What is Open Carry

[3rd_gear]

With Open Carry coming back to commifornia, how much of a pistol has to be exposed to be considered "open carry"?

[MudCamper]

Why / how is legal open carry coming back to California?

[ABR]

Open is coming to CA? Didn?t know that.

I open my 10mm on trail hikes. Which means outside the waistband wearing jeans and t-shirt completely uncovered.

Many people carry this way here and nobody cares. I did strike up a conversation with a guy carrying open a WC EDC 9 asking how he liked it a few months ago.

[Mute]

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/....php?t=1524878

[3rd_gear]

Can we open carry the ole "virgina tuck" style where only the pistol handle is visible?

[acaligunner]

Originally Posted by ABR

Open is coming to CA? Didn?t know that.

I open my 10mm on trail hikes. Which means outside the waistband wearing jeans and t-shirt completely uncovered.

Many people carry this way here and nobody cares. I did strike up a conversation with a guy carrying open a WC EDC 9 asking how he liked it a few months ago.

I have a WC CQB and a Nighthawk grp, and I like / shoot the Nighthawk better.

Which is strange - because they are basically the same kind of pistol.

[IVC]

Aside from the "The Open Carry is Coming to Town" debate, anything that is not "concealed" should be considered "open." This is where restrictive states such as CA set their own standard with over-zealous interpretation of printing and trying to get CCW carriers on a technicality. If/when/where open carry is allowed, anything that wouldn't pass as "concealed" should be good to go.

[heavyrecoil]

^^^ so a LeMat or Colt Walker it is!

[ABR]

Originally Posted by acaligunner

I have a WC CQB and a Nighthawk grp, and I like / shoot the Nighthawk better.

Which is strange - because they are basically the same kind of pistol.

I completely understand. Between my Brown 5? and Brown commander I shoot the 4.25? far better.
It just points nicer. Both have 3 pound triggers.

I carried the commander during the winter months in CA for a few years but I switched to a 16+1 XDm 10mm here in N Idaho last winter. I really like that pistol.

[tomrkba]

They were ordered by the higher court to fix their sheeeet and get it resolved properly under Bruen.

[Epaphroditus]

It's like pornography - once you see it you know.

[Tripplet918]

Originally Posted by IVC

Aside from the "The Open Carry is Coming to Town" debate, anything that is not "concealed" should be considered "open." This is where restrictive states such as CA set their own standard with over-zealous interpretation of printing and trying to get CCW carriers on a technicality. If/when/where open carry is allowed, anything that wouldn't pass as "concealed" should be good to go.

I didnt know there were issues with printing. Do you have a link?

Ive been carrying under T-shirts. I?d like to look into the details.

[M1A Rifleman]

Originally Posted by 3rd_gear

With Open Carry coming back to commifornia

Doubt it. After reevaluation, it will be found that issuance of CCW in California is happening due to Bruen, and because CCW is preferred by the State over open carry, then open carry can be banned.

[3rd_gear]

Originally Posted by M1A Rifleman

Doubt it. After reevaluation, it will be found that issuance of CCW in California is happening due to Bruen, and because CCW is preferred by the State over open carry, then open carry can be banned.

damn...

[OlderThanDirt]

The beginning of the end for open carry in CA started in 1967 with the Milford Act banning loaded open carry. These guys had something to do with that.



Unloaded open carry died on 1/1/2012, in part due to people trying to make a point and scaring the snowflakes.

[Librarian]

Going back to the original question, 'open carry' is NOT 'substantially concealed'.

The Calcrim jury instructions reference

Substantial Concealment.
People v. Wharton (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 72, 75 [6 Cal.Rptr.2d 673] [interpreting now-repealed Pen. Code, ? 12020(a)(4)];
People v. Fuentes (1976) 64 Cal.App.3d 953, 955 [134 Cal.Rptr. 885] [same].

Wharton says

1] Defendant contends there is insufficient evidence of concealment because the tip of the knife was protruding from his pocket. We disagree. Only substantial concealment is required. (People v. Fuentes (1976) 64 Cal. App. 3d 953, 955 [134 Cal. Rptr. 885] [dirk with handle protruding from waistband found to be a concealed weapon].) "A defendant need not be totally successful in concealing a dirk to be guilty of violation of Penal Code section 12020, subdivision (a)." (People v. Fuentes, supra, 64 Cal.App.3d at p. 955.)

Here, the jury was permitted to examine the knife, which our perusal discloses is approximately seven and three-eighths inches long. The jury was apprised that only one and one-half to two inches of the blade were protruding from defendant's pocket. These facts support a finding of substantial concealment. [5 Cal. App. 4th 76]

Wharton references Fuentes,

Fuentes contends that there was no evidence to show that the dirk was concealed and argues that "[t]here is not even a suggestion in the record that the dirk was ever anywhere but in plain sight." The dirk obviously was not in plain sight. This is not a situation where the weapon was carried openly in a sheath or attached to a belt. fn. 1 The dirk was in Fuentes' waistband. [1] The mere fact that some portion of the handle may have been visible makes it no less a concealed weapon. A defendant need not be totally successful in concealing a dirk to be guilty of violation of Penal Code section 12020, subdivision (a). (See People v. Hale, 43 Cal. App. 3d 353, 356 [117 Cal. Rptr. 697]; People v. May, 33 Cal. App. 3d 888, 891 [109 Cal. Rptr. 396]; People v. Tarkington, 273 Cal. App. 2d 466, 469 [78 Cal. Rptr. 149].) [64 Cal. App. 3d 956]

Though both of those refer to dirk or dagger, the Calcrim folks seem to believe that applies to concealable firearms, too.

[IVC]

Originally Posted by Tripplet918

I didnt know there were issues with printing. Do you have a link?

Ive been carrying under T-shirts. I?d like to look into the details.

It was more of a tongue in cheek comment about using the argument of the state against them. In reality, it would come to a case law and I'm not aware of any. So, it's all speculation about what interpretation of the words "open" or "concealed" would win in court.

[MudCamper]

Also 25400, which makes it illegal to carry concealed, uses pretty plain language for what is not concealed:

25400 (b) A firearm carried openly in a belt holster is not concealed within the meaning of this section.

[Coolguy101]

Originally Posted by 3rd_gear

damn...

Damn?

Open carry, except during hunting, is pretty much pointless and unnecessary.

Concealed carry, though, is useful, and preferred.

Why would you prefer to open carry?

[IVC]

Originally Posted by Coolguy101

Open carry, except during hunting, is pretty much pointless and unnecessary.

Legal open carry takes care of any potential issue with gun being partially exposed at any time during concealed carry. It also takes care of any publicly accessible private land issues, where a person carries on his own land. And don't forget that there are a lot of people hiking, camping, visiting remote areas, or just living in secluded open spaces where open carry is much more convenient.

What you're probably thinking is open carry in urban centers just to make a political statement. Those have a role too, we have to make sure the other side understands we'll come to their turf if they keep poking us. And open carry doesn't hurt, we've seen it from all the states that allow it.

So, what's the downside?

[Librarian]

Originally Posted by MudCamper

Also 25400, which makes it illegal to carry concealed, uses pretty plain language for what is not concealed:

25400 (b) A firearm carried openly in a belt holster is not concealed within the meaning of this section.

That was added to cover silly prosecutors charging such belt carry as illegal concealed, because the gun was concealed by the holster.

But it is one clear statement on one way to not be concealed.

[acaligunner]

Originally Posted by Coolguy101

Damn?

Open carry, except during hunting, is pretty much pointless and unnecessary.

Concealed carry, though, is useful, and preferred.

Why would you prefer to open carry?

That?s not entirely true, as I opened Carried in AZ for 5+ years and it saved me twice during bad confrontations.

Why did I open carry? Well because the state / city of Phoenix, Arizona allowed it.

I even traveled multiple times through south central phoenix ( LOL I guess they also wanted that status ) and multiple other counties and no one disarmed me / or went for my pistol - which was a Glock 17 with 2 mags on my belt.

I wasn?t the only person doing so also, and unless you?ve carried a loaded self defense weapon and had that experience ~ well it?s not as dumb as you would believe it to be.

[3rd_gear]

Originally Posted by Coolguy101

Damn?

Open carry, except during hunting, is pretty much pointless and unnecessary.

Concealed carry, though, is useful, and preferred.

Why would you prefer to open carry?

I live in Santa Clara county, where it's still virtually impossible to get a ccw. I was hoping to open carry with an IWB holster with only a small portion of the pistol visible.

[Coolguy101]

Originally Posted by acaligunner

That?s not entirely true, as I opened Carried in AZ for 5+ years and it saved me twice during bad confrontations.

Why did I open carry? Well because the state / city of Phoenix, Arizona allowed it.

I even traveled multiple times through south central phoenix ( LOL I guess they also wanted that status ) and multiple other counties and no one disarmed me / or went for my pistol - which was a Glock 17 with 2 mags on my belt.

I wasn?t the only person doing so also, and unless you?ve carried a loaded self defense weapon and had that experience ~ well it?s not as dumb as you would believe it to be.

I've open carried while hunting and in my campsite. I haven't done it in the city. I found open carry while hunting and camping to be useful and practical.

I've been to Arizona multiple times in the past, and have seen open carry. I saw a guy with a .44 mag on his hip eating at Red Lobster, and another person with some sort of semi auto on their hip at Walmart.

I don't see the point, and I don't get into confrontations where I need a gun. Good decision making and situational awareness likely played a major part in that.

People open carry in public to make a statement, and I just don't happen to agree with them. I don't like cowboys, and I'm not talking about the ones what work with cattle.

Hopefully the Supreme Court will make it so we can all conceal carry in the near future.

[acaligunner]

Originally Posted by Coolguy101

I've open carried while hunting and in my campsite. I haven't done it in the city. I found open carry while hunting and camping to be useful and practical.

I've been to Arizona multiple times in the past, and have seen open carry. I saw a guy with a .44 mag on his hip eating at Red Lobster, and another person with some sort of semi auto on their hip at Walmart.

I don't see the point, and I don't get into confrontations where I need a gun. Good decision making and situational awareness likely played a major part in that.

People open carry in public to make a statement, and I just don't happen to agree with them. I don't like cowboys, and I'm not talking about the ones what work with cattle.

Hopefully the Supreme Court will make it so we can all conceal carry in the near future.

I believe Living in ARIZONA and visiting are way different experiences, I carried a gun - not to make a point and not to act like a cowboy.

I believe in the right to carry, and have practiced enough to be safe and know how to use my SD tools.

I do see a point - the right to self defense and in 2 examples I stopped an attack on myself and another attempt years later, all because I did have a means to stop a attack with a knife and later a gang - so you do not have to be ? looking for trouble ? to defend yourself ~ even if the area is safe.

Arizona did later change up on the rules, but for the years I open carried a loaded SD Weapon ~ I?m glad I did.

[IVC]

Originally Posted by Coolguy101

People open carry in public to make a statement, and I just don't happen to agree with them. I don't like cowboys, and I'm not talking about the ones what work with cattle.

Feel free not to like or agree with anyone and feel free to do things your way. But also let others do what they want, it's not up to each one of us to tell others how they must behave. Nor do we have the authority.

[deckhandmike]

Open carry is where it?s at. I think a lot of those that frown on it haven?t seen the practicality of it. I often open carry while hunting or outdoors and it substantially more comfortable. It allows me to add the stuff like a rds and light that make CC uncomfortable and prints. So much more comfortable while sitting and driving.

While I enjoy being subtle in certain settings such as a nice restaurant I generally wouldn?t care when out and about running errands. I stopped worrying about what other people think years ago. The only thing cowboy about about open carry is caring about more about your family than other people?s feelings.

[Coolguy101]

Originally Posted by IVC

Feel free not to like or agree with anyone and feel free to do things your way. But also let others do what they want, it's not up to each one of us to tell others how they must behave. Nor do we have the authority.

Actually, we do have the authority to tell others how they must behave. That's why laws exist.

[redbridge]

Nice thread!

[acaligunner]

Originally Posted by Coolguy101

Actually, we do have the authority to tell others how they must behave. That's why laws exist.

Oh you mean unjust laws that restrict and take away ca citizens rights like the 2nd amendment ?

Govt is about controlling and giving itself power and does little for the people when you consider all aspects.

Your insight is a bit flawed, just like your opinion on open carrying.

[Coolguy101]

Originally Posted by acaligunner

Oh you mean unjust laws that restrict and take away ca citizens rights like the 2nd amendment ?

Govt is about controlling and giving itself power and does little for the people when you consider all aspects.

Your insight is a bit flawed, just like your opinion on open carrying.

Come on now, you gotta admit that you walked right into that one when you said that. That was an easy softball that I smacked out of the park.

I know you had your chest was puffed out, and your fingers were trembling when you typed it, and now you don't want to admit you lost that one.

Its been pretty entertaining. Thank you

[acaligunner]

Originally Posted by Coolguy101

Come on now, you gotta admit that you walked right into that one when you said that. That was an easy softball that I smacked out of the park.

I know you had your chest was puffed out, and your fingers were trembling when you typed it, and now you don't want to admit you lost that one.

It?s been pretty entertaining. Thank you

I?ll compare that to your inept opinion on open carry.

You having ? visited ? Arizona and not lived there.

You never having open carried in a major city ( phoenix was number six at the time I lived there ), and generally not even having a clue on any kind of real substance.

There?s always someone as clueless as you trying to be ? cool ? LOL !!

Go back to bed son - your boring us. Thank you.

[ar15robert]

Have the choice of open or concealed here in az. IMO concealed in the city for sure.

Now in the desert or woods I?ll open carry. Both have their pluses

[rplaw]

Originally Posted by ar15robert

Have the choice of open or concealed here in az. IMO concealed in the city for sure.

Now in the desert or woods I?ll open carry. Both have their pluses

The issue with your viewpoint is that it doesn't take into account the fact that the State dictates which way you must carry regardless of appropriateness or necessity.

To compensate when the State outlaws OC in favor of CC, the State will provide space outside of incorporated cities and outside of prohibited areas outside of incorporated cities where your full panoply of Rights can be exercised. A situation which creates a 2-tier constitutional Right, a limited Right inside the described areas and an unrestricted Right outside those areas.

On the other hand, OC everywhere doesn't restrict your Rights at all (other than traditionally and historically recognized sensitive places). The problem with this, as we saw, are the snowflakes and Karens of the world.


Me, I'd rather it be set up so no one has to worry about OC or CC. That way when it rains you can put on a raincoat without concern about being popped for CC without a permit. Or removing your jacket or coat to change a tire on a hot day.

[isntzen]

Originally Posted by rplaw

The issue with your viewpoint is that it doesn't take into account the fact that the State dictates which way you must carry regardless of appropriateness or necessity.

To compensate when the State outlaws OC in favor of CC, the State will provide space outside of incorporated cities and outside of prohibited areas outside of incorporated cities where your full panoply of Rights can be exercised. A situation which creates a 2-tier constitutional Right, a limited Right inside the described areas and an unrestricted Right outside those areas.

On the other hand, OC everywhere doesn't restrict your Rights at all (other than traditionally and historically recognized sensitive places). The problem with this, as we saw, are the snowflakes and Karens of the world.


Me, I'd rather it be set up so no one has to worry about OC or CC. That way when it rains you can put on a raincoat without concern about being popped for CC without a permit. Or removing your jacket or coat to change a tire on a hot day.

Been wondering about this.

There certainly weren't any laws restricting open carry circa 1791. I mean, most were carrying muskets right? Others would have pistols inside a band or coat.

Seems to me any law restricting the manner of carry would be without pedigree, no?

By the way, I think the snowflakes and Karen's need to adjust their expectations when it comes to Constitutionally protected rights. And I think we should help them realize this adjustment.

[BrokerB]

I agree. IWB of my ar pistol and 10.5" barrel is tough as it looks like I have 2 x peni's

[BigPimping]

Move out of Santa Clara, and to the city of Concord. Get a CCW in five weeks.

[IVC]

Originally Posted by Coolguy101

Actually, we do have the authority to tell others how they must behave. That's why laws exist.

No, we don't tell people how to behave, we can only set the boundaries with the laws. Laws are not a legislated morality.

But in this case your argument is against you, because the open carry that you observed and disparaged was *legal.* And my argument wasn't that you should like it or do it, only that you should do what you like and let others do what they like. Tolerate each other. That's all.