Campus encounter

[Sky Pilot]

Another good reason to peruse this forum: I've found a few misconceptions that could get me in trouble, and thanks to the wisdom of my good compadres hereon, you've all kept me from several potential problems! A big THANK YOU!!
(Years in the emergency services taught me that prevention is much, much cheaper than the post-event cleanup!)
Anyway:
I was in line at the drive-thru ATM and had just inserted card and keyed in my secret decoder-ring combination. Some Jack Doe in a red Ford pickup pulled up behind me and laid on the horn. No idea who this impolite soul was, or is.
I had been in the habit of keeping the key in the lock of my "Steal Me" box.
Apparently (above reference to Ohio's Byzantine laws) this isn't a good idea.
A quick flip of the fingers and the box was unlocked and ready. Fortunately nothing further transpired, though I was using my mirrors often!
I'll go to the plain view holster from now on.
Mein freunds, thank you again for your clarification of such details as they key in the lock. You may have saved me a great deal of difficulty!

[MJK]

I had been in the habit of keeping the key in the lock of my "Steal Me" box.
Apparently (above reference to Ohio's Byzantine laws) this isn't a good idea.

Nobody knows for sure if it is or isn't legal to have the key in the lock. I believe the argument is, the key in the lock may violate the spirit of the law. The USA is not a spirit of the law nation, so in my opinion (which probably isn't worth much) the lock is still locked as long as the key is turned to the locked position. I believe a person who was taken to court over the issue would win. However, I don't feel like being the test case. So I will make sure the key is out of the lock in the event that I am stopped by law enforcement.

[dan_sayers]

In the rare event I'm travelling with mine in the glovebox because I know I will be visiting a CPZ, my key is in the lock. If something happens and I get pulled over, it won't be. Otherwise, who knows? It's more important to be able to defend myself if the need be than to follow along with some nonsensical hurdles set up by those who would only hate to see me smitten because it would mean less tax dollars for them. /I/ have to protect me, so I do what I can to obey the law. That doesn't include locking myself away from them. Otherwise, what did I spend all that time, money, and effort on training, buying, practicing, getting licensed, etc?

Thankfully, I'm almost never in any CPZ's.

[GasTurbine]

In the rare event I'm travelling with mine in the glovebox because I know I will be visiting a CPZ, my key is in the lock.

This circumvention of the law is ileagal. Having the key "in the lock" renders the glove box by definetion, "unlocked".

If you are ever seen, or caught locking your glove box after a stop, you CAN ( and should) be charged.

Until the law is changed, be lawful, not unlawful.

[dan_sayers]

Should? Yeah, right. Unless I'm using my guns in an unlawful manner, no charge should surface. I'm not afraid to admit that I WILL protect myself in any way possible at all times. That's why when I'm showering, they're right there with me. You never know and that's the point. One day you'll have to accept that people have their own free will and that might mean they make decisions differently from you.

[GasTurbine]

Its not about making decisions diffferently, it about making a decision to violate law...which you have stated you do.

It makes no difference that you are doing it in an effort to protect yourself at all times...that is not relavant to the fact that you ARE breaking the law...period.

It would now seem your signature is a lie.

Take care now...b,bye!

[NavyChief]

This circumvention of the law is ileagal. Having the key "in the lock" renders the glove box by definetion, "unlocked".

You may - or may not - be correct. There has been much discussion on this, but no - to my knowledge - case law. And, of course, who wants to be the test case? Nonetheless, being a reasonably competent "grammarian" (but certainly no lawyer), I would say that the key being in the lockset, but the lockset to the "locked" position would be locked. I could be wrong.

[SMMAssociates]

IANAL....

The "spirit" of the law would say that it's a violation to keep the key in the lock.

The criminal-friendly folks in Columbus don't want us to be able to get to the gun to defend ourselves and others.

From a standpoint of "Officer Safety", which is usually invoked, it's a little more interesting. If you can grab the gun before an approaching Officer can see you do it, it's likely a violation. If you're going to have to bounce around a bit, it's probably not....

'Course, it's hard to say how this would go in Court.

Regards,

[Raph84]

Its not about making decisions diffferently, it about making a decision to violate law

People decide to "violate" the law everyday. Ever go 5 mph over in the passing lane...if so you broke the law.
While I would never say it is a good thing to break the law, I will say it is not necessarily immoral or unethical to break and or bend a law if that law is unjust or if there is conjecture about the letter of the law (and you are willing to pay for the consequences if it is determined you broke said law)

If the Law says the box must be locked, but does not define locked (as it does not define plain sight) then each individual needs to decide how they want to interpret it.
Those that don't want any trouble will make darn sure it is locked and the key is nowhere in sight (similar to the people who make darn sure they are in plain sight by wearing a tactical thigh holster vs. those who buckeye tuck with an IWB). Those that are less inclined to follow the intent but the letter of the law will keep the key in the box (with the mechanism locked).

The best part is until someone gets busted and goes to trail for it, we will not really know what the law is (just like plain sight).

[GasTurbine]

People decide to "violate" the law everyday. Ever go 5 mph over in the passing lane...if so you broke the law.

Sure, but theres a big difference between a minor traffic violation, by staying with the flow of traffic, and not complying with gun handling law.

While I would never say it is a good thing to break the law, I will say it is not necessarily immoral or unethical to break and or bend a law if that law is unjust or if there is conjecture about the letter of the law (and you are willing to pay for the consequences if it is determined you broke said law)

Generally, I dont agree. I conduct myself within the letter of the law the best I can. Simply ignoring the law (and reguarly being charged) is ignorant, and does nothing to change it. I would rather spend my time lobbying for a change.

If the Law says the box must be locked, but does not define locked (as it does not define plain sight) then each individual needs to decide how they want to interpret it.

And the DA will have his/her own definition as well...and so will a jury. And common sense will dictate...what percentage of people do you think would consider a box "locked", if the key was in it?

Take care.

[dan_sayers]

Sure, but theres a big difference between a minor traffic violation, by staying with the flow of traffic, and not complying with gun handling law.

O RLY? Taking a 3,000 pound car and using it to go faster than the signs in that area have dictated to be "safe", in a lane that is riddled with vehicles going in the opposite direction is less of an infraction in your head than having a key in a lock? Your eagerness to judge others and make a case in doing so is both desperate and obvious.

And the DA will have his/her own definition as well...and so will a jury. And common sense will dictate...what percentage of people do you think would consider a box "locked", if the key was in it?

Yes, differing bodies have the potential for differing interpretations. But since you chose to play the "common sense" card, I feel constrained to remind you that a closed door is closed despite the fact that it is equipped with a doorknob; the turning of which would render the door open. Only when speaking of potential energy does what an item MIGHT become impact it's present identity.

[MJK]

My 2 cents...

If I truly felt the key being in the lock was illegal, I wouldn't keep it there. That being said, I would still pull the key from the lock if pulled over by a police officer. It's the same reason I slow down to 50 when I see a cop in a 55 zone. I don't like to take the chance.

The Ohio Attorney General has stated that "plain sight" is a common sense term. It seems reasonable to assume that "locked" is also a common sense term, being that there is no legal definition for it.

If I have turned the key to the locked position, and I can pull on the glovebox's handle and it doesn't open, then it is locked.

[GasTurbine]

O RLY? Taking a 3,000 pound car and using it to go faster than the signs in that area have dictated to be "safe", in a lane that is riddled with vehicles going in the opposite direction is less of an infraction in your head than having a key in a lock?

Ive never driven in a lane that is "...riddled with vehicles going in the opposite direction".

Your eagerness to judge others and make a case in doing so is both desperate and obvious.

Hehe heh...its like listening to your 6 year old compile complex sentences, with big words he doesnt understand...

...it doesnt make any sense, but they sure are cute trying.

Take care.

[GasTurbine]

Only when speaking of potential energy does what an item MIGHT become impact it's present identity.

Aw...isnt that cute!

[dan_sayers]

Passing takes place in a lane designed for traffic in the opposite direction. You have a license, right?

And you're more than welcome to visit dictionary.com should you encounter words you're not familiar with.