The Armed Traveler.

The knife would still be a concealed deadly weapon, if he concealed it. Pepper spray may in fact be a half-decent option, or bear spray even.
 
hmmm....!

Your friend is traveling isn't he? I wonder if he couldn't make some creative use of the firearms owner protection act? He'd still get arrested, but a good lawyer spraying depositions all over the landscape could make his situation a whole lot more agreeable.:D
 
Alright, I met him again the other day. He says he now keeps the gun in a locked box, and keeps pepper spray on him. He says if a cop searched him illegally they would not go as far as to attempt to open it. I am not entirely sure how it would work.

If a cop searches you without your consent, and finds a locked bag or box in your pack, how will he go about opening it? Taking it down to the station? Smash it? If he takes it down to the station, then you will probably go with him, and if that's true, you could vocaly say you do not consent to a search in front of all those witnesses... Would you think a cop would really go that far in breaking the law?
 
IF the gun was discovered on his person in Florida, I believe he would be facing a 5-year felony for carrying a concealed firearm (if he does not have a CHL that is issued by either Florida or a state whose licenses it honors.

I wonder also, why is he carrying a .25 Raven if he wants to be protected?


-azurefly
 
ask him to get a Florida or Utah permits, 30 states recognize those two.

other than that there is no easy answer. Until we have national CCW standards states can make life hard for out-of-state folks.

don't get me wrong I'm not big fan of national CCW since that creates a handy federal list of gun owners. just that the discrepancies between individual states can be a daunting task to sort through.
 
Sum1_Special said:
I believe the law is a bit messed up in this case, a traveler or homeless man is not allowed to own a gun? Even when they especially need one? Shouldn't everybody who isn't a criminal have that right?
Click to expand...

Yes, yes they should. In theory, there are several states in which he can own a gun, he simply can't conceal a gun...open carry is legal in many states. Of course, if he gets a holster and wears his gun in plain sight it might make it harder for him to get rides (and also many states seem to consider any loaded gun in a car to be "concealed").

As it is if he conceals it he is most likely breaking the law in 49 states. I don't recommend it. He really should try to get a permit in a state that is recognized (through reciprocity) in as many states as possible. Granted, this might be difficult considering the circumstances.

Personally I've never understood how any state can restrict open carry. I mean, how loose of a definition of "bear arms" and "infringed" do you have to use to square that with the second ammendment?
 
Springmom, you mentioned that you knew of no state in which he didn't need a license of any kind to carry a gun concealed; did you forget Vermont and Alaska?! :eek: The two states that have it "right"!


One aspect of this issue that I notice is that IF this friend ever has to use his gun to defend himself, I guess he'd better hope that the situation occurs in a far-outta-the-way place where he can leave his attacker's body, and bug the hell out.

He does not want to be caught with a gun he wasn't licensed to carry, standing over a dead body, self-defense or no. I mean, does he have a couple hundred grand to blow on a lawyer? I suppose it's possible to make an affirmative defense ("Yes, I was carrying a gun illegally, but excuse me, because it just so happens that it's what saved my life!")

Any comments on how it might play out if he had to use the gun defensively, and had to answer for it?

My own feeling is, his ideal situation would be that he bags-n-tags his attacker but does not have to ever have anybody know about it...


-azurefly
 
Personally I've never understood how any state can restrict open carry. I mean, how loose of a definition of "bear arms" and "infringed" do you have to use to square that with the second ammendment?
Click to expand...


Comes down to the fact that some argue that the Second Amendment prohibits the FEDS from making anti-RKBA laws but does not prohibit the STATES from doing so.

I think that's an asinine argument, made only by the most leftist-socialist idiot college professors with agendas to disarm the public.

I mean, when it comes to the FIRST Amendment, do they argue that the STATES are not prohibited from infringing on the rights to speak, publish, worship, etc. the way the FEDGOV is?! :mad:

Their logic is so inherently flawed it is astounding that anyone can be fooled by it for even a minute. Nonetheless, it manages to find its adherents. Go flippin' figure. :mad: :barf:


-azurefly
 
Listen to some of you:mad: Bahhh bahhh bahhh.
Some of you are so in the mindset of permission to carry ,that you now associates a CHL as the only way to legally carry a firearm.
Most states make provisions for someone travelling through their state with a firearm, be it open carry, or unloaded and secured.
If you are a transient, yes, you are more likely to be hassled, but if you are clean and not a pain in the ass, you generally will not be harrassed.
As to hitchhiking being illegal in "most "states......... baloney.
http://www.chrononhotonthologos.com/lawnotes/travel.htm

Quit being sheep.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top