"Printing" -- why care?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I never think about it. Open carry is legal here, and I practice it about half the time anyway. If someone happens to "make me" more power to them. From my experience, nobody really seems to give a hoot.
 
Concealed carry means concealed carry. if you are printing, as in clearly printing, you are not concealed and could well be in violation of state law.
 
Just for sake of argument, the proper term is "concealed carry". Printing obviously removes "concealed" from this right.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. It's a gradient. Printing could be anything from a very slight bulge that could easily be a cell phone, to the M29 under a tight wife beater mentioned above. At what level of printing do you decide it's no longer concealed? Or better yet, at which combination of a particular level of printing and an observer with a given level of observation is it no longer concealed? One level of printing may go unnoticed by everyone but a cop or a career criminal, while another is obvious to everyone around you.

Personally I'm not terribly concerned if my 1911 pokes a bump in my shirt when I bend over, or if someone sees the bottom of my holster when I grab something off the top shelf at the supermarket. Sure, absolute concealment is possible, but it can be difficult to get absolute concealment and still pass a Tueller drill.
 
I don't worry much about printing. I try not to because I want to maintain the element of surprise, but I don't sweat it. I'd rather print a little on occasion and have a really fast draw than be totally concealed and have a slower draw. When you need a gun you need it right now. I know I've printed quite badly from time to time and apparently nobody noticed. Living and carrying concealed in both Bellevue and Seattle for many years even the cops never seemed to notice, or maybe they just didn't care? I can't imagine that being the case here in Pugetropolis, especially the way I look.... Honestly, I look like an outlaw biker to a lot of people. :evil: Cops and security people usually look me over really good but nobody has ever said anything to me about my gun(s), even when I was printing in a mall that's posted "no guns". (For the record, those signs do not carry the force of law in WA). I've carried daily since 1990 and have spent a lot of time out in public. I guess nobody notices anything. :D
 
I suppose printing can be some what of a comfort. On a recent flight from the west coast to the midwest I was seated several rows behind what I "assume" was a sky marshal or LEO. He was in an aisle seat and the guy next to him had to frequent the bathroom several times during the flight. Every time the guy stood up, the bottom of the holster peaked out and the glock was clearly visible. Made the flight a little more tolerable.
 
I worried alot more about printing untill I got my blackberry. I have found that it prints more than my pistol. I do prefer to remain as concealed as possible so that the element of suprise remains.
 
Texas does not have open carry and is obsessive about printing.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where this comes from. The code in Texas regarding "printing" is so nebulously written as to be pretty much unenforcible.

GC §411.171.(3) "Concealed handgun" means a handgun, the presence of
which is not openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable
person.

Openly, ordinary, reasonable...all meaningless.

PC §46.035.(a) A license holder commits an offense if the license
holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person
under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.

INTENTIONALLY fails to conceal. Again so broad all one needs to prove is that the "printing", or even open display (shirt blew up) is unintentional.

I have been carrying for a long time and have many friends that carry as well as many friends and acquaintances in Law Enforcement, and I have never heard of anyone being tagged for "printing" in Texas. I'm quite sure it happens, but if you look at the number of concealed carry permits (314,574) in Texas, I'm betting the charges for failure to conceal are a fraction of a percent.

If you really look at the way the law is written for Texas all they are doing is telling you that you can not open carry except under specific circumstances.

When I first started carrying, it kind of bothered me. Now I never think about it. Have I been "made"? Probably. Do I care? Not in the least.
 
^--- the obsessive part comes from CHL instructors. At least they haven't broken ranks yet but I've only been through one renewal so far.

As I noted, I also find it's largely theoretical. Nobody seems to care. The one time I believe I was noticed resulted in nothing more menacing than the Hooters associate bumping up against where the offending article was supposedly concealed. Repeatedly. And on every return visit thereafter, even when well concealed.

And given that I have a granddaughter the age of said associate, it's a given that it was just some "CHL kidding around". Can't say as I was the slightest bit troubled by the attention though.

Oh yeah, and a bank officer once pointed out that my "slip was showing".

I haven't tried the "Ranger Poster Boy" open carry yet but I don't have the build for it.
 
INTENTIONALLY fails to conceal. Again so broad all one needs to prove is that the "printing", or even open display (shirt blew up) is unintentional.
Click to expand...

Case law can mean a lot (in California, it has really limited the scope of some anti-gun laws). I don't know about the case law.

There might not be any. If nobody is ever charged with a "gray area" violation, then there isn't any.

As the law is written, though, it certainly sounds like what the authors intend to prohibit is someone sticking a gun under a tight t-shirt so it's clearly visible, on purpose, so he can use it to threaten other people.

Most states have laws that prohibit using a firearm to threaten another person except when that other person is committing, or intends to commit, a felony, or an assault, or some specific crime or crimes, with details varying from state to state.

However, carrying a gun that's intentionally "printing" could be a way to circumvent that law. "I never pointed the gun at my neighbor," wouldn't be a valid defense if someone was clearly threatening his neighbor by "printing."

I believe that, in Idaho, it is specifically illegal to return to the scene of an argument with an openly-carried firearm, even when holstered. The purpose of the law is the same: to make it illegal to use a firearm in a way that a reasonable person would consider to be an intentional threat. Normally, it would be perfectly legal to open carry in almost any situation or place, Idaho law and the state Constitution.
 
I don't care if I print, or if the whole gun shows. Tactically, I don't care about since I feel open carry would prevent more issues from even starting.
 
I care because I don't want people bugging me about it. I'm out and about to conduct my own freakin' business, not get continual questions of "What's that? Why do you need a.....a....GUN!!!", etc.
 
I really don't worry about it. I used to fret about it, but now I don't. I now have neither a legal nor psychological impediment to printing. Legally, if it's concealed, it's concealed. Just because it prints doesn't mean it's not "concealed". Psychologically, I care a little, but very very little. When my smartcarry band is hiked up past the top of my jeans in the rear, I have to wonder whether people take pity on the poor man who has to wear depends at such a young age. :p
 
In Pennsylvania, it's not illegal to print. We're also an open carry state.
I prefer to carry concealed just because I don't want the attention (I'm pretty reserved unless I'm drinking...but then I'm not packing).
Anyway, I'll wear a vest over the gun (normally a Glock 19 if I'm carrying OWB), but if the gun is flashed now and then, I don't get excited.
 
Case law can mean a lot (in California, it has really limited the scope of some anti-gun laws). I don't know about the case law.

There might not be any. If nobody is ever charged with a "gray area" violation, then there isn't any.

As the law is written, though, it certainly sounds like what the authors intend to prohibit is someone sticking a gun under a tight t-shirt so it's clearly visible, on purpose, so he can use it to threaten other people.

Most states have laws that prohibit using a firearm to threaten another person except when that other person is committing, or intends to commit, a felony, or an assault, or some specific crime or crimes, with details varying from state to state.

However, carrying a gun that's intentionally "printing" could be a way to circumvent that law. "I never pointed the gun at my neighbor," wouldn't be a valid defense if someone was clearly threatening his neighbor by "printing."

I believe that, in Idaho, it is specifically illegal to return to the scene of an argument with an openly-carried firearm, even when holstered. The purpose of the law is the same: to make it illegal to use a firearm in a way that a reasonable person would consider to be an intentional threat. Normally, it would be perfectly legal to open carry in almost any situation or place, Idaho law and the state Constitution.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's the reason either.
Here's why:
If a Texan walking up to his car in an empty parking lot, and there's a group of meanies hanging out around it, Texans are allowed to unholster the gun (not draw) and hold it chest heightm pointing somewhere safe all the while.
According to my CHL instructor, this is perfectly legal as long as you don't point the gun at anyone or anything( just keeping the gun flat against the chest, finger off the scary switch.)



EDIT:

I just thought about it, and that has nothing to do with preventing someone from threatening their neighbor with printing.

You might be right :)
 
I care because I don't want people bugging me about it. I'm out and about to conduct my own freakin' business, not get continual questions of "What's that? Why do you need a.....a....GUN!!!", etc.
Click to expand...

I've NEVER been asked either of those questions and in fact I've never been asked anything while open carrying, not to mention "continual questions".
 
I don't really care about it. If I print, I print. My wife oc's pretty often. Here in MN, we can carry either way. The only place I'm careful is in church. I make sure I don't print there.
 
"Printing" is such a vauge, elusive concept that legally defining it would be nearly impossible. Does any visable bulge constitute "printing?" Or is it an actual defined outline of a pistol. I don't worry about printing at all.
 
Last edited:
I don't worry about it. I use quality holsters, cover my pistols as best I can, and then get on with life. I've been doing it long enough that I've come to realize I'm not being personally scutinized by anyone who cares one way or the other.
 
"Printing" is a legal nullity in Ohio, which is an open carry state.

I take reasonable efforts to conceal, but I don't get ridiculous about it. I regularly have to expose my firearm in order to disarm and rearm when entering prohibited zones such as Post Offices and restaurants with liquor licenses.

The bottom line is, I don't worry about it at all.
 
when someone that isn't framiliar with firearms/carrying sees printing through a shirt i doubt they realize its a gun
 
Yeah, I've carried inside the house when there's company over, and I am probably printing as much as humanly possible.
Nobody ever notices.

Scared the crap out of my uncle when he lifted my shirt to give me a pink belly slap once, ahahah.

"WHAT THE HELL IS THAT!!"


That brings up "contact" printing, I guess you'd call it; when someone doesn't know you're carrying and inadvertently touches your roscoe.
My best friend and I were horsing around once and he playfully jabbed me in the stomach, nailing my 1911's hammer. He knows that I carry, so he apologized and rubbed his knuckles.
 
Last edited:
To me avoiding "anything" that lets others know that I am carrying concealed is of paramount importance. To go to the trouble to achieve an effective concealed carry and then give it all away by allowing printing (which is totally avoidable with just a little care) lacks both care and intelligence. To me it is very, very important that printing be avoided at all times.
Click to expand...


I fully agree with the above.
 
To go to the trouble to achieve an effective concealed carry and then give it all away by allowing printing (which is totally avoidable with just a little care) lacks both care and intelligence.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is totally avoidable when you carry a .32 Mouse Gun buried away somewhere giving you a 2-3 second draw time. I'd rather trade off a tiny bit of concealment for a real gun that I can get to quickly. My 5" 1911 carried OWB has never gotten me unwanted attention. To me carrying an ineffective weapon in an ineffective manner shows a lack of both care and intelligence. I'm making the assumption that when you say "effective concealed carry" you're talking about effectively concealing, not being able to effectively utilize your weapon...

To me it is very, very important that printing be avoided at all times.
Click to expand...
That's very nice. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion. What I'd like to know is WHY? What's going to happen to you if 1 person out of 100 even notices an odd shape and only 1 out of 100 of those people even consider it might be a gun? How is that worth the trade offs in effectiveness?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

HoosierQ
  • Locked
What's the problem with "printing"?
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Treo
T
HoosierQ
  • Locked
Preventing a CC Print - How?
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
M203Sniper
M
Bobson
  • Locked
Concealed Carry in Scrubs
2 3 4
Replies
93
Views
15K
klausman
klausman
SCMikeyP
  • Locked
Tips for Conceal-ability
2 3
Replies
59
Views
3K
cougar1717
cougar1717
A
  • Locked
Printing, is it legal ?
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
Sean Dempsey
S
Back
Top