Carry question

Congratulations, Mr. Dobson, you have just gotten yourself, the police department (if this is departmental SOP), and the city into a major lawsuit.
Click to expand...
I'm discharging my official duties - performing a lawful, legitimate investigation to determine if the report of possible criminal activity is warranted. A citizen reported a man with a gun who created alarm for his/her safety. I'm well within legal authority to contact you if you're in possession of a gun in plain view. Whether or not I detain you depends on the circumstances. If you hinder the investigation you may be subject to arrest for obstructing an officer.

The FL Supreme Court ruling does not apply to a complaint of possible unlawful carrying or display of a weapon in plain view. Open carry of a firearms in FL is explicitly prohibited, as well as exhibiting a firearm in a "careless" manner.

Rule 4 of the Five Rules for Concealed Carry applies to concealed carry, as the title indicates. If you're in a jurisdiction where open carry is permitted then universal rules for concealed carry obviously don't apply. FL is not an open carry jurisdiction and Rule 4 applies.

Why would a criminal choose to attack a target that he/she KNOWS is hardened and KNOWS has the ability to kill them...
Click to expand...
You're expecting an attacker to be in his/her right mind. He/she can be completely irrational. He/she can be drunk, drugged, emotionally disturbed, or psychotic. This kind of person may be attracted to you instead of repelled by your gun and the situation can quickly deteriorate. He/she/they can be with a street gang (like the Lincoln Country Boy Crips - as in USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN) and brazenly harass you, short of threatening you, when you're openly carrying because they know you're gonna play by the rules. Or target you first for murder in an armed robbery because he/she/they know you have a gun but you don't know he/she/they has gun. This kind of stuff NEVER happens.

I hope we get to meet in person some day, Mr. Dobson. I would like to introduce you to a group of people who won't allow themselves to be burdened by the illegal actions of police...
Click to expand...
You'd probably be surprised to learn that I'm exactly like you and your acquaintences. Scroll about halfway down this page and see my comments posted under my own name. Then do a search for my name on the Seattle P-I web site and see what else I may have commented in regard to firearms. http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/archives/186508.asp?page=2#comments

Cheers!

Beware the sea lawyer.
 
Last edited:
I'm discharging my official duties - performing a lawful, legitimate investigation to determine if the report of possible criminal activity is warranted. A citizen reported a man with a gun who created alarm for his/her safety. I'm well within legal authority to contact you if you're in possession of a gun in plain view.
Click to expand...

Which does work in Florida because Florida has chosen to trample on the rights of Americans to defend themselves and requires them to pay the state for the privilege of carrying concealed and does not allow Americans the right to carry open or the right to carry concealed without taxing it. However, that reasoning would not work in Washington state.

In Washington state, of course you are within your right to contact me. And, if the call is simply a man in possession of a gun, and I am in possession of that gun, in a holster, going about normal business, then it is perfectly within my right to terminate your contact with me whenever I feel I desire to terminate the contact, which will be immediately. Once it becomes a reasonable assumption that I am no longer free to terminate the contact, AND the only circumstances that exist are a call about a man with a lawfully carried firearm, now we have a rights violation with plenty of court case history to back it up.

Also, I will say, open carry is not, imho, the preferred method of carry 100% of the time. If I was in a high gang activity area, I wouldn't open carry. Gangs do view firearms as a challenge to overcome. There aren't those kinds of gangs in Oak Harbor, though. Now Yakima, I probably wouldn't open carry there from what I have read. I am not worried about the psycho, drunk or drug addict, though... they are going to do what they are going to do and in their condition it will be just as much a surprise to have a gun barrel on their nose from open carry as it would be if I had to dig the gun out of concealment.
 
In Washington state, of course you are within your right to contact me. And, if the call is simply a man in possession of a gun, and I am in possession of that gun, in a holster, going about normal business, then it is perfectly within my right to terminate your contact with me whenever I feel I desire to terminate the contact, which will be immediately. Once it becomes a reasonable assumption that I am no longer free to terminate the contact, AND the only circumstances that exist are a call about a man with a lawfully carried firearm, now we have a rights violation with plenty of court case history to back it up.
Click to expand...
There are a lot of good people who believe they don't have to pay federal income tax. They have lots of seemingly credible documentation to back up their claims. But guess what? People who follow their advice run afoul of the law.

You can be reasonably detained (usually up to about 20 minutes, depending on circumstance) while an officer is investigating possible criminal activity involving you.

For example, a dark colored SUV runs over your mother in the parking lot of Albertsons. You call police. Police stop a medium colored SUV with front damage a few blocks away in the same direction in which the SUV fled. Are police violating the rights of the driver and passengers while they detain and investigate? Maybe police want to drive you to the stopped SUV to see if you can identify it and the driver, but you want to be with your mother until the ambulance takes her away. Now reverse the situation - you're the driver of the SUV in question and you're completely uninvolved with the crime. Are your rights being violated?
 
Last edited:
All I am doing is saying what the courts have ruled. If the cops get a call about a person in LAWFUL possession of a firearm, engaged in NORMAL activities, they have no LEGAL basis to OFFICIALLY DETAIN the subject of the call.

If you get a call that a man robbed a convenience store with a stainless steel handgun, and I walk by you two blocks from the scene with my stainless steel handgun in plain sight, now we are talking about a different situation, because you have a call about a real crime being committed, not just some scared ninny who thinks my gun is going to jump out of its holster and dance by itself.

Now, you stop me because of the robbery call, your legal options, according to court opinions are a little wider. You can legally officially detain me, and because it is a legal detention you can disarm me for officer safety. It would STILL be illegal to run the serial number of my gun, because you are not investigating a stolen gun, you are investigating a convenience store robbery. You can legally ask me where I was two minutes ago, and I would probably answer you, but would not be required to. You can ask me my name, address and date of birth, and I will tell you that information, but at this point you STILL have no legal authority to compel me to show you identification (according to Washington state law). You can then call in the info I gave you and dispatch will tell you the info on my driver's license, and heck, I don't know, may be even able to send you my driver's license photo.

Until you have reasonable suspicion to believe that I am the actual suspect of the robbery, that's about the extent of your legal authority. Because I refuse to show you my ID is NOT grounds for hindering an investigation. The US Supreme Court has ruled that one. According to Washington State law I am only required to show you ID during a traffic stop and/or for the actual issuance of a citation or an arrest and subsequent booking into custody. If I am in possession of a handgun in such a manner that requires a CPL, I have to show you that CPL upon your request, but open carrying outside a vehicle would not meet that criteria.

Then, at the end of our discussion, if you choose to stick to your story that you stopped me only because I was carrying a gun, then I will file a FOIA request and begin the court process. If you tell me, "I am sorry to bother you, sir, but the convenience store was robbed a few minutes ago and we are checking that out", then I will probably say "I hope you find the guy, be safe, good luck, have a nice day." And maybe check on the validity of the robbery story.

It's too bad, though, that the bad behavior exhibited by a few cops who have trampled on others rights such as exhibited here:
At minimum I expect an officer to make contact, explain the reason for the contact (received a citizen report), request identification, request a statement, and check WACIC and NCIC to ensure that the subject is indeed in lawful possession. Normal SOP.
Click to expand...
have caused those of us who are concerned about our rights to have to be PITAs in order to preserve those rights.
 
Precisely, NavyLT. The actions he described there violate at least the 4th Amendment, and are grounds for a lawsuit and termination of employment... and they darn well should be!

If any cop ever runs my gun's serial # for no reason like that, I *will* sue unless and until he apologizes to me in the newspaper (since I'll no doubt be embarrassed in public).
 
All I am doing is saying what the courts have ruled. If the cops get a call about a person in LAWFUL possession of a firearm, engaged in NORMAL activities, they have no LEGAL basis to OFFICIALLY DETAIN the subject of the call.
Click to expand...
The officer is investigating a report of potential UNLAWFUL carry or display. If you're a suspect then it's a Terry stop and you'll be compelled to provide ID. See: Suspects Who Refuse to Identify Themselves

If, after investigation, the complaint is unfounded then I agree.
 
Last edited:
Are we talking about Washington state or are we talking about Florida.

Let me explain Washington state. It IS LAWFUL TO OPEN CARRY A FIREARM in a holster during normal activities REGARDLESS of who is scared by it. Period. End of story. That is what the Washington Supreme Court has declared numerous times and is NOT grounds for a Terry Stop. Just because someone calls 911 and says that the fact that I am eating dinner, minding my own business with a gun in my holster scares them is NOT grounds for you to force any kind of interaction with you upon me. You can certainly come up to my table and request, "Want to step outside with me for a moment?" and I can certainly tell you, "No, I won't I am eating dinner, thank you for the offer."

If ten of us open carriers are gathered eating breakfast together and you get a call regarding ten men carrying guns, you are welcome to do the same thing - come up to us..."Hi, do you mind telling me why you are gathered here carrying guns?" and we would likely reply, "Yes we do mind telling you, have a nice day." I DON'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN LAWFUL BEHAVIOR to you, period.

If you get a call that a guy with a gun in a holster just walked into 7-11 at two in the morning, SO WHAT?!? If it wasn't considered normal for a person to be in 7-11 at two in the morning, then 7-11 would not be open for business at two in the morning.

It is the same as if I called 911 and I said, "There is this guy who came out of Wal Mart wearing baggy pants half off his hiney and some do rag on his head. He gets in his car and it is lowered to just barely off the ground and has weird wheels on it. He drove by me kinda slow and stared at me as he went by and I am scared." What are you going to do? Stop the guy when he is driving down the road and ask why he stared at me? Are you going to verify that he is the lawful owner of the car because he scares me? Hell, that's why I carry a gun is because people like that do scare me! Are you going to address MY fears?
 
The only problem we are having, Mr. Dodson, is that you consider receiving a 911 call about a person, in an open carry state such as Washington, who is LAWFULLY carrying a firearm openly, in a holster, because that firearm scares that person, ABSENT ANY other suspicious behavior, is reason to investigate the person carrying the gun for possible illegal carrying or possession of a gun.

Again, if I am sitting in a restaurant, eating dinner, at 6:00pm, and a person calls 911 because my holstered handgun is terrifying them and they fear for their life because I am sitting there eating dinner with a handgun in a holster in Washington state, absent any other behavior other than eating dinner, then WHO THE HELL CARES! THERE IS NOTHING THAT THE POLICE CAN DO about that person being terrified for their life because I am carrying a holstered gun and eating dinner in a restaraunt.

AND when you come and tell me that person who left 5 minutes ago was terrified and crying and screaming for 911 to do something, I am going to tell you to leave me alone, let me eat my dinner. If you want to me to leave - TOO BAD - unless the manager of that restaurant wants one of his paying customers to leave - YOU as a COP do not have the authority to remove me from private property against the wishes of the owner of that property unless you are taking me into custody for committing a crime.

If you want me to show you ID, TOO BAD, you are not investigating a crime, because it is not a crime to eat dinner in a restaurant with a holstered handgun, REGARDLESS OF WHO IS AFRAID (except if it is the manager of the restaurant) because CAUSING FEAR by carrying a holstered handgun is not illegal in Washington state.

Carrying a firearm in Washington state in a manner that WARRANTS fear, which means pointing it at somebody, is what is illegal - not CAUSING irrational fear.
 
It IS LAWFUL TO OPEN CARRY A FIREARM in a holster during normal activities REGARDLESS of who is scared by it.
Click to expand...
I understand that.

The officer is investigating you for a report, from a third party, of potential UNLAWFUL carry or display, a report over which you have no control. He/she must investigate to determine if the third party report is founded or unfounded. The officer is investigating your conduct, not your gun. If the officer finds that you didn't doing anything to warrant alarm for safety then the no crime has been committed. This we agree.

If there are ten guys eating breakfast and they're openly carrying guns and a report was called in about potential unlawful activity, then reported information and circumstances will determine the officer's course of action. if y'all are just enjoying breakfast, having a good time and the report doesn't indicate anything different, then it's likely that no crime has been committed. But if one of the gang was handling his gun out in the parking lot before he entered and his actions, credibly reported by a third party, warranted alarm for safety, then things will be different.
 
Last edited:
http://policechiefmagazine.org/maga...cle_id=757&issue_id=122005757&issue_id=122005

AND, if the officer shows up at the scene of the 911 call and sees a person eating dinner with a firearm in his holster, he has no basis to initiate official contact with that person. From the above article:

Enforcement Guidelines
Where a police officer receives a report that a person is in possession of a firearm, but the weapon is not visible to the officer, the following options are available:

Engage in a voluntary contact and simply ask the person if he or she has a firearm.

If he or she confirms he or she is in possession of a gun, the officer may ask the person to voluntarily hand it over just while the interview takes place, or insist that they hand it over if there is a reasonable belief that the safety of the officer or public is in jeopardy, or that the person has used it in a crime or is about to do so.

If the person denies having a firearm or refuses to answer, and the officer does not otherwise have (legally sufficient) reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, the officer must allow the person to continue on his or her way.
Click to expand...

AND, in Washington, an open carry state you need to add to the opening sentence:
Where a police officer receives a report that a person is in possession of a firearm, but the weapon is not visible to the officer or is being carried in a holster or other non-threatening manner, the following options are available:
 
Last edited:
The only problem we are having, Mr. Dodson, is that you consider receiving a 911 call about a person, in an open carry state such as Washington, who is LAWFULLY carrying a firearm openly, in a holster, because that firearm scares that person, ABSENT ANY other suspicious behavior, is reason to investigate the person carrying the gun for possible illegal carrying or possession of a gun.
Click to expand...
If there's no conduct to genuinely warrant alarm then there's no potential crime to investigate. (If it's not unlawful to park your car on the street in front of your house then there's no crime being committed if you do.)

If a 9-1-1 call is received that reports anything other than simple carry and display (e.g., you unholstered and did a press check, or you dropped your pistol onto the floor while using the public toilet, or somebody calls 9-1-1 and falsely reported that you did) then there's a potential for UNLAWFUL carry and display that warrants criminal investigation.
 
1-13-2010

Last Activity: Today 08:58 PM
Click to expand...


January 9, 2010, 06:18 PM #1
holt2010
Member


Join Date: December 6, 2008
Posts: 67 Carry question

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hey guys I live in Arkansas and its legal to posses a handgun at the age of 18, but you cant get your concealed carry license until the age of 21. That being said, im 18 years old and i was wondering if I could carry my handgun in the car in plain view, not concealed, but in plain view. My local gun shop said it was ok but i really dont know. Can somebody help me out please?
Click to expand...

I just like to thank you all for putting in the time to respond.:D
 
OP question

Sorry if I missed it but just wanted to touch on the OP's question.

I see that there are three basic issues: Please note I am not a lawyer (IANAL)

1) 18 and possessing a handgun
2) Open carry under 21
3) Carry in a vehicle (without a "conceal hangun license")

So, 1 has been addressed. I have not confirmed so I will go with what the OP posted. Now the difference he has to make is that if an 18 year old can "own" or possess a handgun there is a difference from owning then open carrying one on you (in his car or on his person). Which leads to 2: Arkansas is listed as a non-permissive state for open carry http://www.opencarry.org/opencarry.html

Since he can not obtain a CHL he can't conceal which has been posted on Page 2 of this thread.

Age to open carry - http://www.opencarry.org/ar.html "not determined" so I imagine that defaults to what age a person can "posses" a gun.

3 I'm assuming he can transport a gun to and from a range and that sort but just generally having it in his vehicle needs to be "research." Now, having it near him while driving - be it on his person or near his reach may be a totally different matter (loaded or not) but again you are talking about needing to look that up too.

So, what are the laws for transporting a gun in Arkansas? For someone without a CHL?
http://www.opencarry.org/travel.html
For Arkansas it seems he can open carry but again you need to find alternate resources to support this.

I'll do some legwork but not all of it. There are many others better at it than I am.
 
Aha, I think we finally might agree.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it just took awhile, eh?

Also, in researching the RCWs, specifically RCW 10.31.100, Arrest without warrant, it appears I was incorrect. If an officer received a complaint of potential unlawful carry he/she cannot arrest you if, when he/she arrives, you're sitting in the food court with the boys enjoying lunch and your handgun is holstered in plain view. The offense of unlawful carry must be committed in his/her presence to make an arrest.

I apologize for posting misinformation that has proven to be incorrect. Good job in helping educate us, NavyLT!

Provided you've been positively identified as the suspect, an officer can detain you for investigation to determine if the complaint of potential unlawful carry is founded or unfounded (or might instead be a more serious offense) and forward a report to the prosecutor. Otherwise the encounter between you and the officer is consensual.

Cheers!
 
Wow! Thank you very much for taking the time and coming back to post that! Not many folks would take the effort to do that, I applaud you! Actually, I thought most states had that provision of not being able to arrest without warrant unless the offense was committed in at least AN officer's presence (not necessarily the arresting officer's presence), I always thought that was just a given so, if that's not the case, I learned something new too. But I did know that applied in Washington and maybe that was where part of our disconnect was.

Thanks again!
 
Shawn Dodson,

You are to be commended. Not many persons would admit to being wrong. It takes fortitude to do that.

However, I can see this discussion was based upon a misunderstanding. It happens. Sometimes we are not as specific in our posts as we should be, or we’ve been told something which later proves wrong, and we get into a “discussion” which leads nowhere.

Glad to know you, you’ve enhanced your credibility.
Clay
 
I just saw a bit of misinformation above. In Arkansas, Open Carry is illegal 100% of the time, permit or not permit, unless you are "on a journey". The journey law is subjective, and for the OP to OC in AR under that law would put his freedom in jeopardy.
 
Yes, we certainly did, probably, commit the worst thread hijack of all time, didn't we...:D

This is what opencarry.org says about AR:
http://www.opencarry.org/ar.html

Summary
Arkansas is not a traditional open carry state. They issue a concealed carry permit, so it is our understanding at this time that open carry is not allowed even with a permit.

Firearms may be openly carried in cars only with a permit OR while traveling.

NOTE: Traveling or being on a "journey" are highly subjective terms and are NOT clearly defined in state law.
 
Glad to know you, you’ve enhanced your credibility.
Click to expand...
As long as I don't have to correct myself frequently. LOL

WA law has changed since I patrolled. I looked for my old field copy of RCW 9A, but it appears I binned it when I moved to FL (why keep an obsolete document?). Just a few years ago firearms had to be carried in an opaque wrapper (container?). I wanted to post what the law used to read to show how it has progressed.

Cheers y'all!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top