No charges over gun in voting booth [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : No charges over gun in voting booth


TBO
03-04-2012, 12:57
http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/local/kent_county/No-charges-over-gun-in-voting-booth

steveksux
03-04-2012, 15:05
This is a weird quirk of 2 intersecting No Pistol Zone's defined many years apart... Originally, possession of a pistol was defined as a crime in the standard places, schools, banks, etc, something like that. But back then, as a may issue state, with few people allowed to carry, they exempted concealed pistol holders. (At that point, I believe they could carry concealed anywhere with the permit, barring restrictions on the permit.) I think its been that way since the late 1800s.

Enter 2001, shall issue becomes law, and no pistol zones are now defined for concealed permit holders, where they cannot carry concealed.

However, in MI, open carry is legal, as there's no law against it. Except for the original pistol free zones you can open carry anywhere else. Only concealed pistol holders are still exempt from those open carry pistol free zones.

Have a problem with the article...

After investigating for a few days, the Kent County Prosecutor's Office decided not to press any charges against the 25-year-old Grand Rapids resident.

The Grand Rapids Public Schools issued a statement acknowledging Looman's right to carry the weapon inside the school. ( The full text of their statement is at the bottom of this article.)

They didn't decide not to press charges?. There were no valid charges to press. Not the same thing. One is they didn't think there was any point charging the guy with the crimes he committed for whatever reason. This was a case of they decided there weren't any law broken.


Randy

xmanhockey7
03-04-2012, 15:33
The guy broke no laws. Lots of people open carried into schools that day to vote. And lots of people have OCed into schools to vote on other polling days and for other reasons without issue. The problem is Kent Co. is very antigun. As one OCer from the area described it they're about 3 years behind the rest of the state (as far as recognizing lawful OC). This county also takes one of, if not the most, time issuing a CPL.

ETA: There is not such thing as an "open carry PFZ" there is 750.234d that prohibits those without a CPL from possessing a firearm on certain premises, which does mean one cannot OC there but it also means even if you are not OCing you may not have a gun there, unless exempted.

steveksux
03-04-2012, 16:11
The guy broke no laws. Lots of people open carried into schools that day to vote. And lots of people have OCed into schools to vote on other polling days and for other reasons without issue. The problem is Kent Co. is very antigun. As one OCer from the area described it they're about 3 years behind the rest of the state (as far as recognizing lawful OC). This county also takes one of, if not the most, time issuing a CPL.

ETA: There is not such thing as an "open carry PFZ" there is 750.234d that prohibits those without a CPL from possessing a firearm on certain premises, which does mean one cannot OC there but it also means even if you are not OCing you may not have a gun there, unless exempted.Simply using that term "open carry PFZ" to distinguish the prohibited areas from the earlier law from the Concealed Carry law pistol free zones. Convenient shorthand.

Randy

xmanhockey7
03-04-2012, 16:45
Simply using that term "open carry PFZ" to distinguish the prohibited areas from the earlier law from the Concealed Carry law pistol free zones. Convenient shorthand.

Randy

Yes but it's misconceiving. Many people will look at 750.234d and say it's where you cannot open carry when in fact people can open carry in those places.

steveksux
03-04-2012, 16:53
Yes but it's misconceiving. Many people will look at 750.234d and say it's where you cannot open carry when in fact people can open carry in those places.That's incorrect, nothing confusing about it. If you cannot possess a pistol in those areas, you can't open carry either.

Just as the PFZs in the 2001 concealed carry law are places you cannot conceal carry.

Both cases unless you fit one of the exemptions.... not legal to carry.

Concealed carry areas have exemptions, the older law has exemptions as well, one of which allows concealed pistol permit holders to possess a pistol in those areas it is otherwise illegal to possess the pistol. The areas, PFZs in the concealed pistol law still apply, and so where they coincide with the same areas in the older law, concealed carry is still illegal, even though the permit makes possession legal. hence, the pistol can be carried openly, but not concealed.

Randy

xmanhockey7
03-04-2012, 16:58
That's incorrect, nothing confusing about it. If you cannot possess a pistol in those areas, you can't open carry either.

Just as the PFZs in the 2001 concealed carry law are places you cannot conceal carry.

Both cases unless you fit one of the exemptions.... not legal to carry.

Concealed carry areas have exemptions, the older law has exemptions as well, one of which allows concealed pistol permit holders to possess a pistol in those areas it is otherwise illegal to possess the pistol. The areas, PFZs in the concealed pistol law still apply, and so where they coincide with the same areas in the older law, concealed carry is still illegal, even though the permit makes possession legal. hence, the pistol can be carried openly, but not concealed.

Randy

So then explain to me what are the "open carry PFZs"?

steveksux
03-04-2012, 17:04
So then explain to me what are the "open carry PFZs"?The specific places listed where possession of pistols is prohibited in the older law.

Offhand, banks (interestingly not prohibited in CC PFZs), schools, stadiums. Mostly the same as the 2001 law's PFZs, lots of overlap, a few differences.

Are you looking for the MCL number, or the exact text of the statute? I'd have to look that up.

ETA: you mentioned 750.234d, I'm assuming that's the 2001 CPL law, right? Its not in that statute, there's an earlier statute where these other locations were listed specifically, which opens the loophole mentioned in the article because it lists a CPL as an exemption to the places possession of pistols is not permitted.

This guy did NOT get off based on the general case in MI of open carrying being legal because there's no law against it. There is no law specifically legalizing open carry, or forbidding it. There IS one that prohibits possession of pistols in certain areas. THAT law has an exemption for CPL holders, which is what made this guy legal to open carry.

IANAL, by the way. Thought I should point that out in case I appear well informed and people don't think they need to check it out for themselves... :supergrin:

Randy

xmanhockey7
03-04-2012, 17:11
The specific places listed where possession of pistols is prohibited in the older law.

Offhand, banks (interestingly not prohibited in CC PFZs), schools, stadiums. Mostly the same as the 2001 law's PFZs, lots of overlap.

Are you looking for the MCL number, or the exact text of the statute? I'd have to look that up.

ETA: you mentioned 750.234d, I'm assuming that's the 2001 CPL law, right? Its not in that statute, there's an earlier statute where these other locations were listed specifically, which opens the loophole mentioned in the article because it lists a CPL as an exemption to the places possession of pistols is not permitted.

This guy did NOT get off based on the general case in MI of open carrying being legal because there's no law against it.

Randy

Old law doesn't matter. What matter is what is the current law. Under current law it's illegal for a person with a CPL to carry a concealedpistol in places listed under 28.425o. If the person does NOT have a CPL they cannot possess a firearm (even in their car in the parking lot) on the premises of a place listed under 750.234d. There is not statue under current law specially regarding places one cannot "open carry".

steveksux
03-04-2012, 17:12
Old law doesn't matter. What matter is what is the current law. Under current law it's illegal for a person with a CPL to carry a concealedpistol in places listed under 28.425o. If the person does NOT have a CPL they cannot possess a firearm (even in their car in the parking lot) on the premises of a place listed under 750.234d. There is not statue under current law specially regarding places one cannot "open carry".
Old law (assuming you found the correct one, i.e. 28.425o) is still in effect. It was not superceded by the CPL law. It does matter. You cannot open carry a pistol where you cannot possess a pistol. It doesn't have to specify "open carry" where mere possession is illegal.

Randy

xmanhockey7
03-04-2012, 17:14
Old law is still in effect. It does matter. You cannot open carry a pistol where you cannot possess a pistol. It doesn't have to specify "open carry" where mere possession is illegal.

Randy

Please provide a cite. The closest thing I can see to why some would think 750.234d applies to OC is because someone without a CPL cannot OC in those places. But it's not that OC is illegal there because it's not for those who do have a CPL.

steveksux
03-04-2012, 17:17
Please provide a cite. The closest thing I can see to why some would think 750.234d applies to OC is because someone without a CPL cannot OC in those places. But it's not that OC is illegal there because it's not for those who do have a CPL.750.234d is not the statute I'm talking about. (turns out that IS the statute I'm talking about)

Why do you think this guy got off without charges? (not meant in argumentative way, simple question)

ETA: Just looked up 28.425o, that's an amendment to the CPL law. That's definitely NOT it.

He wasn't ok because the CPL law doesn't prohibit open carry in PFZ's listed in the 2001 CPL law or its amendments.

Its generally legal to open carry anywhere in MI because its not prohibited. That's not why he got off. Its not a case of cops assuming open carry was illegal when it is not. He was in a school, a prohibited place under both the CPL law (when concealed) and the older law. If he did NOT have a CPL, he could have been charged.

The "old law" I refer to is not the original 2001 CPL law, which was amended by 28.425o.

The old law prohibited possession in banks, schools, churches, etc.

Have to go, but if you google MSP legal update (probably #86 if memory serves) you should be able to find it... I'll post later when I get home...

ETA: just looked, it is 234d. Old as in 1931 Prohibited places. Not sure what the issue is here....

You can't open carry where possession is prohibited. If you are open carrying, you are in possession of the pistol.

If you are claiming 234d does not prohibit open carry in those places because there are some exemptions, then there are no PFZs in the 2001 CPL law either, because there are exemptions there also.

You can't possess a pistol in a school, therefore you cannot open carry in a school, that's why he was arrested. Charges were not filed because a CPL exempts him from the prohibition against possessing a pistol codified in 234d. Its not that open carry is legal in a school, its because he's exempt from that law due to the CPL. Without the CPL, he's facing a violation of 234d.

Randy

xmanhockey7
03-04-2012, 17:38
750.234d is not the statute I'm talking about.

Why do you think this guy got off without charges? (not meant in argumentative way, simple question)

ETA: Just looked up 28.425o, that's an amendment to the CPL law. That's definitely NOT it.

He wasn't ok because the CPL law doesn't prohibit open carry in PFZ's listed in the 2001 CPL law or its amendments.

Its generally legal to open carry anywhere in MI because its not prohibited. That's not why he got off. Its not a case of cops assuming open carry was illegal when it is not. He was in a school, a prohibited place under both the CPL law (when concealed) and the older law. If he did NOT have a CPL, he could have been charged.

The "old law" I refer to is not the original 2001 CPL law, which was amended by 28.425o.

The old law prohibited possession in banks, schools, churches, etc.

Have to go, but if you google MSP legal update (probably #86 if memory serves) you should be able to find it... I'll post later when I get home...

Randy

Well the law regarding weapons on school grounds is 750.237a. (besides 28.425o) which exempts those with a CPL. I am very familiar with MSP legal update #86. Also it is not illegal to open cary or concealed carry in a bank (with a CPL), it is also not illegal to open carry in a school or church. The police knew OC was legal in MI they just didn't know it was legal to OC in a school with a CPL.

saxconnection
03-06-2012, 13:29
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a school is not clearly defined in the law:
MCL 750.234d provides that it is a 90 day misdemeanor to possess a firearm on the premises of any of the following:
A depository financial institution (e.g., bank or
credit union)
A church or other place of religious worship
A court
A theater
A sports arena
A day care center
A hospital
An establishment licensed under the Liquor
Control Code

The above section does not apply to any of the following:

The owner or a person hired as security (if the
firearm is possessed for the purpose of providing
security)
A peace officer
A person with a valid concealed pistol license
(CPL) issued by any state
A person who possesses on one of the above
listed premises with the permission of the owner or owner’s agent

The wording used to state a "school or day care center. " IIRC.

The word "school" is not used here. As a fellow Michigander, I find this interesting.

I can OC with my CPL into COBO? That would be sweet! What I mean is, can you basically skirt the Pistol Free Zones by OCing with a valid CPL?

Adam

steveksux
03-07-2012, 00:30
Yup, looks like I was mistaken about schools, was going by memory, must have been thinking of the 2001 CPL zone

Randy

xmanhockey7
03-07-2012, 00:57
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a school is not clearly defined in the law:
MCL 750.234d provides that it is a 90 day misdemeanor to possess a firearm on the premises of any of the following:
A depository financial institution (e.g., bank or
credit union)
A church or other place of religious worship
A court
A theater
A sports arena
A day care center
A hospital
An establishment licensed under the Liquor
Control Code

The above section does not apply to any of the following:

The owner or a person hired as security (if the
firearm is possessed for the purpose of providing
security)
A peace officer
A person with a valid concealed pistol license
(CPL) issued by any state
A person who possesses on one of the above
listed premises with the permission of the owner or owner’s agent

The wording used to state a "school or day care center. " IIRC.

The word "school" is not used here. As a fellow Michigander, I find this interesting.

I can OC with my CPL into COBO? That would be sweet! What I mean is, can you basically skirt the Pistol Free Zones by OCing with a valid CPL?

Adam

750.234d is not the applicable statue when it comes to schools. 750.237a. is though. And yes you can legally open carry into places listed under 28.425o. because it applies to concealed carry only. If you have a CPL you are exempt from 750.234d and 750.237a. (weapons free school zone). Keep in mind thought you still cannot carry (open or concealed) into a PRIVATELY OWNED DETROIT CASINO. And I do not know what COBO is. Also keep in mind that while you are not violating this statue by open carrying into a college dorm or classroom colleges can still create ordinances as severe as misdemeanors. I believe the only colleges that can do this are UofM, MSU, and WSU. UofM allow not guns on campus PERIOD. MSU allows all "lawful carry" but have said they will arrest open carries, and WSU does not allow guns on campus as well. I'd suggest checking out migunowners.org forum before open carrying to make sure you know the laws well.

HarleyGuy
03-07-2012, 02:57
In most any situation or area in Michigan "open carry" definitely causes attention.

I have never openly carried and never plan to do so, however, I think it serves the purpose of making sure that no person who is licensed to carry a concealed firearm can be charged for simply allowing their firearm to accidentally being exposed.

It's a perfectly normal reaction for people to notify the police if they see a person openly carrying(or attempting to conceal) a firearm.

While I wouldn't advise, or support the choice of the guy who openly carried his firearm to the shcool in order to vote. However, it did attract a lot of attention and the result was many people being educated about Michigan law in regards to openly carrying a firearm.

xmanhockey7
03-07-2012, 03:39
I would like to add a lot of people OCed into schools (and other polling stations) on that day and many other days with zero issues.

DScottHewitt
03-07-2012, 16:09
http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/local/kent_county/No-charges-over-gun-in-voting-booth

That is a kind of interesting intersection of two laws. Open carry is legal there in a school zone, for a CCW holder.....


Scott

saxconnection
03-08-2012, 12:28
750.234d is not the applicable statue when it comes to schools. 750.237a. is though. And yes you can legally open carry into places listed under 28.425o. because it applies to concealed carry only. If you have a CPL you are exempt from 750.234d and 750.237a. (weapons free school zone). Keep in mind thought you still cannot carry (open or concealed) into a PRIVATELY OWNED DETROIT CASINO. And I do not know what COBO is. Also keep in mind that while you are not violating this statue by open carrying into a college dorm or classroom colleges can still create ordinances as severe as misdemeanors. I believe the only colleges that can do this are UofM, MSU, and WSU. UofM allow not guns on campus PERIOD. MSU allows all "lawful carry" but have said they will arrest open carries, and WSU does not allow guns on campus as well. I'd suggest checking out migunowners.org forum before open carrying to make sure you know the laws well.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this. It is just hard to fathom taking my weapon into a school after 5 years of carrying and only observing the 28.425o law. I don't generally OC, but I'm open to the idea if it allows me and my weapon into places I normally wouldn't be able to carry. Also, if this exemption is the case, why are people checked at Ford Field with metal detectors? Are you saying that with an OC, by law, if it's not private property, I would have to be let in with an OC?

I see under the 750.237a http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%28gc1lqn45qwtwslug2rpnca45%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-750-237a
Under 5 c.
(4) Except as provided in subsection (5), an individual who possesses a weapon in a weapon free school zone is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by 1 or more of the following:
(a) Imprisonment for not more than 93 days.
(b) Community service for not more than 100 hours.
(c) A fine of not more than $2,000.00.
(5) Subsection (4) does not apply to any of the following:
(a) An individual employed by or contracted by a school if the possession of that weapon is to provide security services for the school.
(b) A peace officer.
(c) An individual licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.


Now, it specifically says "possesses". Does "possesses" simply mean you have one unloaded in a case walking through the grounds to somewhere close by (such as you only live a few blocks away from a buddy who will look at your gun if you have a problem - but there is a school between the two destinations)?

What I'm getting at here is, is OCing a loaded handgun simply possessing it, or is it carrying a loaded gun? I see a discrepancy in the meaning of possess versus carry.

ETA: This is what I could find regarding the issue. It concerns a reserve police officer. This is the last paragraph:
It is my opinion, therefore, that a uniformed reserve police officer acting as an unpaid volunteer for a local police agency may carry an exposed, holstered pistol within the gun-free zones established by the Concealed Pistol Licensing Act; and if the officer is either a fully authorized “peace officer” or, alternatively, possesses a valid concealed pistol license issued under the Concealed Pistol Licensing Act, he or she may also carry an exposed, holstered pistol within the gun-free zones established by the Michigan Penal Code. - Jennifer Granholm June 28, 2002. (From the opinions section of the Firearms Laws of Michigan 2011 pdf)

BTW, COBO Hall is the place right next door to Joe Louis Arena (where the 'Wings play). It is home to the North American International Auto Show when it comes to town, and also Autorama which just recently took place there.

Adam

xmanhockey7
03-08-2012, 18:31
I'm still trying to wrap my head around this. It is just hard to fathom taking my weapon into a school after 5 years of carrying and only observing the 28.425o law. I don't generally OC, but I'm open to the idea if it allows me and my weapon into places I normally wouldn't be able to carry. Also, if this exemption is the case, why are people checked at Ford Field with metal detectors? Are you saying that with an OC, by law, if it's not private property, I would have to be let in with an OC?

I see under the 750.237a http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%28gc1lqn45qwtwslug2rpnca45%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-750-237a
Under 5 c.
(4) Except as provided in subsection (5), an individual who possesses a weapon in a weapon free school zone is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by 1 or more of the following:
(a) Imprisonment for not more than 93 days.
(b) Community service for not more than 100 hours.
(c) A fine of not more than $2,000.00.
(5) Subsection (4) does not apply to any of the following:
(a) An individual employed by or contracted by a school if the possession of that weapon is to provide security services for the school.
(b) A peace officer.
(c) An individual licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.


Now, it specifically says "possesses". Does "possesses" simply mean you have one unloaded in a case walking through the grounds to somewhere close by (such as you only live a few blocks away from a buddy who will look at your gun if you have a problem - but there is a school between the two destinations)?

What I'm getting at here is, is OCing a loaded handgun simply possessing it, or is it carrying a loaded gun? I see a discrepancy in the meaning of possess versus carry.

ETA: This is what I could find regarding the issue. It concerns a reserve police officer. This is the last paragraph:
It is my opinion, therefore, that a uniformed reserve police officer acting as an unpaid volunteer for a local police agency may carry an exposed, holstered pistol within the gun-free zones established by the Concealed Pistol Licensing Act; and if the officer is either a fully authorized “peace officer” or, alternatively, possesses a valid concealed pistol license issued under the Concealed Pistol Licensing Act, he or she may also carry an exposed, holstered pistol within the gun-free zones established by the Michigan Penal Code. - Jennifer Granholm June 28, 2002. (From the opinions section of the Firearms Laws of Michigan 2011 pdf)

BTW, COBO Hall is the place right next door to Joe Louis Arena (where the 'Wings play). It is home to the North American International Auto Show when it comes to town, and also Autorama which just recently took place there.

Adam

The law prohibits "possessing a weapon in a weapon free school zone". This would mean someone who does not have a CPL. Could not have a "weapon" anywhere on school property even if it's in a case in their vehicle. CPL holders are exempt from that. There is no law that says you cannot carry a non-concealed firearm onto or into a school or it's property. Also IMHO if you're carrying a gun you're also in possession of it.
And the reserve officer attorney general opinion does not only apply to reserve officers it applies to all law abiding citizens.

When it comes to Ford Field yes it would be legal to OC there. Whether they can legally not let you in because of it is up for interpretation ie. case law. Unless you have the money and time to file suit you're probably not going to be allowed to OC there.

saxconnection
03-08-2012, 19:26
The law prohibits "possessing a weapon in a weapon free school zone". This would mean someone who does not have a CPL. Could not have a "weapon" anywhere on school property even if it's in a case in their vehicle. CPL holders are exempt from that. There is no law that says you cannot carry a non-concealed firearm onto or into a school or it's property. Also IMHO if you're carrying a gun you're also in possession of it.
And the reserve officer attorney general opinion does not only apply to reserve officers it applies to all law abiding citizens.

When it comes to Ford Field yes it would be legal to OC there. Whether they can legally not let you in because of it is up for interpretation ie. case law. Unless you have the money and time to file suit you're probably not going to be allowed to OC there.
Thank you for the discussion. I am learning a lot here.

But I have two things:

First, you kind of have my point backwards about the possessing vs. carrying. I would think there is a difference between merely possessing a weapon, and the carry of that weapon. I guess you could use the bird analogy to explain what I mean. "An Eagle is a bird, but a bird is not necessarily an Eagle." Likewise, carrying is possession, but possession is not necessarily carrying.

Secondly, IMO, the Ford Field example I used might not be a good fight to bring. Bringing that issue to an open court may result in laws being made to define OC, which may end up restricting it, hindering some of the freedom the ambiguity of the law provides.

Adam

xmanhockey7
03-08-2012, 19:38
Thank you for the discussion. I am learning a lot here.

But I have two things:

First, you kind of have my point backwards about the possessing vs. carrying. I would think there is a difference between merely possessing a weapon, and the carry of that weapon. I guess you could use the bird analogy to explain what I mean. "An Eagle is a bird, but a bird is not necessarily an Eagle." Likewise, carrying is possession, but possession is not necessarily carrying.

Secondly, IMO, the Ford Field example I used might not be a good fight to bring. Bringing that issue to an open court may result in laws being made to define OC, which may end up restricting it, hindering some of the freedom the ambiguity of the law provides.

Adam

It's pretty well established in Michigan OC is legal. Right now there is a lawsuit with the Capital Area District Library about whether they can restrict firearm carry. They say they are not a local unit of government Michigan Open Carry says they are. We'll see what happens. If you have any other questions let me know or check out opencarry.org forums in the Michigan section. They know the laws in Michigan very well. Also if you have a CPL you don't need to get hung up on the possession part of 750.237a or 750.234d since you are exempt.

saxconnection
03-09-2012, 01:42
It's pretty well established in Michigan OC is legal. Right now there is a lawsuit with the Capital Area District Library about whether they can restrict firearm carry. They say they are not a local unit of government Michigan Open Carry says they are. We'll see what happens. If you have any other questions let me know or check out opencarry.org forums in the Michigan section. They know the laws in Michigan very well. Also if you have a CPL you don't need to get hung up on the possession part of 750.237a or 750.234d since you are exempt.
Yes indeed, I am exempt. Thanks for the intelligent conversation (even if most of the intelligence came from your side). It's nice being able to learn new things. I had pretty much thrown the notion of OC out the window. My take was that I'd rather carry myself in a way that shows I am aware, and have that special element of surprise should the situation dictate it. I'll admit I'm not completely comfortable with it FOR ME, but I don't look down on anyone else for doing it. A little more research, and I'll give it a shot (well, hopefully a shot won't be needed...). I think the first time out will be the decision maker for me. I have been carrying concealed every day for 5+ years now, and doing it comfortably. I feel naked without my gun, but I think I would feel even more exposed with my gun exposed. Anyway, thanks again.

Adam

xmanhockey7
03-09-2012, 02:53
Yes indeed, I am exempt. Thanks for the intelligent conversation (even if most of the intelligence came from your side). It's nice being able to learn new things. I had pretty much thrown the notion of OC out the window. My take was that I'd rather carry myself in a way that shows I am aware, and have that special element of surprise should the situation dictate it. I'll admit I'm not completely comfortable with it FOR ME, but I don't look down on anyone else for doing it. A little more research, and I'll give it a shot (well, hopefully a shot won't be needed...). I think the first time out will be the decision maker for me. I have been carrying concealed every day for 5+ years now, and doing it comfortably. I feel naked without my gun, but I think I would feel even more exposed with my gun exposed. Anyway, thanks again.

Adam

No problem. Again if you have any questions just ask. It took me a little while to get used to OCing but now I do it without thinking about it much. Only reason I started was because I'm not yet 21 so I can't get a CPL and I wanted to be able to defend myself. I'm happy to hear you're someone who concealed carries but has no problem with people OCing. We need more of that. And one of the idea's behind OC is that you'll be less likely to have to take a "shot".