Don't carry it that way it is illegal for you under 21!
Arizona vs Moerman has determined that what you are doing is a crime. Most people will no longer have a problem under the law as they are 21+, which further means the definition under Moerman will likely remain for those 18-21.
This should not be an issue for those who are over 21.
Since you are under 21 I would go with the older requirements under case law.
The definition for you under 21 would be under Arizona vs Moerman:
Here is my previous post citing why it is a crime, I will partially re-post the important parts:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=6384575&postcount=5
In Moerman the defendant was convicted for carrying a firearm in a fanny pack, something long known to be acceptable in Arizona prior (I remember people doing so in the 90s.) These are fanny packs specifically designed to case a firearm.
In this case it is cited that numerous places people may store a firearm do not meet the definition of case. But many that do not meet the definition of case can meet the definition of "pack" but that this is for off body storage.
Yet the definition of pack then becomes muddied.
Not every specially designed conveyance such as a fanny pack, purse, backpack; lunch box, or briefcase is a
"case" for purposes of statute prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons on one's person except in holster,
scabbard, or visible case. AR.8. § 13-3102, subd. F.
In enacting statute prohibiting the carrying of concealed - weapons, legislature intended to prohibit person from
carrying concealed weapon on his or her person in manner readily accessible for immediate use unless the
conveyance utilized to carry the weapon would place others on notice that such person is armed. AR.S. § 13-
3102.
The way the firearm is carried must tell others that the person is armed. Throwing a firearm in a briefcase to transport it from say work to your vehicle therefore could be an illegal act due to this case law.
Quite strange considering "luggage" is exempted. So you can do so with "luggage" but not a briefcase.
For purpose of statutory exemption for concealed weapons carried in luggage, "luggage" is commonly defined as
suitcases or traveling bags for a traveler’s belongings.
Under that definition what is luggage could change just based on whether it is for "a traveler's belongings."
So in luggage it is allowed,
in a "pack" it is exempted, but
in a backpack or a briefcase it is a crime. Sure glad they cleared that up. :banghead:
The intent of the law is to make sure the way you carry it concealed makes it unsuitable for use as a weapon.
Carrying it loaded in a backpack is most likely a crime under Moerman, especially since they specifically reference a backpack right along with a fanny pack (the item the person was illegally carrying a firearm in) as not meeting the exempted definition of "case" or "pack".
Carrying it loaded and concealed in any manner suitable for self defense is most certainly a crime under Moerman.
So an attorney would have especially cringed to hear you say "Everything you said is exactly what I thought the laws were and how I feel unloading it is completely useless for SD."
If you are carrying it for defense then by law others have to be able to tell you are armed, otherwise you have broken the law.
Having it unloaded and inaccessible would make a stronger case that it was not in violation of the law. Pointing out you want it for self defense just stacks the deck against you if prosecuted under case law.
You may also wish to take a look at the other case law I cited in that post, which may still apply to you under 21.
That is Arizona vs. Adams, which says even a legally open carried firearm can be considered an illegally concealed firearm once you get into a vehicle if the officer cannot see the gun from outside the vehicle.
Whether the officer can see it can also be discretionary, so just because they should be able to does not mean the charge wouldn't stick.
This should no longer apply to people over 21.
