Can you "Openly" Conceal Carry?

Legally I’m not sure why this would differ from a fanny pack or other concealing bags etc. As long as you can’t see the firearm it is concealed.

During the height of the fanny pack craze a lot of us carried in them. Because of the size and construction of fanny packs designed for concealed carry someone who really looked could tell which ones might be holsters (e.g., maybe spot the odd edge of material that hides the velcro). But that takes real effort and expertise, and just didn’t happen with people walking down the street. The same can be said for all forms of carry, occasionally you will have an unusual lump show briefly (e.g., when you bend over) even if nothing looking like a gun is ever visible. Someone in the know may suspect, but it takes a pretty big leap to go from mentally realizing “that’s a bit odd” to screaming “GUN!”.

My problem with the SP is that just as fanny packs have gone out of style as general street wear, they look odd and thus attract attention. So they may be perfectly good (and legal) forms of concealment, I’d rather not have something that draws attention to where I’m concealing my gun.

2 Likes

Sorry, it was the wrong link. https://casetext.com/case/delk-v-commonwealth?
It really is a short read.
That other Delk case is absolutely crazy. I don;t think anyone knew what really happened.

1 Like

By the way, for most attorneys, brief means 25 pages, double spaced in a 12 point font, not including attachments, bibliography, footnotes, …

2 Likes

IMO, that is concealed carry. Can’t see it so…? :face_with_monocle:

2 Likes

As a layman who regularly reads opinions, in particular in IP cases but also sometimes constitutional law, I agree this is super short and pleasantly readable. Try reading and understanding the rulings in Oracle v. Google, if you have a couple of weeks. Or months. Potentially years :rofl:

2 Likes

I’ll leave the IP stuff to my daughter. She’s in one of those fancy Chicago law firms. The one where Justice Brett Kavanaugh was a partner. She doesn’t generally do IP but will if it ends up in litigation.

I’m kind of glad you posted the wrong link before as the 1948 case is educational.

  1. Covers many aspects of behavior that would disqualify one from a claim of self-defense (which was never claimed, but they are apparent).
  2. Clearly illustrates that an appeal only covers legal mistakes made by the court; that even if the appeals court believes the verdict was erroneous they will not overturn a jury verdict absent prejudicial error.

A bunch of other tidbits came to mind as well. They apparently never found the gun, or fingerprints would have told the real story. And, realizing that in the 1940s testing for GSR is a rarity and that could have made all the difference in this case. Fun to read. Now I have real work to do.

1 Like

It’s definitely a specialty. I’ve had to spend time on it because even the full-time IP attorneys may understand the law but not the IP itself. I had to bridge the gap, and the only way to do that was to (in this example) become immersed in Copyright Law, how Oracle v. Google had overturned decades of previous case law, and all the subsequent rulings. It was fun, but after taking up a substantial amount of 2 months all I wanted to do was get back to actual engineering.

1 Like

:rofl: brief… that’s funny

1 Like