Open carry story

[Louisiana Carry]

Ok, I'm here now. Sorry I'm late.

(I really wish you guys on here would PM me when this stuff comes up- I need to know about it.)



First off, getting a lawyer is a good idea. Unfortunately, pro-2A lawyers in LA are scarce. I am seriously thinking of going back to school to become one for that very reason.

Anyway, who you want is Ashton O'Dwyer. He understands that what needs to happen is the Departments that make false arrests like this need to be sued. He is in your area.

Next, no you can be assured that you did not do anything wrong. If you were indeed carrying concealed, they would have charged you with RS 14:95 Illegal carrying of weapons. The fact that you do not have a permit, yet were instead charged with RS 40:1382 Negligent carrying of a concealed handgun is evidence of that, to me. RS 40:1382 is for people who are permitted to carry concealed, which you obviously aren't, because of your age.

As you can see, there is nothing in 40:1382 or 14:94 that prohibits open carry. Also, if you had remained after being prohibited or disturbed the peace, they would have charged you with that. However, neither of those statutes apply at all to a holstered weapon on a law abiding citizen.

Yes, open carry is legal in LA. I do it every day. The Office of the Attorney General's web site has been having trouble recently, but I have an opinion outlining the legality of OC here.

There is a contact form on my web site. You are welcome to get in touch with me and I will see if there is anything else I can do. I team up with the NRA Grassroots division at times, and I can drop them a line and see if our State coordinator has any ideas, as well. Wayne LaPierre gave me his email address to alert him to this type of thing, as well, but I prefer to go through channels.

Anyway, get ready for a fight (which I assume you already have done, since you choose to open carry, as I do so often). You really need to be determined to buckle down and see this one through, and by that I mean make the PD pay for this crap. That is one of the places the rubber hits the road. A public pretender is not going to do this for you. We need to get on the horn and get people involved that are willing to help with this.




Contact info


Louisiana Carry Mission Statement

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

Louisiana Carry has several goals. We seek to:

Promulgate and promote needed changes to Louisiana law as it relates to the rights of the citizenry to keep and bear arms.
Provide and foster an online community environment for all weapons and civil-rights enthusiasts in Louisiana.
Maintain an email alert network for individuals concerned about their gun rights.
Raise awareness of the positive aspects of- and need for- weapons ownership, for defense of people, property and State.
Raise awareness of our legal right to openly carry weapons and our prerogative as Louisiana citizens to obtain Concealed Handgun Permits.
Educate the public in regards to their actual legal rights and responsibilities under current law.
Positively impact the revenue of establishments in Louisiana that support our right to keep and bear arms.
Negatively impact the revenue of establishments in Louisiana that disparage our right to keep and bear arms.
Raise awareness of current events as they pertain to weapons ownership.
Raise the consciousness of the Citizenry in relation to the importance of liberty in all walks of life.
We plan to continue working to accomplish these goals as far into the future as we are able, and pray for God's guidance and grace in order for these goals to be realized.

Become a member and join the fight!

 

[Andrewsky]

I don't know if anyone thinks I'm throwing someone under a bus, but I'm not. I just said what I think, without giving advise or preaching how people should handle themselves or carry weapons.

OC is legal in my state, and in my state, the right to carry or have guns is hardly under imminent threat, regardless what the result in Heller is. In fact, in my state the laws are becoming less restricitve over time. Where I live most of the time, though, OC may put me in more danger than CC, it just doesn't make sense for ME.

I'm not a constitutional warlord for the 2d am. I am an attorney, however, and I make wise decisions about what I do based on what I know. I don't have the time or energy to become a test case for OC laws, and I don't have an in your face attitude about the fact I have guns, enjoy shooting them, or may employ one to defend myself if necessary for the same reason I mentioned above as to why I don't OC. If someone else wants to try it out and see what happens go for it. The problem is, as someone mentioned earlier, you may end up with a weapons related conviction on your record and you can look forward to recieving the guns you want to buy as "gifts", not getting a CC license, or losing it if you have one.

Just my $0.02.

What you don't understand is that this young man cannot get a permit to carry concealed because he is too young.

Would you prefer that he go unarmed?

With all the shootings happening around the country we need more armed citizens.

 

[JerryM]

We are all in this together in a larger sense. It is doing no one a favor or to tha 2nd cause to not point out poor choices and unwise decisions. We seldom all agree on what is wise or not.

But we have an obligation to try to help one another and further gun rights.
To just give attaboys when not due does not help and is instead harmful.
We have not flamed the OP, but he made an unwise decision in the eyes of some of us. It may cost him more than he wants to pay in money and legal problems.
It is obvious to me that his actions would cause problems. He may have been willing to confront them in order to further the right to OC. If so that was his choice. It would be interesting to know if he would make the same decision again, and again after the legal problems are over.

We should support what is right and wise, and try to help and correct those actions which are unwise so that in the end we are not perceived as a bunch of kooks with guns. It is easy to get categorized as such when one is pro-active.
Try to use good judgment and do that which is both legal and proper under the circumstances.
Was he better protected by getting arrested or detained and not having his gun, than if he went unarmed? How do we know he was even skilled and had good judgment enough to shoot in a crowded theater?

As Paul wrote,
"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not."

Regards,
Jerry

 

[Zedicus]

Just wanting Clarification.

poor choices and unwise decisions.

What Poor Choices and Unwise Decision are you referring to?

If you are referring to OC, then even if you don't think so, you are technically throwing the Original Poster under a bus.

I'm not trying to attack anyone or what their beliefs may be, or start any fights, but to me and quite likely to others on the outside looking in, these kind of devisions make all of us look bad.

 

[JerryM]

Yes, I was thinking of carrying OC to a movie theater. I guess we will just have to disagree on this one.
I would hope to keep someone else from falling under the bus.
Regards,
Jerry

 

[Louisiana Carry]

CCWers that do not condemn OCers- this does not apply to you.

As an OCer, I am used to all of the "just lay low and maybe the Gestapo won't come for us" people. NEWSFLASH- THE RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE IS ABOUT AS BASIC A RIGHT AS THERE IS- AND HOW SOMEONE CHOOSES TO EXERCISE THAT IS A PERSONAL DECISION THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL HAS EVERY RIGHT TO MAKE, UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND IMMORAL LAWS NOTWITHSTANDING. We are adults here, and unless you are speaking to your own children, no one here answers to you, so you have my personal and cordial invitation to keep all the sanctimonious BS to yourself.

When the day has come that it is politically incorrect to simply carry a weapon- in a day and age where shootings are the daily news- that should cause no other thought in you than "MAN, I NEED TO GET OFF MY DUFF AND START WORKING HARDER AND MORE VOCALLY FOR MY RIGHTS!!" The fact that your logic is so defunct that you skipped that obvious point and have gone all the way to "Man, that was dumb to be carrying a weapon," is a sad, sad state of affairs. You should be ashamed of yourself, and should take that emotion and turn it into positive energy and start making darn sure you are doing everything you can to protect, preserve and FORWARD the RKBA (and all other human rights, for that matter).

 

[Louisiana Carry]

Only cool people double post.

 

[sonyhoppes]

As an OCer, I am used to all of the "just lay low and maybe the Gestapo won't come for us" people.

Good for you. Some of us simply cannot risk the legal and financial hassles of potentially being prosecuted for OC, even if it is legal. Like I said before, OC is legal in Connecticut because there is no law specifically banning it. I'm sure as hell not going to try it in this liberal hell hole and be a test case. This does NOT mean that I don't support those who can successfully and legally OC. In fact, I OC from time to time when I go back to visit family in Arizona.

 

[gym]

Go to court, tell the Judge only what he asks, don't offer any information or story, or what you thought. You should be okay as long as you are telling the truth

 

[Louisiana Carry]

sonyhoppes- Cool.

As I said before, "CCWers that do not condemn OCers- this does not apply to you."

 

[wyocarp]

I disagree with most of the posts on here. Just because open carry catches people's attention and causes a stir is not a reason to not do it. If it is legal to drive a certain speed limit, I drive it. I know nothing of the laws there, but if it were here in Wyoming, I say wear it, because it is legal. Only because it is legal, not because it is more rural. I get strange looks around here from hikers at times while out hunting, but it is their problem not mine. Most of the time they are hikers from other states.

 

[politicalgeek]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=yqMjMPlXzdA

45 minute video on dealing with police by a group called "Flex Your Rights". Mostly about protecting your pot from the cops.

The short version:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=uV0g5B1blqk
http://youtube.com/watch?v=nyokKFIecIo&feature=related

EDIT

To add, just so we are clear, I am pretty neutral on Police. There are some wonderful officers that put themselves on the line on a daily basis. They train hard, study hard and know what the laws are.

Just like there are gun owners that are bad apples, there are police. Too often they get in the news and color our opinion against the good officers.

I disagree with some of the video. Obviously the easiest way to avoid trouble is to know the laws and not break them. There are good points made, however, on how to communicate and how to exercise your rights .

 

[mattmacklind]

Well, I disagree on a few points. I hope this is the discussion board I thought it was and not a collective political action party, too. I don't think its sanctimonious BS to express an opinion here about what I do and why in response to a thread about what someone else does and why, either.

I don't OC, unless I'm in the woods or somewhere remote and it doesn't make sense to CC anyway, and I don't carry regularly either. Is my attitude toward OC so because I don't want to be arrested or have problems with the police? In part, but there are other reasons that I make that decision, and they have to do with the places I go. Sometimes showing a gun makes you more a target than not, and I don't want to be mistaken for an LEO by someone who wants to shoot them for sport. As I said, I know some people who OC in my area. Its a personal decision. I don't make decisions to express my rights in their fullest extent and for no other reason, there has to be some other reason I do something coupled with the fact that the action is lawful and within my rights, but that is my decision. Like I said, I'm not preaching to anyone or giving instructions.

I can understand that the OP doesn't have the right available to conceal and carry. At the same time I hardly think the actions of the theater manager, who was enforcing the policies of his establishment as he saw it at the time, or the LEO's to respond and make inquiries, rise to the level of gestapo tactics. They decided to make an arrest and cite the OP for an offense, and then a prosecutor decided to file an information or complaint after reviewing the report, at least one would hope they reviewed it.

I am also not suggesting that OC is politically incorrect. For me it doesn't fit my environment. Does it offend people in its politically incorrectness? I don't think so, I don't think its a PC issue. The way I see it, guns have a very real effect on people around you, and it isn't always good. For me its not worth the non verbal communication value that is percieved according to the perspective of the other person.

I'm not throwing anyone under the bus, I don't know anyone here personally and thats something else I try to keep in mind when it comes to discussions and posting.

 

[4sooth]

Harahan Open Carry mishap

Comfortador--you have not broken the law in Louisiana---but the officers have violated your state constitutional rights in many ways.

The constitution of the state of Louisiana recognizes an individual right to keep and bear arms openly.A permit is only needed to carry concealed

There are at least four -five Attorney General opinions and two La. Supreme Court decisions supporting this.

The two Supreme Court findings are State vs Fluker (April 24, 1975) 311 S0. 2nd 863. The Supreme Court held that where the defendant wore the gun in a holster on his hip, it had been exposed,except for the portion in the holster, and it had been fully recognizable as a pistol, defendant was not guilty of intentional concealment of a weapon.

"Conviction reversed,sentence set aside and case remanded to trial court for proper judgement of acquital in compliance with this opinion."

More from this same case--"Weapon,although not in full,open view, is nontheless not "concealed" if it is sufficiently exposed to reveal its identity"

State vs Ferrand 664 So.2d 396 (Dec.8,1995)

"Public possession of a openly displayed handgun in not a crime in Louisiana and does not alone provide cause for arrest".

Note--"is not a crime in Louisiana". That means it is not ANY KIND OF CRIME whatsoever. It is not disturbing the peace,alarming the public or any other imaginary violation cooked up by the police.You have a very strong case against the police here for you were totally in the right and they have committed a false arrest for a non existent crime.

I strongly urge you to hire legal counsel and sue for this transgression against your rights for the law is on your side completely.

 

[cobrian45]

Ok, I read this entire thread, then thought maybe I shouldn't post. I don't generally make waves. I left, went to the kitchen and came back because this doesn't make any sense to me. I agree with Louisiana Carry to the T.

I thought these type of laws were exactly what most of us were after. I thought that there was an entire associated site devoted to RKBA. What is with all of the "an armed society is a polite society" type of signature lines if no one really believes in it? If it is legal, it is legal. We should all be so lucky to have the legal ability to open carry. I can open carry on my property here and one of the neighbors might get a little upset. It is the job of the police to tell them that what I AM DOING IS LEGAL. If they need to read up on it, then fine. Their job is to enforce the law. THE LAW. Their job is not to decide that the general public is a little queasy and we're not sure, so we're going to slap this kid with something so we don't look stupid.

It's fine if some of you do not wish to make waves because you cannot upset your lives. I totally understand that. On the other hand, know that there are people out there like LA Carry fighting the fight so that you can have precious rights and not upset your lives.

I'm always confused when I see the "lay low" and "don't upset the apple cart" type of posts on here. They are your rights. Exercise them. If they are violated, make sure you make them hurt legally and in the court of public opinion for doing it.

I'm stepping off the soap box and putting it away now.

 

[jakemccoy]

A appreciate this type of thread.

Hi Everybody,

Threads like this remind me of how a complete gun ban could easily be implemented in America. Here, many people are lecturing the kid on how he should not have done something that's perfectly legal. The lectures are all underneath the guise of helping out. Some lectures are actually helping out. Some are sanctimonious. I’m consciously in the former group. I invite those who aren't in this group to join us.

According to some, the kid not only needs to know the law but also needs to know the general whims and personal biases of police officers. I know the law in my state of California. I have to admit that just being within Cali laws is difficult. Now, according to some, I'm supposed to mold my behavior around the whims of the public.

That’s where my abilities break down. I’m far from being unreasonable. Anybody who knows Cali laws as well as I do knows that the laws unreasonably encroach on my God-given right to defend myself, a right recognized by the Second Amendment. I refuse to allow further encroachments based on Joe Citizen's whims that are unsupported by law.

In a gun ban, we'd actually have laws indicating certain actions of fellow gun owners would be illegal. This thread already tends to prove that we'd do ourselves in under the guise of complying with public whims. In a gun ban, we'd do ourselves in under the guise of complying with the law, a much stronger basis than public whims. If we couple our own actions with the behavior of the anti-gun crowd, we’ll have no chance.

I actually appreciate this type of thread. It keeps me grounded and gives me a heads up of what's coming and how I should conduct my own affairs.

Thanks,
-Jake McCoy

 

[JerryM]

There are legal and moral rights.
I might have the legal right to wear T shirts with vulgar or even porno words or phrases. Some would plead 1st A. But I do not have the moral right to offend as many people as would be offended and let children see such.

I might have the legal right to use vulgar language in a restaurant, but I do not have the moral right to be so offensive to families and others who would be offended.

I may have the legal right to OC inside a shopping mall or a theater, but I do not have the moral right to cause panic to so many people as would be frightened by my doing so.

Folks, this is where rights and responsibilities must mesh. Many insist upon their own rights, but ignore the rights of others. Others have the right to shop or view a movie without the fear of someone shooting up the place, and with recent mass shooting such fears are not irrational.

In addition, the laws can be changed. If enough gun owners are so intent upon showing the general public that they can carry where and when they please and whosoever does not like it can "go fly a kite" there could be enough pressure placed upon the lawmakers to prohibit OC in many areas or altogether.

This is in part what consideration of others is about, or love of your fellow man. You are in so little danger when you go shopping that you have a better chance of getting killed in your auto on the way there. I do not remember any incident of someone shooting up a movie theater.

In addition, if security is your concern then carry CC. I realize the OP was underage for that, but sometimes folks just have to wait until they get older to do certain things.

I say again, that he was no safer after he was detained and not permitted to carry than if he had gone unarmed. He is also under some stress, and maybe worse when this is settled. Even if he gets off of a gun charge he may be found guilty of some sort of nuisance law.
Folks, there is not a BG behind every light pole or car, or doorway. Many are either paranoid or determined to show they can do it and let the chips fall.

Do you only care about your rights, and not the rights of others when it does not really endanger you? How many of you have ever been attacked so that you would use deadly force in a theater or a mall?

If I were a mall owner or manager, and OC caused shoppers to be frightened and complain I would prohibit OC in my mall, or theater.

For liberty to work there must be a balance between rights and responsibilities. Use good judgment and consideration for others instead if "in your face" and in the long term you will be much better off.

I am going to leave it here. Each of us can do as he pleases and accept the consequences of his actions.

Have a good evening All.
Jerry

 

[jakemccoy]

Hi Jerry,

The United States is a republic, not a democracy. We are a nation with a government that governs according to laws. The public's vote to enforce their whims, which you are incorrectly calling moral rights, does not hold legal weight in the United States.

So, you have an interesting theory, but you're wrong. For example, a 6'9" 300 pound muscular black man with dreadlocks may cause fear and panic by walking into some random mall in Omaha, Nebraska. He nevertheless has the right to walk in that mall.

By the way, the original poster conducted himself in a legal manner with respect to the movie theater. It almost sounds like you're thinking of your own story in your imagination and commenting on that. Also, you don't seem to be processing the fact that he has to walk from his car, probably in a dark parking lot, to the theater and back.

Jerry wrote,

Do you only care about your rights, and not the rights of others when it does not really endanger you?

Are you talking about the right of others not to see his gun? Or are you talking about the right of the public to project their own ignorant views about firearms? Either way, please provide links to such laws, thanks.

Regards,
-Jake McCoy

 

[Louisiana Carry]

God help us if they every ratify the "right" not to be offended.

Man, most people really don't understand what rights are.

 

[DRZinn]

Jerry, I agree with your general point about moral rights, but sometimes we have to draw a line and say that when being offended by a particular action is so ridiculous, it's no longer our concern. If someone was offended by your wife wearing pants instead of a dress, would you want her to change clothes?

 

[Louisiana Carry]

The difference is there is no such thing as a right to have your phobias catered to.

An individual may choose to be considerate and cater to people's phobias anyway, or they may not. That is their rightful choice. Not seeing a gun on someone is NOT a right, it is a preference. Not seeing a black person may be someone's preference- obviously they are just going to have to deal. When people choose to go out in public, they are choosing to possibly encounter things that they don't like. How do we determine in today's society where the line is between women wearing pants being ok and flashing people being not ok? The law, combined with private property rights. An owner/tenant may restrict what they allow- that is OK, and should be respected. Beyond that, if I am in a public area abiding by the law- and especially if we are talking about me being prepared to defend my own butt and possibly yours- then you are just going to have to hang your little phobias up, because they are your problem, not mine. That is not me being a jerk- that is the rightful truth of the matter.

 

[sonyhoppes]

Good post, JerryM. It IS a fine line of which we all must be aware of.

 

[JerryM]

Hi DRZinn,

I do agree that there is a line. Sometimes the line is directly of a moral nature, such as my example of a pornographic Tee shirt. That involves absolute moral values. Those are defined in the Bible. I realize the forum does not like mentions of the Bible, but that is where absolutes originate, and I seek to follow however imperfectly.

Others involve the attitudes of society such as a fear of guns, or maybe the dress of persons. There are no absolute values that prohibit the fear of guns. It is not wrong to be ignorant and fear guns. With the media making headlines of each shooting it causes fear and concern among people. Why are many dedicated to carrying a handgun and some would not go where they could not carry, including to Mom’s house at a reunion or church?
Considering that fact, which borders on paranoia, it is not surprising that many are panicked when they see someone OC. In my view that is a moral issue in consideration of others when it is not really necessary to cause them concern. I think to ignore that is to have an “in your face” attitude. I do not think the fear and objection to OC rises to the ridiculous here.

As to my wife and pants, if society in general, not some individual, had the attitude that women should not wear pants, then my wife, by her own volition, would not wear pants. As it turns out my wife (and I know you did not mean to make this personal but just an example) has a circulatory disease that results in the extremities being cold. Our local church does not make a point of it, but believes that in general women should wear dresses, and not short ones. I talked to the pastor and he has no problem with my wife wearing pants. However, she does not want to wear them except in especially cold weather. She prefers a dress and also is sensitive to what others think.
She would not go along with society if it thought women should wear shorts everywhere. That would be ridiculous.

I take the conservative approach to society’s views. I do not think I need to go along with immodest clothing and many other things, but I do want to conform in general as long as it does not conflict with absolutes in letter or principle.

It is difficult to define in some instances, but that is where I stand in general. I do care what others think, and should. I am governed in that by Biblical principles. I realize others do not share my view, but that is where I stand. I won’t compromise values to be like others.

I would hope that in threads such as this, we can learn some lessons, or at least look at things we should consider when deciding to push or exercise our “rights.”

Thanks, sonyhoppes.

Regards,
Jerry

 

[sonyhoppes]

JerryM, another fine post! You have a valid point about comparing a woman wearing pants to open carry. Even if offended, people don't have a "deeply ingrained fear" of a woman wearing pants, but a great many DO have that fear when it comes to guns in the hands of "ordinary joes/janes". This is self-evident with all the "blood will run in the streets" when carry laws were passed. Then we all saw this same thing again with castle doctrine and "stand your ground"/no duty to retreat laws. Gasp! In TX, you can kill someone over property after sundown! Right or wrong, that is how a very large segment of the population at large thinks concerning carrying (and even ownership) of guns by private citizens. A woman wearing something a person doesn't like carries about as much weight as someone not liking my haircut. Get over it because I don't care. OC is a whole 'nother issue altogether because it can cause genuine fear and uneasiness, unlike simply being offended. Someone can tell an off color joke and it might offend another, but they aren't going to be "afraid" and will just be pissed. Good point about enough people getting all riled up about OC and then pressing to get the laws changed and NOT in our favor.

 

[Headless]

I don't believe I just saw someone equating carrying a gun to wearing profane shirts...on THR. Someone doing something that is not illegal nor immoral (carrying a gun is immoral? are you joking me? Why are you even here if you think that carrying a gun is immoral?)...should not be treated in any way as a negative thing - equating it to someone wearing a vulgar or pornographic t-shirts is disgusting. It is his right to carry a firearm for the purpose of self defense, and it is protected by our constitution. If you believe he should not excercise this right simply because it makes somebody else uncomfortable, you are confused about the purpose of rights that are granted by our constitution. Perhaps you think that if my skin color offends people that i should not be allowed in some public places too; hey, what's the difference?

As far as nobody ever being attacked in the mall or at a movie theatre...haven't you been watching the news? There's a couple dozen people killed in innocuous public places who would disagree with your assertion that they did not need personal protection in a public place.

If you're a business owner and you don't like him carrying openly, ask him to leave, or store the gun somewhere else - like the business owner did in this case. Ta-da, your customers are no longer scared by the sight of the gun. However, if you call the police and they make up a charge about a perfectly legal activity, things have just crossed The Line. If you actually support that behavior, you are our very own worst enemy and a superb hypocrit.