OPen carry in CC states

[Quiet]

In CA...

It is still legal to open carry a loaded firearm in non-prohibited areas of unincorporated territory.

It is not legal to open carry a loaded firearm in prohibited areas and in public places. This ban was enacted in 1968.

In counties with a population of less than 200,000; a person can obtain a LTC permit that allows them to open carry a loaded handgun. This type of LTC permit is only valid in the county it is issued in.

It is still legal to open carry an unloaded long gun in non-prohibited public places. Although there is legislation currently trying to ban this activity.

It is not legal to open carry an unloaded handgun in prohibited areas and in public places. This ban was enacted in 2011.


Prior to 1924, CA had "constitutional carry". You could legally conceal carry or open carry a loaded firearm without needing a carry permit.
In 1924, CA enacted the "may issue" CCW permit issuance system to ensure that minorities could not conceal carry for protection.
In 1968, CA enacted it's ban on open carrying loaded firearms in public places to ensure minorities could not open carry for protection.
In 2011, CA enacted it's ban on open carrying unloaded handguns in non-prohibited areas of public places because it frightened the anti-gunners and the anti-gunners could not make businesses change their policies to prohibit "open carriers" from their stores, but they could make the legislature change the laws as a way to make those buisnesses do what they wanted.

 

[NavyLCDR]

I recognize that some people want to make a stand for their rights. However, I believe their position is foolish as it alarms many individuals and emboldens the anti-gun crowd to label us a "kooks". Discretion is the better part of valor!

People like Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King and Susan B. Anthony alarmed many people by their actions and beliefs. They should have just stayed in the back of the bus and kept quiet.

 

[Malamute]

I don't disagree that there is a small segment of our population that is frightened by the sight of a firearm, but for the life of me I don't understand it. The person choosing to legally open carry has laid their cards on the table with no hidden agendas, and as I said earlier they rather should be worried about the criminal concealing a weapon.

I've read these type of threads over time with interest. There's a lot of varied opinons, though it seems that the opinon in the gun crowd has changed a bit over time to be friendlier to open carry.

Years ago, I open carried a lot. It was simply the only legal way to carry at the time and place, there was no concealed carry easily available that I knew of, if at all. I never got a permit when they became available, as the crime rate where I now live is almost nonexistant, and I can have a gun about anywhere I'd want to anyway (always have one in the vehicle, if not on me), though I don't carry in towns much. Yes, there were some looks, and a few comments, but that's life, and were generally from non-locals or tourists. One of the things that was mentioned in the past regarding concealed, and why there weren't permits available, it was considered "sneaky" to want to conceal a gun, honest people didn't need to do that. I think it was an attitude held over from times past, but seemed to be the way the state looked at it at the time. Open carry wasn't a problem for the most part, and loaded guns in vehicles werent a problem.

Just interesting how the outlook has changed. Now, '"normal" people would conceal their guns, and someone that didn't was "weird" or trying to make a point somehow. Glad some folks are loosening up a bit in that regard.

 

[smalls]

That's why concealed carry was originally deemed illegal in MI, but open carry was still legal. If two people are fighting, they had a right to know if the other was armed.

 

[316SS]

That's why concealed carry was originally deemed illegal in MI, but open carry was still legal. If two people are fighting, they had a right to know if the other was armed.

1) If you are doing or saying something differently, believing another is unarmed, than you would if you knew they were legally armed ... then you are behaving badly.

2) It would seem these days that some folks don't care if you are go armed, so long as they can pretend you aren't (because it is concealed). They bury their heads in the sand and just don't think about it.

 

[Skribs]

2) It would seem these days that some folks don't care if you are go armed, so long as they can pretend you aren't (because it is concealed). They bury their heads in the sand and just don't think about it.

Yep. My anti-gun coworker who absolutely loves police officers (and is dating one who carries off-duty) is this way.

 

[larryh1108]

In CT, you get a permit to carry whether open or concealed. However, it is suggested that you carry in such a manner as to not alarm people. If you are legally open carrying and it causes a commotion you can be arrested for breach of peace and ultimately lose your permit to carry, if found guilty.

CARRYING
A permit to carry a pistol or revolver is required to carry a handgun on or about one’s person, either openly or concealed, or in a vehicle. However, the Connecticut Board of Firearms Permit Examiners (which reviews denials and revocations of permits) cautions that "every effort should be made to ensure that no gun is exposed to view or carried in a manner that would tend to alarm people who see it."

So, imagine legally carrying in a McDonalds and a woman sees your gun and screams "OMG, he has a gun!". Then imagine all the patrons running for cover and stampeding to the exits due to the recent random shootings. Now, even though it is legal to carry, just doing so caused a dangerous situation. You did not use common sense because you should have known what would happen. You could lose your permit for acting legally and within your rights. Now, you may have it thrown out in court or you may have an anti-gun judge but the thousands it would cost to defend yourself makes it smarter to carry concealed, IMO.

Yeah, maybe if we all carried openly it would help the cause but who can afford the process in the mean time and risk losing your permit altogether (depending on the outcome of the reaction)? If someone was seriously hurt or killed by the stampede from you exercising your rights then you have put yourself into a deep hole. Sometimes being right isn't always right or smart.

 

[Skribs]

Now, even though it is legal to carry, just doing so caused a dangerous situation.

No, patrons panic to a legally and responsibly carried firearm caused the dangerous situation. In most of these circumstances, the most the police are going to do is check out what happened and then admonish the person who freaked out and caused the mass panic.

You did not use common sense because you should have known what would happen.

I recognize the possibility, but I do not put the responsiblity on the gun owner. It is the person who saw a person legally carrying a gun who didn't use the sense in this scenario. The idea that OC is politically incorrect just shows how far from the 2A we've come.

 

[Just One Shot]

A right not exercised is a right easily lost! If it's legal it needs to be encouraged, the more it's seen in public the more oportunities there will be to educate the masses about firearm ownership.

 

[larryh1108]

Quote:

Now, even though it is legal to carry, just doing so caused a dangerous situation.

No, patrons panic to a legally and responsibly carried firearm caused the dangerous situation. In most of these circumstances, the most the police are going to do is check out what happened and then admonish the person who freaked out and caused the mass panic.

Ideally you are correct. However, in the training class we are required to take to get the permit, the instructor emphasized that the board will revoke your permit if the breech of peace was significant enough to justify it. Yes, the patron over-reacted and is at fault but you were told that open carry can and will cause issues which will put your right to carry at risk.

 

[NavyLCDR]

So, imagine legally carrying in a McDonalds and a woman sees your gun and screams "OMG, he has a gun!". Then imagine all the patrons running for cover and stampeding to the exits due to the recent random shootings. Now, even though it is legal to carry, just doing so caused a dangerous situation. You did not use common sense because you should have known what would happen. You could lose your permit for acting legally and within your rights. Now, you may have it thrown out in court or you may have an anti-gun judge but the thousands it would cost to defend yourself makes it smarter to carry concealed, IMO.

Yeah, maybe if we all carried openly it would help the cause but who can afford the process in the mean time and risk losing your permit altogether (depending on the outcome of the reaction)? If someone was seriously hurt or killed by the stampede from you exercising your rights then you have put yourself into a deep hole. Sometimes being right isn't always right or smart.

Thank goodness I don't live in your state! First, I have carried in many McDonalds in many different places and nobody has screamed gun, nobody has run in terror, and if anybody has called the police the dispatcher told them to pack sand, there was nothing illegal going on because I have never even seen a LEO in a McDonalds.

So, your statement of "You did not use common sense because you should have known what would happen." is completely bogus because all over this country people openly carry guns every day in McDonalds where it is legal to do so and I have yet to see one news story of mass panic caused by it.

Second, my state law says it is illegal to intentionally display a firearm in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time a place under which a reasonable person would feel cause for alarm. Causing a soccer mom alarm does not violate my state law, especially since the Supreme Court of my state has already ruled that a handgun legally carried openly in a holster is not cause for a reasonable person to be alarmed.

Third, at least in my state, your statement of "If someone was seriously hurt or killed by the stampede from you exercising your rights then you have put yourself into a deep hole." is also equally bogus. Put the blame where the blame belongs - on the person screaming about a lawfully carried firearm by a person doing exactly the same things everyone is doing at the location - in this case getting a meal.

"Sometimes being right isn't always right or smart." Thank goodness in my state exercising the right of open carry is 99% of the time as equally, if not more, a smart thing to do as carrying concealed.

 

[Skribs]

If you were legally and responsibly carrying, i.e. not making any motions to act like you're going to draw or making any effort to draw attention to your pistol, then you did nothing wrong.

Should someone overreact, and you get blamed for it, then that would be the same to me as a black person being arrested during the civil rights movement for violating segregation laws. Am I saying that I know what they went through? No, I am a white person born well after the civil rights movement. However, I am using the lesson they teach us, that if a right is morally, legally, and constitutionally legitimate, that it should be practiced without prejudice.

 

[larryh1108]

Keep in mind this is the politically correct Northeast. Also keep in mind that I am not saying this is right. I am just sharing how it is in other parts of the country. This beats having to right to carry at all (IL) and if I am in a rural setting where there is few people I can open carry if I choose. It just shows how different each state is. Right around me is MA and NY. I'll take the CT laws over those any day. I have only been out here 1 year (I moved from IL, of all places) and, to me, it is great that I can carry. I have not seen one person OC here in the year I've been here, anywhere. Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor. Since the general public is not used to seeing a gun on someone's hip, just the sight of one may cause panic or a panic reaction due to the slanted news reports and advocates of gun laws. We were warned by the instructor of how the sheeple act and the words quoted above shows that CC is the smart way to go. Some states do not allow OC at all. At least we have the option to do it where we deem it is an option. Some people have the time and money to push the envelope. I am one who is enjoying, for the first time in my life, the ability to carry outside the home or work. Carrying concealed is not such a bad idea anyways as many have stated.

 

[Skribs]

It sounds, by your words and the instructors, that gun control advocates are winning, and nobody is doing anything to change the minds of the sheeple. It's the same principle as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the military - you can carry, just don't offend anyone with it. If the right is legal, but nobody does it for fear of persecution, then the right isn't actually there.

 

[larryh1108]

you can carry, just don't offend anyone with it. If the right is legal, but nobody does it for fear of persecution, then the right isn't actually there.

The right is there with discretion. How many states have no open carry option? Is it better to be discreet or to not have the option?

Are they winning? Yes and no. I feel that the laws have come a long way in our favor with the recent SC decisions. There's even talk of a nationwide reciprocity of carrying.

It seems the thrust is now in the, so called, assault weapons. The fight will never end but as long as we inch forward there is hope. I feel we are in better shape now, with the gun control laws, than we were 10 years ago. As long as the media is anti-gun and the politicians cry about guns killing people we have a battle in front of us.

 

[Skribs]

The right is there with discretion. How many states have no open carry option? Is it better to be discreet or to not have the option?

If you don't do it for fear of being arrested or for fear people will take the right away, then you have already given up that right. You make the fight easy for the public by not even requiring them to make it illegal. I'm not saying don't CC, in fact I have yet to OC (I liken it to wearing a Speedo instead of trunks), but if there is no law against OC and the person isn't being irresponsible, then they are not doing anything wrong.

It seems the thrust is now in the, so called, assault weapons. The fight will never end but as long as we inch forward there is hope. I feel we are in better shape now, with the gun control laws, than we were 10 years ago. As long as the media is anti-gun and the politicians cry about guns killing people we have a battle in front of us.

Exposing people to responsible gun owners is one way to inch forward. Show them that there are more of us than CNN wants them to believe, that we're not dangerous like MSNBC wants them to believe, and that we're responsible individuals. Even my severely anti coworker would agree that if someone is OCing and someone else freaks out and causes a panic, that the person who freaked out is the one being irresponsible in that situation, which actually makes the pro-gun camp look better to the fencers.

 

[larryh1108]

I choose to not OC because I feel being stealth is better for my own needs. However, in this society, you'd be risking tens of thousands of dollars and you may lose your right to carry totally just because you wish to make a statement. Risk/reward. Yes, many have done this exact thing to give us this very freedom. No doubt. However, unless there was a mass OC day with thousands OCing to show force it makes no sense to do it just because you can if you have no desire to anyways. I'd OC on a statewide OC day if that came about. If they had an OC day of the week to acclimate people to the fact that good guys do have guns, count me in. However, I am not in a position to fight this battle alone. The masses have to speak to make it work.

 

[Skribs]

Choosing to CC for reasons of stealth is a personal decision.

Choosing not to OC because of the potential for some random person to freak out is something I strongly disagree with.

However, unless there was a mass OC day with thousands OCing to show force it makes no sense to do it just because you can if you have no desire to anyways. I'd OC on a statewide OC day if that came about. If they had an OC day of the week to acclimate people to the fact that good guys do have guns, count me in. However, I am not in a position to fight this battle alone. The masses have to speak to make it work.

Well, every person who starts OCing is another person in on that battle. You don't have to influence everyone - just the people you come across. I'd also argue that instructors that say "don't OC because of hoplophobes" are part of this problem - everyone in their class gets into the mindset that OC is bad because someone might get upset.

I'll also point out that mass OC events generally are for the sake of the media, and the media doesn't like them.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Is it better to be discreet or to not have the option?

It is better to not have the option. Here's why. The Constitutionality of a law that says you can't do something can be fought in court and overturned. It's pretty dang hard, without written/recorded threatening statements made by a government official, that you are prevented from exercising a right because you fear what the government MIGHT do.