(PA) Person Charged with Disturbing the Peace for Open Carry

Status
Not open for further replies.
PA Code on Disorderly Conduct

§ 5503. Disorderly conduct.

(a) Offense defined.--A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he:

1. engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior;
2. makes unreasonable noise;
3. uses obscene language, or makes an obscene gesture; or
4. creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor.

(b) Grading.--An offense under this section is a misdemeanor of the third degree if the intent of the actor is to cause substantial harm or serious inconvenience, or if he persists in disorderly conduct after reasonable warning or request to desist. Otherwise disorderly conduct is a summary offense.

(c) Definition.--As used in this section the word "public" means affecting or likely to affect persons in a place to which the public or a substantial group has access; among the places included are highways, transport facilities, schools, prisons, apartment houses, places of business or amusement, any neighborhood, or any premises which are open to the public.
 
What a crock.

Part a4 would be the relevant part, except that moving your gun from one holster to another serves a legitimate purpose, plus I'm sure there was no intent to scare people.

Absolutely not guilty, he needs to fight this.
 
Cruz, of 401 Gordon St., also was carrying two magazines for the gun and 20 rounds of ammunition, police said.
Click to expand...
I'll wager that the officer(s) who arrested him also carried two spare mags, and several more rounds than 20. Two-mag holsters seem to be pretty standard duty wear -- I've been looking for a nice leather single mag holster for a Para Ordnance P12 mag and can't find anything but doubles.

On the bright side, the 20 rounds suggests that he was carrying PC 10-round mags. They should be patting him on the back for not packing an "assault weapon."

This is an idiotic charge.
 
I saw this article earlier in another forum. I sincerely hope the citizen files a multi-million-dollar law suit against that police department. Our civil rights don't exist at the whim of cops.
 
I was at the PennDot driver's license office yesterday and there was a civilian carrying a very much printing medium sized 1911 that even had the muzzle sticking out under his shirt. That's almost my first experience in Pennsylvania as an almost new resident from NJ. He might as well have been a martian if that happened in NJ. It brought such a warm feeling that I can't describe.
Conversely, one of my first experiences as a NJ resident 7 years ago was when I was helping a deaf guy place his order at a bagel shop and the woman right in front of me (behind him) said to the bagel guy, "Why are you taking his order before mine?" (thinking that I was giving my order instead of the gentleman who was clearly having a problem).
I'm just let'in it all go. Freedom even has a smell to it.
 
Beat me to it Lonnie

Allentown area here -------I posted the article on Packing.ORG this morning--then had to run off to the NRA-ILA Grassroots meeting - or else I would have posted here too.

I'll keep everyone in the loop as the story develops.......................
 
From The Morning Call -- May 22, 2004

Police: Man'S Shift Of Gun Causes Concern

An Allentown man was charged with disorderly conduct Thursday after he shifted a handgun from his waistband to a shoulder holster near the federal courthouse in Allentown, city police reported.


Omar Cruz, 25, who is licensed to carry the .40-caliber gun, was taken into custody shortly after noon in the 600 block of Hamilton Street when a courthouse employee saw him moving the gun and called police, police said.

The courthouse employee also told police that Cruz was seen loitering earlier in front of the courthouse and across the street at the post office.

Cruz was charged with misdemeanor disorderly conduct because although he is permitted to carry the gun, the manner in which he moved it ''raised the concerns and attention of persons in the area,'' police said.

Cruz, of 401 Gordon St., also was carrying two magazines for the gun and 20 rounds of ammunition, police said.

Cruz, who was released later from police custody, will be sent a summons in the mail to plead guilty or request a hearing before a district justice.

Copyright © 2004, The Morning Call
 
Something I just realized - they put his address in the article. Is there some purpose to this other than attempting to "shame" people into not carrying?
 
With a name like "Omar Cruz", do you think that perhaps the way his skin was colored had anything to do with it? *sigh*

Something I just realized - they put his address in the article. Is there some purpose to this other than attempting to "shame" people into not carrying?
Click to expand...

Hmm... yeah, that's pretty sleazy, even for journalists.
 
They simply mischarged him. His actual crime was "Public Stampedeing of Livestock.":rolleyes:
 
Boats, I take it you mean there was a grave danger of people being trampled by bleating and fleeing sheeple in and around the courthouse.
 
Lonnie: What are you talking about? I'm ALREADY afraid to carry a handgun openly in a state that allows it!

Even though Virginia has some "liberal" gun laws (and more liberal ones coming in July 2004), I CANNOT afford to go to court for ANY reason.

I know it's my right to "bear" arms, but given the current social and political situation, it's a very chancy thing.
 
Of course the question is why was he doing it in public?

PS..if it was an ATF agent carrying a machine gun while making an arrest everyone would be whining about how the JBTs are terrorizing the public :)

PPS...I guess Im a sheeple, becasue if I saw someone with a gun in his hand for NO REASON on the street Id call the cops. I live in reality, and in my normal world, people dont hold gunsd in their hands in front ot a courthouse

WildalwaysmorefactsAlaska
 
in matters of 'open carry', WA and myself dont share the same views.

but this isnt about 'open carry'. the gentleman arrested wasnt arrested for having a pistol in a OWB holster while walking around a court building and a post office.

i'd give Mr. Gordon the benefit of the doubt and say that he had a momentary lapse of common sense. maybe it was inexperience in carrying a handgun, i dont really know.

what i do know is that, whether i have a IWB holster and a shoulder holster on at the same time, i'm not going to swap the gun between them in open! i'll find a restroom or somewhere else that no one will see me do it.

even carrying concealed, we try to draw as little attention to the concealed area. why? because we dont want to give away to the public that we are carrying.

i bet the person who saw Mr. Gordon with that pistol in his hands, would have never noticed a holstered pistol on his waist. no one but gunny's like us ever bother to look at a persons waist.
 
what i do know is that, whether i have a IWB holster and a shoulder holster on at the same time, i'm not going to swap the gun between them in open! i'll find a restroom or somewhere else that no one will see me do it.
Click to expand...
This advice is probably prudent, but we need to remain cognizant of the distinction between personal preference and legal requirement.

Any number of people criticized MVPel for carrying open into a Barnes & Noble, disregarding the fact that in his state doing so is legal and he was exercising a right. I see this instance as incrementally different, but fundamentally the same. This guy has a license to carry his handgun. He had two holsters. He moved the handgun from holster 'A' to holster 'B.' No threatening, no "brandishing" involved.

Whether you or I or anyone else on the face of the planet would have done so isn't really pertinent. The question is: did he really break any law? If so, is it a good law, or a dumb law?
 
i mulled over the idea of 'brandishing' as i read this thread and the newslink, and i'm certain it wasnt brandishing, since i interpret that phrase to mean "display of a weapon to intimidate".

so you're right, Mr. Gordon was not brandishing.

as far as mvpel's situation, its a whole 'nother ballgame. thats already been dissected and mulched over and over again.

was what Mr. Gordon done illegal? probably not. but it definitely wasnt prudent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Legal trap - domestic violence - attorneys pay attention!
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
138
Views
6K
peacefuljeffrey
P
Lichter
  • Locked
Open Carry in Wisconsin? Think Again
Replies
19
Views
1K
cyclist
C
J
  • Locked
Michigan court rules in favor of teen who open carried rifle
Replies
5
Views
846
henschman
H
C
  • Locked
Michigan Open Carry Civil Rights Suit
Replies
2
Views
449
RDak
R
B
  • Locked
Target shooting a "breach of the peace"?
2 3
Replies
55
Views
3K
Ira Aten
I
Back
Top