Central Information Exchange?
Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators
-
- Posts: 3504
- Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2005 10:52 pm
- Location: Lima, Ohio
Central Information Exchange?
quit the board, delete
Last edited by Buckshot on Wed Feb 01, 2006 10:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Daniel
- OFCC Coordinator
- Posts: 3375
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:07 am
- Location: Sheffield Village, OH
They're winging it. Hell, in Hamilton's examples, points 1 and 3 are contradictory!
Daniel White
NRA Training Counselor
Northcoast Firearms Training
We must carry arms because we value our lives and those of our loved ones, because we will not be dealt with by force or threat of force, and do not live at the pleasure and discretion of the lawless. - Jeff Snyder
NRA Training Counselor
Northcoast Firearms Training
We must carry arms because we value our lives and those of our loved ones, because we will not be dealt with by force or threat of force, and do not live at the pleasure and discretion of the lawless. - Jeff Snyder
-
- Posts: 1321
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 4:45 pm
- Location: ROSSFORD,OHIO
Central Information Exchange?
I have 2 friends that are LEO. I wear mine IWB and just tuck my shirt behind it when I get in my vehicle. They both told me that aslong as they can see at least the grip of the gun they would consider that "plain sight". I'm not saying all LEO's have this same opinion, but it really is a pain in the butt to pull the holster out and put it on the outside of my pants, then when you get back out tuck it back in your pants.
"Let me not mourn for men who have died fighting, but rather let me be glad that such heros have lived" ----- General George S. Patton Jr.
-
- OFCC Member
- Posts: 10911
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:41 pm
- Location: Mercer County, Ohio - what is yours?
Re: Central Information Exchange?
That is a bunch of BS! He can't make up definitions!Buckshot wrote:Is there a central information exchange on CCW stuff, or are the county prosecutors just winging it?
Ours (Allen Co.) has come up with the following points:
1. "In plain sight means that if you are asked to step out of your vehicle and turn 360 degrees in place WITHOUT ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO YOUR HOLSTER OR CLOTHING and your firearm can be seen visibily while you are turning you are "in plain sight".
2. A locking console or other FACTORY INTSTALLED locking compartment in a vehicle is fully interchangable in use and definition with "locking glove compartment".
3. A belt holster, when uncovered by tucking the outer garment behind the handgun grip is "in plain sight" while an IWB holster carried in exactly the same place and with the same tuck method "is NOT in plain sight".
Are they HIS points and determinations, or are they comming from some centeral group in Columbus? AG, some kind of working group, or what?
Thanks,
Buckshot
-
- Posts: 3504
- Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2005 10:52 pm
- Location: Lima, Ohio
IF he can't, who can?
quit the board, delete
Last edited by Buckshot on Wed Feb 01, 2006 10:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Glock Rock
- Posts: 993
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:50 am
- Location: Belly of the Beast (Cleveland)
Re: IF he can't, who can?
Yes. Case law.Buckshot wrote:I am trying to find out who, exactly DOES decide.
the courts?
Buckshot
- BKVic
- Posts: 128
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:13 am
- Location: Canal Winchester OH
Re: IF he can't, who can?
And as far as I know there are none yet. I hate to say it but some poor CHL holder is going to have to get arrested and fight it out in court before we get any definite answers as to what is in plain sight.Glock Rock wrote:Yes. Case law.Buckshot wrote:I am trying to find out who, exactly DOES decide.
the courts?
Buckshot
BKVic
You can take the Mountaineer out of the mountains but you cant take the mountains out of the Mountaineer!! GO WVU!!!
-
- Deceased
- Posts: 9710
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:31 am
- Location: Toledo
Re: IF he can't, who can?
Yes. Case law.
Yup, but that's the way our system works, and, for the most part, it works pretty well.BKVic wrote:And as far as I know there are none yet. I hate to say it but some poor CHL holder is going to have to get arrested and fight it out in court before we get any definite answers as to what is in plain sight.
TunnelRat
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
-
- Posts: 9557
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:36 am
- Location: Youngstown OH
Re: Central Information Exchange?
Definitely winging it. Most of the requirements in the law are way too vague to create a list like this.Buckshot wrote:Is there a central information exchange on CCW stuff, or are the county prosecutors just winging it?
Fine in the summer with a paddle or other belt holster and tucked shirt, but a PITA to conceal without putting on a jacket or sweater, which isn't necessarily a good idea in the summer.Ours (Allen Co.) has come up with the following points:
1. "In plain sight means that if you are asked to step out of your vehicle and turn 360 degrees in place WITHOUT ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO YOUR HOLSTER OR CLOTHING and your firearm can be seen visibily while you are turning you are "in plain sight".
Cold weather, though, implies a Sam Browne or some such over your jacket/parka, which may not pass the "on your person" test if a seat-belt holster won't. Impossible to conceal outside of vehicle without removing said belt & re-holstering someplace.
IMHO, any other "tuck behind" carry would be impossible, because there's no way to guarantee that the gun would stay exposed.
But, now for the fun part: You are not required to unconceal your weapon if you're not in a vehicle. A sentient Jury in a not-too-anti area would probably laugh at the LEO who brought somebody in on this one. If you get out of the car and the cover garment falls over the gun, who's fault is it? You were ordered by the officer to get out....
In short, I don't think the requirement would be reasonable, if even possible, on any sort of "always" basis.
I like this one - just common sense. Legitimate Officer Safety (and carjacker protection) requires that it be difficult to access the weapon without the Officer (or carjacker) being able to be relatively certain that you weren't just sitting there with your hands on the wheel. The rest of the "steal me" and glovebox stuff is fuzzy enough cover about any decent attempt to comply.2. A locking console or other FACTORY INTSTALLED locking compartment in a vehicle is fully interchangable in use and definition with "locking glove compartment".
As "Cable" pointed out, this is incompatible with Point 1, and nonsense too.3. A belt holster, when uncovered by tucking the outer garment behind the handgun grip is "in plain sight" while an IWB holster carried in exactly the same place and with the same tuck method "is NOT in plain sight".
Gonna keep some lawyers in expensive cars for a while....
One thing in our favor about the "in plain sight" (not original with me) - successful drug and weapons possession busts have been made based on a bit of residue in the ashtray, a cigarette behind the ear, or in a pocket, or, a bit of gun butt sticking out of a pocket or waistband. Can't have it both ways....
(And it's insulting.... We're being held to a higher standard of "in plain sight" than criminals....)
IANAL, but I hold that the "in plain sight" requirement is just plain impossible without wearing the gun in a manner that would get it shoved into your chest in an accident, and even then an approaching LEO or carjacker (wouldn't that be brandishing?) wouldn't really have a reasonable expectation of seeing the thing from a safe position behind the driver. Under the circumstances, I'd call it void.... However, it's then reasonable to ask "why didn't you put it in the glovebox or steal-me?" Fun with lawyers....
Regards,
Last edited by SMMAssociates on Tue Aug 16, 2005 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Stu.
(Why write a quick note when you can write a novel?)
(Why do those who claim to wish to protect me feel that the best way to do that is to disarm me?)
יזכר לא עד פעם
(Why write a quick note when you can write a novel?)
(Why do those who claim to wish to protect me feel that the best way to do that is to disarm me?)
יזכר לא עד פעם
-
- Deceased
- Posts: 9710
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:31 am
- Location: Toledo
Re: Central Information Exchange?
That may be because an overreaching government is more fearful of an armed citizenry than they are of criminals...SMMAssociates wrote:(And it's insulting.... We're being held to a higher standard of "in plain sight" than criminals....)
TunnelRat
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
-
- Posts: 9557
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:36 am
- Location: Youngstown OH
Re: Central Information Exchange?
Tom:tommcnaughton wrote:That may be because an overreaching government is more fearful of an armed citizenry than they are of criminals...SMMAssociates wrote:(And it's insulting.... We're being held to a higher standard of "in plain sight" than criminals....)
That pretty much spells it out....
And the fun thing is that they can say "well, we gave you a Concealed Carry law", too, if Hilary loses....
Can't win....
Regards,
Stu.
(Why write a quick note when you can write a novel?)
(Why do those who claim to wish to protect me feel that the best way to do that is to disarm me?)
יזכר לא עד פעם
(Why write a quick note when you can write a novel?)
(Why do those who claim to wish to protect me feel that the best way to do that is to disarm me?)
יזכר לא עד פעם
-
- Posts: 9557
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:36 am
- Location: Youngstown OH
Jeff:Petrofergov wrote:Now look, my main man Adolph Hitler would have issues with that remark.That may be because an overreaching government is more fearful of an armed citizenry than they are of criminals...
We need to look at why we have governments. I've chosen the following order to simplify my comments.
1. Public Works.
2. Protection from outside enemies.
3. Protection from inside enemies.
While non-trivial, point #1 is pretty simple. At some point a civilization may require cooperation and management on a scale that's not possible when it's just you and the guys next door. City Walls, water systems, this year's model of catapult.
Point #2. At some level, there's a reasonable assumption that the guys down the river a few cubits may decide that you have enough stuff, women, whatever, to be worth invading. Somebody has to organize a militia, or maintain a standing army. It's nice when a Cincinattus pops up out of the woodwork to do it himself, but usually somebody's got to appoint him, try to pay the army, etc.
Point #3 is where things get unsoldered. The Government may itself be the "inside enemy", seeking to treat us as if they were an invading army. Or it could be a criminal element, religious fanatics, or rabid soccer moms.... At this level, the Government usually provides Police and Fire services, and a host of other things that may or may not be of use.
The problem is simple, though. If we take it upon ourselves to take care of any part of this (usually the internal stuff), then the need for the Government and whatver extensions (agencies) that were doing it is lessened or eliminated. Whoops.... Can't have that.... Push 'em down, and keep 'em down. "We'll take care of everything." However, we're just too big now.... My 'burb had one LEO when I was growing up. The Sheriff would help out if something major happened, and the State Patrol handled traffic issues on State Highways. On a busy night, should I dial 911 for anything that isn't high-profile and in-progress, I'll get a response, but I better have a "safe room." We've got over 40 now, but they're kinda busy.
We've also turned into a real City in terms of crime and undesireable characters. And there's nothing much left to steal in Youngstown, so the criminal element there is working here too. Time was that you had to call the PD Dispatcher to ask 'em to say something in order to figure out if your radio was working. Not any more....
Very simply, the "tax & spend" folks don't want to give up our money, don't want to be told they're not necessary, and don't want to give up their jobs. It makes them unhappy if we can do things for ourselves.
The criminals, OTOH, are the reason we have much of this Government. The more the merrier....
/RANT
Regards,
Stu.
(Why write a quick note when you can write a novel?)
(Why do those who claim to wish to protect me feel that the best way to do that is to disarm me?)
יזכר לא עד פעם
(Why write a quick note when you can write a novel?)
(Why do those who claim to wish to protect me feel that the best way to do that is to disarm me?)
יזכר לא עד פעם
-
- *** Banned ***
- Posts: 4030
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:39 pm
Cool beans, Stu...
I got no problem with governement...where'd you get that idea?
Heck, government is a natural extension of civilization....I'm ALL for civilization....this crap of catching yer own dinner every day is for the birds.
I guess my problem is when oppressive jerks like hitler, stalin, hussien, amin, clinton...you get it..use government to oppress others.....sheesh.....how old is that story???
You know...with all the contempt I have for muslims....sometimes I have to put myself in their place....if I was a middle eastern muslim would I detest Americans????????
While I am disappointed in the average American...I still have faith in the American Spirit.....
If and when it finally gets down to the wire??? We will rise to the occasion...many will die....but the fighters will survive, and we will defeat our enemies and emerge victorious.
I got no problem with governement...where'd you get that idea?
Heck, government is a natural extension of civilization....I'm ALL for civilization....this crap of catching yer own dinner every day is for the birds.
I guess my problem is when oppressive jerks like hitler, stalin, hussien, amin, clinton...you get it..use government to oppress others.....sheesh.....how old is that story???
I hear ya dude...Trouble is...most Americans are fat, lazy slobs.....we have gotten accustomed to the government providing for us. We have evolved into fat, stupid, lazy, sedentary SLUGS.The problem is simple, though. If we take it upon ourselves to take care of any part of this (usually the internal stuff), then the need for the Government and whatver extensions (agencies) that were doing it is lessened or eliminated.
You know...with all the contempt I have for muslims....sometimes I have to put myself in their place....if I was a middle eastern muslim would I detest Americans????????
While I am disappointed in the average American...I still have faith in the American Spirit.....
If and when it finally gets down to the wire??? We will rise to the occasion...many will die....but the fighters will survive, and we will defeat our enemies and emerge victorious.
Last edited by Petrovich on Wed Aug 17, 2005 2:28 am, edited 1 time in total.