Utah Guns Forum banner

'Loaded" Definition for Revolvers

19K views 31 replies 11 participants last post by  davidbilly 
#1 ·
I know that in Utah, for someone without a concealed carry permit, they can open carry, but it has to meet the legal definition of unloaded. That's easy for a semi-auto pistol, but I'm not sure how that applies to a revolver. More specifically I'd like help with both a single action, and double action revolver.

My understanding is it must take 2 actions to fire. That's easy enough. A single action revolver always takes 2 actions to fire, cock hammer and trigger pull. For the Double action, that would be 2 trigger pulls.

But, there also can't be a round in the firing position. But, what is the firing position for a revolver that is not cocked? Is it the round under the hammer, or is it the next round over, that will be under the hammer, after the hammer is cocked, and the cylinder has rotated?

So, can anyone tell me how these rules apply for both a Single Action and Double Action revolver?

thanks
 
#27 ·
Charles, you're absolutely right. I don't know the exact codes, or carry a flashcard. I probably should. But on the other hand, my hackles get raised by ignorance, particularly in someone who's job it is to KNOW the law, not make it up as they go. I will comply with their "guidance", take their badge and department phone number if he'll offer it, and also the name of his Sargent again if he'll provide it. I would then go home, carefully craft an email or better yet physical mail and send it off. Or hand deliver it, if local. I will do everything possible in my power to get the officer in as much hot water as can be generated by a single citizen. Preferably boiling so he walks out feeling like the *** that he is, and lobster red. All done very respectfully. Up to and including mentioning the name of my personal attorney. Or asking if I need to retain one.

Different approaches, hopefully similar outcomes, but I will be embarrassed by him, and spite forces me to admit to wanting to return the favor Not in person, because even if he agrees at the end of our conversation, he'll still feel like he was right.

Mel
 
#28 ·
quychang said:
Charles, you're absolutely right. I don't know the exact codes, or carry a flashcard. I probably should. But on the other hand, my hackles get raised by ignorance, particularly in someone who's job it is to KNOW the law, not make it up as they go.
I try to remember that even among college trained lawyers, there is a lot of specialization. Consider that most lawyers will specialize in areas like criminal defense, water rights, corporate law, property law, etc.

One of the problems with the change in vernacular from "Peace Officer" to "Law Enforcement Officer" is the subtle requirement to know all the laws. Think of Andy Griffin. How often did he cite code? He was keeping the peace. And there probably weren't too many laws on the books in Mayberry that didn't relate directly to keeping the peace. Complex matters like estate law or property law were matters for lawyer and judges, so long as those involved weren't getting into fist fights or worse.

Certainly, police officers need to have some minimum working knowledge of areas of law they routinely need to uphold: traffic laws, various breeches of the peace, and the basics of our gun laws. A polite officer who is honestly mistaken, gets my courtesy so long as he is willing to accept correction either from me or his superiors when I provide it. If I ever have a run in with a jerk who has a badge, your course of action would seem appropriate.

Charles
 
#29 ·
bagpiper said:
quychang said:
Charles, you're absolutely right. I don't know the exact codes, or carry a flashcard. I probably should. But on the other hand, my hackles get raised by ignorance, particularly in someone who's job it is to KNOW the law, not make it up as they go.
I try to remember that even among college trained lawyers, there is a lot of specialization. Consider that most lawyers will specialize in areas like criminal defense, water rights, corporate law, property law, etc.

One of the problems with the change in vernacular from "Peace Officer" to "Law Enforcement Officer" is the subtle requirement to know all the laws. Think of Andy Griffin. How often did he cite code? He was keeping the peace. And there probably weren't too many laws on the books in Mayberry that didn't relate directly to keeping the peace. Complex matters like estate law or property law were matters for lawyer and judges, so long as those involved weren't getting into fist fights or worse.

Certainly, police officers need to have some minimum working knowledge of areas of law they routinely need to uphold: traffic laws, various breeches of the peace, and the basics of our gun laws. A polite officer who is honestly mistaken, gets my courtesy so long as he is willing to accept correction either from me or his superiors when I provide it. If I ever have a run in with a jerk who has a badge, your course of action would seem appropriate.

Charles
I guess one of my issues is two fold. They don't necessarily know all the traffic laws either. And they are in a position to make judgement calls, like did you stop for a full three seconds at a stop sign, or did you pause and roll through? And even if you did, was it unsafe? An experience I had with a Summit County Deputy is a good example. I got off work near Park City at 2:00am. The only real traffic on the road was employees leaving the parking lot. There was a stop sign at the T in the road where our exit from work intersected the highway. I freely admit that I blew through the stop sign without even really slowing down. There was a set of lights about a mile down the road approaching me. Far enough that I could see lights, but there was no chance, even had he been doing 100 mph that he would hit me. About two miles down the road he caught up to me, pulled me over and approached the car. He laid out what happened, pretty much as I've described it, I said yes sir, that's pretty much exactly what happened. His response was reasonable, he said look...I realize at this time of night, with no traffic, what you did was not dangerous. But please, in the future, even if you don't stop, at least slow down enough that I can pretend that you did. And let me off with a warning.

That was bad enough, but about a week later, rolling towards home, just before getting to Henefer, he was coming towards me on the other side of the freeway. I was doing 80 in a 60 mph zone. Again, no traffic, straight road, no curves...I saw him pull down into the median to turn around and I pulled over before he even turned on his lights. He approached, said, don't I know you from last week? I said yes sir. He asked if I was aware of how fast I was going. I said yes sir, about 80. He said that's pretty much what I clocked you at, I know you're in a hurry to get home. Do me a favor and slow it down so you get there alive. I meekly said yes sir, I will. And he said if he caught me again, he'd most likely have to issue a citation. And he let me go. Yes, I was going too fast. No, I had no passengers, was cold sober, and the only one I was putting in danger was myself. He used his judgment and didn't ticket me.

You can bet that I didn't screw up again in his county in the almost 4 more years that I worked that shift and made that drive. I could see him shaking his head as he walked back to his SUV, and I''m sure he was chuckling at the coincidence of it being him catching me again.

Moral of the story. I'm always super polite, whether they are right or wrong. I admit to what I do, or don't do and talk to them like they deserve my respect. Even in the cases where I don't feel like they do. No, I didn't write to his Sargent, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have wanted me to. But I still remember him, and think how lucky I was to get a lenient officer twice in a row. So Judgment isn't always a bad thing.

I never give an officer with a gun, taser and handcuffs a reason to want to be a jerk to me. They have the position of power. If they are reasonable and most of them are if treated right, then no problem. If there is an issue, I don't confront, I report my issue and let them handle it internally. I've done it exactly once. And I wasn't a jerk about it, because he wasn't one to me. He was wrong. Dead wrong. I did disagree with him, he told me to tell it to the judge and issued a citation. I told it to his Sargent instead, showed up to court, the officer wasn't there and the ticket was dismissed. I suspect that he got the message, though I don't know. Maybe he had a valid reason for not making it. But I didn't end up with a fine.

Mel
 
#30 ·
quychang said:
bagpiper said:
quychang said:
Charles, you're absolutely right. I don't know the exact codes, or carry a flashcard. I probably should. But on the other hand, my hackles get raised by ignorance, particularly in someone who's job it is to KNOW the law, not make it up as they go.
I try to remember that even among college trained lawyers, there is a lot of specialization. Consider that most lawyers will specialize in areas like criminal defense, water rights, corporate law, property law, etc.

One of the problems with the change in vernacular from "Peace Officer" to "Law Enforcement Officer" is the subtle requirement to know all the laws. Think of Andy Griffin. How often did he cite code? He was keeping the peace. And there probably weren't too many laws on the books in Mayberry that didn't relate directly to keeping the peace. Complex matters like estate law or property law were matters for lawyer and judges, so long as those involved weren't getting into fist fights or worse.

Certainly, police officers need to have some minimum working knowledge of areas of law they routinely need to uphold: traffic laws, various breeches of the peace, and the basics of our gun laws. A polite officer who is honestly mistaken, gets my courtesy so long as he is willing to accept correction either from me or his superiors when I provide it. If I ever have a run in with a jerk who has a badge, your course of action would seem appropriate.

Charles
I guess one of my issues is two fold. They don't necessarily know all the traffic laws either. And they are in a position to make judgement calls, like did you stop for a full three seconds at a stop sign, or did you pause and roll through? And even if you did, was it unsafe? An experience I had with a Summit County Deputy is a good example. I got off work near Park City at 2:00am. The only real traffic on the road was employees leaving the parking lot. There was a stop sign at the T in the road where our exit from work intersected the highway. I freely admit that I blew through the stop sign without even really slowing down. There was a set of lights about a mile down the road approaching me. Far enough that I could see lights, but there was no chance, even had he been doing 100 mph that he would hit me. About two miles down the road he caught up to me, pulled me over and approached the car. He laid out what happened, pretty much as I've described it, I said yes sir, that's pretty much exactly what happened. His response was reasonable, he said look...I realize at this time of night, with no traffic, what you did was not dangerous. But please, in the future, even if you don't stop, at least slow down enough that I can pretend that you did. And let me off with a warning.

That was bad enough, but about a week later, rolling towards home, just before getting to Henefer, he was coming towards me on the other side of the freeway. I was doing 80 in a 60 mph zone. Again, no traffic, straight road, no curves...I saw him pull down into the median to turn around and I pulled over before he even turned on his lights. He approached, said, don't I know you from last week? I said yes sir. He asked if I was aware of how fast I was going. I said yes sir, about 80. He said that's pretty much what I clocked you at, I know you're in a hurry to get home. Do me a favor and slow it down so you get there alive. I meekly said yes sir, I will. And he said if he caught me again, he'd most likely have to issue a citation. And he let me go. Yes, I was going too fast. No, I had no passengers, was cold sober, and the only one I was putting in danger was myself. He used his judgment and didn't ticket me.

You can bet that I didn't screw up again in his county in the almost 4 more years that I worked that shift and made that drive. I could see him shaking his head as he walked back to his SUV, and I''m sure he was chuckling at the coincidence of it being him catching me again.

Moral of the story. I'm always super polite, whether they are right or wrong. I admit to what I do, or don't do and talk to them like they deserve my respect. Even in the cases where I don't feel like they do. No, I didn't write to his Sargent, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have wanted me to. But I still remember him, and think how lucky I was to get a lenient officer twice in a row. So Judgment isn't always a bad thing.

I never give an officer with a gun, taser and handcuffs a reason to want to be a jerk to me. They have the position of power. If they are reasonable and most of them are if treated right, then no problem. If there is an issue, I don't confront, I report my issue and let them handle it internally. I've done it exactly once. And I wasn't a jerk about it, because he wasn't one to me. He was wrong. Dead wrong. I did disagree with him, he told me to tell it to the judge and issued a citation. I told it to his Sargent instead, showed up to court, the officer wasn't there and the ticket was dismissed. I suspect that he got the message, though I don't know. Maybe he had a valid reason for not making it. But I didn't end up with a fine.

Mel
Nothing against you, but I don't think he should have let you go for either of the incidents you describe. I think that letting people off when they violate the rules of traffic is exactly why people drive the way they do... badly. They've gotten away with it too long. Even I have. If the laws were enforced then we would all be driving more carefully. Of course, I would have to drive slower.
 
#31 ·
You're right Althor. My wife was disgusted at my luck, especially the second time. But there really was no danger. If he had cleared the top of the hill 5 seconds later he would never have seen the missed stop, and frankly no one stopped for it unless there was a set of lights close. As for the speed. I freely admit I was driving way to fast. That was back in the 90's when I was a lot younger and more reckless. I rarely exceed the limit by more than 5mph these days, and honestly that only happens if I'm driving with the flow of traffic and don't notice. Usually I set the cruise control on the speed limit and watch what's going on around me. I used to do a lot of things differently than I would do them now. I'm not necessarily proud of all the things I got away cleanly on. But would you have said, no Deputy, I really think you need to ticket me?

Mel
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top