CCW no printing or printing?

[doublins]

Sure there is printing, no matter how good you think you are at concealment (unless you keep a winter coat on all day). Clothes combined with conscious movement help mitigate someone (joe citizen)from seeing, but there will always be a print somehow during the day.

A print doesn't mean that someone can see that there may be 'something' other than air between your clothing and skin- it means that the outline of a likely firearm is visible. So, there is no real excuse to print.

Edited the following sentence because it could have been worded better and it's intent was lost:

Printing is bad. It can get you into hot water (how hot depends on jurisdiction, whether OC is legal, intent, etc), because the deliberate display of a firearm through a cover garment (i.e. pulling your t-shirt tight over your appendix-carry gun), is brandishing without actually displaying or unholstering the gun. It sounds like this is the avenue that the OP was heading down with his line of questioning without asking it directly..

 

[joppaj]

Printing is illegal because it's used deliberately as a form of brandishing/intimidation.

Huh? Can I see the code for that one please?

 

[Indiana Jones]

A print doesn't mean that someone can see that there may be 'something' other than air between your clothing and skin- it means that the outline of a likely firearm is visible. So, there is no real excuse to print.

Printing is illegal because it's used deliberately as a form of brandishing/intimidation.

Aside from those trips to VA, PA, and DE, do you actually carry?

 

[awptickes]

A print doesn't mean that someone can see that there may be 'something' other than air between your clothing and skin- it means that the outline of a likely firearm is visible. So, there is no real excuse to print.

Printing is illegal because it's used deliberately as a form of brandishing/intimidation.

Lol.

Two questions:
How long have you had your permit?
Where did you get your law degree?

 

[gamer_jim]

Well a few weeks ago me and a family member had a long discussion of if carrying a firearm concealed and leaving printing thru clothing was beneficial or not? One thought was that if they didn't know you had a firearm are they likely? In Maryland the are taking laws on there side and most likely not "legally" carrying a firearm. Are you more likely to be a victim of a crime if you are or aren't showing a sign on personal protection while legally carrying and printing in a free state. One opinion was if you aren't showing then they are going to get a surprise them self. But on the other hand is printing a firearm a deterrent it self? If you were already a target now you are more venerable but you were to begin with for whatever reason being singled out.
So if you lived in a free state or travel to them with a ccw that is valid there and printing a firearm arm without open carry would you or would you not?
Please try to keep this open mind with opinion and facts. Not turn it into a bash fest on either side.

I don't see the benefit in printing on purpose when CCW'ing. There is quite discussion on these forums about CCW vs. Open Carry in regards to security.

I personally believe that each has their own place according to the law and comfort of the carrier.

That said, here is my story: Back when PA used to honor UT I would carry as often as possible. At the time I only had my Springfield XD 9mm which is a full sized 1911-style firearm. I was in TSC in Hanover carrying concealed in my Galco leather holster that sits IWB at about 5 o'clock. I was in a long line for check out leaning over my cart because I was tired. I heard the couple behind me talking when the woman said : "that man has a gun!" The man quietly said "uh-huh" and gave it no more conversation to the topic.

A few things:

First it was good to hear a PA resident not GAF that I was carrying. Obviously I wasn't there to rob the store if I was waiting in line.

Second, It made me much more conscientious of printing. It was one of the reasons I bought a smaller .380 with appropriate holster that I could probably conceal in my armpit.

For me, if I were out in a place where I felt OC was appropriate I would. I would never infringe upon someone else's right or ability to do that if they wanted to--Given they were following the law. I would probably only OC while hiking where having the concealed advantage on another human is not really important.

I would never see printing as a tactical advantage. We are to treat, and expect, everyone with respect. Having the ability to lawfully commit deadly force is nothing to flaunt. I pray that if I am ever in that situation that I would be able to read the signs and leave before being forced to draw for my own safety. As one human to another we are to try everything in our power to de-escalate and defuse a situation before it gets to the point of lawful lethal force.

As Ice-Cube said: Today is a good day when I didn't have to use my AK.

 

[doublins]

IANAL. That said, I carry daily, and have bothered to look into CCW laws, dos/dont's extensively to make sure I carry within the law.

"Printing" is indeed the revelation of a concealed firearm through a cover garment by making the shape of the firearm visible. Maybe I should have been more careful with my words, but printing is something that absolutely could get you in hot water if a LEO sees it, or if one is called in by a member of the public, especially depending on what state you're in. Will it necessarily land you in hot water? Of course not. But it absolutely could. The reason it is not allowed in states that do not offer open carry is because deliberate printing... i.e. pulling your shirt tight against your appendix-carry gun, would otherwise be a way to legally brandish or threaten without actually displaying or unholstering the firearm. That is what I meant.

Do you offer a different opinion?

Aside from those trips to VA, PA, and DE, do you actually carry?

Lol.

Two questions:
How long have you had your permit?
Where did you get your law degree?

 

[Stoveman]

IANAL. That said, I carry daily, and have bothered to look into this extensively.

"Printing" is indeed the revelation of a concealed firearm through a cover garment by making the shape of the firearm visible. Maybe I should have been more careful with my words, but printing is something that absolutely could get you in hot water if a LEO sees it, or if one is called in by a member of the public, especially depending on what state you're in. Will it necessarily land you in hot water? Of course not. But it absolutely could. The reason it is not allowed in states that do not offer open carry is because deliberate printing... i.e. pulling your shirt tight against your appendix-carry gun, would otherwise be a way to legally brandish or threaten without actually displaying or unholstering the firearm. That is what I meant.

Do you offer a different opinion?

Cite please. Pick a state, any state.


And you do know that Maryland is not a CC only state?

 

[Mr H]

doublins....

I grant that they are nothing more than anecdotes... but we have seen recitations here over the years where LEOs have pulled CCers aside and simply asked if they had a permit, then advised them to adjust their holster.

To declare as a blanket assessment that it is an illegal form of brandishing (accepting that in the states there are various degrees of transgression) is, on its face, absurd.

 

[RoadDawg]

Concealed = Concealed = Concealed...

Printing is for printing presses. If you do it to intentionally telegraph the fact that you are carrying... you really need to rethink carrying. Your ego is in the way of your better judgement.

 

[doublins]

doublins....

I grant that they are nothing more than anecdotes... but we have seen recitations here over the years where LEOs have pulled CCers aside and simply asked if they had a permit, then advised them to adjust their holster.

To declare as a blanket assessment that it is an illegal form of brandishing (accepting that in the states there are various degrees of transgression) is, on its face, absurd.

Mr H- I went ahead and edited my original statement because it's clear that my intent was lost through a poor choice of words, and I regret what confusion and... outrage... was generated. Hopefully the new wording makes my intention more clear? It was never meant as a blanket assessment, instead I was asserting that the "reason" printing is bad and can get you in hot water, is because of instances in which it is used as a means to 'show' or 'brandish' while staying 'concealed'.

Does that make anymore sense?

I feel like I should bow out of this conversation now before you guys get the torches and pitchforks out

 

[doublins]

Concealed = Concealed = Concealed...

Printing is for printing presses. If you do it to intentionally telegraph the fact that you are carrying... you really need to rethink carrying. Your ego is in the way of your better judgement.

RoadDawg gets it! This is what I inferred that the OP meant when he brought this up... maybe I misunderstood his intentions, but that is clearly the impression I got.

 

[Stoveman]

Concealed = Concealed = Concealed...

Printing is for printing presses. If you do it to intentionally telegraph the fact that you are carrying... you really need to rethink carrying. Your ego is in the way of your better judgement.

Straight up serious question for you or any other current or former LEOs: Did you ever get dispatched to a call from a concerned citizen that somebody was carrying a firearm because they could see the outline of it through their shirt?

And if so, how did the interaction with the carrier go?

 

[Art3]

Mr H- I went ahead and edited my original statement because it's clear that my intent was lost through a poor choice of words, and I regret what confusion and... outrage... was generated. Hopefully the new wording makes my intention more clear? It was never meant as a blanket assessment, instead I was asserting that the "reason" printing is bad and can get you in hot water, is because of instances in which it is used as a means to 'show' or 'brandish' while staying 'concealed'.

Does that make anymore sense?

I feel like I should bow out of this conversation now before you guys get the torches and pitchforks out

I was going to suggest simply changing the word, "because" to "if" in your post before you changed it. Too bad for you it got quoted before you could change it. Now it's on the internet forever! Like pee in a pool, once it goes in, it can never be completely removed.

And I think the torches may be going to the, "Who are you?" thread tonight...you're probably safe.

 

[Red5]

New on here. Eager to learn how to get a carry permit.

 

[Mark75H]

New on here. Eager to learn how to get a carry permit.

Open a business. Protecting cash is MSPLD's main authorizing key

 

[RoadDawg]

Straight up serious question for you or any other current or former LEOs: Did you ever get dispatched to a call from a concerned citizen that somebody was carrying a firearm because they could see the outline of it through their shirt?

And if so, how did the interaction with the carrier go?

Yes.
In one of those cases...
I found the person was illegally armed with a handgun and arrested him. He was found guilty in court.

And in other cases... I saw the "print" ... investigated further ... found the person was armed illegally, and made the arrest.

And yet in other cases... I investigated ... found that the person was legally armed ... advised them to be more responsible and told them that if I could see it, so could anyone who wanted to rob them and take it away from them. Showing it off only serves to give the advantage away to the bad guy.

 

[Blaster229]

A print doesn't mean that someone can see that there may be 'something' other than air between your clothing and skin- it means that the outline of a likely firearm is visible. So, there is no real excuse to print.

Edited the following sentence because it could have been worded better and it's intent was lost:

Printing is bad. It can get you into hot water (how hot depends on jurisdiction, whether OC is legal, intent, etc), because the deliberate display of a firearm through a cover garment (i.e. pulling your t-shirt tight over your appendix-carry gun), is brandishing without actually displaying or unholstering the gun. It sounds like this is the avenue that the OP was heading down with his line of questioning without asking it directly..

Explain how printing can get you into hot water? I'll listen. A gun that prints is a gun that is concealed, meaning it is covered and not out in the open to cause a scare.
So we are all clear here, we are not talking about a pistol in a level 3 retention duty holster under a tight Underarmour polo shirt.

Someone doing it deliberately is a whole other topic.

 

[Sealion]

Open a business. Protecting cash is MSPLD's main authorizing key

Does it have to be cash? My business (opening TBD) will be collecting checks. I thought I had read in other threads, it did not have to be cash only. Very curious if anyone knows for a fact. Thanks.

 

[Schipperke]

Does it have to be cash? My business (opening TBD) will be collecting checks. I thought I had read in other threads, it did not have to be cash only. Very curious if anyone knows for a fact. Thanks.

https://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=77878

 

[daggo66]

If you have permit in the State of Maryland while it is not a concealed carry permit, it is a "Wear Carry" some may say that is a permit to carry any way you want. MSP have stated that if you while carrying causes the public distress (easy these days) that could be reason to revoke your permit.

Can you please provide the details for this? First I ever heard of this. What exactly is "public distress?"