Let's take a look at the law that forbids carrying a long gun in public:
Okay. Now let's look at the definition, in relevant part:

So, again: for purposes of the law that forbids carrying a long gun in public, when a person with a carry permit is toting one about, he or she cannot be said, in a legal sense, to "carry" it.

Pinky swear.

Your instructor was wrong. Who was he or she?

Here's the timeline:

The beginning of time - 1974: No restrictions on the carry of pistols
1974-2003: May-issue pistol carry permits
2003-present: Shall-issue carry permits

The beginning of time - 1993: No restrictions on long gun carry
1993-present: Long gun carry prohibited, unless you have a pistol carry permit*


-----------------
* Technically, Joel is right, as he explained above.

Long gun carry by a permit holder has to be the most confusing topic of the carry permit. Everyone has a different opinion on it.

My instructor says it's perfectly legal to carry any rifle openly as long as you have a carry permit. Not advised, but you can do it.

Others say no you can't carry

Others say you can.

Just pointing out it's a confusing topic

Andrew's right; your instructor is, I would hope, simply ill-informed. Who was he?

I generally like to stay out of topics like this, but ....

It is not at all confusing. Perfectly legal to carry a loaded long gun in public. It is not ambiguous, ambivalent, confusing or unclear.

Wise? Different issue.

Yup.

So my original answer was pretty much on the mark then.



BB

Pretty much, sure. My one quibble -- and it's a serious one -- is that your answer was apparently (whether actually or not, I dunno) informed by the belief that the issue is what's "allowable," rather than by what's "not forbidden, and therefore up to you."

I can't see a good reason why somebody would choose to routinely carry, say, a 30-30 slung over his or her shoulder for personal safety, here and now. Yeah, it would be a better choice in a lot of self-defense situations (not all) than my preferred pocket snubby, but it would be deucedly inconvenient, and not just because it's easy to predict that there'd be a lot of badged folks who are ignorant of 624.7181, the law that says that when a permit holder is doing that, he's not "carrying" a long gun at all, legally speaking.

But there's no law forbidding somebody from putting on a clown suit and flippers, and flopping over to Town Hall to sing, "Three Sails in the Sunset," either, and that's "allowable," too.

I'm confused, because my instructor said it was legal, then you said Joel was right and Joel pretty much said the same thing.

I should have said "people with carry permits would have the right..."

I took the course from Rusty Ramirez, who teaches at the Rogers Cabella's.

Ah. That explains it.

Ah. This sentence is the confusing one. What is "it" and who thought it unimportant?

Long gun carry has never been prohibited to pistol carry permit holders, ever. Katrina had no effect on this.

Doesn't much matter. The Katrina Change story is just Rusty blowing smoke. I don't know whether he made it up, or heard it somewhere, and it really doesn't matter which.

I teach it pretty much from the time line Andrew mentioned.
The difference between carry vs transport, what constitutes legal transport, what is a motor vehicle.
Not prohibited / legal.That which is not prohibited is allowed and this is SPECIFICALLY not prohibited in the sense that they spell out what is prohibited and then specifically say this isn't it.That's about the point where people chuckle at the it's not carry if you have a carry permit bit. Apparently the long gun just levitates.
Then we talk about legal vs wise and the attention it could draw.



I'd say Katrina gave this relevance and a point of reference, not renewed importance. WHY would you ever want to carry a long gun? It's not a perfect example because we've seen how the NOPD and other agencies responded. I point out that there are stories of neighbors banding together and truly patrolling their neighborhoods during the absence of any social order. I use it as a small example of the limits we THINK are placed on law enforcement / the government / ourselves / our fellow man vs what may happen in times of stress. Then we talk about the Officers that stood on the elderly lady's back and took her revolver "for her safety"

It's a bit of how did we get here, a bit of how does this work, a cautionary word on transport, and an opportunity to discuss paying attention to civil liberties and inalienable rights. Education as activism and teaching with analogies. Helping the student tie an occasionally misunderstood (by the general public and some students) issue to real world events.

That's fine. Long gun carry is one of those very, very minor issues that can be used to spotlight far more important ones.

You're missing one important factor:

Beginning-of-time-1985: Local communities can, and some did, impose their own restrictions and/or licensing systems on the carrying of handguns or long guns
1985-present: The state legislature preempts all local regulation concerning firearms with a few narrow exceptions.

There were restrictions on carrying handguns and long guns, in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and other cities, prior to 1974.