What is it worth for you to carry

[DD214]

If you are caught, the worst case scenario, since you are inexperienced at concealed carry, would be the officer asks you if you are carrying and you reply yes and reach for the gun. Then someone has to tell your family about your tragic demise, while the officers actions are Monday morning quarterbacked by everyone, when all he did was resort to his training and react to...yes...fear. So please don't look at the world as if it is always trying to take away your Constitutional Rights, but see the fact that not everyone, not many actually, have any common sense at all. Just because you feel you are capable and qualified to carry, Billy Bob down the street, who is a drunk and a complete idiot, thinks he too is going to carry. Sorry but that does not make me feel safe at all.

Huh, funny thing is that this doesn't seem to be true at all in the 40 states that allow citizens to carry. Is there something special about MD gun owners that make them extraordinarily irresponsible or untrustworthy? This is the same argument that I hear from the antis that show up in Annapolis for the CCW hearings (just add the Wild West factor to complete the argument), but it is easy to shoot down with statistics from the other 80% of the US that can legally carry.

I'm not saying that one should break the law and carry in MD, although if I really, honestly believed that I was going to die if I didn't, then of course I would. Novus, isn't there something in MD code that allows an unlicensed individual to carry if there is an imminent threat? Maybe I imagined that, but I thought there was some kind of exception for extreme circumstances.

 

[novus collectus]

Huh, funny thing is that this doesn't seem to be true at all in the 40 states that allow citizens to carry. Is there something special about MD gun owners that make them extraordinarily irresponsible or untrustworthy? This is the same argument that I hear from the antis that show up in Annapolis for the CCW hearings (just add the Wild West factor to complete the argument), but it is easy to shoot down with statistics from the other 80% of the US that can legally carry.

I don't think he meant people legally carrying, I think he meant inexperienced unlicensed carry specifically.

I'm not saying that one should break the law and carry in MD, although if I really, honestly believed that I was going to die if I didn't, then of course I would. Novus, isn't there something in MD code that allows an unlicensed individual to carry if there is an imminent threat? Maybe I imagined that, but I thought there was some kind of exception for extreme circumstances.

There is an exception for fear of apprehended danger for concealed weapons, but not in the "Handguns" section.

YOu have to check with someone that knows what it means, but there is somthing called a common law "affirmative defense" which I am not sure if it can be used for that in MD.




If I am wrong about the antique handguns worn concealed I keep mentioning and they are not exempted from the "Weapons" statute, then there is still the "fear of apprehended danger" exception available because it is not a violation of the "Handguns" statute which does not have the exception.

(b) This section does not prohibit the following individuals from carrying a weapon:

(1) an officer of the State, or of any county or municipal corporation of the State, who is entitled or required to carry the weapon as part of the officer's official equipment, or by any conservator of the peace, who is entitled or required to carry the weapon as part of the conservator's official equipment, or by any officer or conservator of the peace of another state who is temporarily in this State;

(2) a special agent of a railroad;

(3) a holder of a permit to carry a handgun issued under Title 5, Subtitle 3 of the Public Safety Article; or

(4) an individual who carries the weapon as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger, subject to the right of the court in an action arising under this section to judge the reasonableness of the carrying of the weapon, and the proper occasion for carrying it, under the evidence in the case.

But this would only apply to an antique handgun worn concealed and not modern handguns.

I am definitely not a lawyer (for those that do not yet know).

 

[DD214]

I don't think he meant people legally carrying, I think he meant inexperienced unlicensed carry specifically.

Ok, but the "training" that you receive in the states that I am aware of is a mere technicality, and in my case I received my permits sans training with nothing more than a DD214. How about VT or AK where no permit or training is required? My point is that I think the argument presented is not an accurate portrayal of reality. I'm a firm believer in letting anyone carry who can legally purchase a firearm. VT carry is the way to go. Live Free or Die (hat tip, NH)!

 

[urbanwarrior]

First of all I don't feel bashed at all, so we can put that one to rest. What we have here is a discussion about a spirited topic near and dear to many of us. I have said before I am here because I am one of you. I don't get on here to play devils advocate and start trouble just to argue. As a LEO we have some classes on law but for the most part its OJT. As with alot things in all walks of like its trial by fire. Thats why we have FTO's to teach the newer officers and veteran officers to guide officers less experienced as the newer ones. I am going to go back and address each post one by one because I have 2 small children that were my main focus today since it was Halloween and they were off the wall excited and I have not had the opportunity to check this thread til now, except that my tour of duty today was to go to the range and receive my X-26!!!
DD214, we will have to have Novus do his thing to find the answer to that. I personally don't believe there is any exception to the CCW laws.
Shawn, you will probably get a different answer to your question with each and every LEO you ask, because you are asking questions that are trivial to some degree because there is not a black and white answer to all of them. Lawmakers don't sit down and beat themselves to death thinking up every possible scenario and making law on it. We, LEO's, lawmakers, judges, etc., are not God and as I said before, even Judges will agree, the law is open to individual interpretation, it has to be because there is not a specific law on each and every scenario we can spend all the time in the world on here thinking up. Thats why if you are convicted of a crime and you file an appeal, a higher court can overturn your conviction because they interpreted the law or even specifics about the trial differently than the initial trial judge. Alot of us do carry the Digest of Criminal Laws with us, but once again there is not every possible situation in there. And BTW, lawyers are not walking law dictionaries. They have the time to sit down and research case law and come up with...you guessed it....an answer that is their interpretation. I have received answers and interpretations from States Attorneys that I have consulted with on a situation and got off the phone and completely disagreed with what they told me or just shook my head because I knew more before I made the call! I am well versed in the laws that apply to situations that I face everyday. If I don't know the answer to a question or situation, you betcha I can make a phone call and get it from a detective or someone that specializes in that area. I don't know what else to tell ya.
CharlieFoxTrot, I meant to say exactly what I said. I have been told that by many attorneys on both sides. I have done this many many times in the real world and have never lost or even been challenged on it. I am not going to leave several persons inside a vehicle where they have a distinct tactical advantage over me. If its grandma I pulled over for running a stop sign, she probably ain't gonna be asked to step out of the car. However, if I am in a particularly violent crime ridden area, which is where I happen to work, and I stop a car full of young males, 16-25 years of age and they can be white, black, green or yellow for all I care. Who are leaving an area at an expedited rate of speed with the lights off, and yes this is just one of a thousand different scenarios we can come up with, they are getting stopped and I am calling for backup and everyone is going to be getting out of the car and checked for weapons and the vehicle is going to be checked for weapons also. Focusr3, this should address your post as well.
Mudskipper, here here, for once we agree. I agree that if you need to protect yourself and your life is genuinely in danger, please by all means protect yourself and your family.
Rattlesnake and Redneck I am in complete agreement with you gentlemen also.
In closing, the law and how its interpreted is something that will always be up for debate. As I have said there is not a law or policy covering every little scenario we could come up with. There are laws and policies that govern and guide us through the majority of issues that arise to LEO's. The rest should fall close enough to a governed subject that a resonable and prudent person could draw a logical and legal conclusion. So let it fly back at me....

 

[FXWG]

I work as a construction supervisor and a lot of our work is now in some bad parts of Baltimore City, re: Park heights, Cherry Hill, ect. I often have to pick up checks from the general contractors and every week drop off payroll to my crews as they work. I have a Florida and Virginia ccw permits but none for MD. I do not carry as I do these duties because although I do worry sometimes I do not want to take a chance on losing my FL. and VA. permits.

Now when I ride my motorcycle into PA I do often take a ccw with me but until I get to the PA/MD line the weapon is unloaded with pistol in one saddle bag and mag in the other with both bags locked. MY FL. ccw permit is good in PA. It is a shame MD is such a liberal state and wont allow the law abiding citizens to take precautions to protect ourselves, family and property.

I am not going to tell anybody how to vote on Tuesday Nov. 4th but I do have just two words for everyone:

THINK REPUBLICAN!


GOD Bless America

 

[hughmon]

Urbanwarrior I have not followed this thread closely, but I wanted to say that I always appreciate a well reasoned post, especially on a subject where passions are high.

I also appreciate the hearing perspective of an LEO. Thanks for your participation, and shouldering an essential, dangerous, and often thankless profession.

 

[urbanwarrior]

No thanks to me for what I choose to do is necessary. I do also agree with the rediciulous nature of the politics of this state. Yes...I do wish the State of Maryland would get over itself and make alot of changes to the CCW laws.

 

[Splitter]

I did follow the thread and want to thank urbanwarrior for giving a LEO's perspective. It is valauble and appreciated.

I look at LEO's as people: some are good and a few are bad, most are just trying to do their job. And they all have good and bad days...and moods.

I respect the fact that they go into dangerous places and often come into contact with the worst sorts in our society. I do not respect them when they are hiding and trying to catch speeders going to work, or worse, when they are trying to catch people early on a Sunday morning going to church (this coming from a guy that has only ever been pulled over for speeding twice in my life, knock wood). But I still figure they would rather be doing something else besides traffic so I would still treat them with the respect they deserve.

Truly, the hiding/sneaking thing brings them down in the eyes of many regular citizens. It's unfortunate.

I also realize that the "small talk" they often make during stops often has a real point to it (ie. trying to uncover damaging information) and I refuse to participate in that. I cannot stop them from searching my vehicle, they wouldn't find anything anyway, but I can state that I refuse the search and let the courts sort it out later.

My point is that cops do a tough and sometimes dangerous job. And they are human. They should get the respect they deserve until they do something to lose it, which is probably how most LEO's view regular citizens too.

I did not see a lot of LEO bashing in this thread and again, I appreciate urbanwarrior's input and perspective.

Splitter

 

[CharlieFoxtrot]

In following this thread I am reminded that one of the things I like about these forums is that by and large the people on here discuss issues in an intelligent and respectful way and that there is very little tolerance from the community and the mods for bashing and flaming.
UrbanWarrior: one of the most difficult things about an LEO's job IMO is that they must make split second decisions that will be dissected in minute detail by people in the judicial system in hindsight and in the comfort of their offices. I think this is especially true in Constitutional Criminal Law: an area that has far more grey areas than bright lines. I interpreted your comments as saying that in a traffic stop for a non-must appear offense you have the right to order everyone out of a car (which I agree you do) and then can then detain them all and pat them down and search the passenger compartment of the car. I respectfully disagree with you that this is Constitutional without further reasonable articulable suspicion on your part that the occupants present a danger to you or have contraband. Other additional factors that you mentioned in your latter post such as driving away at high rate of speed without headlights, high crime area etc. might give you what you need IMO.

 

[urbanwarrior]

Yup, in my little scenario I gave myself a good bit more probable cause, so to speak, in most peoples eyes. I do not have the exact law or wording, I was kinda counting on Novus for that, but I am going to make every attempt to obtain it from some attorneys that I have some faith in this week. Any assistance from anyone else would be helpful, otherwise I'll get back with it as soon as I can.

 

[novus collectus]

Yup, in my little scenario I gave myself a good bit more probable cause, so to speak, in most peoples eyes. I do not have the exact law or wording, I was kinda counting on Novus for that, but I am going to make every attempt to obtain it from some attorneys that I have some faith in this week. Any assistance from anyone else would be helpful, otherwise I'll get back with it as soon as I can.

CharlieFoxtTrot is an attorney.

 

[Redneck]

No thanks to me for what I choose to do is necessary. I do also agree with the rediciulous nature of the politics of this state. Yes...I do wish the State of Maryland would get over itself and make alot of changes to the CCW laws.

I often hear that most LEOs do agree that citizens should be allowed to CCW, providing they are qualified. In your line of work if you come across someone who is carrying and is allowed even if at the time you don't know it, that has to obviously change how you would handle the situation, right? If they say yes I am carrying officer what is your next move? Reach for your gun? Ask for paperwork? How do you handle that situation? If they are ok to carry do you leave them with the weapon while you proceed to do your business of why you pulled them over or stopped them? I am just very curious since this doesn't really happen here in MD about how the situation is handled.

 

[urbanwarrior]

CharlieFoxtTrot is an attorney.

My guess is a defense attorney. No offense, but that seems to be the angle being taken. I'm not trying to get into that whole thing, but we all have our guidelines within which we must operate. All I am saying is that I have been told by the group of attorneys that prosecute my cases, I am doing it right and prosecuting my cases is no problem. They can't always say that for all my peers, unfortunately.

I often hear that most LEOs do agree that citizens should be allowed to CCW, providing they are qualified. In your line of work if you come across someone who is carrying and is allowed even if at the time you don't know it, that has to obviously change how you would handle the situation, right? If they say yes I am carrying officer what is your next move? Reach for your gun? Ask for paperwork? How do you handle that situation? If they are ok to carry do you leave them with the weapon while you proceed to do your business of why you pulled them over or stopped them? I am just very curious since this doesn't really happen here in MD about how the situation is handled.

Well I work in Baltimore City, which as most of you know is an animal unto itself. In 13 years here, and all of it on the street in various violent crime units and patrol division, I have only had 1, yes 1, encounter with someone that was armed and had a permit. That was several years ago and he was standing on a street corner on Southwest Baltimore. As I drove past I saw the breeze blow his "cover" shirt to the side and I saw a large silver revolver in a shoulder holster. I turned around and went to "speak" with him. Now, first of all like I said it was in a shoulder holster, that in and of itself told me this guy was probably legit, but it is my duty, and curiosity, to INVESTIGATE. As I approached him he immediately put his hands on his head and said I am a bailbondsman and I am armed. I removed the revolver, a .357 if I remember, from his holster and handed it to my backup and asked him if he had any other weapons, to which he replied no. I then patted him down and told him to put his hands down and asked for his ID and permit. Both of which he had in his wallet in his back pocket, and without hesitation, handed them to me. After checking those documents I gave him his pistol back and told him to be careful because I had seen the pistol as the breeze blew open his shirt as I passed by and that sort of thing can make people nervous, and to please be careful to not let that happen in the future. He thanked me, we shook hands and went our seperate ways. Now, that was that situation, every one will be different depending on many variables, most depending on the other person. Also taken into account is environment and location. All the other guns, handguns, rifles, shotguns and assault rifles (yes automatic ones too), have come off of less than savory characters in less than ideal situations, and there are several hundred of them I have personally recovered. I have never been sued or been accused of being unconsitiutional or anything of the like. Have I won every case in court, NO. Thats just the nature of the business. Has everyone had kind things to say about me at the end of our little encounter, once again, NO. They are commiting criminal acts and got caught and didn't like being caught. The old addage, did they dislike more being caught or the fact that they broke the law!! We can all do the math on that one! Let me have it....

 

[CharlieFoxtrot]

Yes I'm a defense attorney right now. I'm also a former prosecutor who taught search and seizure law to the the local Police Academy classes. If you have any questions I would suggest taking a few minutes to talk to an Assitant State's Attorney that you trust. I know I was always more than happy to take the time to answer any questions any officers might have. After all in the long run it made my job easier.

 

[fivepointstar]

Yes I'm a defense attorney right now. I'm also a former prosecutor who taught search and seizure law to the the local Police Academy classes. If you have any questions I would suggest taking a few minutes to talk to an Assitant State's Attorney that you trust. I know I was always more than happy to take the time to answer any questions any officers might have. After all in the long run it made my job easier.

CF

I'm actually glad you are here to bring some balance. You are able to look at both prespectives from the CD and the SAO side of issues. Sometimes I see a lot of police bashing on this forum, sometimes is deserving but most of the time is unwarranted.

There are so many people that don't understand 4A and they think the LEO ignore 4A and step all over citizens rights. I don't want to call it "ignorance" but for a lack of a better term it is, just not knowing the perameters of seach and seizure.

I see that they don't understand "reasonable suspicion" and "probable cause" and think HEY the 4th Amendment is DEAD!!! Everyone has thier place

-Legislature write the law
-Judiciary interpret the law
-police enforce the law
-OSA prosecute the law
-CD make sure that everyone is kept in check.

People don't understand if there is a violation of 4A in a suppresion hearing, that case can lost by the prosecution. I'm hoping with your years of experience in the SAO and teaching at the academy can bring balance and understanding to those who don't understand.

 

[jehu]

Spot77





Join Date: May 2005
Location: Anne Arundel County
Posts: 5,551 It's not worth my honor and breaking my word.

I've tried to live my life by the law, and I've testified countless times in front of the legislature about how I, as a law abiding citizen should be allowed to carry.

I'd rather die with my integrity than live without it Our forefathers rebelled against unjust laws by refusing to follow them, they fought aginst them to uphold their freedom and integrity. The right to self defense and self preservation is a God given right and best preserved with the best weapons of the day. Do not follow blindly into the abyss. Were the black civil disenters of the 60's giving up their integrity when they disobey discriminatory laws against them?

 

[gamer_jim]

I recently started employment with a local government agency. One of the mandatory classes we had to take was "Workplace Violence Prevention". Funny thing mentioned several times throughout the video and by the LEO giving the lecture, people "fascinated with firearms" were a risk indicator for someone likely to commit workplace violence.

Also, for this particular local government, all firearms by non-LEO's are banned, EVEN IF YOU HAVE A MSP ISSUED CCW. That surprised me. Can a local government really make a law against carrying concealed if you have a MD State issued CCW?!?

Certainly the message of the day was "guns are bad" and "people with guns are bad". We did talk about other things as well, other indicators, but the guns thing really irritated me. Again, if CCW permits were shall issue, I think workplace shootings would be eliminated overnight. Yeah, they crazy nut-job might get one shot off but their co-workers, who would be armed, would be able to respond immediately.

I'm so tired of this "people with guns" attitude and have never seen it so prevalent since I started my new job. Am I missing something or am I not seeing something they are?

 

[gamer_jim]

...assault rifles (yes automatic ones too)

Are there any other kinds?


I'm giving you a hard time, but really my hat is off to you for your service. I now work with LEO's and I have a lot of respect for someone who is willing to do what you guys do. A shame that most of them are good and the few bad ones give a bad name to the rest of you. I try not to let that filter my opinion when I see one on the street, or when I get pulled over.

 

[novus collectus]

I recently started employment with a local government agency. One of the mandatory classes we had to take was "Workplace Violence Prevention". Funny thing mentioned several times throughout the video and by the LEO giving the lecture, people "fascinated with firearms" were a risk indicator for someone likely to commit workplace violence.

There are about 80 million gun owners in America and most of them are enthusiasts. We know there are not 80 million nutjobs shooting up workplaces so we know there is something wrong with their stereotyping right there.
No it is possible a large portion of workplace shooters are gun enthusiasts, but hey, if a large portion, like maybe one in three adults, are gun enthusiasts, then it only makes sense that workplace violence involves a similar percentage.
I seriously doubt the percentages are the same though because most people with mental problems or impulse control cannot own firearms anyway so while a few of them may own firearms illegally anyway, it would still lower the percentage of the attacks being gun owning gun enthusiasts.

Also, for this particular local government, all firearms by non-LEO's are banned, EVEN IF YOU HAVE A MSP ISSUED CCW. That surprised me. Can a local government really make a law against carrying concealed if you have a MD State issued CCW?!?

No, there is a state preemption on the possession of regulated firearms.
They might be able to tell you to leave though, or there might be a state law about government buildings in the handgun permit section. (have to look it up)

§ 5-133.

(a) This section supersedes any restriction that a local jurisdiction in the State imposes on the possession by a private party of a regulated firearm, and the State preempts the right of any local jurisdiction to regulate the possession of a regulated firearm.

Certainly the message of the day was "guns are bad" and "people with guns are bad". We did talk about other things as well, other indicators, but the guns thing really irritated me. Again, if CCW permits were shall issue, I think workplace shootings would be eliminated overnight. Yeah, they crazy nut-job might get one shot off but their co-workers, who would be armed, would be able to respond immediately.

I'm so tired of this "people with guns" attitude and have never seen it so prevalent since I started my new job. Am I missing something or am I not seeing something they are?

I think this gun owners are bad mentality is a holdover from the 80s and early 90s. The insurance and human resources people are propagating the attitude and the only way we can change their erroneous impressions is if we take them to the range and we let them turn into gun enthusiasts just like us.
I have spoken to a few mailmen that will only speak about their gun ownership in whispers (sometimes literally in whispers...seriously) because they think if the USPS or their superiors find out they fear some kind of reaction that will lead them to losing their job.

 

[Spot77]

Spot77





Join Date: May 2005
Location: Anne Arundel County
Posts: 5,551 It's not worth my honor and breaking my word.

I've tried to live my life by the law, and I've testified countless times in front of the legislature about how I, as a law abiding citizen should be allowed to carry.

I'd rather die with my integrity than live without it Our forefathers rebelled against unjust laws by refusing to follow them, they fought aginst them to uphold their freedom and integrity. The right to self defense and self preservation is a God given right and best preserved with the best weapons of the day. Do not follow blindly into the abyss. Were the black civil disenters of the 60's giving up their integrity when they disobey discriminatory laws against them?

Completely different.

By your reasoning, I should carry illegally to prove a point to the legislature, to change the laws......

I do more to change the ccw laws in Maryland than 95% of the people here, and I don't need to break the law to change the law.

My best offense against the legislature is being a man of my word. Carrying illegally during the night, while proclaiming to be an usptanding citizen denied my rights during the day is not something I can do. Being a hypocrit will accomplish nothing.

To each and his own.