# Concealed guns laws **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 27, 2001, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-guns-laws/78322 "2001-08-27T14:29:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Neurodoc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/848f3c/32.png) [@Neurodoc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurodoc)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2001, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-guns-laws/78322/21 "2001-08-29T03:52:34Z")
The advantages of open carry are: 1) you know who is armed; and, two your visible gun MAY be able to deter a Bad Guy who would otherwise selct you as a victim. That’s about it. The disadvantages of open carry are: 1) you may provoke nasty reactions from those who see your gun; 2) if you are carrying for personal protection, you lose the advantage of “surprise” when a Bad Guy attacks you. On the whole, I prefer concealed carry, which is how I carry my own weapon. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2001, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-guns-laws/78322/22 "2001-08-30T05:06:53Z")
The Supreme Court of Canada addressed this issue a few years ago, in determining the mens rea for the offence of carrying a concealed weapon, in [R. v. Felawka](http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/1993/vol4/html/1993scr4_0199.html). Here’s the majority’s take on the purpose of the offence: > [@](#): > > What then should be the requisite mens rea for this offence? Perhaps a solution can be arrived at by considering the aim or object of the section itself. There is something extremely menacing and intimidating about the presence of a naked weapon. There is something even more sinister in the presence of a concealed weapon. No doubt the legislators enacting s. 89 believed that weapons are usually concealed by persons on the way to commit crimes or after leaving the scene. Clearly then one of the goals of the section is to discourage the prospective bank robber who might be apprehended on the way to the bank with a sawed-off shotgun concealed in his pant leg. Yet, I think the section has a wider aim. All Canadians have the right to feel protected from the sinister menace of a concealed weapon. If it was ever thought that it was lawful to carry concealed weapons more and more Canadians might come to believe it would be prudent for them to carry concealed weapons in order to defend themselves and their families. This might lead to a vigilante attitude that could all too readily result in an increase in violence in Canadian society. Canadians are well satisfied with the security provided by the close regulation of the ownership and use of firearms. They have every right to expect the concealment of weapons would also be prohibited or properly regulated. To fulfil the aim and object of s. 89, it would then appear that the requisite intent or mental element should be that the accused intended to hide from others an object he knew to be a weapon. ---
**Author:** ![Neurodoc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/848f3c/32.png) [@Neurodoc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurodoc)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-guns-laws/78322/23 "2001-08-31T07:28:11Z")
Northern Piper’s quotation from the Canadian Court opinion may be summarized thus: Canada believes that: 1) openly carried weapons are menacing; and, 2) the concealed carry of weapons implies a criminal intent. In other words, no citizen has a legitimate reason to carry a weapon, either openly or concealed… This is one of the many reasons I thank God that I was born in the USA and not in some place like Canada. ---
**Author:** ![Heath\_Doolin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Heath\_Doolin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heath_Doolin)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 7:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-guns-laws/78322/24 "2001-08-31T07:58:23Z")
Answer me this… In Die Hard, John McClaine carries a gun along with him on a plane at the beginning of the movie. (‘relax I am a cop’). Wouldn’t FAA regs stop him from carrying even though he is a police officer? ---
**Author:** ![Tomcat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Tomcat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tomcat)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 10:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-guns-laws/78322/25 "2001-08-31T10:30:07Z")
Y’all should go to Rangely, Colorado around Hunting season (coming up soon…). Lots of people walk around with holstered guns, plus the two or three in the back window of their pickup. But that is out in the sticks…so… I have a concealed carry license here in the Czech Republic- the ONLY type of gun carrying license you can get as a private citizen. To be able to carry a weapon un-concealed you need to be a cop, security guard, military, etc (maybe gun collector, I forget). It wasn’t that hard to get either- a written test and 3 shots out of a 9mm. Now, for me to get a hunting license here- Ohmygod! A year course on all of the mating habits of every animal in the woods plus you have to know all about the flora that the animals eat. Some people take 2 to 3 years before they pass all of the hunting tests. I was lucky I found my Hunters Safety Cert back in Colorado- I got a foreigners permit. Now, if only the guns themselves were cheaper, I’d be able to get one. They are about 2 to 3 times more expensive than in the States. A Ruger 1022 costs $350 here, so I brought two back with me from the States the last time I travelled. But, unfortunately, handguns don’t travel easily, so I can’t bring one of those here. Handguns fall under the category “weapons of war” with the airlines. AS for law enforcement officers and guns on planes- thank all those years of pilot training in said town of Rangely…I remembered it fell under FAR 108 something… [http://www.risingup.com/fars/info/part108-11-FAR.shtml](http://www.risingup.com/fars/info/part108-11-FAR.shtml) They can if they demonstrate a need to, basically. -Tcat ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2001, 11:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-guns-laws/78322/26 "2001-08-31T11:55:12Z")
Kansas has open carry, but it also has “home rule”, as I posted about in the past. Which means that the combination of the two makes it suprememly easy for the police to harass you, ticket you, or arrest you depending on which County, City, Township, Subdivision, or Homes Association you are in. Unless you are a lawyer and know the laws of every single legal entitiy in Kansas that you travel to, you can’t really be sure if you are a law-abiding citizen one moment, felon the next. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/concealed-guns-laws/78322.md?page=1)