Minimun age for open carry

[marinakorp]

What's confusing for me isn't so much what the law says, but what it doesn't address that seems to be open to interpretation. I only used the example from AZ as a point of interest. To be specific, I asked a nephew, who's an AZ DPS Trooper, how one goes about open carry when it's cold outside and one is wearing a coat. He told me that so long as the handgun is carried in a holster on the belt, as opposed to being just stuck in the waistband or in a pocket, it's considered visible even if it's completely covered by a coat. I know this isn't the law here in PA, which is why I said it's merely a point of reference.

In AZ... when I lived there for a couple of years near Tucson... the rule was as long as a Portion of the Holster and a portion of the weapon was visible, the it was not considered concealed...and allowable


So, and IWB was OK...as the Butt was sticking out of the pants, and the loop to the belt was considered part of the holster.

The portion about covered by the coat... no difference if covered by a shirt. If full concealed (not a portion visible) then they are concealing....not so sure the police officer was correct in that (may have changed since then...possibly)

If no Holster is used (tucked in to a belt) then that does not meet the open carry for Az, and considered illegal form of carry. It gets a little confusing when you bring in to the picture a clip draw device...never researched the legality of that in Az

I typically had one in a IWB at all times, or in a shooulder holster when on a motorcycle

[tl_3237]

IANAL but I believe that the determination as to whether a firearm is concealed or not is if its presence would be obvious to a reasonably observant person.

[Liketohike69]

I spoke to the Sheriff in Pike County about this very issue. He told me he would bring my daughter up on charges, From what I've read he's wrong and putting legal 18 year's no way to decent themselves. I also asked him about a Sportsman's Firearms Permit to allow the carrying of a handgun while going to or from fishing and hunting. He said if I was there and within sight of my daughter it would be ok otherwise he would arrest her.
Pike County sucks as they do whatever they want to do. It's my understanding they stopped issuing carry permits to people from out of state. NOT Legal

[Mike]

I spoke to the Sheriff in Pike County about this very issue. He told me he would bring my daughter up on charges, From what I've read he's wrong and putting legal 18 year's no way to decent themselves. I also asked him about a Sportsman's Firearms Permit to allow the carrying of a handgun while going to or from fishing and hunting. He said if I was there and within sight of my daughter it would be ok otherwise he would arrest her.
Pike County sucks as they do whatever they want to do. It's my understanding they stopped issuing carry permits to people from out of state. NOT Legal

Open carry of holstered handguns is legal in PA at age 18 on foot; these folks though generally cannot possess a handgun in a vehicle at all.

There are a couple of exceptions...need to check the uniform firearms act but a sportsman permit may allow vehicle carry in some circumstances;

Better though is the provision at section 6106.b(13) which provides a pretty good way for those 18 or older to possess a parent or spouse's handgun in a vehicle (open or concealed) and then subsequently open carry that handgun when stepping outside the vehicle throughout the Commonwealth except for Philadelphia (requires LTCF to open carry on foot): "(13) Any person who is otherwise eligible to possess a firearm under this chapter and who is operating a motor vehicle which is registered in the person's name or the name of a spouse or parent and which contains a firearm for which a valid license has been issued pursuant to section 6109 to the spouse or parent owning the firearm."

Make sense?

[MikeB0]

To start, I think PA needs to go the route of if you are legal to buy/own you are legal to carry and only have LTCF for reciprocity purposes. Probably not likely to happen in the near future though.

Now that said, the state of the law as it is today, if I had a child between 18 and 21 I would not recommend any form of Open Carry. There are just too many potential pitfalls that could end up with them not ever being able to get a LTCF or legally own guns in the future if they meet up with the wrong LEO/Prosecutor over one of the potential pitfalls.

It may seem a long 3 years from 18 to 21, but it is a lot more years from 21 to 70, 80, 90, whatever age most people live to. Granted there is a small possibility of something happening during those 3 years, but probably statistically greater chance over the course of an entire lifetime vs. those 3 years.

[mosseater]

IANAL but I believe that the determination as to whether a firearm is concealed or not is if its presence would be obvious to a reasonably observant person.

I would tend to agree, however, if there's one thing I've learned since starting into this crazy, mixed-up world of carrying firearms some thirty years back, it's that common sense has no business being discussed in the same sentence as "the law".

The law, I'm sure, could easily re-define everything, even down to "knife", "fork", "cat", "dog", et al. When you start splitting hairs, common sense is too dull a knife.

[Deleted]

Here is the skinny on Concealment in Pennsylvania....

Concealment is not defined by statute in Pennsylvania so you have to look at the case law to determine what the courts will say as far as what is concealed and what is not. Here is the most relevant case law for the Commonwealth:

“Our interpretation of the statute under consideration is that the issue of concealment depends upon the particular circumstances present in each case, and is a question for the trier of fact.”
- Commonwealth v. Butler, 150 A.2d 172, 173 (Pa.Super. 1959).

Comm v. Williams

As he rounded the corner of Harlan onto 22nd Street he observed appellant firing a long-barrelled, jet black hand-gun at a fast-moving tan Cadillac. After the Cadillac turned a corner appellant then held the gun to his side and began to walk. Johnson proceeded to his automobile, which was parked on 22nd Street and drove to the corner where he stopped for a red light. At the corner Johnson saw appellant pull a gun, which was apparently the same gun he had seen appellant firing at the tan Cadillac. Appellant then walked over to the corner, about fifteen feet from Johnson, and began to spin the gun and toss it from one hand to the other. As the light turned green appellant stuck the gun in his belt, turned around and walked away.

“In the instant case there is no evidence whatsoever as to any attempt by appellant to conceal any weapon; and, therefore, we must conclude that the evidence was insufficient to sustain appellant's conviction as to Section 6106.”
- Commonwealth v. Williams, 346 A.2d 308, 310 (Pa.Super. 1975).

Testimony of two witnesses that they saw the actor pull from his waistband something that looked like a gun was sufficient to prove concealment. - Commonwealth v. Scott, 436 A.2d 607 (Pa. 1981).

Actor was directing traffic in a parking lot when an officer observed a firearm “in a holster at his waist,” evidence was sufficient to uphold concealment element. - Commonwealth v. Bavusa, 750 A.2d 855 (Pa. Super. 2000)

Both Scott and Bavusa cite to the Butler ruling from 1959.


Since we are talking about schools... Every DA is going to be different how he / she looks at the whole school zone issue. Some will totally reject the defense argument provided in 912 and some will accept it WHEN COMBINED with the LTCF requirement of USC 922.


18 Pa.C.S.A. § 912 – Possession of Weapon on School Property
A person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree if he possesses a weapon in the buildings of, on the grounds of, or in any conveyance providing transportation to or from any elementary or secondary publicly-funded educational institution, any elementary or secondary private school licensed by the Department of Education or any elementary or secondary parochial school.

Defense: It shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed and used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course or is possessed for other lawful purpose.


The Gun Free School Act of 1990

18 U.S.C. § 922(q)
(A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.
(B) EXCEPT—
(i) on private property not part of school grounds;
(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;
(iii) that is— (I) not loaded; and (II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;
(iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;
(v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual;
(vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or
(vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.

[SevenMilePete]

Open carry of holstered handguns is legal in PA at age 18 on foot; these folks though generally cannot possess a handgun in a vehicle at all.

There are a couple of exceptions...need to check the uniform firearms act but a sportsman permit may allow vehicle carry in some circumstances;

Better though is the provision at section 6106.b(13) which provides a pretty good way for those 18 or older to possess a parent or spouse's handgun in a vehicle (open or concealed) and then subsequently open carry that handgun when stepping outside the vehicle throughout the Commonwealth except for Philadelphia (requires LTCF to open carry on foot): "(13) Any person who is otherwise eligible to possess a firearm under this chapter and who is operating a motor vehicle which is registered in the person's name or the name of a spouse or parent and which contains a firearm for which a valid license has been issued pursuant to section 6109 to the spouse or parent owning the firearm."

Make sense?

As long as no LEO notices her entering or leaving the car with the firearm.

[tl_3237]

Open carry of holstered handguns is legal in PA at age 18 on foot; these folks though generally cannot possess a handgun in a vehicle at all.

There are a couple of exceptions...need to check the uniform firearms act but a sportsman permit may allow vehicle carry in some circumstances;

Better though is the provision at section 6106.b(13) which provides a pretty good way for those 18 or older to possess a parent or spouse's handgun in a vehicle (open or concealed) and then subsequently open carry that handgun when stepping outside the vehicle throughout the Commonwealth except for Philadelphia (requires LTCF to open carry on foot): "(13) Any person who is otherwise eligible to possess a firearm under this chapter and who is operating a motor vehicle which is registered in the person's name or the name of a spouse or parent and which contains a firearm for which a valid license has been issued pursuant to section 6109 to the spouse or parent owning the firearm."

Make sense?

The question falls as to when is someone "OPERATING" a vehicle and the garnering the 6106(b)(13) exception [assuming all other conditions met]. There is no statutory definition of "operating" and hence the time period that the exception begins and ceases is nebulous.

A cursory review of court cases does provide a SCOPA definition which could readily be applied and would cause some misgivings as to the utility of the exception in the manner you suggest.

In Love v. City of Philadelphia, 543 A. 2d 531 - Pa: Supreme Court 1988 :

As we have illustrated, to operate something means to actually put it in motion. Merely preparing to operate a vehicle, or acts taken at the cessation of operating a vehicle are not the same as actually operating that vehicle. Thus, according to the common and approved usage of the word "operation", the van was not in operation at the time of Mrs. Love's accident. Getting into or alighting from a vehicle are merely acts ancillary to the actual operation of that vehicle.

The issue then would be the status of the exception between the time the vehicle is parked with engine off and the driver begins his entrance or exit. He is still "in" the vehicle while not "operating" the vehicle and arguably falls to the 6106 proscription of "any person who carries a firearm in any vehicle " since the exception is no longer in effect.

I can find no case law that provides an application of 6106(b)(13) or that addresses the above conundrum even when the circumstances fit what the legislature probably intended by the exception.

[Greywolf]

What's confusing for me isn't so much what the law says, but what it doesn't address that seems to be open to interpretation. I only used the example from AZ as a point of interest. To be specific, I asked a nephew, who's an AZ DPS Trooper, how one goes about open carry when it's cold outside and one is wearing a coat. He told me that so long as the handgun is carried in a holster on the belt, as opposed to being just stuck in the waistband or in a pocket, it's considered visible even if it's completely covered by a coat. I know this isn't the law here in PA, which is why I said it's merely a point of reference.

It also isn't the law in Arizona. Your nephew needs a refresher at the academy.

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/arizona.pdf

Arizona has passed “Permitless Carry.” That means anyone who can legally own/purchase a firearm and is 21 or older can carry it concealed without any type of permit/license. This new law becomes effective July 29, 2010. Those who wish to carry in Arizona without a permit/license from AZ or any other state can not carry in the places listed in the “Places Off Limits Even With a Permit’ section below. Arizona did not remove other restrictions in their law when they passed Permitless Carry. If you choose to carry without a permit from Arizona or any other state you must also abide by the following restriction.

The old language in Arizona statute was that a concealed firearm is one that is "not in plain sight or easily visible." Essentially, that meant that Arizona was one of those states in which a concealed carrier had to worry about "printing." Since concealed carry is now legal with NO permit, there is effectively no need to distinguish between concealed and open carry.
.