'shadow' ccw: true or not?

[Mannlicher]

The great State of Florida did not 'grant the right' to carry to it's Citizens until 1987. By then, I had been carrying something daily for about 25 years. I knew many people that followed that same path.
I went 'legal' as soon as the CCW law was passed, but I still know a lot of folks that carry without the benefit of State sanction.

[BlueTrain]

Here's a twist on the situation. I live in Fairfax County, Virginia, just outside Washington, D.C. Back a few years ago when the "shall issue" law apparently became effective and more people began applying for a carry license, some local paper took it upon themselves to publish the names of those applying for licenses. Under those circumstances, probably more than a few thought twice about doing it.

I don't have a license and do not carry a gun (like Jeff Cooper, I stay out of dangerous places) but that is the most unreasonable, inconsiderate thing I can think of at the moment. It would be like publishing how you voted in the last election.

[lockedcj7]

The Communist (I mean Commercial) Appeal in Memphis did the same thing. They hide behind the 1st Amendment and FOI but they'll take every opportunity to attack the 2A.

[OBIWAN]

In many places carrying without a CCW is merely a misdemeanor

So I can see some folks deciding that they were willing to "risk it"

Were those same folks suddenly required to use the weapon they might suddenly wish they had bothered with the paperwork

[Ct.]

like Jeff Cooper, I stay out of dangerous places

Dangerous people are not confined within the area of "dangerous places". So if you leave your home you are now in a potentially hostile environment. Schools are meant to be safe places, but they aren't as deranged loonies with guns show us time and time again they go in and shoot up a safe place.

Just because you avoid the most dangerous places doesn't mean you aren't in one. Just something to think about

[BlueTrain]

The Jeff Cooper comment came from a magazine article in which various gunwriters were asked about their favorite hideout weapon or something like that. Mr. Cooper refused to give one because he stayed out of dangerous places like bars and so on. I stay out of bars myself, I'm not in retail sales and my coming and going is pretty much confined to going to work everyday, accompanied by hundreds of my closest friends.

I believe we are led to believe the world (our world, that is) is made to seem to be a very dangerous place because for one reason, CNN and other news stations spend all their time talking about some relatively isolated incident that took place two thousand miles away and for another, some peoples or groups agendas are advanced when the world is made to seem more dangerous. Not necessarily more dangerous than it really is, just more dangerous. In other words, it sells and lots of people have things to sell you.

I also base my thinking on my own experiences, as no doubt you all do. I am confined, as someone said, by the narrowness of my own experience. But you also make your own experiences, in a way. There are lots of comments here about awareness, yet there are also many stories of things happening to people. So far, knock on wood, little has happened to me but I'm doing my best to fly under the radar. Still, there is a first time for everything. I had lived in my present house for 18 years before someone through no fault of their own, no doubt, drove through my neighbors yard, demolished my old Ford station wagon that had 199,000 miles on it and wound up on her roof. It ruined my evening but I met all of my neighbors that night and was impressed by the response of the local fire and police departments.

I realize it is a dangerous world and that anything can happen at any time. After all, I have insurance on the house and the car and have used it for both. But, ironically, many places I go do not allow guns and even the range has a sign that says no loaded guns on the premises off the firing line.

Maybe sometime I'll let you know about the things I do that are really risky.

[BlueTrain]

Here is something of a relative nature. If you think I'm running around the countryside taking all sorts of risks, which I may well be, trusting only in Divine Providence, then consider my wife's cousin.

One of my wife's cousins is a free-lance journalist. He has lived overseas for most of the past 25 years. He has lived in Bankok, Moscow, Pristina (Kosovo), Cairo (Egypt, not Illinois) and sundry other interesting places. In fact, he married a Serb but the family could use some fresh blood. My son once asked him if he carried a gun and he just laughed. He was with the invading army going into Iraq but got kicked out because of a slip of the lip. At the moment he is in Afganistan, about which he has had a book published. So he's been around and, well, he's still around. In Iraq and Afganistan he generally travelled with a guide but he has still been through the experience of being held up. The whole family kind of thinks he is living on borrowed time.

Now, tell me again how dangerous a life I am living.

[Mikeyboy]

Here's a twist on the situation. I live in Fairfax County, Virginia, just outside Washington, D.C. Back a few years ago when the "shall issue" law apparently became effective and more people began applying for a carry license, some local paper took it upon themselves to publish the names of those applying for licenses. Under those circumstances, probably more than a few thought twice about doing it.

I don't have a license and do not carry a gun (like Jeff Cooper, I stay out of dangerous places) but that is the most unreasonable, inconsiderate thing I can think of at the moment. It would be like publishing how you voted in the last election.

That is Horrible. The best candidate for a CW permit is a guy/gal who just wants to carry for protection. They are not on a power trip, they are not going to be waiving it around, the want to keep it private, and decrete. These are the SAME people who would think twice about applying for a permit because their name will be in the paper if they do apply.

Thank God in PA we don't have that problem, honestly, I don't carry 24/7 and at one time I considered letting it lapse. Then one of the Philadelphia Eagles Coach's kids got arrested for brandishing a weapon during a "Road Rage" incident. The funny thing was he was found with pills, small amounts of cocaine and marijuana, and drug paraphernalia. He was charged with simple assault and making terroristic threats, but guess what the biggest offense was???? The felony charge of carrying a firearm without a license.

Felony conviction for me in PA=No more buying or possessing firearms. Thankfully my state has an easy CCW procedure. Those who live in less CCW friendly places need to organize, write letters and vote for pro ccw candidates, and not be forced to break the law. All you need is to accidently print, expose or drop your weapon at the worse possible time, and suddenly you can't carry, buy or own firearms legally anymore

[junglebob]

Bluetrain, You ever been to Cairo Illinois? Your wifes cousin may be safer in Cairo Egypt.

It would be interesting to know how many people 'shadow carry' in Illinois. If Cook county would just become its own state Illinois would probably have concealed carry legislation the same year.

More and more all the time are "fanny packing" in Illinois, which is legal but still subjects you to the possibility of being arrested. This requires a FOID card (firearm owners ID), but you are required to have this anyway to own a gun or buy ammunition. The definition of fanny packing is carrying a handgun in a fanny pack or case unloaded with a loaded magazine in the pack or case. The so called "six seconds from safety option", not near as good as regular concealed carry, but better than leaving it at home. www.gunssavelife.com (the Champaign County Rifle Association site) has more info if you click on "about us".

I'd be curious if any other state has such a provision.

I do have a non-resident Pa handgun license, so I do regular concealed carry legally in gun friendly neighboring states.

[BlueTrain]

I've never been to Cairo ("Karo"), Illinois, but I've been to Oklahoma.

[BillCA]

BlueTrain,

I understand your meaning, I think. I live in the tenth largest U.S. city which is one of the safer large cities for its size. Many factors account for this, but it is far from being safe from crime. I've been burglarized and a local liquor store owner shot during a robbery 1/2 block away.

Now that a large apartment complex nearby has a considerable section-8 housing population, I can see a rise in some crime and significantly more police presence in the last few years.

I avoid many "dangerous" places associated with crime - bars, night clubs, gambling parlors, strip joints, known bad neighborhoods and so forth. But it only takes one incident to remind you that violent people can show up anywhere.

Eight years ago, my ex-girlfriend was in a bank when three men stormed in, fired into the ceiling and announced a hold-up. They knew what they were doing, did it quickly, efficiently and violently. Time on site was under 2 minutes. And this occurred in a "nice" neighborhood with about 12 staff and 30 customers in the bank.

A couple of years ago a man drove up to a local gas station, knifed a man who was pumping gas, then filled his own tank, replaced the nozzle in the victim's tank and drove off. Pretty damn cold. The clerk inside was doing paperwork and never saw a thing.

The point is that violent people can bring violence into an otherwise nice neighborhood at any time.

[BlueTrain]

I certainly appreciate the fact that crime can happen anytime and anywhere, though in most places the possibility of being involved are smaller than witnessing a traffic accident, though plenty of people are killed and injured in traffic accidents. But how many have you seen in the last 40 years, much less been involved in?

Around here, which is the suburbs of Washington, D.C., there are sometimes rashes of bank robberies. It seems that someone will attempt (and usually succeed) at hitting several in quick succession. The fact that the state lines aren't far away, plus the presence of the subway, makes a clean getaway that much easier. But sooner or later they usually get caught and note that in the other thread about the FBI report, all the data was based on bad guys that did not get away. Only corporate executivies can make crime pay.

I have heard that most murder victims know their killers, which is a neutral comment about having a gun handy. But it makes you wonder about the people you might know. But I've only known one murder victim myself and there was a love triangle situation.

Plenty of people shoot back, too, and without any severe consequences half the time. A few years ago, perhaps as many as ten years, a store owner in Mongomery County, Maryland, was held up but he pulled his own gun, chased the man out of the store and killed him after the man had entered a car. The store owner was armed with a Beretta .380. And some of you laugh at 9mm.

[David Armstrong]

Schools are meant to be safe places, but they aren't as deranged loonies with guns show us time and time again they go in and shoot up a safe place.

That is the problem with perception, it frequently has no relationship to reality. Schools are one of the safest places in America, in spite of the hype. Blue Train hits it right when he says, "I certainly appreciate the fact that crime can happen anytime and anywhere, though in most places the possibility of being involved are smaller than witnessing a traffic accident, though plenty of people are killed and injured in traffic accidents." When you look at violent crime, it is very restricted in terms of geography. Even in "high crime" areas it is actually fairly rare, and outside of those areas it is almost non-existent.

[bclark1]

i've known a couple women who carry in chicago. never knew any guys. glad i'm out of there now.

[njtrigger]

The police cannot search your car just because they pulled you over for a minor traffic violation anymore.

If the police ask to search your vehicle (or anything for that matter), the answer is always "no". Even if they threaten you or speak in a very firm manner, the answer is always "no".

[David Armstrong]

The police cannot search your car just because they pulled you over for a minor traffic violation anymore.

The police could never search your car just because they pulled you over for a minor traffic violation. The police always could, and still can, search your car after a minor traffic violation if certain evidentiary/legal standards are met.

[James K]

I have said this before and will say it again. Those who feel the need to carry a gun will do so, law or no law. Whether those people are otherwise honest citizens or Mafia hit men makes no difference. (Of course in NY, NJ and some other places, I am told Mafia guys are automatically given a CCW license, but that might not be true.)

Jim

[mikejonestkd]

Jim Keenan,

>>Of course in NY, NJ and some other places, I am told Mafia guys are automatically given a CCW license,<<<

yes we are....how did you find out about it? What's your address? My 'friends ' Tony and Moose would like to come pay you a little visit....



I agree for the most part that people will do what they have to do to protect themselves, legally or not.

[revjen45]

"The police could never search your car just because they pulled you over for a minor traffic violation. The police always could, and still can, search your car after a minor traffic violation if certain evidentiary/legal standards are met."

The police can do anything they want. Try to prove they're lying. It's your word against theirs, and they have a lot of practice.

[David Armstrong]

The police can do anything they want.

Not really.

Try to prove they're lying.

The evidence is usually pretty probitive. Police have been shown to be lying in some cases, but usually they aren't. There is rarely any real reason for them to do so.

It's your word against theirs, and they have a lot of practice.

Actually there is more to it than that in most instances. As for practice, I'd suggest the typical citizen has had a lot more experience lying to the police than the police have had lying to the citizen.

[BillCA]

...though in most places the possibility of being involved are smaller than witnessing a traffic accident,

This may be true, however the risks and stakes are much higher if you're the victim of a violent crime. At least cars have seat belts, crumple zones and air-bags.

I have heard that most murder victims know their killers, which is a neutral comment about having a gun handy. But it makes you wonder about the people you might know. But I've only known one murder victim myself and there was a love triangle situation.

This is a somewhat misleading statistic. "Known" to the victim can mean a lot of things and include a lot of circumstances most of us wouldn't consider credible. For instance, a drug user making a buy from a drug dealer, even though they're meeting for the first time. The guy who sticks up a liquor store and the clerk says "yeah, I think I seen him in here before."

In general, the homicide victim has some connection with the killer. It may be a robbery, rape, burglary, jealous (ex) of someone, a neighbor or coworker with a grudge, etc. That's why the Zodiac murders were so difficult to stop -- they were random so there was no connection to the killer.

The police could never search your car just because they pulled you over for a minor traffic violation. The police always could, and still can, search your car after a minor traffic violation if certain evidentiary/legal standards are met.

David, you're correct, though those standards are called "probable cause". And it is not unlimited. As our local cops found, stopping someone and seeing legally purchased items does not automatically give PC to search. For instance, seeing a plastic bag with four boxes of Super-X shotgun shells does not (of itself) automatically allow for searching the vehicle. Nor does nervousness on the driver's part when asked about them. Nor can a search for a shotgun include looking in the console or a small glove box.

[NukeCop]

Nor does nervousness on the driver's part when asked about them. Nor can a search for a shotgun include looking in the console or a small glove box.

Not sure if it's a wide spread term, but we often refer to that as a "fishing expedition"....

[BillCA]

+1 NukeCop

[David Armstrong]

Not sure if it's a wide spread term, but we often refer to that as a "fishing expedition"....

We refer to it as "you can't find an elephant in a matchbox."

[Edward429451]

Fishing expedition and the ubiquitous 'odor of marijuana' is built in probable cause and irrefutable.