open carry in sc?

[thebrasilian]

Can an off duty leo open carry in sc in plan clothes?

 

[Paco]

I believe their badge has to be visible if they do open carry. I usually see the badge on the same side of the belt as the handgun.

 

[thebrasilian]

I was at a books a million and the way he was sitting you couldn't see his badge. At first I thought he was someone trying to be bold.

 

[C_Carson]

Last year I saw a guy in Bilo wearing tan slacks and a black polo shirt, tucked in, open carrying. Saw no badge or other identification.

 

[Paco]

They could have been open carrying on accident. I know a guy at one of the gun shops around here accidentally open carried into a store because he had just left work. He didn't realize it until he saw the shocked face of the clerk.

 

[melloyello]

I've seen a n LEO open carry in plain clothes playing with his children in the park in Goose Creek.
Reason I "assumed" he was an LEO was that he drove up in his patrol car.
Did not see a badge on him anywhere and if I didn't see him driving up, wouldn't have known he was LE.

I'd like to be able to Open Carry.

 

[armaborealis]

Apparently. I eat lunch at a fast food joint that offers a military/LEO discount one day a week, and on that day you can see a whole raft of plain clothes folks open carrying with badges clipped to belts at lunch. I've also seen a guy in the grocery store in the evenings, pretty clearly "off duty" picking up groceries after work.

I haven't seen any statutory requirement to carry the badge visibly but it seems to be SOP.

It is unlawful for anyone to carry about the person any handgun, whether concealed or not, except as follows, unless otherwise specifically prohibited by law:

(1) regular, salaried law enforcement officers, and reserve police officers of a state agency, municipality, or county of the State, uncompensated Governor?s constables, law enforcement officers of the federal government or other states when they are carrying out official duties while in this State, deputy enforcement officers of the Natural Resources Enforcement Division of the Department of Natural Resources, and retired commissioned law enforcement officers employed as private detectives or private investigators;

I do find it questionable for them to OC off-duty after hours. I find no statutory exemption to SC 16-23-20 giving them Super Secret Special Open Carry Authoritay when not carrying out official duties. I guess they could make the argument that they're always on the clock, but I suspect the police officer's union would disagree with eliminating overtime rules if LEOs are "always on duty," so I guess that argument might cut both ways. Then again I really doubt a LEO would actually enforce 16-23-20 against another LEO.

Despite hysterical anti-open carry attitudes among many of the citizens of SC, CWP trainers, some members of this very board, and many who are in or claim to speak for law enforcement (cough cough Jake Knotts cough), these plain clothes officers don't seem to provoke any trouble or issues with misidentification. I guess their Super Gun Powers protect them from bad guys shooting them first, bad guys stealing their sidearms, or cops/CWP carriers confusing them with gang bangers and taking them out. I hear that all of those things happen to open carriers elsewhere all the time on the internets.

I have been thinking about getting my fishing license and "fishing" regularly so I can OC more. In this ridiculous heat it would certainly be more practical.

 

[melloyello]

When an LEO does not identify themselves, i.e. a badge, how can they carry out official duties...."when they are carrying out official duties while in this State,"??

 

[armaborealis]

When an LEO does not identify themselves, i.e. a badge, how can they carry out official duties...."when they are carrying out official duties while in this State,"??

I don't see how displaying the badge relates to duty status.

Example:
- Plainclothes detective on his shift in unmarked car = no badge but on duty.
- Cop who changes into street clothes at the locker room at work, clocks out, ends his shift, has no more official duties for the evening, but swings by Wally World to get a gallon of milk on the way home with an OC glock and a badge displayed = not on duty. Unless there's some strange rule or law that says that LEOs are "always on duty," in which case why do they get paid overtime?

Remember, the police are under no obligation to tell the truth or volunteer their identification... Deception has long been upheld as a legitimate police tactic.

 

[P-1]

Realistically, cops are not above the law. They have to follow the rules like everyone else. If they carry openly, their badge or identification of an officer needs to be presented, openly. DNR has the uniform to carry openly and thus recognition.

 

[11B3XCIB]

I would support the legislation allowing open carry, but I doubt I'd exercise the privilege to do so. I would prefer to keep my firearm a secret so I may not be targeted, nor do I want people to think my behavior is influenced by the presence of a gun.

 

[John Canuck]

Not to worry. No one yet (at least not a real case I've seen) has been targeted for excercising the RIGHT to OC in the majority of states where OC is not prohibited. If there have been any cases at all of the specific targeting of an OC'r for a crime, it isn't statistically significant enough to concern yourself with (IMHO).

 

[thebrasilian]

People in Lexington county have a choice this year. Get boss hog out.

 

[craigp]

Probably the one big bonus for allowing open carry is that if you conceal carry now and allow your weapon to be seen, you are in trouble. If OC was permitted and you still wanted to CC but say you reached up and your short exposed a part of the weapon, you would not be in violation of any law. I agree that even if OC was permitted, the tactical advantage of CC is still preferred.

 

[FunkyMonkey]

Probably the one big bonus for allowing open carry is that if you conceal carry now and allow your weapon to be seen, you are in trouble. If OC was permitted and you still wanted to CC but say you reached up and your short exposed a part of the weapon, you would not be in violation of any law. I agree that even if OC was permitted, the tactical advantage of CC is still preferred.

This.

See my previous posts about OC in VA. I open carried for convenience many times over the past decade, and never had a single problem. Talked openly with police on their beat in my neighborhood while carrying, sometimes they didn't even mention it. Makes it convenient to go quickly to the store. MUCH more comfortable in the heat of the summer - no fat piece of black plastic or steel squashed on your sweaty back. And most importantly, as this poster said, the public doesn't "freak out" seeing a "civilian" carrying a firearm or your shirt accidentally pulls up while bending over or such. In fact, I had many pleasant chats with people while open carrying - it was a great way to "spread the word" about 2A issues. Most people had no clue.

This (OC) and restaurant carry are the most imporant things we have to change. Had both in VA and absolutely no problems. Count me in for anything I can do. Sadly I live in a district where I can't help vote Knott out. Spread the word to anyone you know in that district.

 

[11B3XCIB]

During my CWP class in 2007, the instructor said "as long as the firearm is concealed by something, it does not matter if it prints slightly. Also, if you reach up to get something off a shelf in a store and the grip exposes slightly, you are still within regulation."

I know this is going to start a debate, but SLED's law states:
"(6) ?Concealable weapon? means a firearm having a length of less than twelve inches measured along its greatest dimension that must be carried in a manner that is hidden from public view in normal wear of clothing except when needed for self defense, defense of others, and the protection of real or personal property. "

The law is no more clear than that. I interpret "normal wear" as standing with my feet roughly shoulder width apart with my arms by my sides. Any extreme manipulation of the clothing that causes slight imprint or brief exposure of a portion of the weapon is not something that should cause a panic.

If someone can find some specific regulation on this, I would like to see it.

 

[FunkyMonkey]

Yeah, you're probably right, but....

An anti-gunner, like my ex-wife, can lie their a*# off to any law enforcement official, who may or may not be sympathetic with the proles carrying their own guns. Might make your life much more (needlessly) difficult. With OC and it being "normal", there's a significantly reduced chance of a brandishing charge.

Incidentally, of the two times in my life I've had to show my weapon, both with my toddler in hand BTW, once I was open carrying - you would think this would have been a deterrent. It was before the VA restaurant conceal carry ban was repealed and we were walking back from getting carry out food at dusk for approximately 4 blocks in a nice neighborhood. Followed by two urban youths, I crossed the street twice and each time they crossed along with me getting closer each time while talking loudly / inappropriately. Finally I just bent over to tie the little one's shoes while pivoting with my strong side showing and "poof", they were gone. Sometimes OC can be a good thing.

We need it.

During my CWP class in 2007, the instructor said "as long as the firearm is concealed by something, it does not matter if it prints slightly. Also, if you reach up to get something off a shelf in a store and the grip exposes slightly, you are still within regulation."

I know this is going to start a debate, but SLED's law states:
"(6) ?Concealable weapon? means a firearm having a length of less than twelve inches measured along its greatest dimension that must be carried in a manner that is hidden from public view in normal wear of clothing except when needed for self defense, defense of others, and the protection of real or personal property. "

The law is no more clear than that. I interpret "normal wear" as standing with my feet roughly shoulder width apart with my arms by my sides. Any extreme manipulation of the clothing that causes slight imprint or brief exposure of a portion of the weapon is not something that should cause a panic.

If someone can find some specific regulation on this, I would like to see it.

 

[armaborealis]

During my CWP class in 2007, the instructor said "as long as the firearm is concealed by something, it does not matter if it prints slightly. Also, if you reach up to get something off a shelf in a store and the grip exposes slightly, you are still within regulation."

...

If someone can find some specific regulation on this, I would like to see it.

I am aware of no case law on the issue, nor am I aware of any Attorney General opinions. Apparently LEOs have a special super awesome exemption (aka professional courtesy) for violating state law -- no case law, but LEOs appear able to OC even when not performing "official duties" which would seem to contradict the letter of the statute in SC.

 

[melloyello]

During my CWP class in 2007, the instructor said "as long as the firearm is concealed by something, it does not matter if it prints slightly. Also, if you reach up to get something off a shelf in a store and the grip exposes slightly, you are still within regulation."

...

If someone can find some specific regulation on this, I would like to see it.

I am aware of no case law on the issue, nor am I aware of any Attorney General opinions. Apparently LEOs have a special super awesome exemption (aka professional courtesy) for violating state law -- no case law, but LEOs appear able to OC even when not performing "official duties" which would seem to contradict the letter of the statute in SC.

Just asking, if a person is not in uniform, i.e. plain clothes w/o an exposed badge, wouldn't it be prudent to call in "person with a gun?" A few of these in the news..????

 

[C_Carson]

Why would it be "prudent"?