owner much to stand on if they don't have a properly worded "No Guns Allowed" sign at the front door.

 

[Tom Servo]

No where in the concealed carry statutes of the state where I live does it say I have to cooperate with a store owner, or answer any store owner's questions.

I'm guessing it doesn't say he's obligated to serve you, either.

Interactions with private individuals are governed by different rules than interactions with law enforcement.

 

[buckhorn_cortez]

I'm guessing it doesn't say he's obligated to serve you, either.

Actually - he is, that's part of his job description "to protect and serve" - at least that's what it says on the side of their cars...

Interactions with private individuals are governed by different rules than interactions with law enforcement.

No - the owner is obligated to abide by state law just like I am. If he doesn't want guns in his store, then there is a specific way that has to be posted.

However, and getting back to the other post - showing a concealed carry pistol in my state is a non-issue as open carry is legal making any type of carry - concealed, partially concealed, or open carry - totally legal.

So, in the case of someone exposing a concealed carry gun - there would be no issue.

 

[Tom Servo]

Actually - he is, that's part of his job description "to protect and serve" - at least that's what it says on the side of their cars.

I was referring to the store owner. Unless that's a weird store.

No - the owner is obligated to abide by state law just like I am. If he doesn't want guns in his store, then there is a specific way that has to be posted.

If we're referring to a system like Texas has, specific signs have to be in place to make carrying a criminal act. However, even in the absence of such signs, a property owner can ask you to leave.