Licensed open-carry or unlicensed open-carry?

[anygunanywhere]

In Unlic carrry, can a LEO stop and ask for ID and check if the OCer is not a felon? Or do you allow the violent felons to OC?

Good question.

The closest I can approach to answering this is that if unlicensed OC is the law, why would an LEO randomlly stop you to check for an ID if you are not breaking the law? If unlicensed OC is not breaking the law, would not asking for ID because you are OCing be a violation of the fourth amendment?

I used totravel in West Virginia quite often, Since WV did not honor any of my carry licenses, I had to OC. The first time I traveled to WV, I was in the Caharleston airport. I picked up my luggage which contained my handguns. I was traveling to Kentucky, which did homor my carry license. I asked the LEO to verify that it was OK to OC. He confirmed that it was legal.

I carried my bags to the rental car, unpacked my handgun, loaded it, put my OWB holster on and put my handgun in the holster, all in plain view. As I was entering my car the LEO walked by wished me well and bade me a nice visit.

I am certain that some LEO somewhere will do as you describe, but since I am not a felon, I will not worry about it. I will deal with the situation if it ever happens.

What would you do??

Anygunanywhere

[baldeagle]

Unlicensed, definitely.

Good point C-dub.

Anygunanywhere

In Unlic carrry, can a LEO stop and ask for ID and check if the OCer is not a felon? Or do you allow the violent felons to OC?

Well, the way I figure it, if OC requires a license the police will stop anyone they see open carrying just to check if they have a license. But, if it is unlicensed OC then they have no reason to stop someone unless they are committing a crime. Oh, and I'm not naive enough to think that it still won't happen, but it will cost some departments some money when they do. However, whether a person is violent or not is irrelevant. If they are not committing a crime at that moment then what's the problem whether they OC or CC without a license?

I also think that if and when OC is legal in Texas that a license will be required. Having it be unlicensed is JMHO.

Not sure I agree with your logic. Let's rephrase it, shall we? If driving requires a license, the police will stop anyone they see driving just to check if they have a license.

Nope, that doesn't happen now, so I see no reason for the police to change their tactics and procedures. If you're driving erratically or breaking the law, you get stopped and they ask for your license. If you're carrying erratically or breaking the law while carrying, you get stopped and they ask you for your license. If OC is unlicensed, they'll ask you for your ID.

[Beiruty]

Sure i would not worry about it. i will present ID/CHL/OCL as`required. Say a known felon was seen OC someone who knew the felon called and reported the guy, felon with a gun. There is a need for the responding LEOs to stip and ID said man with a gun.

Another issue is disarming the OCer by LEO. if CHLer can be disarmed why not OCer in normal contact by LEO?

I watched video on the net for a guy who was called by his girfriend to come and video tape a normal traffic stop, the guy came and he was OC and LEO did not like the interference and called for backup and the backup LEO had a hard time to ask for ID from the OC. It was not fun and that could have escalated easily.

[C-dub]

Not sure I agree with your logic. Let's rephrase it, shall we? If driving requires a license, the police will stop anyone they see driving just to check if they have a license.

Nope, that doesn't happen now, so I see no reason for the police to change their tactics and procedures. If you're driving erratically or breaking the law, you get stopped and they ask for your license. If you're carrying erratically or breaking the law while carrying, you get stopped and they ask you for your license. If OC is unlicensed, they'll ask you for your ID.

I see your point and it may not happen very much or at all. And it might even be illegal for an officer to stop someone in Texas just to ask for a license or ID without that person already having broken some law. Except of course, if they are stopping everyone like a drunk checkpoint or something. Are those even really legal? Never mind, that's another topic.

[srothstein]

Not sure I agree with your logic. Let's rephrase it, shall we? If driving requires a license, the police will stop anyone they see driving just to check if they have a license.

Nope, that doesn't happen now, so I see no reason for the police to change their tactics and procedures. If you're driving erratically or breaking the law, you get stopped and they ask for your license. If you're carrying erratically or breaking the law while carrying, you get stopped and they ask you for your license. If OC is unlicensed, they'll ask you for your ID.

That does happen in other states. It happened quite a bit until someone fought it to the SCOTUS. All it would take is a state law describing the process (which has been introduced a couple times)to make it legal again.

I voted unlicensed because I want to see Chapter 46 (and 18 USC 921 through 931) repealed in its entirety. But I will happily accept licensed carry as a small first step.

[jimlongley]

Being in favor of Vermont style carry, everywhere of course, but starting in Texas if the whole US can't be accomplished in one fell swoop, and that would be unlicensed.

Working around the house today, twice I had to go get items to complete the project at hand, and that meant setting up concealment that I would not have to have done if I could just get in the car and go. The one time I had to go all the way back in the house. Not that I'm lazy, but it would have been more convenient and saved me about five minutes. OTOH, I would have to wonder about my workplace's no weapons policy when I'm not working and just show up to buy Christmas lights.

[stash]

I support OC if for no other reason the problem with printing/unintentional failure to conceal problem that we have seen here in the past. I assume OC would eliminate these possible problems.

Oops - I think CHL should be required for OC as opposed to no license.

[anygunanywhere]

I support OC if for no other reason the problem with printing/unintentional failure to conceal problem that we have seen here in the past. I assume OC would eliminate these possible problems.

Oops - I think CHL should be required for OC as opposed to no license.

Neither printing nor unintentional faillure to conceal are offenses under state law. How can they be a problem if they are not illegal?

Anygunanywhere

[Oldgringo]

I support OC if for no other reason the problem with printing/unintentional failure to conceal problem that we have seen here in the past. I assume OC would eliminate these possible problems.

Oops - I think CHL should be required for OC as opposed to no license.

Neither printing nor unintentional faillure to conceal are offenses under state law. How can they be a problem if they are not illegal?

Anygunanywhere

You reckon that the problem might lie in convincing the LEO AND the judge that the exposures weren't intentional?

[Ziran]

Licensed OC is just asking for LE harassment.

[Teamless]

Licensed OC is just asking for LE harassment.

Just the same way licensed concealed carry asked for LE harassment?

does that mean that UNlicensed OC is NOT asking for LE harassment?

[stash]

I support OC if for no other reason the problem with printing/unintentional failure to conceal problem that we have seen here in the past. I assume OC would eliminate these possible problems.

Oops - I think CHL should be required for OC as opposed to no license.

Neither printing nor unintentional faillure to conceal are offenses under state law. How can they be a problem if they are not illegal?

Anygunanywhere

You reckon that the problem might lie in convincing the LEO AND the judge that the exposures weren't intentional?

Yeppers - I know they are not illegal but If I remember correctly, someone here (can't remember his screen name) this past summer had problems with the law when he had an unintentional failure to conceal.

On second thought, maybe it does not happen often enough to be concerned about.

Stan

[hangfour]

I support licensed open-carry. There is something comforting to me knowing that CHL'ers have been vetted and have at least a little training in the use of weapons. I went to the tree lighting at the Texas capitol last night and needed to use the bathroom ... I saved a lot of time going through the CHL line and not through the metal detector (some were being wanded). But my real thrill came from knowing that our state trusts us CHL'ers to carry loaded weapons in our capitol. I can't imagine that they (or even I) would be comfortable with 'just anyone' carrying open in the capitol.

[Teamless]

I am against unlicensed OC, if OC has to happen at all, I would prefer licensed.

I guess I am concerned a bit however: what If licensed open carry were made into law. And OC became pretty 'normal', where people stopped having the "shock factor' of seeing guns all over place, there are 2 issues that I have (1 is for Licensed and 1 is for OC in general).
1 - If licensed OC is law, what then stops others without the license to OC? yes, you could say the same for CC, but at least with CC, people do not see it. if OC, then other 'posers' or even criminals could OC and blend in with law abiding OC'ers.
2 - for general OC, what happens when someone has a hip holster, and then throws a jacket on, they are then CC and unless they are licensed for CC, they are now breaking the law. I would guess that normal law abiding people would then get jammed up for breaking the law.

[Oldgringo]

Just because you see someone driving a car, that doesn't mean that that driver is licensed and insured. The same goes for OC.

IMO, OC, licensed or otherwise, is much ado about not much. In our travels where OC is legal, we just haven't seen any civilian OC in either the rural areas and certainly not in the metro areas. Any 2A RKBA arguments notwithstanding, OC is not necessary and if passed, OC won't be widely seen after the new wears off. What, in all liklihood, will be seen is more 30.06 and/or "gunbuster" signs. Again, JMO.