Open carry in vehicles

[smokejensen]

I was going to write a post addressing this very issue. It was going to be titled:
SB17. DUDD on arrival.
The open carry of a pistol in a vehicle will still be illegal despite all of the tongue and cheek verbal twistifications(new word) . I too have a Grassburr mounted holster in my truck.



As soon as I read the analysis of SB 17 I knew its clear meaning. Although I have no earthly Idea what is going through Sen. Estes melon. I can guess he was trying to ensure that there wouldn't be a rash of gun waving. You know how people get when the government grants the peons a new freedom(/sarc). Why else would you create a class A misdemeanor if not to give the police a tool to keep people in check? He might also be thinking, man, my name is on this bill. What can I do to thwart any political insults by the left should one of these open carry goofballs have themselves an accident?
In any event I believe locke_n_load has a simple but elegant solution when he wrote:
"When does this go for a vote?
And I really hope they change "belt or shoulder holster" to "holster" and no retention requirement, ......"
Oh well. Maybe one day our betters will let us have our pre Reconstruction rights back.

[locke_n_load]

My bad...it was Locke_n_load that was wanting the steering column thing...

And I appreciate it, now that holster would just need some retention according to the law as it is now... sigh.

I'm going to write Estes with my concerns for this licensed bill. The only other gripe I have is LEO asking for license every time they want. That does not seem right to me, but during the hearing I heard numerous folks state that LEO could walk up and check for a handgun license for anyone open carrying.

So my gripes are:
Change "belt or shoulder holster" to just say "holster"
No retention requirement, since there is no standard and we aren't chasing criminals all day like cops
Provision to keep LEO from asking for license just because they want to

I'm all for Constitutional Carry, but if we get licensed carry, it needs to be right.

[smokejensen]

"And I appreciate it, now that holster would just need some retention according to the law as it is now... sigh."
If you'll notice in picture number 3 the holster has an adjustable snapping retention strap.
As far as being stopped by LEOs for your license, well that's what come with licensure. The odds of getting that changed before it become law are less than those of winning the powerball lottery.
Maybe in 20 years, you know after we've proven ourselves yet again to be responsible.
Heck. Even if by some miracle " Constitutional carry " we're to pass I'd bet you'd be stopped be LEOs for an ID check. That's just going to be a fact of life until cops and the public become used to it.

[RogueUSMC]

My bad...it was Locke_n_load that was wanting the steering column thing...

And I appreciate it, now that holster would just need some retention according to the law as it is now... sigh.

I'm going to write Estes with my concerns for this licensed bill. The only other gripe I have is LEO asking for license every time they want. That does not seem right to me, but during the hearing I heard numerous folks state that LEO could walk up and check for a handgun license for anyone open carrying.

So my gripes are:
Change "belt or shoulder holster" to just say "holster"
No retention requirement, since there is no standard and we aren't chasing criminals all day like cops
Provision to keep LEO from asking for license just because they want to

I'm all for Constitutional Carry, but if we get licensed carry, it needs to be right.

I don't have one of those but it appears that you might be able to mount any single loop holster to it...like a cheap Uncle Mike's with a thumb break.

[smokejensen]

I don't have one of those but it appears that you might be able to mount any single loop holster to it...like a cheap Uncle Mike's with a thumb break.

If you're referring to the grassburr holster, they have special mating adapters sewn into the holster itself and no loops.
https://www.grassburr.com/catalog/mountable-holsters
Edit:
They are rock solid. I have one in each vehicle as well as my 4 wheeler.

[Ruark]

As far as being stopped by LEOs for your license, well that's what come with licensure. The odds of getting that changed before it become law are less than those of winning the powerball lottery.

Whoa... it's my understanding that that is one of the amendments that's going to be proposed; it's not (yet) part of SB 17.

[smokejensen]

As far as being stopped by LEOs for your license, well that's what come with licensure. The odds of getting that changed before it become law are less than those of winning the powerball lottery.

Whoa... it's my understanding that that is one of the amendments that's going to be proposed; it's not (yet) part of SB 17.

Even if amended it would not stop a determined LEO from creating a pretext to check your license. An LEO is not supposed to be able to stop you while your walking down the street and demand ID either. But they do for any contrived reason. It'll be no different for CHLs...er...HLs while open carrying.

[Ruark]

As far as being stopped by LEOs for your license, well that's what come with licensure. The odds of getting that changed before it become law are less than those of winning the powerball lottery.

Whoa... it's my understanding that that is one of the amendments that's going to be proposed; it's not (yet) part of SB 17.

Even if amended it would not stop a determined LEO from creating a pretext to check your license. An LEO is not supposed to be able to stop you while your walking down the street and demand ID either. But they do for any contrived reason. It'll be no different for CHLs...er...HLs while open carrying.

Would you have any legal recourse if such a thing were to happen? If that pretext were CLEARLY fictitious and could easily be challenged in court, could you sue for "false detention" or whatever the correct label would be?

Our disdain for Grisham notwithstanding, that video of what happened to him sends shivers down my spine.

[smokejensen]

As far as being stopped by LEOs for your license, well that's what come with licensure. The odds of getting that changed before it become law are less than those of winning the powerball lottery.

Whoa... it's my understanding that that is one of the amendments that's going to be proposed; it's not (yet) part of SB 17.

Even if amended it would not stop a determined LEO from creating a pretext to check your license. An LEO is not supposed to be able to stop you while your walking down the street and demand ID either. But they do for any contrived reason. It'll be no different for CHLs...er...HLs while open carrying.

Would you have any legal recourse if such a thing were to happen? If that pretext were CLEARLY fictitious and could easily be challenged in court, could you sue for "false detention" or whatever the correct label would be?

Our disdain for Grisham notwithstanding, that video of what happened to him sends shivers down my spine.

Disclaimer.IANAL.
There is always recourse of course. But the success of your recourse is directly related to 1.) the depth of your pockets 2.) any witness's, both human and video 3.) the ability to keep your mouth shut and most importantly 4.) an honest judge.

[cb1000rider]

Would you have any legal recourse if such a thing were to happen? If that pretext were CLEARLY fictitious and could easily be challenged in court, could you sue for "false detention" or whatever the correct label would be?
Our disdain for Grisham notwithstanding, that video of what happened to him sends shivers down my spine.

Looking at the Grisham case:
1) No camera, no case. He recorded the incident. Without that camera, it's his word against the perspectives of two officers. He'd lose.
2) Even with the camera, he lost. IMHO you're not going to get constitutionalists on the jury. Lots of people are going to find it very legal to stop and demand ID of someone carrying a rifle. We all know that's NOT the law and it shouldn't work that way, but it does work that way.

I was shocked that the DA proceeded to prosecute Grisham - to me there was no legal justification for the basis of that encounter. The DA got what he was after.

Remember, you're essentially arguing about what created suspicion from the officers perspective. You're not going to get "clearly fictitious" unless an officer picks a tangible reason that can be proven baseless in fact. Something like - he was constantly looking back - or some other "behavior" based queue is just testimony...

Some OC states protect from this by stating in legislation that OC itself is not enough pretext to stop someone. That language should not be necessary, but if more than one state has it, they're trying to solve a problem.

[JKTex]

I'm scratching my head over this thread. The bill and the subject of license to carry whether concealed or open has to do with the carrying of a handgun, or in the words of the Constitution, wearing. It has nothing to do with how a handgun is or is not stored in a car. What was quoted in the OP is simply extending the same thing to open carry. Nothing changes, a CHL holder would still permitted or limited to carry the same way whether in or out of a car just as it is now.

[PaJ]

I'm scratching my head over this thread. The bill and the subject of license to carry whether concealed or open has to do with the carrying of a handgun, or in the words of the Constitution, wearing. It has nothing to do with how a handgun is or is not stored in a car. What was quoted in the OP is simply extending the same thing to open carry. Nothing changes, a CHL holder would still permitted or limited to carry the same way whether in or out of a car just as it is now.

I think how to define "carrying" is the rub. The bill requires a "belt or shoulder holster". If I get in my car and want to make my weapon more accessible, I cannot put it in a holster mounted in some other fashion and have it 'open'. So now, I would have to resort to the CC laws currently in place. OC should make our lives easier, even for those who don't often open carry.

While I may rarely open carry, to be able to take my gun out of concealment and use a car mounted holster with easier access would be great. Then when I leave the car, I reholster and re-conceal. The "belt or shoulder" requirement prevents that. In a holster nearby (such as steering column mount), the weapon would still be "on or about" the person but not in a "belt or shoulder holster".

While I cannot say for sure, I think it could be argued that "carrying" doesn't require "wearing". I carry stuff in my truck all the time. The country's founders carried stuff on their horses. That's why (I believe) the law reads "on or about" instead of just "on".

If I read it correctly, simply changing that to "holster" would make it OK to use any holster without concealing in a car, thus accomplishing the purpose. Or mounting a belt holster as shown in the pics. Right?

[poppo]

I think how to define "carrying" is the rub. The bill requires a "belt or shoulder holster". If I get in my car and want to make my weapon more accessible, I cannot put it in a holster mounted in some other fashion and have it 'open'. So now, I would have to resort to the CC laws currently in place. OC should make our lives easier, even for those who don't often open carry.

I'm still not getting the issue. Open carry, does not mean open display on your dashboard or anywhere. As noted earlier, just cover it up as we have always been doing. A non-issue IMO.

[Pawpaw]

Every time I see this thread I think about what might happen if you modified a holster so you could attach it to your seat belt. Even better if it's attached to the shoulder strap portion of the belt.

You could truly look at the officer and explain that it's a shoulder belt holster.

[CoffeeNut]

Every time I see this thread I think about what might happen if you modified a holster so you could attach it to your seat belt. Even better if it's attached to the shoulder strap portion of the belt.

You could truly look at the officer and explain that it's a shoulder belt holster.

Works out for everyone because when he asks you to step out of the car the "shoulder belt holster" stays with the car