6th Circuit [OH] Open Carry Decision

Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
8,423
Likes
6,299
Location
My forest stronghold
Feedback: 26 / 0 / 0
Enjoy

Officer Bright claims that he had a “reasonable suspicion” that Northrup was engaged in
criminal activity based on two undisputed facts: (1) Northrup was visibly carrying a gun on his
holster, and (2) Bright was responding to a 911 call. That reasonable suspicion, Bright claims,
justified his disarmament, detention, and citation of Northrup. Before addressing whether he is
right, we should mention a few guiding principles.

In today’s case, Officer Bright relies on two “specific and articulable facts”: Northrup’s
open possession of a firearm and the 911 call about what Northrup was doing. The Fourth
Amendment no doubt permitted Bright to approach Northrup and to ask him questions. But that
is not what he did. He relied on these facts to stop Northrup, disarm him, and handcuff him.
Ohio law permits the open carry of firearms, Ohio Rev. Code § 9.68(C)(1), and thus permitted
Northrup to do exactly what he was doing. While the dispatcher and motorcyclist may not have
known the details of Ohio’s open-carry firearm law, the police officer had no basis for such
uncertainty. If it is appropriate to presume that citizens know the parameters of the criminal
laws, it is surely appropriate to expect the same of law enforcement officers—at least with regard
to unambiguous statutes. Heien v. North Carolina, 135 S. Ct. 530, 540 (2014).

Clearly established law required Bright to point to evidence that Northrup may have been
“armed and dangerous.” Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40, 64 (1968) (emphasis added). Yet all
he ever saw was that Northrup was armed—and legally so
. To allow stops in this setting “would
effectively eliminate Fourth Amendment protections for lawfully armed persons.” United States
v. King, 990 F.2d 1552, 1559 (10th Cir. 1993); accord United States v. Ubiles, 224 F.3d 213, 218
(3d Cir. 2000); United States v. Black, 707 F.3d 531, 540 (4th Cir. 2013); United States v. Roch,
5 F.3d 894, 899 (5th Cir. 1993).
 
This legal stuff just confuses me sometimes but I thought this was interesting.

"This requirement and the impropriety of Officer Bright’s demands are particularly acutein a State like Ohio. Not only has the State made open carry of a firearm legal, but it also doesnot require gun owners to produce or even carry their licenses for inquiring officers."
 
This legal stuff just confuses me sometimes but I thought this was interesting.

"This requirement and the impropriety of Officer Bright’s demands are particularly acutein a State like Ohio. Not only has the State made open carry of a firearm legal, but it also doesnot require gun owners to produce or even carry their licenses for inquiring officers."

NH is the same.
 
Wait, did Bright also have a gun in a holster? Should he have arrested himself? Not bright.
 
As far as I recall open carry was lawful in Ohio at least as far back as the early 1970's.
 
Soloman02,

Do you by chance have a link to that? I did a quick search and did not see it. I know you have a lot of the NH stuff down pat. Thanks.

There is a reason you didn't find it. NH has no law on open carry. NH has "Vermont Style" open carry. Ergo, we have zero laws referencing the act of open carry. For conceal carry we do have a law but in the law it make no mention that you must carry said license on your person, just that you have to obtain said license. Laws have always worked on the premise that if it is not listed then it is legal. Some states have been slowly turning this on its head due to incredibly vague and overly broad laws.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159/159-mrg.htm

RSA 159 only applies to loaded conceal carry OR loaded handgun in a vehicle.

- - - Updated - - -

While this decision isn't binding on the rest of the country it can be used as "Persuasive Precedent."
 
So, how do you make this happen? Attach the language to some other bill? Slip it in during the middle of something else, like they do? Expose the tyrants for their civil rights violations? All of the above? Other? Need to hammer this from every direction, six ways til Sunday.
 
Back
Top Bottom