The good news in this case is that the ticket will be thrown out in an instant, because a holstered firearm on a calm-demeanored person doesn't WARRANT alarm, regardless of whether or not it CAUSES alarm.
I think he will be able to get rid of the ticket because wearing it in the manner and place he did did not “warrent alarm”.
This is Canada, they can make their own laws, and quite frankly, it is none of my business (I have liberals because they are always sticking their noses into other people's business). Nonetheless, I find the argument ludicrous. Conditional laws make no sense because the encourage the whim of the people to be the law. Open carry should either be legal or not. Let the arguments be based on the merits of having open carry, not on some persons daily feelings.
What idiocy. The wording basically says I'll get cited for displaying or drawing my weapon if I actually needed to protect myself. In that situation, somebody is bound to be intimidated or alarmed.
The good news in this case is that the ticket will be thrown out in an instant, because a holstered firearm on a calm-demeanored person doesn't WARRANT alarm, regardless of whether or not it CAUSES alarm.
Walking around town while wearing clothes is legal —can I get a ticket for that, if it doesn’t strike the fancy of some of those I live around...?
Go there every day w/ the gun,.
.
repeat calls to 911 will be harassment
This is Washington State. Never could figure out the way they worded that law. I imagine like most laws, it was meant one way and is enforced another way. A VERY subjective law: “....and in in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.”
Probably was meant at first for a situation such as you see your neighbor on the street and say you want to talk about them encroaching on your property with all their crap, they start to leave and ignore you so you flash your gun and say “I want to talk about it now”.
The NRA, GOA & every other gun group should call for a once a month OPEN CARRY DAY - where all gun owners deliberately go out & wear their weapons openly in public. It should be well announced - both to police & the general public - so everyone understands that it’s legal. It’s the person raising the ‘alarm’ who should be ticketed for causing a disturbance!
This is an “anti-brandishing” law, and the misuse of it.
What’s this country coming to?
Oh, it’s Canada.
They'd get more alarmed if you taped everyone's mouth shut before going into the theater, and someone spotted a small fire, but could not yell "fire".
Maybe folks should "get alarmed" when they see a security guard or policeman with an openly carried firearm?
Maybe a hint of the location would be nice. We don;t all live in your neighborhood.
I'll be Sgt. Raquer does. Is he not a responsible person?
Was the store robbed while the dude was there? No? Then the store should be thankful by what he might have deterred.
I’m uncomfortable around muslims. Does that mean they will get ticketed?
Vancouver, WA ping.
I wonder how “comfortable” he’d feel if someone came in to rob the store and the guy with the weapon foiled the crime!
That’s why some states require CCW. People can be frightened at the site of a gun on a civilian stranger and that can be considered assault.
This is, of course, utterly absurd. Welcome to Canada. Thirty five years ago I drove to Toronto with some friends. We were stopped by a cop who told me I MUST wear my seat belt. I’ve never been back.
Sounds like he's innocent. Just cause there's a wussy little hoplophobe in the room who gets his very, very pretty lace panties in a bunch, doesn't mean you're in violation. The law requires either "intent to intimidate" or "warranted" alarm, neither of which seems to have been present.