Comments on the practice of open carry, from a friend and criminal-defense attorney in PA:
“I represented a client in PA who had a valid concealed-carry permit. On a particular occasion, for reasons that seemed good to him at the time, he chose to carry his handgun openly into a credit union where he had an account.
I note here that open-carry is perfectly legal, even without a permit, in all of PA, except Philadelphia, where a CCW is needed. Where this incident took place is no where near Philadelphia.
In this credit union, my client got into a verbal disagreement with a female teller about how long it would take for a check he was depositing to clear, so that he could draw on the funds. He never used a foul word, never touched his holstered gun, never mentioned the gun, and never verbalized any threat of any kind. It was just a typical ‘animated conversation,’ which take place in banks every day. The foregoing was all confirmed by the teller herself during her testimony at my client’s subsequent criminal trial!
Nevertheless, the mere fact that he was wearing a gun openly while engaged in a disagreement about a check upset this teller, so she pushed the silent alarm button.
Shortly thereafter, six police officers arrived at the bank and, with drawn guns, had my client lay down on the bank floor while they handcuffed him and relieved him of his gun. He was subsequently charged with ‘disorderly conduct,’ which in PA can be either a summary offense or a misdemeanor.
At his trial, despite the judge openly conceding that my client had done nothing illegal, he was convicted of the summary offense anyway.
The judge said to me, ‘I’m not going to have cowboys walking into banks all over town displaying guns on their hips!’
Besides a fine and court costs, my client incurred thousands of dollars in legal fees. That, and having to suffer the indignity, danger, and life disruption of a felony arrest and trial.”
My comments: The foregoing is a perfect example of why open carry is not recommended by most competent trainers, and also most lawyers. We can argue all day about the “technical legality” of the practice, as well as the “unconstitutionality” of various and assorted statutes, laws, local ordinances, agendas etc.
Again, all very interesting, but mostly irrelevant!
Many prosecutors and judges bring with them into their job personal political agendas. They’re not supposed to. In fact, they take an oath promising not to, but it’s all BS, as we see.
The judge in the above case, in effect, unilaterally “manufactured” a new law, a law no elected legislator ever voted on, and no governor ever signed. He obviously harbors a personal dislike for “cowboys,” and looks for opportunities to misuse his office in order to punish them.
Obviously, you don’t have to look very far to find examples of “injustice” in this civilization, and we can spend the rest of the day expressing our disappointment. In the interim, those of us near the bottom of the food-chain need to look for ways of preserving our good physical health, financial health, and mental health, no matter the political climate, and a needless “high profile” usually doesn’t help!
And, if you’re wondering if there is a point lurking in all this:
Going armed is a personal choice. For those of us who do, as routine, discreet concealment represents the best practice.
Out of sight. Out of conversation.
Words to live by!
/John
