Author Topic: what to do? ccw question (Read 1863 times)

broken arrow · « **on:** September 09, 2003, 09:33:17 AM »

Okay, I am the security director of our local mall. The other day one of my officers (we are all sworn police officers too) walked out the door of our office and saw a guy packing a Ruger semi-auto in plain view on his hip. We pulled him into the office, checked his weapon and made sure he had a valid carry permit. In Tennessee it is legal to carry in plain view. The only real stipulation is that you cannot carry anywhere the owner/ agent does not allow it. It is up to the owner to post "no weapons allowed" on all entrances.
So should I allow handguns so long as they are concealed or, am I inviting a lawsuit by allowing them at all? should I prohibit them altogether despite my beleif that law abiding citizens have that right? I am on the horns of a dilema.

PA-Joe · « **Reply #1 on:** September 09, 2003, 09:49:26 AM »

If the State Law allows him/her to carry in full view with a CCW Permit then what is the problem. Most State are concealed carry only.

volshooter · « **Reply #2 on:** September 09, 2003, 09:54:53 AM »

Feel your pain but like you said it is up to the owners of the property if carry permits are to be honored. I also live in TN and there are a few places that don't mind open carrying. I don't wish to openly carry but our permit is not conceled only. Unless the mall owners post the property I think you would be out of line asking a permit holder to hide his pistol. Granted it's not cool to tote where some folks are squirmish but it is his right. I won't shop at any mall that prohibits our permits (or any business). There was a story last week that a chain of convenent stores in Knoxville is now allowing their employees to openly carry in high crime neighborhoods. I would personally feel safer if cashiers all toted. Few scumbags would have the desire to try to rob an armed cashiers.
Rick

DzrtRat · « **Reply #3 on:** September 09, 2003, 12:58:32 PM »

The mall here has a "no guns" sign at every entrance, and for that reason I don't shop there. The Wal-Mart here also had one for a while, but one of the local CCW instructors had some conversations with the manager and then it was changed to "no guns allowed without valid CCW permit". Now I think the signs are gone altogether.

I really see no point in the signs. Criminals won't obey them anyway, and store owners shouldn't be concerned about law abiding citezens.

As a side note, we also had someone who was shot and killed in a local K-Mart when it was posted "no guns" It seems to me that folks should have the right to defend their lives no matter where they go. Besides, would everyone feel better with all the guns sitting in unguarded cars out in the parking lot?

Some things to think about.

~Rat

Graybeard · « **Reply #4 on:** September 09, 2003, 04:01:33 PM »

If you truly believe in the Second Amendment why would you even ask this question? You say that according to state law what he did was perfectly legal. Why do you think you should make law over and above that of the state?

I'd think you would be opening yourself up to a lawsuit to post a sign saying guns not allowed. If someone is robbed or murdered on your premises after you refuse them the right to defend themselves that both the US Constitution and the state allows them I'd say the burden is on you.

If the mall owner comes up with the idea on their own then you are off the hook legally I'd say but for the life of me I can't understand why a gun owner and person who believes in the Second Amendment would even consider what you are considering.

GB

Savage · « **Reply #5 on:** September 09, 2003, 04:17:33 PM »

One of the best crime deterent aspects of the CCW is keeping the criminal element guessing as to who's armed. Most CCW holders don't have a clue when it comes to weapons retention. For those individuals, wearing in the open, is an invitation for a disarm. There is also the danger of becoming a primary target if they happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Don't know about the rest of you guys, but the only times I would carry in the open is in uniform, or on duty in civilian clothes. I also think public open carry contributes to the negative image that some people have about CCW and guns in general. That said, common sense should dictate when to conceal and when to carry openly. In a crowded urban area open carry can be disruptive and downright dangerous. As open carry is legal in your state, looks like your hands are tied. Common sense is not all that common.
Stay Safe,
Savage

Mikey · « **Reply #6 on:** September 10, 2003, 04:34:25 AM »

Broken Arrow: I think this is one of those situations where common sense applies.

If the law allows it then legally you should not have a problem with it.

I have problems with places that don't allow licensed carry because those are the places where problems emerge, like schools, banks and malls, yet this is where you would need to defend yourself most.

If the law allows concealed carry you should never even see it. If the law allows open carry you may wish to apply a bit of common sense to the situation - a parallel is here in NYS during hunting season. They used to require us to display our harvest in full sight, like over the fender, in the back of the truck, etc., but with something hanging out so EnCon could tell you had an animal and you could prove it was a legal harvest. BUT, it got to the point where people complained so much that EnCon removed that requirement and you no longer have to display the animal. Yes, you still have buttsniffs cooking up a fresh carcass over the hood of a truck and willfully displaying it for all to see but even they begin to listen to common sense when they begin to understand they could lose that right (the right to hunt), if too many complain too vociferously about it.

Also, although it may be allowed under law to carry openly, it makes you a primary target and that is something a lot of folks need to understand. I have seen few so arrogant as those who carry openly, making the terrible mistake of thinking that just because everyone sees they have a gun they are invincible. Let me tell you how easy a target those people are. They put all their resources (defensive capability) in a firearm they carry openly yet there it is in plain sight where it is easily accessible to almost anyone. That's where some more common sense might come in. If you can see it you can take it. I'll bet ya a pocket full of nickles that the guy you pulled into the office has/had little or no capability to defend himself against a gun grab - he would then be a perfect target for anyone who wants a gun and doesn't want to buy one. What's he gonna do, beg for his gun back?

Rather than to make yourself a legal target for violating someone's right to carry, or worrying whether the employer might or might not back you up, some common sense (if they can understand that) might go a lot further. M2C. Mikey.

Savage · « **Reply #7 on:** September 10, 2003, 05:10:25 AM »

Mikey,
Well said!
Stay Safe,
Savage

1GLOCK · « **Reply #8 on:** September 10, 2003, 07:27:29 AM »

I believe its a double edged sword. If the state allows open carry or concealed and the person has a valid permit to do so but the store or place of buisiness does not allow it and something happens and the person ends up needing that weapon for a defensive situation you could be opening yourself up to a lawsuit because you wouldnt let them carry when said individual was qualified to carry. Does that make any sense? I believe there was a similar case in Texas with a Mcdonalds that was sued by a woman who had to leave her handgun in her car and her parents were killed. On the other hand open carry does tent to make others a little squimish, I personaly prefer concealed carry, I would prefer that the bad guys not know I have a gun or where its at.

Dave in WV · « **Reply #9 on:** September 10, 2003, 12:26:07 PM »

If the property owner doesn't object there is no problem. Why it's ok for a law enforcement officer to openly carry and civilians only concealed carry is silly. I'd rather know for sure who's packing as not. I remember when Block Buster stores prohibited carrying a firearm in their stors and business dropped quick. They had a change of heart. Another thing, if the property owners refuse to allow firearms on the property they resonsible for our safety. Dave

volshooter · « **Reply #10 on:** September 10, 2003, 12:39:20 PM »

While I don't carry off my own property openly I suspect dang few cowardly criminals would be willing to try a grab from an armed citizen. If I'm not mistaken, there have been many more crimes prevented by the simple sight of a weapon. ( I think that comes directly from the NRA ) As a former "Refuse to be a Victim" instructor, I would not suggest open carry but common sense tells me "more" crime would be stopped than "less" by open carry. Biggest problem I have with open carry is the image created in the itty-bitty-closed-gun-o-phobe minds of the anti-self protection crowd. As far as I have researched, there have been no problems with permit holders in Tennessee, either openly or hidden carry. The cries of "WILD WEST" didn't happen as they perdicted. On a side note, during the Democrat fest on the tube last night, the canadate from VT ? noted that gun laws should be different in places like TENNESSEE and VERMONT than are needed in high crime areas. Our crime rate has been dropping steady in the last 7 years. Good law enforcement and I believe many armed citizens are to be credited.
Rick

454Puma · « **Reply #11 on:** September 10, 2003, 06:12:26 PM »

broken arrow
What you did was violated that person rights by detaining him with out proper cause -and I would hope he sues the crap out of you!!! :evil: He broke no law- being an officer you should have known better!! :twisted:
I would love to be that guy right now- I would be making your life pure hell!! :shock: This is still AMERICA- not Bagdad!!

Savage · « **Reply #12 on:** September 10, 2003, 06:49:25 PM »

Dave,
You can bet the criminal element would like to know who's armed too! I think it's better to keep um guessing. Sorry, I didn't quite get your point in comparing open carry by an LEO to a civilian.
Volshooter,
In spite of fairly extensive training in weapons retention and security holsters, officers are frequently disarmed by criminals. Now imagine how easy it is to grab an untrained person's gun out of an open top holster.
454Puma,
If I were in BA's place, I would have asked to see his license too. Like Volshooter said, why give the gun-o-phobes something to squeal about?
Stay Safe, Guys
Savage

williamlayton · « **Reply #13 on:** September 11, 2003, 01:24:58 AM »

puma--

in texas, and i am, an officer has the right to check out a person suspected of carrying-ie check for permit ect.--i kinda like the idea that peace officers do this. personally it would not bother me to be asked. what if this guy was not permitted.
i guess ya can not protect society from everything but i hear as much guff from folks-both here and on tha street--that they carry for protection because police are not around and do not protect only try and catch after the fact. seems to me they are critized whatever they do.
is it possible that you are reading too much into or assuming too much into the situation. sounded too me as if it was a a pretty calm situation, not a rodney king thing.
blessings

ps- why would you want to give him a hard time--let it go.

broken arrow · « **Reply #14 on:** September 11, 2003, 08:46:33 AM »

Okay, not to get over analytical or split hairs, I beleive every citizen has the right to carry a concealed firearm. I do not beleive anyone who has ever been convicted of a felony (weather or not it has been exponged) has the right to own a gun. I do not beleive anyone who is not in full posession of their faculties and poses a threat to themself or others should own a gun. I would not place myself in a position over the State of Tennessee and disallow the posession of a firearm. I am merely generating discussion and asking your opinions. I guess the main point I'm trying to emphasize is this. It is stupid to carry a weapon in plain view in a public place. To do so gives me a moment of pause, I wonder if this person is mentally stable. I will alaways verify the validity of a permit and I will always support the second ammendment up to and including giving over my life in the defense of it. I once discovered a valid carry permit from a man who was drunk and beligerant at a bar. The same man retained it after numerous infractions and ultimately shot his wife (he was a nut). This has thus far been my one negative experience. The cost of freedom is eternal vigilance. I will, of course, ultimately leave this matter to the owners of the property with my recommendation that weapons are welcome, but must be concealed. I think it's a mistake for my state to allow open carry.....sorry...... (I can't carry in plain view off duty either)

DzrtRat · « **Reply #15 on:** September 11, 2003, 11:16:44 AM »

Broken Arrow,

You said:

Quote

Okay, not to get over analytical or split hairs, I beleive every citizen has the right to carry a concealed firearm.

I agree with this, and I agree with the limitations that you stated afterwords. I believe those limitations are according to federal law, too.

But then you say:

Quote

It is stupid to carry a weapon in plain view in a public place. To do so gives me a moment of pause, I wonder if this person is mentally stable.

Maybe I've just lived in Arizona too long (all my life), but I don't understand this statement. What about the person who chooses not to obtain a CCW permit? Here in Arizona, it's perfectly legal to carry openly WITHOUT A PERMIT OF ANY KIND. The only time one would need a permit in Arizona is to carry concealed. Should a person who doesn't keep a valid CCW permit not have the right to protect their lives and / or the lives of their loved ones?

Now, I realize that your state laws vary from ours, but I have to wonder what the mentality of this country is coming to when I hear people say things like this. Has our society's view on firearms really deteriorated to the point that the mere site of a gun places doubt on a person's legal status and mental stability?

~Rat

broken arrow · « **Reply #16 on:** September 11, 2003, 01:11:20 PM »

Rat, I know there may seem to be some duality here. One would have to look at the "spirit" of concealed weapons laws. By concealing your firearm you make potential assailants have to decide for themselves if this person is armed. By carrying in plain view at theaters, malls, Wal-mart you give him an instant advantage, make yourself and those you are with a target and invite confrontation from business owners, liberals etc...
BUT IF THAT'S WHAT SOMEBODY WANTS, FINE. I just don't agree with that one aspect of it. I do not beleive everyone has the right to carry a gun. The premise behind a CCW permit is to weed out felons and the emotionally incapable in society. Here, they do not allow anyone convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault to carry a gun. I think that's going too far. Slapping your wife makes you a coward and a loser, not a criminal. Carry laws are different in other states apperantly. You cannot carry a loaded firearm here without a permit. You have to have it unloaded and separated from the ammunition.

Here is the main excerpt from my recommendation letter to the owners of this mall:

I would also like to tender my opinion in regards to patrons carrying firearms on mall property with a carry permit. The incident on Saturday involving officer ****** necessitates us to promulgate a permanant policy.
The corporate office is , of course, the final authority on the matter but my recommendation is that no action be taken to prohibit citizens from carrying concealed weapons on mall property provided they have a current, valid handgun carry permit. Officers should continue to check permits from patrons carrying a weapon in plain view and insist that said weapons be concealed. (State law allows plain view carry, but this is not conducive to to the family environment of our establishment and would promote myriad problems)

If this is seems like a non-handgun friendly approach, I don't understand why. I guess Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein would love it though?

broken arrow · « **Reply #17 on:** September 11, 2003, 01:29:25 PM »

And by the way 454 Puma, I did no such thing. You are overzealous and wrong. I do not have to articulate probable cause to detain a person for investigative purposes. I may detain any person carrying an exposed weapon for a reasonable amount of time and the citizen "must present his handgun permit for inspection at the request of any dually sworn peace officer in this state" At the end of this contact and when I am satisfied he is who he purports to be and has a valid permit. I must release him. This encounter was cordial and BREIF. I never gave him a hard time, nor did my officers. We apologized for detaining him and let him go about his business. If I gave the impression that we somehow hassled him, I apologize, we didn't. I guess if you are so litigious and anxious to sue, :twisted: you could start with your legal council for giving you a bum steer!

DzrtRat · « **Reply #18 on:** September 11, 2003, 07:57:11 PM »

Broken Arrow,

Federal law prohibits convicted felons and those convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence from posessing a firearm. Ditto for those deemed "mentally deficient" or who are under a restraining order. They all fall under the category of "prohibited posessors". Of course, you are a LEO and so I'm sure that you know this, but I thought I would post it in explanation of my state's laws.

It's definately different here than in your state. Here you can carry open and loaded with no problems so long as you are not a "prohibited posessor". In fact, here in Arizona you can carry a loaded pistol in the glove box without a permit as long as it's in a holster or pistol rug. Arizona makes no distinction between a loaded or unloaded firearm. A firearm is a firearm and is treated accordingly.

Arizona laws may seem liberal to some, but they work well. Senseless restrictions won't stop a criminal from doing what he/she is going to do anyway, since the only ones who obey these laws are for the most part law abiding citizens who shouldn't be restricted in the first place.

~Rat

williamlayton · « **Reply #19 on:** September 12, 2003, 01:28:26 AM »

these last few post have been well thought out and articulated by the responders--all openions are valid--boils down to culture and the law we have been exposed to.
i have thought about it-my first reaction to exposed carry would be shock and fear---then thinking further, i live in texas, and i am not shocked or fearful by the sight of shotguns or rifle slung in a rack of a truck--i suspose what i must admit is that i probable would get use to seeing exposed carry--shouldn't take too long-and that i know most folks around these parts have a gun in the glove box anyway, wheather they have a permit or not.
blessings

Mikey · « **Reply #20 on:** September 12, 2003, 03:53:11 AM »

broken arrow - here in NYS, our LEOs will and most usually do function the same way you do as a sworn, uniformed Law Enforcement Officer - this is, they have the right to stop, detain and question the legality of any pistol packin' individual.

It is also our responsibility, as licensed CCW holders (in many states and all those I am licensed/reciprocated to carry) to immediately surrender or respond to a uniformed or on-duty LEO regarding our permits.

I find it interesting that so many CCW holders take the issue with having to respond to LEOs or having 'lost' rights to the Patriot Act, or some other 'perceived invasion of rights', when they are questioned about their legality.

Every dog gone time I am stopped or asked or questioned regarding my carry sidearm, the paper comes out first. I make absolutely certain the LEO questioning me is (1) on duty and (2) within juristiction before I hand over anything. But, once the paper comes out it almost always becomes a social situation and once proof has been provided and information shared, we usually wind up taking about guns, shooting and hunting and all that. Never has it turned or become adversarial and I sure wish to heck that some of these nervous nellies get the hay off their high horses and understand that one of the highest qualifications a citizen can hold is a CCW.

I can tell you that many people say - "I'll never go for that background check - who the hay do they think they are invading my privacy like that by checking my background, or what business is it of theirs about that DWI I had 25 years ago or the fact that my ex-wife felt she had to get a restraining order against me". Or, "what happens if they find something they don't like or wish to question". Hay, it is their business, but successfully passing a background check, even if there are questions that must be answered, puts the CCW holder in the most favorable civil light there is regarding his/her ability to carry. For goodness sake, if one's background is so checkered that the right to carry is called into question then thank goodness, again, for background checks. I doubt anyone on this forum wants the bad guy joioning our ranks but there are some who feel that any background check or LE action is some sort of violation.

What I find most disturbing is that LEOs don't get in as much practice as many civilians do. When I hear they only get to qualify twice, maybe, a year I can understand why there are so many shots fired in response to a threat.

Broken Arrow, it wouldn't bother me a bit to have you validate my CCW, more than once, even if you forget you did the same thing two months ago. The one time you find an illegal carry is the time you just might save a life. Screw the nay-sayers, do your job Officer, that's what we law-abiding citizens count on your being there for. M2C. Mikey.

volshooter · « **Reply #21 on:** September 13, 2003, 03:53:08 PM »

As a TN resident I have no problems with a "keep it covered" reg by business. WalMart has such a policy and it works fine. I have talked to WalMart HQ and have been assured this policy will continue.
Rick

williamlayton · « **Reply #22 on:** September 15, 2003, 02:14:13 AM »

mikey--- you are "rat on"--well said. i can't get a piolets liscense(sp-probable) because of a physical limitation, so whats the diff.-they don't want me in the air and in control. i'm sorry but i'm not offended.
blessings

454Puma · « **Reply #23 on:** September 15, 2003, 05:54:01 PM »

broken arrow
So what gives you the right to HASSEL a person who has done nothing but carry a firearm open carry!! LEGALLY!! As you stated. You should have look at him, seen that he was not causing a problem, tipped your hat and went on your way-period. :x You took it opon yourself to interject your opinion on open carry by Hasselling a person whom was abiding the law for no reason but your dislike of OPEN CARRY!! :x
So do you -stop every person that looks like he might be a drug dealer and seach them for drugs? Of course not cause you'd befired pretty quick would you not -same thing applies to the person who open carries -just because they carry that way doesn't mean you can hassel them!

:shock:

williamlayton · « **Reply #24 on:** September 16, 2003, 05:58:56 AM »

puma
let me intercede as i am a third party with no ax to grind and not a leo.
i am not offended nor do i feel hasseled when ask to provide proof of my right to carry. as ba said it was a nonconfrontational situation--just checking it out--no big deal--no harm, no foul.
i understand, to some degree, your point and to that point you are correct; however,this was no bigger deal than being stopped for speeding. this feeling would be better left by the curb--evertime i am stopped it makes me angry--it makes me angry--why make myself more unconfortable by dwelling on the subject--it does not do anything to the officer, just me.
leo's are given the right to make decisions concerning the welfare of the public--called being pro-active--and i applaud this. to me it means the officer takes his job seriously-not frivously, as in it for a paycheck. yes there is a fine linewhich a officer must try his best not to cross and i would be the first to condemn for wanting to show off authority.
let's face it police have the worse job in the world-i couldn't do it-they must be perfect, and they can't be--but by golly they must be. i admire, give mercy when i have too, and applaud them for their courage. i also demand they police their own with vigilance to protect the public from the overzealous and bad apples.
all this said in love and respect for your openion.
blessings

jhm · « **Reply #25 on:** September 16, 2003, 03:22:50 PM »

Broken Arrow : I will attempt to turn this question around, by that I will ask the question like this a individual was walking thru the mall and several of the security officers noticed he was wearing a handgun in plain view which the state allows we just nodded at the individual and went on our seperate ways and no one said anything about it after a few minutes go by we hear gunfire and respond and this individual has shot someone now the news media is there asking why didnt you do something yuou saw the gun, as you can see you are in a no win situation, I am not going to praise yhou for stoping the individual nor am I going to beat you up because its a catch 22, you will have to work on your gut feeling as to what is right. BTW I would be willing to bet that if those that have jumped on you for yuour post would have been in the front of the line to hang you for not stoping the individual in the shooting. JIM

broken arrow · « **Reply #26 on:** September 17, 2003, 08:02:06 AM »

Thank you all for the well thought out replies and thought provoking discussion. I use this forum to make me a better cop, and give myself insight into other options and opinions I may have overlooked or have never considered. Again, you serve to help.

454 Puma, You say hassle. I can see what you mean, but still. Saturday night we had a fight call at a known crack/gang house in our city. We took an aggressive posture and essentially stood around ordering them off the street and to "calm down". The fact is, we should have simply addressed the fight and gone about our business, as aside from the fight they were violating no law. When my wife and I discussed it, she brought up a valid point. Just being there, standing around and looking imposing is tantamount to harrassment. I guess it comes down to a desire to do my job more effectively but looking at both sides of the argument. Constitutionally, Americans have the god given right (endowed by their creator) to go about their lives with minimal intrusion by the police. In a perfect society a law abiding citizen should never encounter a cop. I try to embody this principal every time I go to work. I ask other officers why they need to detain or even approach someone. As a training officer I have to try and strike a balance every time I go out on the streets. I have to be mindful of the civil rights of every person and be an effective officer as well. It is not easy, perhaps, theoretically impossible. But I strive for that balance. If we meet on the streets some night, and you feel harrassed or intimidated without cause. Let's discuss it. Maybe we will just have to agree to disagree, or maybe we'll find common ground. :?

Savage · « **Reply #27 on:** September 17, 2003, 01:14:21 PM »

Pretty tough mall you have there BA. Got your own crack house do ya?

? :lol:
Stay Safe,
Savage

broken arrow · « **Reply #28 on:** September 18, 2003, 05:28:33 PM »

I work at the mall in the afternoons and for the police department at night. The crackhouse

is at the mall.

tripper · « **Reply #29 on:** September 19, 2003, 06:26:18 PM »

:-) Brokenarrow, haveing lived in a state where in the past it was up to one indevidual, cty. sheriff or chief of police depending on where you lived, as to whether you could get a permit or not, i may be a little reserved on my feelings on carrying open. 1. I personaly would feel uncomfertable carrying open makeing it easier for some one to snatch and run. 2. I feel that anybody that asks for and gets a permit is also saying that it is ok for and officer to check them for that permit if an officer has observed the carried weapon wether concealed or not. If officers are not allowed to check for permits it is just opening the door for the bad guy to walk around with a weapon openly displayed. 3. I feel that if a person is detained for any reason, they should let the officer know they are carrying and were the weapon is and be willing to produce the permit and place the weapon in plain veiw if requsted.
As has been mentioned, differnt states have had and do have differnt laws. Some states have to let people get use to the ideal of some one walking around with a concealed weapon before they can say "ok, just strap it on your leg. In my state a firearm,including compound bows have to be completely cased and unloaded in a mortized vehicle and i mean anything with a motor on it. Duck hunters are only excempt after turning the mortor off and the boat has stop it's forward motion.
This has gotten long enough.
BA, thank you for your effort , even if you don't live in my state, and thanks for being there.