Open Carry

Your right

IMHO,it doesn't look like he was argueing of the advantage/disadvantage of anything..looks more like he was stating how it should be straight out...




must be so they're at a "disadvantage"....[wink]




i swear it's becoming a pissing contest,and we know how those end...





(wet shoes)---[smile]



just as a side note...i can't believe i made or(don't remember) making this comment about how i'd never OC
http://northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=54900&postcount=24

it is a liberating feeling..

Your right, he wasn't stating how it was a tactical disadvantage. He was just flapping his jaw on the keyboard. That's why I didn't entertain the other guys weak attempt of explaining. This isn't E.T. [rofl] I understand what he wrote because although there were a lot of mispellings, english is one of two languages I can read, write, and speak.

The point of this thread had to do with opencarry.org. OC.org has a wealth of info and is correct except for the District of Colombia and for a few states regarding private sales. Mike and John do an outstanding job with OC.org

Lonnie Wilson was mentioning how open carry is legal in MA as the law does not mandate concealement and LEO's in MA carry on the same license that everyone else does, if OC was illegal then every uniformed LEO in MA would be a criminal.

Now if people want to discuss chiefs revoking licenses, that's a different story, but to say that OC.org is wrong on MA is incorrect. The law is quite clear. I highly doubt most chiefs would support open carry but one poster on OC.org lives in a town where the chief does not have a problem with it so he's good to go, so far, he has had no reactions from anyone.

This is interesting because now with Heller, most case law regarding guns is null and void (collective rights). So we have a fresh start in a lot of areas. If Heller is incorporated, then it will be clear that a chief can not play games with a LTC. So this is worthy of discussion.

As far as people saying OC hurts our cause. [rofl] Mass seems to have no problem eliminating gun rights without people OC'ing so it's a moot point.

The GCA of 1998, screwed many gun owners as well as resident aliens.
Romney screwed people with the $100 license.
Romney screwed people again by making most high caps illegal (even with the high cap Class A license).
 
Last edited:
If in terms of self defese[sic] open carry offers no real advantage why do police officers do it?

For someone who is not a law enforcement officer, concealed carry provides the element of surprise -- the perp does not know that you have a gun. For a law enforcement officer in uniform, concealed carry of their primary gun would offer no purpose, since the perp would know that they were armed anyways.

Open carry does have an advantage -- a faster draw. But it also has disadvantages -- your gun is more open to gun grabs and you might be the first target. Personally, I'd rather carry concealed even if I wasn't in MA. Here in MA, with discretionary licensing and a very anti-gun populace, open carry may have negative consequences.
 
If in terms of self defese[sic] open carry offers no real advantage why do police officers do it?

How would one conceal a handgun while wearing a police uniform? It isn't possible. In addition, while carrying in uniform, I and my people carried in a Level Two or Three holster. I've seen some walk around with unsecured open top holsters which while they will retain the firearm will not in any way prevent a grab. It you want to open carry, purchase a suitable holster, not a ten dollar Uncle Mikes that is a one size fits all.
 
Massachustts has always been an open carry state.I can remember a gas station owner in Brockton who carried openly in the 60's and 70's.If you carry openly now however,you will probably be charged with disorderly person or disturbing the peace ,and most likely you will have your permit pulled.
 
Massachustts has always been an open carry state.I can remember a gas station owner in Brockton who carried openly in the 60's and 70's.If you carry openly now however,you will probably be charged with disorderly person or disturbing the peace ,and most likely you will have your permit pulled.

But isn't that a seperate charge? (I'm not a lawyer, but I'll give this a shot)

LTC A says you can carry, LTC B says you can carry, but not concealed - which would mean openly.

So the LAW allows open carry, and you would be charged on something else and would lose your license based on suitability, but not for a charge of carrying openly.

I've just had this discussion with a LEO, he said that OC is illegal and I showed him the parts of the MGL on the license where I got the info on A vs. B LTC's.

He then said he'd charge me with brandishing. I asked for where THAT term was defined.

He ended the argument saying that "legal or not, I see someone with a gun, they're getting jacked up and at the end of it, even if you're right, you're going to wind up losing your license".

I think his last statement sums it up pretty well.


As for my opinion on OC, just because it isn't a smart idea, doesn't mean it should be illegal. I'd like the ability to do so, even if I don't care to.
 
I had a police officer at my house after I set my alarm off. I was carrying. All she wanted was for me to keep my hands away from it. I lied to her by saying if I had known it was the police here I would have left it inside. If I hadn't known it was the police I would have been out there with my AR.

She said it was my right to carry my pistol, but she just wanted to be sure she wasn't going to get shot. When I went to get my wallet she kept her hand on her pistol, but never drew.
 
I've just had this discussion with a LEO, he said that OC is illegal and I showed him the parts of the MGL on the license where I got the info on A vs. B LTC's.

He then said he'd charge me with brandishing. I asked for where THAT term was defined.

He ended the argument saying that "legal or not, I see someone with a gun, they're getting jacked up and at the end of it, even if you're right, you're going to wind up losing your license".

I think his last statement sums it up pretty well.

I've had a similar discussion with the licensing officer in my town. What he said was completely opposite. He said that OC is legal in MA and that there are a couple of people he knows who practice it. One of the people collects empty bottles and cans around town and he always OC's. Now, I have yet to see anyone OCing in my town but it seems to me that if I decided to do it, it wouldn't be a big deal.

Am I willing to try it? Probably not. I guess I am just too paranoid about the possibility of losing my license.
 
Typical of a southern New England LEO

But isn't that a seperate charge? (I'm not a lawyer, but I'll give this a shot)

LTC A says you can carry, LTC B says you can carry, but not concealed - which would mean openly.

So the LAW allows open carry, and you would be charged on something else and would lose your license based on suitability, but not for a charge of carrying openly.

I've just had this discussion with a LEO, he said that OC is illegal and I showed him the parts of the MGL on the license where I got the info on A vs. B LTC's.

He then said he'd charge me with brandishing. I asked for where THAT term was defined.

He ended the argument saying that "legal or not, I see someone with a gun, they're getting jacked up and at the end of it, even if you're right, you're going to wind up losing your license".

I think his last statement sums it up pretty well.


As for my opinion on OC, just because it isn't a smart idea, doesn't mean it should be illegal. I'd like the ability to do so, even if I don't care to.

Typical of a MA LEO. "legal or not". This isnt even an issue for MA courts. This can be done in federal court.

42 USC 1983 and 1988. Come to mind. There's are federal laws and federal issues that MA has no control over. based upon 28 USC 1331 and 1343. There are also other laws these local hacks must be aware. People have been starting to sue police over these issues. Lousisiana just had a lawsuit. The defendant got $$$$ from the police officer (could lose his house) and the city. The case is being requested because part of the judgement was that he could not talk about it, so a FOIA is being filed to see the case. See more at OC.org

In PA, 5 people are suing Dickerson and all local LEO's involved. If it's found that they acted outside the scope of their employment, they could lose the shirt off their back.

These are real issues that local hacks who think they can do what they want must be aware of. Even if a chief revokes you licesnes for no illegal conduct. That could be a FEDERAL (not state court where everyone goes and loses) court issue over federal law. He could be liable for damages, he could also be ordered to restore your LTC due to you having a property interest in your license per Board of Regents et al V Roth 1972 SCOTUS as well as U.S. v Medina (1st cir. court of appeals).

Chiefs and local LEOs are not God, there are plenty of federal laws criminal and civil that they can be found liable under. It can ruin their career and their finances.

Preston Gulliory received 1.2 million of tax free money from the Orange County Sheriff Brad Gates in the 1980's in Gulliory v Gates (famous 9th circuit decision) over open carry and violation of civil rights. Don't think you welfare workers (corrupt police and their chiefs) are above being slammed like Sheriff Gates was in the 1980's... in the most liberal circuit. For some of socialist towns in MA, it could very well bankrupt them and I doubt locals would like to see their property taxes go up.
 
If thats how you feel abgout it, then you have missed the point of carrying a gun in the first place. YOu missed the point that in terms of self defese,...

You are assuming everyone would carry for the purpose of "self defense". What of those who are hunting, or just feel like it. You are kind of limiting things here.




Massachustts has always been an open carry state.I can remember a gas station owner in Brockton who carried openly in the 60's and 70's.If you carry openly now however,you will probably be charged with disorderly person or disturbing the peace ,and most likely you will have your permit pulled.

Regarding your first sentence: http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=294732&postcount=98



...When I went to get my wallet she kept her hand on her pistol, but never drew.
Were you buying something? (-:







I've had a similar discussion with the licensing officer in my town. What he said was completely opposite. He said that OC is legal in MA ....

I've had the same discussions with several police in at least 2 towns, and they seem to be in agreement with this. For that matter, open carry is the only carry allowed and required by a Class B license.
 
Last edited:
Typical of a MA LEO. "legal or not". This isnt even an issue for MA courts. This can be done in federal court.

42 USC 1983 and 1988. Come to mind. There's are federal laws and federal issues that MA has no control over. based upon 28 USC 1331 and 1343. There are also other laws these local hacks must be aware. People have been starting to sue police over these issues. Lousisiana just had a lawsuit. The defendant got $$$$ from the police officer (could lose his house) and the city. The case is being requested because part of the judgement was that he could not talk about it, so a FOIA is being filed to see the case. See more at OC.org

In PA, 5 people are suing Dickerson and all local LEO's involved. If it's found that they acted outside the scope of their employment, they could lose the shirt off their back.

These are real issues that local hacks who think they can do what they want must be aware of. Even if a chief revokes you licesnes for no illegal conduct. That could be a FEDERAL (not state court where everyone goes and loses) court issue over federal law. He could be liable for damages, he could also be ordered to restore your LTC due to you having a property interest in your license per Board of Regents et al V Roth 1972 SCOTUS as well as U.S. v Medina (1st cir. court of appeals).

Chiefs and local LEOs are not God, there are plenty of federal laws criminal and civil that they can be found liable under. It can ruin their career and their finances.

Preston Gulliory received 1.2 million of tax free money from the Orange County Sheriff Brad Gates in the 1980's in Gulliory v Gates (famous 9th circuit decision) over open carry and violation of civil rights. Don't think you welfare workers (corrupt police and their chiefs) are above being slammed like Sheriff Gates was in the 1980's... in the most liberal circuit. For some of socialist towns in MA, it could very well bankrupt them and I doubt locals would like to see their property taxes go up.

You got style....I like that. Also, a key benefit in open carrying is the message your sending. I guarantee you you'll wind up explaining and educated people more often than having to use the firearm itself. In this way, open carrying provides two purposes....one being self-protections, the other being education. Educating the ignorant, showing other gun owners that its ok to open carry. I strongly believe if most of us went to our local downtown and saw several people open carrying, and everything was fine more people would regardless of it being a tactical advantage or not. Technically, I feel it is "tactically advantageous" because you have quicker access to the firearm. The biggest problem in MA, is that no one , including myself, wants to be a test case or can afford to bring a LEO or Chief to court.
 
Typical of a MA LEO. "legal or not".

Unfortunately, I have to agree with you on this one. [frown]

42 USC 1983 and 1988. Come to mind. There's are federal laws and federal issues that MA has no control over. based upon 28 USC 1331 and 1343. There are also other laws these local hacks must be aware. People have been starting to sue police over these issues. Lousisiana just had a lawsuit. The defendant got $$$$ from the police officer (could lose his house) and the city. The case is being requested because part of the judgement was that he could not talk about it, so a FOIA is being filed to see the case. See more at OC.org

In PA, 5 people are suing Dickerson and all local LEO's involved. If it's found that they acted outside the scope of their employment, they could lose the shirt off their back.

These are real issues that local hacks who think they can do what they want must be aware of. Even if a chief revokes you licesnes for no illegal conduct. That could be a FEDERAL (not state court where everyone goes and loses) court issue over federal law. He could be liable for damages, he could also be ordered to restore your LTC due to you having a property interest in your license per Board of Regents et al V Roth 1972 SCOTUS as well as U.S. v Medina (1st cir. court of appeals).

Chiefs and local LEOs are not God, there are plenty of federal laws criminal and civil that they can be found liable under. It can ruin their career and their finances.

Preston Gulliory received 1.2 million of tax free money from the Orange County Sheriff Brad Gates in the 1980's in Gulliory v Gates (famous 9th circuit decision) over open carry and violation of civil rights. Don't think you welfare workers (corrupt police and their chiefs) are above being slammed like Sheriff Gates was in the 1980's... in the most liberal circuit. For some of socialist towns in MA, it could very well bankrupt them and I doubt locals would like to see their property taxes go up.


Great post!
Thanks for the info.

Gary
 
Unfortunatly, so does everyone else.

I agree 1000%.

Those that have never HAD to OC don't seem to understand and think it is a neat idea. Those of us who carried in uniform and had to worry about who might be standing too close, don't see the novelty.

+1 Rep Point added!
 
Hmm...

If an in stater can't get tangled up in a situation where they're afraid of losing their Class A, I'm sure we got plenty of out of staters who will volunteer.

That's the great thing about the licensing statutes that Maryland, New Jersey, Massachusetts have: Out of staters can get licenses there, and there's subject to just as much "suitability" issues as those who actually reside in those states..

As for "your gun will be taken". Though retention holsters are generally standard equipment with open carriers, there are a *few* that don't have them. I regularly chastise those that do that and generally get them to upgrade their retention.

That being said, civilian open carriers are generally not forced by the dictates of their jobs (like LEO's are) to get right into the middle of bad situations. They generally aren't the type to start handcuffing people who don't want to be handcuffed, etc. That's when the usual "gun grab" situations occur. Comparing law enforcement retentions problems with civilian retention issues is not the same.
 
Last edited:
If an in stater can't go tangled up, I'm sure we got plenty of out of staters who will volunteer.

That's the great thing about the licensing statutes that Maryland, New Jersey, Massachusetts have: Out of staters can get licenses there, and there's subject to just as much "suitability" issues as your in-state folk

HUH???????
 
Of course, I'm not saying someone in a neighboring state such as NH. Perhaps a plains state or west coast plaintiff who happens to have an LTCF Temp Non-resident license.
 
Back
Top Bottom