Together we stand, divided we fall
I would like to take this opportunity to address some rumors and speculation with regards to the Responsible Citizens of California.
My name is Adnan Shahab. I am not rich; I am not famous. I am an average person who has to work for a living in order to pay my bills. Just like other average people, I am in a position where I am still fighting to be heard by my government. The fact that the government does not seem to care about the things that are important to me and is unresponsive to my concerns is one of the main reasons why I decided to run for State Assembly in California’s 20th District (Fremont, Newark, Union City, Milpitas).
Among the many things that concern me are gun rights. As a person who holds concealed weapons permits (CCW) from multiple states, the fact that the State of California (the place where I was born, raised, and live) will not issue a CCW to me for personal protection bothers me.
At the end of 2009, I became aware that unloaded open carry is legal in California. After learning that fact, I thoroughly researched the issue and began open carrying in my daily life. I would much prefer to carry concealed (as I am currently authorized to do so in 32 other states), but that is not an option available to most law abiding citizens in this state. Open carry is the only legal means that I have to be able to carry a firearm with which to protect myself if my life were to ever be put in jeopardy.
After many months of open carrying as an individual, I was approached by a group of individuals who were planning on creating a non-profit organization dedicated to carry rights. These individuals saw that the disjointed open carry community had already reached its full potential. It would be difficult for unorganized individuals to push for additional carry rights. Furthermore, AB 1934, legislation introduced by Assemblymember Lori Saldana to ban open carry in California, showed that attempts were already under way to curtail carry rights even further in this state.
The group of individuals that approached me created an organization that took on the name the Responsible Citizens of California (RCC). RCC is a privately funded organization. RCC’s mission is to protect the right of law abiding citizens to be able to carry firearms in California and to push to expand those rights. RCC is also dedicated to educating the public about what their rights are with regards to carrying firearms so that responsible individuals can make an informed decision as to whether they would like to carry in their private lives.
The goals of RCC and my personal goals with regards to carry laws in California are so in tune with one another that I could not turn down the opportunity to become a part of RCC from the beginning. I sit on the Board of Directors of RCC, and I currently hold the position of RCC’s Executive Vice President. In the next few months, I will be transitioning to the position of President of the Responsible Citizens of California.
I am in the process of stepping into the leadership position of the organization. The future of RCC will be largely determined by my beliefs, my dedication, and my actions. I have never undertaken such an endeavor before in my life. I am a human being; I am not perfect. I cannot guarantee that I will not make mistakes. But what I can guarantee is that I will try my very best to accomplish RCC’s goals and my personal goals with regards to carry laws.
On top of my personal commitment, I enjoy the counsel and advice of some of the most prominent members of the California open carry and gun rights communities. Most notably, the Chairman of the Board of Directors for RCC is Sam Wolanyk. Sam and his brother Nate Wolanyk, residents of Southern California, were amongst the first people to bring open carry to prominence in the State of California.
One of my first major goals (beyond defeating AB 1934 and its imminent threat to legal open carry) is to unite all of the open carry groups in California. There is a motto that goes “Together we stand, divided we fall.” I wholeheartedly believe in this motto. I feel that everyone who believes in the Second Amendment, in gun rights, and in the right to carry a firearm for personal protection needs to work with each other to ensure that our rights are respected by the government. Only by working together will we be able to make sure that our rights are not stripped away from us and trampled upon. No one single person can do everything on his or her own. But together, we can move mountains.
And once our rights are secured, we can then move forward to acquire the additional rights that law abiding citizens in other states, rightfully so, already enjoy. The Responsible Citizens of California will be the organization that will be at the tip of the spear fighting to secure those rights. I ask everyone to please rally with us.
http://responsiblecitizensofcalifornia.org/
California Unloaded Open Carry – December 11, 2009
At around 10:30AM on Thursday, December 10, I received a call back from Sgt. Souza (Badge #2601) at the Union City Police Department. Sgt. Souza seemed to be a very nice person. He explained to me that the day before had been very busy at the UCPD, and he was calling me back to make sure someone had responded to my earlier inquiry. I told him that I had not received a call back and that the UCPD was the last local law enforcement agency that I was waiting to hear back from. I explained to him that I was simply trying to get some clarification about how his agency interpreted California’s unloaded open carry laws. Fortunately, Sgt. Souza informed me that the UCPD is doing some training on that specific issue. He explained that safety of the officer is the main concern for him. He said he advises his officers to draw a gun on any person who is open carrying who they do not recognize as being a law enforcement agent. He also told me that he would expect that the officers would prone the person out and handcuff the person until the firearm could be inspected to ensure that it was unloaded and a background check could be done on the person. He also told me that he would expect his officers to treat everyone the same. When I asked him whether he would expect his officers to draw their weapons, prone out, and handcuff the Mayor of Union City if he were open carrying, Sgt. Souza said that he would. He said that even the Mayor can have stress and have a bad day and that he would not be willing to risk the life of his officers by not taking every precaution in dealing with such a situation.
It was a lengthy conversation (almost as long as my conversation with Commander Milner at the Newark Police Department last Monday). I eventually got through my three questions. Sgt. Souza told me that, as long as a loaded magazine is not attached to the firearm, it can be concealed. He said that a drop-leg thigh holster would definitely be legal, and it might even be a safer way to open carry than a belt holster because it is less likely to get covered by an arm or clothing. He did, however, express reservations about the legality of a shoulder holster. Surprised, I expressed that I would think that a shoulder holster would be the least likely to be construed as being concealed in any way or in violation of open carry. Sgt. Souza explained that carrying in a shoulder holster could be interpreted as concealed carry if a person’s arms were crossed or if the holster were under the arm pit, thus obstructing open view of the firearm. He said that there is no issue open carrying while driving as a car, but he emphasized that the firearm cannot be concealed. I asked him whether that would necessitate orienting the firearm so that it is visible to an officer who is approaching the car window. He advised me that a person should keep their hands as far away from the firearm as possible and to notify the officer that you are open carrying as soon as he or she approached the car. He also advised to try to get in a position where the officer is able to view the firearm.
Another interesting issue came to light as I spoke with Sgt. Souza. At one point, he asked me what organization I was affiliated with. At that point, I realized that a couple of the other officers who I had spoken with had asked me a similar question. I asked Sgt. Souza why he was interested in that. He explained that one of the reasons why it might be so difficult for me to get outright answers one way or the other from law enforcement officers when I ask a question is because many of them feel like members of the public ask them questions to pump them for information and try to put them on the spot. That would also explain why, when I told Sgt. Souza about how I believed open carry in a shoulder holster did not seem to concealed in any way, Sgt. Souza said something to the effect of, “Well, I expect to see some people carrying in shoulder holsters in the near future.” He had assumed that I was probing for areas that I could test the limits of the law on. He thought I would go out and tell some sort of organization that I was working with to have multiple people open carry in shoulder holsters in Union City to see what happens. I explained to Sgt. Souza that I am not representing any sort of organization. I am representing me, myself, and I. I speak for Adnan Shahab. I am representing my right to defend myself and expressing an interest to exercise my right to openly carry an unloaded firearm that is guaranteed to me under California law.
I am not trying to play any sort of “gotcha politics” here. For that to be the case, that would necessitate me knowing the correct black and white answer and then questioning law enforcement officers in an effort to catch them making a mistake. What I am doing is quite the opposite. From talking to many people, it appears that there is no black and white answer. Instead, there seems to be a whole lot of gray area when it comes to California’s unloaded open carry laws. Well, quite honestly, gray area scares me. I most definitely do not want to break the law, and I don’t want to go to jail. That is exactly why I am asking so many questions. I am trying to ask experts in the field to clarify the issue for me. Honestly, I think that it’s a shame that the California Attorney General cannot simply send an advisory message out to all law enforcement agencies and district attorneys within the state on how to interpret the statutes on the books. Until that happens, we will not get a black and white answer on unloaded open carry until a test case goes through the courts. And like I said, I do not want to risk going to jail by being that test case.
Please visit my official campaign website at:
www.Shahab2010.com
California Unloaded Open Carry – December 9, 2009 (Part 2)
Today was an interesting day in my quest to get some answers about California’s unloaded open carry laws. This is a record of what transpired.
At around 1:45PM on Wednesday, December 9, I attempted to contact the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office. Being as I live in Fremont, I called their branch at the Fremont Hall of Justice. The man with whom I spoke gave me his name with no hesitation. But at the end of the call, after he had already told me everything that he was going to tell me, he said that he did not want to be quoted and that he did not want his name to be used anywhere. I did record his name for my records, but, for now, I will abide by his wishes to not be named. He did say, however, that it was okay for me to refer to him as a male within the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office. He told me that he could not give me any sort of legal advice with regards to California’s unloaded open carry laws. He pointed me at 12025 of the Penal Code and told me to interpret the statute for myself. During the course of our conversation and my attempts to get him to give me some sort of guidance with regards to how the District Attorney’s Office would react to unloaded open carry, he seemed intrigued to hear how some of the law enforcement agencies that I spoke with reacted to my questions. I informed him that many agencies do not seem to have specific policies to deal with unloaded open carry and that it is left up to the interpretation of individual officers to understand the statutes. I also told him that I got conflicting responses from many different law enforcement officers. But the man seemed intrigued when I told him that I was informed that the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office does indeed have a policy specifically dealing with unloaded open carry. After I explained to him the positions of the Sheriff’s Office, he told me that I “should be safe” if I followed their policies. That is hardly a definitive position that I can take solace in, especially coming from somebody who is unwilling to go on record with his response.
At around 5:00PM on Wednesday, December 9, I once again called the Union City Police Department. At first I was told by a woman that the Watch Commander was in a meeting and that I would be transferred to his voicemail. I was transferred, wound up getting stuck in one of those “Press 1 to talk to so-and-so, Press 2 to look up officers by name” phone trees of death, and was then dumped off on another woman who I had to explain everything to once again. This second woman told me that Watch Commanders don’t have voicemail (why did the first lady try to send me to his voicemail if it doesn’t exist?) and that he was out on the streets at the moment (not in a meeting?). Apparently, UCPD is the most difficult local law enforcement agency to get a hold of an officer at. The second woman told me that she could take down my name and number and give it to the Watch Commander when he returned. I am still waiting to get a call back.
Starting around 5:30PM I started doing more research about California’s unloaded open carry laws online. I found some discussion threads at Calguns.net to be extremely relevant to the issues that I am researching. I also read the court decisions in the cases of People v. Knight and People v. Clark.
Unhappy with the response that I got from the man at the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office earlier in the day, I decided to e-mail the Fremont branch a little after 10:00PM. I am hoping to get a more meaningful response from somebody at the DA’s Office this time. And hopefully that person will be willing to go on record with their response.
I am now trying to find a lawyer in my area who is an expert in California firearms laws. It would be nice to find someone who is an authority on the subject of unloaded open carry. And, just in case I do decide to eventually open carry, I want to know a lawyer who will be able to help me if I either accidentally break the law or am unfairly arrested and prosecuted because of misinterpretations of the statutes on the part of law enforcement. If anyone knows of any such lawyers (hopefully ones who are willing to work pro bono) in the Fremont area, please do not hesitate to send their information to me at AdnanShahab@aol.com
Please visit my official campaign website at:
www.Shahab2010.com
California Unloaded Open Carry – December 9, 2009
Over the last few days, I have taken a heightened interest in California’s unloaded open carry laws. Since my first blog entry a few days ago, I have decided to refer to it as “unloaded open carry” instead of simply “open carry” because I feel the unloaded aspect of the process is critical to people understanding what I am talking about.
In talking with a few more law enforcement agencies over the last two days, I have also decided that it is important to chronicle the learning process that I am currently going through. I want people to understand that I am not simply some crazy person who wants to walk around with a gun. (Hell, at this point, I’m not even sure whether I will ever get to a point where I actually do feel comfortable enough to open carry.) Instead, I am making every effort to fully understand California’s unloaded open carry laws. I am endeavoring to make sure that, if I do make the decision to open carry, I do not break any laws. Furthermore, in case I do accidentally break the law, I want it noted that I am trying not to break the law.
Another issue that I have run up against is that different law enforcement agencies read the statutes on unloaded open carry very differently. And even speaking with different officers within the same law enforcement agency, I have heard vastly differing interpretations of the statutes. That scares me. With so much left up to interpretation, a person who does decide to open carry in California runs the risk of a law enforcement agent arresting them for something that is completely legal. Taking the interpretation argument even further, there is always the risk that a district attorney may interpret the statute quite differently from the way a well-intentioned citizen might interpret it. And who knows what could happen if such a case eventually wound up in the hands of California jury. And so I will make an attempt to log as much of the process that I am going through for the sake of posterity.
When last I left this issue, there were three main issues that I wanted to gain clarity on:
- Is it legal to open carry an unloaded handgun in a shoulder holster or drop-leg thigh holster?
- Does the holster that is being used for open carry have to have a snap closure?
- Is it legal to open carry an unloaded handgun while driving a car?
I also wanted to revisit a question that I thought I had already gained clarity on. I continued to read differing opinions on the issue on the Internet, so I wanted to know:
- While open carrying an unloaded firearm, does a loaded magazine have to be open carried? (Or can a loaded magazine be concealed in a pocket?)
With these four questions in mind, I contacted the Union City Police Department, the Milpitas Police Department, the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office, the Fremont Police Department (for a second time), and the State of California Department of Justice Bureau of Firearms. The following a summary of my interaction with each agency.
I e-mailed Union City Police Department on Friday, December 4, but I never got any sort of response. I also called the UCPD at 11:50AM on Monday, December 7 and asked to speak to a desk officer. There was no desk officer available to speak with. A person at the Union City Police Department took down my name and number and told me that I would be called back. I never received a call back.
I called the Milpitas Police Department around 5:15PM on Monday, December 7. I spoke with Sgt. Tran (Badge #200) who was very helpful. In response to my questions, Sgt. Tran said that a loaded magazine is considered to be a firearm, so it must not be concealed and must be open carried. He said that any form of open carry in a holster is legal as long as the firearm is not concealed in any way by clothing or other things, so shoulder holsters and drop-leg thigh holsters are legal. Sgt. Tran had not heard anything about snap closures, and he believes snap closures are not necessary on the holster. He also said that is legal to open carry while driving a car. He cited the fact that it is legal to drive around with an unloaded shotgun in a rack in your car as evidence of the legality.
In response to an e-mail inquiry that I sent to the Newark Police Department on Friday, December 4, I got an e-mail message on Monday, December 7 stating that my original message was going to be passed along to a Watch Commander. Approximately 8:20AM on Tuesday, December 8, I received a call from Commander Tom Milner (Badge #C-1). Commander Milner was a very pleasant guy who was more than willing to talk with me for as long as I wanted to talk about the issue of unloaded open carry. He told me that Newark leaves it up to the discretion of the officer to look at the totality of the situation when called to the scene of a person who is open carrying. He said that it is up to the interpretation of the district attorney as to whether a loaded magazine must be open carried. He said that he, personally, would prefer that the magazine were carried openly. He said that it is not legal to open carry in a shoulder or drop-leg thigh holster and that the location of the firearm on the belt in the mid-section of the body probably harkens back to the days of the old west. He said there are no specific of any type of retention in the code, so a snap closure is not necessary. And after first saying that it was legal to open carry while driving a car, he then changed his mind. Citing 12026.1, he said that it is not legal to open carry while driving a car because the unloaded firearm must be locked in a container.
Around 9:30AM on December 8, I called the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office. I spoke with Sgt. Gemmell (Badge #1365). Sgt. Gemmell told me that the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office actually has a policy manual regarding open carry. I asked him whether there was a copy of that manual that I could take a look at, but he said it is not available to the public. Sgt. Gemmell told me that he was going to locate their policy manual on open carry and find the answers to my questions. He called me back around 10:00AM with the answers to my questions. Sgt. Gemmell told me that it is legal to carry a loaded magazine concealed in your pocket and that the key is that there cannot be any ammunition in the chamber of the firearm. He said that any open carry holster is fine, so shoulder and drop-leg thigh holsters are okay. He had not heard anything about snap closures on a holster, so snap closures are not necessary. He then told me that, as long as an unloaded firearm is being carried openly on your person, it is fine to open carry while driving. He cautioned that if the firearm is not on your person (e.g. on the passenger seat, under the driver’s seat, etc.), it is a violation of the law. He also reminded me to be cautious of school zones and government buildings.
I then decided to call the Fremont Police Department again. Around 10:50AM, I spoke with Officer MacDonald (Badge #12553). I was explaining to Officer MacDonald that I had called a few days earlier and spoke with Officer Bruner. I told her that I wanted to get clarification and ask some additional questions. I started off by saying something to the effect of, “I already know that it’s legal to carry a loaded magazine. I am trying to figure out if the loaded magazine must be open carried.” To this, Officer MacDonald told me that it is illegal to carry ammunition on your person or have it in your vicinity if you are unloaded open carrying. I retorted that she might be mistaken because I had already spoken with numerous law enforcement officers who said it was legal to carry a loaded magazine. Officer MacDonald seemed to get upset with me. She asked me something like, “Well, if you already asked the question, why are you calling again?” I was shocked at her tone. What kind of community relations is that on the part of a law enforcement officer? I responded by telling her that my question for her was whether the loaded magazine needed to open carried, not whether I could carry it in the first place. Officer MacDonald then told me that she had to go because she had to deal with a person at her desk. She took down my name and number and told me that she would call me back. At around 11:40AM, Officer MacDonald called me back. She told me to Google search “Department of Justice Firearms Division” and look at the case laws on that website. Basically, she punted the entire issue and told me to figure it out for myself. I might have to call the Fremont Police Department back and speak to someone (not Officer MacDonald) who is actually willing to talk with me about the issue of unloaded open carry.
Around 1:10PM on December 8, 2009, I called the California Department of Justice Bureau of Firearms. The man who I spoke with referred to penal code sections 12025(f), 12026(b), and 12031(e). He told me that he cannot give me any sort of legal advice. He also told me to talk to the local district attorney or to seek legal advice from someone who is an expert in the field of open carry.
So, I am now left with a situation where I cannot get concrete answers to some basic questions about California’s unloaded open carry laws. About the only thing that I am confident in after the last two days is that a snap closure retention is not necessary on a holster used for open carry (sorry Officer Bruner), so I am going to drop that issue. It seems that there is a whole lot that is left up to the interpretation of law enforcement officers and district attorneys. This process is frustrating, but I am not going to get discouraged easily. This topic interests me, so I am going to do a little more digging. I want to get a response from somebody who is in a position to give me a definitive answer to my questions.
Please visit my official campaign website at:
www.Shahab2010.com
California Unloaded Open Carry – December 4, 2009
In the past, I have been an advocate for concealed weapons permits (CCW). I currently have a license to carry a concealed firearm from two different states. Because of the reciprocity laws between states, this allows me to carry a concealed handgun in approximately 31 states. (The exact number changes from year to year. It is important to brush up on reciprocity laws and individual state laws whenever you travel to another state.) Ironically, even though I live California, I do not have a CCW issued by my home state. Because I am neither rich nor famous, it was no surprise when I was not able to obtain a CCW from the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office when I applied for one nearly five years ago. Additionally, because of California’s lack of reciprocity with other states, neither of my CCWs are valid in California. As a result, I am not legally allowed to carry in the state in which I spend over 99% of my time in. Thus, if I am ever put in danger of grave bodily harm, I will most likely not have a firearm at my disposal with which to defend myself.
One of the benefits of concealed carry is that it goes largely unnoticed by society. Once the government is convinced that you are a law-abiding citizen who can be trusted to carry a loaded handgun, you can do so without the general population being aware of it. In such a case, the opportunity to protect oneself from harm is present, but the chances of alarming other citizens by the overt presence of a firearm is avoided. In my opinion, that is the best possible scenario. But since that scenario has been denied to me in California, I have now looked at another scenario.
I have always known of California’s open carry law, but I never really considered it because I felt that concealed carry was a far superior option. But with the realization that the better option is being denied to me by my government, I have recently been reminded to look more carefully at the open carry option. In order to try to fully grasp the law, I have spent the last two days researching the issue online. I have also placed numerous calls the Fremont Police Department and the California Highway Patrol (both in Oakland and in Hayward).
To the best of my understanding:
- It is legal (for a person who is allowed to own a handgun) to carry an unloaded handgun in a belt holster as long as it is not concealed in any way whatsoever by an article of clothing (e.g. cannot be covered by a shirt or jacket). No ammunition may be in the magazine that is inserted into the firearm or in the firearm's chamber. This is what is meant by OPEN CARRY.
- While open carrying, it is legal to also carry a loaded magazine(s) on your person. According to both Officer Bruner (Badge #1986) with the Fremont Police Department and Officer Simmons (unfortunately, I failed to ask for a Badge #, but he was at the Hayward location) with the California Highway Patrol, it is fine to conceal the loaded magazine in a pocket, although Officer Bruner recommends open carrying it on your belt if possible.
- It is legal to open carry with an EMPTY magazine inserted into the firearm.
- It is definitely ILLEGAL to open carry within 1,000 feet of a school. It is also ILLEGAL to carry in local or state public buildings, California State Parks, or at U.S. Post Offices. Basically, schools and government buildings are prohibited areas for open carry. (The issue of proximity to prohibited areas is a separate concern of mine. Someone needs to fix some of these ridiculous laws and allow responsible citizens to behave in responsible ways in more places. But this blog entry is about compliance with current laws, not changing bad laws.)
I am still trying to get clarification on the following issues:
- Is it legal to open carry an unloaded handgun while driving a car? I have read articles online stating that it is indeed legal to do so. But when I asked two different CHP officers (including Officer Simmons), I was basically told that the mere act of getting into a vehicle makes the handgun concealed, thus violating the law. Also, ever since I purchased my first handgun numerous years ago, I have always been told that I needed to put the unloaded handgun in a locked container in my trunk whenever I drove somewhere, which, intuitively, runs counter to the ability to open carry while driving. Having to lock up my handgun in my trunk every time I got into my car and then having to unlock it whenever I got out of the car in order to open carry seems cumbersome. It’s not a deal breaker, but it’s definitely an issue. (Also, it might be wise to lock it in the trunk just in case one drives through any school zones.) I need to get a definitive answer on this.
- Is it legal to open carry an unloaded handgun in a shoulder holster or drop-leg thigh holster? California Penal Code Section 12025 (f) reads: "Firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed within the meaning of this section." By specifically referring to belt holsters, are other types of open holsters deliberately excluded? Quite honestly, this is a question that, in all of my excitement about the subject, I forgot to ask to any of the officers who I spoke with. Considering that open carry requires that no article of clothing cover the handgun, these two options seem far safer than a belt holster when it comes to open carry. After all, an untucked shirt could very easily turn a legal open carry into an illegal concealed carry. I will try to ask this question as soon as I can talk to another law enforcement officer.
- Does the holster that is being used for open carry have to have a snap closure? Officer Bruner told me that it must have a snap closure to restrain the firearm, but I have not seen any reference to this elsewhere. Having the proper equipment is essential to being in compliance with the law.
The good thing is that Officer Bruner told me that the City of Fremont has no specific laws regarding open carry and that the Fremont Police Department recognizes the right to open carry that is guaranteed by state law. That means that an understanding of state law is sufficient to open carry in Fremont. I will look into contacting surrounding cities for their positions in the next few weeks.
As I said earlier, I still consider concealed carry to be a superior option. Concealed carry will lead to less public disruption. But there is also something to be said for the deterrent effect of a handgun in plain sight. Perhaps people will act more civil to one another in the presence of a handgun. Also, concealed carry allows for a loaded handgun to be drawn for quicker response to a deadly threat. Luckily, with a little bit of training, an unloaded open carry handgun can be loaded and ready to fire in less than two seconds. That’s not bad, and it’s better than nothing when faced with the threat of deadly bodily harm.
I am not saying that I am going to begin open carrying immediately. I would want to find out far more information before I began doing so. As they say, the devil is in the details. But once I obtain clarity on the issue, unless the clothing I am wearing prevents it, I can see no reason to not open carry.
With regards to people in the community getting upset at the sight of open carry, all I have to say is deal with it. The law clearly says that open carry is legal. If you see someone open carrying, you have the right to call the police. Also, the responding law enforcement officer has every right to inspect an open carry handgun to ensure that the firearm is not loaded. But other than that, citizens have every right to open carry. We should not blame people for exercising their rights.
And if law enforcement starts getting overwhelmed by calls to respond to law-abiding citizens who are open carrying, that is not the fault of the person who is exercising their rights. The weird part is that, if it were easier for law-abiding citizens to obtain CCWs, then law enforcement would not have to respond to so many time consuming calls from the public.
We all know that criminals will continue to carry concealed weapons. The fact that they are criminals means that they are willing to break the law. It is unfortunate that law-abiding citizens must resort to such extreme measures as open carry in order to be able to both protect themselves and remain in full compliance with the law.
Please visit my official campaign website at:
www.Shahab2010.com
Firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed within the meaning of this section.