[stephpd]

Wynder, You're not scary I was referring to George. And I keep my mouth shut while riding the bike. Beetles still hurt when they hit you in the face.

As far people who see the gun it would appear that most assume that you have a job that requires it, most people thinking cop. Could be armed security of park rangers or whatever but people around here don't know that the average Joe can legally carry. Hopefully as more people encounter you guys they will become more informed as to the law. Statically as more citizens carry the lower the crime rate.

Might want to inform Wilmington City Council of this fact. Better 10% of the residents carrying legally then 'stop and frisk' or any other bad laws they can come up with to combat crime.

[George]

1. Discreet OC --- IWB with shirt tucked grips plainly visable, able to conceal easily with shirt or jacket if situation demands (business)....[/quote]I'm hoping you have your CCDW License, otherwise OCing w/ the gun partially concealed is a big problem. According to the AG, to OC means the entire gun must be out in the open, i.e. no IWB setups.... Sorry to rain on this parade but that statement caught my eye.... There is no "discreet OC" because by definition, OC is totally out in the open, totally unconcealed. There is no middle ground.
======================================================================


Dave, reading the following give insight into the elements of concealed:

"Concealed" weapon may be in "plain view" of police officer. ‐ A weapon may be "concealed" within the meaning of this section, and still be in "plain view" for purposes of the search and seizure doctrine.
Robertson v. State, 794 A.2d 267 (Del. 1997).
A weapon is "concealed" if it is hidden from the ordinary sight of another person, i.e., the casual and ordinary observation of another in the normal associations of life; however, since "ordinary observations" are not the same as the observations of an investigating police officer, a weapon concealed from an ordinary person may be in the plain view of a police officer. Robertson v. State, 794
A.2d 267 (Del. 1997).

Burden of proving concealment. ‐ Since an element of this offense is concealment by the defendant of a deadly weapon "on or about the person," the State must prove this element beyond a reasonable doubt. Dubin v. State, 397 A.2d 132 (Del. 1979).

IMO The argument that: “because by definition, OC is totally out in the open, totally unconcealed. There is no middle ground.” Is flawed because there is no law permitting OPEN CARRY so there is no definition needed for open carry. Now there is a law that prohibits CC and even though not strictly defined there has been rulings (see above). The issue is not to define open carry as the opposite of CC but to disprove CC. if Concealed is disproved then you are by default open carrying. Using your argument, there is no difference to part of the gun being hidden in a holster vs. your pants (or IWB holster) or to be even more ludicrous, menacing with your gun would be considered as concealed as part of the gun is concealed by your hand.
I am aware of the AGs opinion, but that is opinion… not law. Of course, that means he would be willing to prosecute because he feels he could win. I personally think the OCing citizen would win, but don’t have the time and money to test the situation.

I stated that discreet open carry allows me to open carry while allowing me the option of concealing with a shirt or jacket as the situation demands….of course, I would do nothing illegal… IANAL