Is carrying a loaded firearm legal?


PDA






WickedXD
October 11, 2006, 01:04 PM
I know concealed carry is illegal...without permit...excluding Alaska and VT. But what about if it is visible...or just carrying it in your hand...its not concealed...if you can legally own one...why not? some say you can carry a loaded gun in a briefcase and its not concealed carry. So if I open carry...is that legall?

If you enjoyed reading about "Is carrying a loaded firearm legal?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
El Tejon
October 11, 2006, 01:09 PM
Which state are you in???:confused:

WayneConrad
October 11, 2006, 01:14 PM
gunlaws.com (http://www.gunlaws.com/)

Alan Korwin's books are concice, and as far as anything about the law can be, easy reading. And they are far, far cheaper than running afoul of the law.

If you can't get your legal advice from a lawyer, at least get it from someone who has read the written and case law in your state.

WickedXD
October 11, 2006, 01:14 PM
Kansas

DRMMR02
October 11, 2006, 01:15 PM
A briefcase would be considered concealed, and thus you would need a permit. As far as it being visible, called open-carry, that also depends on what state you are in.

Refer to this site (http://www.opencarry.org/) for info about your states open-carry laws.

Zundfolge
October 11, 2006, 01:26 PM
Which state are you in???
Kansas.

Yes and no.

Statewide open carry is legal ... in some cities (and some counties) its not.

Rev. DeadCorpse
October 11, 2006, 01:27 PM
http://www.packing.org/state/kansas/

Has more info including a link to the applicable statute.

WickedXD
October 11, 2006, 01:35 PM
so without a permit...as long as you can see that i'm armed its not againt the law?

Zundfolge
October 11, 2006, 01:45 PM
so without a permit...as long as you can see that i'm armed its not againt the law?
No. It depends on where in the state you are.

While open carry is technically legal throughout the state, some communities will still have you arrested for "disorderly conduct" if anyone complains (or a cop sees you). Other communities (like Wichita for example) have city ordnances against open carry (even though I believe that a state wide preemption law was passed recently).

Kansas is a web of confusing and inconsistent carry laws (so get your permit and after 1/1/07 you can CCW).

In general I'd advise against open carry anywhere in Kansas except some of the less populated counties out west (and then only after you've talked to the local Sheriff's office about it).

Rev. DeadCorpse
October 11, 2006, 01:49 PM
so without a permit...as long as you can see that i'm armed its not againt the law?

Technically, you are correct. However, as Zundfolge points out, localities may have "stop scaring the Sheeple" laws they get you on instead.

Check with your local law enforcement types first if you have doubts about your neck of the woods. Be nice, be polite, but insist on an answer and have your facts lined up before making the call. Right down to applicable statute numbers. Better to talk it over on the phone with them than trying to "roadside lawyer" your arresting officer.

XavierBreath
October 11, 2006, 01:51 PM
so without a permit...as long as you can see that i'm armed its not againt the law?Better yet, consult an attorney. Legal advice is worth what you pay for it.

Got to Packing.org (http://www.packing.org/state/kansas/) to see the laws relevant to your state.

carnaby
October 11, 2006, 01:53 PM
But what about if it is visible...or just carrying it in your hand...

Be carefull about that. Carrying it in your hand would be considered "brandishing" and is not legal in normal peaceful situations.

Zundfolge
October 11, 2006, 01:54 PM
better to talk it over on the phone with them than trying to "roadside lawyer" your arresting officer.
And if the information you are given is to not carry even though you know thats not the law, follow it anyway.

Sure you'll likely win if it goes to court, but until then expect harassment, confiscation of your sidearm and risk ventilation by an overzealious deputy (that would suck for you).

Kansas is not "Free America". The statist mentality is very much alive and well there (one of the many reasons I moved from the state of my birth after 33 years...can't figure out why I didn't move sooner).


What part of the state are you in? Have you been here yet: http://www.ksconcealedcarry.com/ ?

Rev. DeadCorpse
October 11, 2006, 01:58 PM
Sure you'll likely win if it goes to court, but until then expect harassment, confiscation of your sidearm and risk ventilation by an overzealious deputy (that would suck for you).

Ye' Olde "You might beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride".

My thoughts exactly. It isn't "right". It isn't "Constitutional". But if it's the law you need to be ready to get smacked by it until we can get things changed back to what they should be.

Personally, I prefer open carry. It's more comfortable, easier access in a SHTF scenario, and it helps with the whole "scare the Sheeple" thing as they get acclimated to seeing other ordinary folks with sidearms.

Jorg Nysgerrig
October 11, 2006, 02:58 PM
It depends on where you live in Kansas. For example, in Wichita:
Unlawful use of weapons.
(1) use of a weapon is knowingly:
(e) Carrying on one's person any unconcealed, loaded firearm, except when on one's land or in one's abode or fixed place of business;
(f) Carrying in any vehicle under one's immediate control, any loaded firearm, except when on one's land or in one's abode or fixed place of business;
(g) Carrying in any air, land, or water vehicle an unloaded firearm that is not encased in a container which completely encloses the firearm;

http://www.wichita.gov/CityCode/Default.htm?code=1487

It's not that simple.

WickedXD
October 11, 2006, 03:09 PM
thanks Jorg...i think that answers my question....according to those city codes of Wichita wich is were i live....I can carry my firearm on me openly...as long as it is not loaded correct? is that what everyone else understands? so i can have my mags on the otherside of me as long as my gun is undloaded?

Zundfolge
October 11, 2006, 03:14 PM
according to those city codes of Wichita wich is were i live....I can carry my firearm on me openly...as long as it is not loaded correct?
Again, you may be safely within the letter of the law, but I guarantee you'll have problems with WPD if you open carry. Period.
(born and raised in Wichita ... left in 2002 ... I know these WPD guys and they are not going to let you walk around with a gun on your hip hassle free)

WickedXD
October 11, 2006, 03:41 PM
thats ok...i get hassled by them all the time anyway...HAHAHA besides I just talked to the city prossecutors office....I FOUND THE LOOPHOLE!!! I can carry open...as long as its unloaded. And I can carry loaded magazine on me also!
No need to apply for a CCW now! this is freaking sweet! and for all you guys that will say well what good is your unloaded gun in case of a BG encounter....
lets just say I'm a real fast speed loader. and who is gunna rob a guy with a gun?:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

280PLUS
October 11, 2006, 03:45 PM
You can load and fire your gun accurately in less than 2 seconds?

and who is gunna rob a guy with a gun?The person who wants the gun, sneaks up behind you and bops you on the head.

txgho1911
October 11, 2006, 03:51 PM
opencarry.org

WickedXD
October 11, 2006, 03:54 PM
what about opencarry.org?

WickedXD
October 11, 2006, 03:55 PM
and yes i can load veryfast...under 2 sec....and nobody is going to grab my gun...they will assume im an LEO.

bigun15
October 11, 2006, 04:03 PM
How do you know that?

Rev. DeadCorpse
October 11, 2006, 04:19 PM
The Kansas Supreme Court has held that the authority granted by Article 12, § 5 permits cities to regulate firearms. In City of Junction City v. Lee, 532 P.2d 1292 (1975), the Court rejected a preemption challenge to an ordinance that prohibited the carrying of firearms, holding that state law “has not occupied the area of weapons control to the exclusion of regulation by cities.” City of Junction City, 532 P.2d at 1300. Moreover, the Court stressed that the “subject of weapons control is such that an exclusive state policy is not necessarily required” and permits local firearms regulations. Id. at 1299. The Court stated that although cities may not enact firearms regulations that authorize what the state forbids or that prohibit what the state expressly authorizes, cities may enact ordinances that are more stringent than state law. Id. at 1297-98.

Gah... this idiot Judge needs to be reminded that the US Constitution strictly stipulates that "shall not be infringed" is the "Supreme law of the Land" the "Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding" and that "the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby".

So NO, they cannot legally, Constitutionally, "regulate" a Right out of existance. Not without tossing out the basic theory of our Nations government and just making it up as they go along...

Art Eatman
October 11, 2006, 04:34 PM
The problem, Rev.DC, is that until somebody risks jail and takes it all the way to SCOTUS, it IS effectively the law in Kansas cities. That's the problem with a lot of these laws: Jail is no fun while your attorneys are spending your money--if you have the money in the first place. Going to SCOTUS ain't cheap.

So, for all practical purposes, yes, they can regulate a right out of existence.

Art

Rev. DeadCorpse
October 11, 2006, 04:40 PM
So, for all practical purposes, yes, they can regulate a right out of existence.

It's gotta get done some time. It isn't going to be any easier tomorrow than it is today.

Zundfolge
October 11, 2006, 04:41 PM
Rev. DeadCorpse, go re-read my post (#13).

We're talking about Kansas here ... and while in terms of Constitutional Theory you are 110% right I must remind you that we're talking about Kansas here!

I swear that left to its own devices, Kansas would become a Socialist Theocracy (and police state) in short order.



It's gotta get done some time. It isn't going to be any easier tomorrow than it is today.
Would be nice if it would happen, but I'm not willing to risk my liberty, meager savings and future RKBA to fight it ... and I would have a hard time asking someone else to do so as well. :(

Jorg Nysgerrig
October 11, 2006, 04:46 PM
It's gotta get done some time.

In that case, why don't you go carry a loaded gun in Wichita, get arrested, and take the fight to them. Make sure you have deep pockets, know some good lawyers, and can afford to take the time to do it.

Rev. DeadCorpse
October 11, 2006, 04:49 PM
In that case, why don't you go carry a loaded gun in Wichita, get arrested, and take the fight to them. Make sure you have deep pockets, know some good lawyers, and can afford to take the time to do it.

Ah yes... And here we have the crux of the biscuit. No one wants to be the first to charge into enemy lines. In the meantime, the rest of what makes this country great gets flushed... :banghead:

ETA: BTW, the next time I go anywhere near Kansas, I'll be travelling up I-35 on my way back to Minnesota. Moving back for family reasons.

wdlsguy
October 11, 2006, 04:53 PM
get arrested
Liberal activists manage to get laws struck down all the time without getting arrested. Why can't we do the same?

Rev. DeadCorpse
October 11, 2006, 04:57 PM
Why can't we do the same?

Because, and I include myself in this, we are a bunch of sniveling wimps who think we have too much to lose to attempt to fight for our Rights.

Wife. Two kids. Mortgage. Saving for retirement.

Not exactly the kind of profile that allows for heroic actions unless any of the above is directly threatened. Of course, by then... it's too late isn't it...

wdlsguy
October 11, 2006, 05:00 PM
I don't know if heroic actions are required. Lawyers (take a page from the ACLU) and $$$ might be sufficient.

Zundfolge
October 11, 2006, 05:04 PM
we are a bunch of sniveling wimps who think we have too much to lose to attempt to fight for our Rights.

True. Not many who are willing charge the machine gun nest with a grenade in their hands.

I can't call anyone a coward for not standing up by being arrested, as I'm not willing to either (mostly because I know that I'd lose ... thats the real problem ... once someone does have the balls to stand up and fight for the original intent of the 2A they will likely be destroyed and whats left of the 2A with them :( ).

Jorg Nysgerrig
October 11, 2006, 05:08 PM
It's true, you may not have to get arrested. You could try with lawyers and money. I don't have an excess of either, however.

MechAg94
October 11, 2006, 05:14 PM
Wouldn't charging a machine gun nest with a grenade alone be bad tactics?

carnaby
October 11, 2006, 05:24 PM
a possible way to approach the laws would be to carry a harmless pistol frame or AR lower receiver, the part that is legally the gun, say in DC. Put it in a holster or on a sling and walk around. If you were inclined to charge the machine gun nest, that's the way I'd do it.

Rotorflyr
October 11, 2006, 05:31 PM
To bring this thread back on topic

thats ok...i get hassled by them all the time anyway...HAHAHA besides I just talked to the city prossecutors office....I FOUND THE LOOPHOLE!!! I can carry open...as long as its unloaded. And I can carry loaded magazine on me also!
No need to apply for a CCW now! this is freaking sweet!

Wicked,
Go for it, but try not to act surprised when you get arrested.
You also realize that the Leo's won't assume your a Leo, and even if they can't get you on a carry charge, they'll get you on other charges, such as inciting, or public nuscence.
Do yourslef (and all the other pro 2a folk) a favor, get your CCW and use it, then loby for changes to the laws that you don't like.

280PLUS
October 11, 2006, 06:31 PM
And while you're at it try a few Tueller drills and THEN tell me you can load and fire accurately in under 2 seconds. You may be in for a rude awakening.

280PLUS
October 11, 2006, 06:53 PM
For your reading pleasure:

by Dennis Tueller

The "good guy" with the gun against the "bad guy" with the knife (or machete, axe, club, tire-iron, etc.). "No contest", you say. "The man with the gun can't lose." Or can he? A great deal depends on his ability with that gun and the proximity of his opponent.

If, for example, our hero shoots his would-be attacker at a distance of 20 yards, he loses. Not the fight, you understand, but most probably his freedom because he will almost certainly be charged with murder. The only thing that justifies your shooting another human being is the immediate need to stop him from trying to kill you (or someone else), remember?

If, on the other hand, our hero waits to fire until his attacker is within obvious striking distance, he may still lose. His shots may not stop his attacker instantly enough to keep him from using his knife.

So, what is the answer - just how close is too close?

Consider this. How long does it take for you to draw your handgun and place two center hits on a man-size target at seven yards? Those of us who have learned and practiced proper pistolcraft techniques would say that a time of about one and one-half seconds is acceptable for that drill.

With that in mind, let's consider what might be called the "Danger Zone" if you are confronted by an adversary armed with an edged or blunt weapon. At what distance does this adversary enter your Danger Zone and become a lethal threat to you?

We have done some testing along those lines recently and have found that an average healthy adult male can cover the traditional seven yard distance in a time of (you guessed it) about one and one-half seconds. It would be safe to say then that an armed attacker at 21 feet is well within your Danger Zone.


As the photo series illustrates, even if your draw and shots are perfect, you are cutting things awfully close (no pun intended). And even if your shots do take the wind out of his sails, his forward momentum may carry him right over the top of you, unless, of course, you manage to get out of his way. And if you are confronted with more than one assailant, things really get tricky. So what's a pistol-packing person to do?

Having analyzed the problem, the following suggestions come to mind: First, develop and maintain a healthy level of tactical alertness. If you spot the danger signs early enough, you can probably avoid the confrontation altogether. A tactical withdrawal (I hesitate to use the word "retreat") may be your best bet, unless you're anxious to get involved in a shooting and the consequent legal hassles which are sure to follow.

Next, if your "Early Warning System" tells you that a possible lethal confrontation is imminent, you want to place yourself in the best tactical position available. You should move to cover (if there is any close at hand), draw your weapon, and start to plan your next move.

Why use cover, you may wonder, if your attacker is using only a knife? Because you want to make it hard for him to get to you. Anything between you and your attacker (trash cans, vehicles, furniture, etc.) that slows him down buys you more time to make the appropriate decisions, and, if it becomes necessary, more time to place your shots.

I suggest you draw your weapon as soon as the danger clearly exists. There is no point in waiting until the last possible second to play "Quick-Draw McGraw" if you recognize the threat early on. Also, the sight of your "Equalizer" may be sufficient to terminate the action then and there.

The purpose of the pistol is to stop fights, and whether it does so by dropping a thug in his tracks, or by causing him to turn tail and run, your goal is accomplished, is it not?

At this point it might be advisable to issue a verbal challenge such as, "Stop"', "Don't move", or "Drop your weapon!" It may work, and even if it doesn't you'll be developing your legal case for self-defense by showing that you did everything you could to prevent a shooting. If all goes according to plan, the odds are that by now you will no longer have a problem, your attacker having remembered he had a more pressing engagement elsewhere.

But, as we all know, things seldom go according to plan and the ideal circumstances previously described are probably not the norm. For example, if this goon tries to throw his knife (or other weapon) at you, what do you do then?

Realistically, knife-throwing is something of a gallery trick requiring specially balanced knives and a pre-measured distance to the target. Suffice it to say, however, that if your attacker is within effective throwing range he will almost surely have encroached into your Danger Zone. This throwing business does create something of a timing problem, for, if you fire after he has thrown his weapon, you may have difficulty convincing a jury that you fired in self-defense since technically you were not in jeopardy if your former attacker is no longer in possession of a deadly weapon. Something to consider, and just one more reason to use cover if it is available and time permits.

Sometime, of course, despite your best efforts, you could find you are suddenly, at close quarters, the intended victim of some lunatic slasher. If you are an expert in one of the many martial arts, you may opt to go at it hand-to-hand, and if you are in this category you do not need advice from me on how to do it. So, we'll get back to the use of the handgun for solving the problem. What it all comes down to now is your ability to smoothly and quickly draw your pistol and hit your adversary, and do it all reflexively. And the only way to develop these reflexes is through consistent, repetitive practice, practice, practice.

Practice so the right move comes automatically.

One thing you should practice, with this kind of encounter in mind, is the step-back technique in which you take a long step to the rear as you draw. This puts another three to four feet between you and your attacker, which may be just enough to make the difference.

Remember, the greater your skill with your weapon, the smaller your Danger Zone will be, but only if that skill is coupled with good mental conditioning, tactical planning and alertness, because no amount of skill will do you any good unless you know that you're in trouble.

Skill at arms and proper mental attitude. that's the combination that will make you the winner in a "Close Encounter of the Cutting Kind".

crunker
October 11, 2006, 08:50 PM
Carrying it in your hand is a realllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllly bad idea. You will be considered a threat and if fellow citizens have any good sense they will shoot you on sight.

MarkDido
October 12, 2006, 07:53 PM
Is it just me, or does anyone else find this entire thread just a little bit creepy? :confused:

distra
October 12, 2006, 08:46 PM
Is it just me, or does anyone else find this entire thread just a little bit creepy?

Just a little. Sounds like a fishing expedition.

WickedXD
October 13, 2006, 12:10 AM
Whats so creepy...that I'm trying to find a "legal" loop hole so I can carry my gun without a permit. Thats not creepy....it's using the legal system!

tyme
October 13, 2006, 12:42 AM
and yes i can load veryfast...under 2 sec....and nobody is going to grab my gun...they will assume im an LEO.
You may want to tell that to the families of the numerous LEOs who have been killed after having their guns taken away and used against them. Also, out-of-uniform LEOs rarely open carry.

It's faster to draw from an exposed holster, and if opportunistic criminals are around, they'll probably be deterred. If determined criminals are up to something, though, you're going to be in serious trouble; they still have the advantage of surprise, and their first act is going to be to neutralize you.

You do what you want, but that's why I will never open carry.

But what about if... [you're] just carrying it in your hand.
In public, in an urban environment? Why would you think for a moment that that's legal? It's certainly not remotely reasonable.

You seem like you haven't thought this through very well, and that's why you're getting a lot of concerned responses.

If you enjoyed reading about "Is carrying a loaded firearm legal?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!