View Full Version : How would any of you of handled this?
jackthewall81
06-23-2012, 15:34
I thought the guy handeled it beautifully.
http://www.break.com/index/detained-for-open-carry-2338359
jackthewall81
06-23-2012, 15:36
Oh and notice the liberal, dumbass comments below.
Bailey Guns
06-23-2012, 15:41
Sucks when the subject...I mean citizen...knows the law better than the detaining officer.
Flatline
06-23-2012, 16:23
I don't know what the laws are in Oregon, but here that could be considered brandishing a weapon if citizens are calling in concerned for their safety that a man is walking with a gun. It would would not hold up in court, but would be enough for an officer to stop you, take your weapon to protect their safety, and run a NCIC search.
This guy is walking around in broad daylight with a gun on his hip in a manner or place that it would not be considered normal (hence the phone call to the police from the public) and had a video camera, a list of court proceeding, and some statutes that benefit his side only ready for when he was contacted by the police.
This guy was clearly being an ass and trying to cause some type of legal or civil issue with the police department.
Once again I don't know about Oregon, but here an officer can detain and transport a person for failure to provide identification.
I thought the guy handeled it beautifully.
I agree, the cop did a great job.
I think the guy talked way too much, but also think the police had no reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, to justify the stop. Police are allowed to have consensual encounters, but once they took his gun, they lost that argument. He could not leave without his property. The guy did a good job overall. The Sargent knew his law and let him go.
I still don't understand why morons see a guy Open Carry and they have to call the cops. My fist thought seeing someone walking around open carrying a firearm would be this guys up to no good, he is obviously about to commit a crime(enter sarcasm here) because bad guys love to draw attention to themselves by showing of their gats before they pull some bad guy stuff.
Sharpienads
06-23-2012, 17:54
I don't know what the laws are in Oregon, but here that could be considered brandishing a weapon if citizens are calling in concerned for their safety that a man is walking with a gun. It would would not hold up in court, but would be enough for an officer to stop you, take your weapon to protect their safety, and run a NCIC search.
This guy is walking around in broad daylight with a gun on his hip in a manner or place that it would not be considered normal (hence the phone call to the police from the public) and had a video camera, a list of court proceeding, and some statutes that benefit his side only ready for when he was contacted by the police.
This guy was clearly being an ass and trying to cause some type of legal or civil issue with the police department.
Once again I don't know about Oregon, but here an officer can detain and transport a person for failure to provide identification.
I agree, the cop did a great job.
There is so much wrong here I don't even know where to begin.
I don't know what the laws are in Oregon, but here that could be considered brandishing a weapon if citizens are calling in concerned for their safety that a man is walking with a gun. It would would not hold up in court, but would be enough for an officer to stop you, take your weapon to protect their safety, and run a NCIC search.
This guy is walking around in broad daylight with a gun on his hip in a manner or place that it would not be considered normal (hence the phone call to the police from the public) and had a video camera, a list of court proceeding, and some statutes that benefit his side only ready for when he was contacted by the police.
This guy was clearly being an ass and trying to cause some type of legal or civil issue with the police department.
Once again I don't know about Oregon, but here an officer can detain and transport a person for failure to provide identification.
I agree, the cop did a great job.
I totally agree with you. This guy was being a real ass. I guess walking around with a gun isn't considered being "suspicious" of doing something illegal.
Could had just handed his ID over and get it over with instead of rambling his mouth.
Byte Stryke
06-23-2012, 17:56
I don't know what the laws are in Oregon, but here that could be considered brandishing a weapon if citizens are calling in concerned for their safety that a man is walking with a gun. It would would not hold up in court, but would be enough for an officer to stop you, take your weapon to protect their safety, and run a NCIC search.
This guy is walking around in broad daylight with a gun on his hip in a manner or place that it would not be considered normal (hence the phone call to the police from the public) and had a video camera, a list of court proceeding, and some statutes that benefit his side only ready for when he was contacted by the police.
This guy was clearly being an ass and trying to cause some type of legal or civil issue with the police department.
Once again I don't know about Oregon, but here an officer can detain and transport a person for failure to provide identification.
I agree, the cop did a great job.
fresh from the re-education camp are we?
Sharpienads
06-23-2012, 17:57
fresh from the re-education camp are we?
Yeah, him and deagler.
ETA: It's a sad day when anybody, especially members of a gun forum, would call an informed, law abiding citizen who is exercising his God given, 2A protected rights an "ass".
Sharpienads
06-23-2012, 18:05
I thought the guy handeled it beautifully.
http://www.break.com/index/detained-for-open-carry-2338359
Me too.
10mm-man
06-23-2012, 18:08
I don't know what the laws are in Oregon, but here that could be considered brandishing a weapon if citizens are calling in concerned for their safety that a man is walking with a gun. It would would not hold up in court, but would be enough for an officer to stop you, take your weapon to protect their safety, and run a NCIC search.
This guy is walking around in broad daylight with a gun on his hip in a manner or place that it would not be considered normal (hence the phone call to the police from the public) and had a video camera, a list of court proceeding, and some statutes that benefit his side only ready for when he was contacted by the police.
This guy was clearly being an ass and trying to cause some type of legal or civil issue with the police department.
Once again I don't know about Oregon, but here an officer can detain and transport a person for failure to provide identification.
I agree, the cop did a great job.
WOW! Really.....
10mm-man
06-23-2012, 18:10
fresh from the re-education camp are we?
[ROFL2][ROFL3] only it really isn't funny! Sad to think they really believe this was all ok! Guess it's why our rights a being slowly eroded.....
lpgasman
06-23-2012, 18:19
I totally agree with you. This guy was being a real ass. I guess walking around with a gun isn't considered being "suspicious" of doing something illegal.
Could had just handed his ID over and get it over with instead of rambling his mouth.
But he did ramble his mouth, and the sarge let him go. Chalk one up for the ass who knows his rights.
theGinsue
06-23-2012, 18:26
I don't know what the laws are in Oregon, but here that could be considered brandishing a weapon if citizens are calling in concerned for their safety that a man is walking with a gun.
It is my understanding that a holster firearm can not be considered "brandished" unless the firearm & holster are getting waved around. I believe the term you were looking for is "menacing".
" How would any of you of handled this?"
Should read "how would you HAVE handled this?" That's what is really important here.
10mm-man
06-23-2012, 18:31
" How would any of you of handled this?"
Should read "how would you HAVE handled this?" That's what is really important here.
So how would you have?
Sharpienads
06-23-2012, 18:32
" How would any of you of handled this?"
Should read "how would you HAVE handled this?" That's what is really important here.
Hahaha, nice. Reminds me of this online poll I saw that asked "What would you like to see more sales on?" I looked for an option that included not ending sentences with prepositions, but couldn't find one.
Back on topic.
10mm-man
06-23-2012, 18:32
I prob wouldn't have handled it as good as he did! Then again I would conceal.....
Portland, Maine
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2898083/posts
The citizen handled the interaction very well. The officer clearly appeared to learn something from the interaction and hopefully he will be better prepared the next time he deals with a similar situation.
Any time everyone walks away and no one is injured, I'm relatively happy. If there was learning on top of that, I consider it a bonus.
Be safe.
mcsurveyer1361
06-23-2012, 20:16
i though he talked to much but did a good job. He handled it way better then prob would have if a cop flagged me with a loaded weapon. Thats when i would get mad and prob make a formal complaint.
Rooskibar03
06-23-2012, 21:15
He ran his mouth a lot but at least he had his facts in order. Can't say I'm as well prepared, which is why I'm hesitant to OC.
The guy knows his stuff, but is really friggen annoying. He just keeps running his mouth like a jack ass. Seriously, the cop was just doing his job, if someone calls in a suspicious guy carrying a gun, they have to check on you. If they check on you, you don't need to be a stupid pain in the ass like that guy was being. Why in your dumb ass mind would you think it is ok to try to be a punk like that guy was doing? It looks like he was showing off for his camera really. All he had to do was ask what he was being stopped for, hand over his gun and wait for his background check to pass. It could have been a whole hell of a lot easier for all of them. I see the guy as an educated jack ass personally. Why the hell would you be a dick and give the cops a hard time when all they are doing is their job responding to some retards complaint? It wasn't the cops fault!
Any officers want to chime in on how that guy handled it and how you as an officer would have handled him?
Inconel710
06-23-2012, 21:40
IMO, the best way for the cop to have handled the situation would have been to just chat the guy up. He didn't have to take the gun first thing. A simple, "Hey someone called in about a guy carrying a gun and we had to check on it."
The civilian talked alot, but I think that was adrenaline. He knew he was in a confrontation and was trying to make his case. He could have been more polite, especially after the cop swept him. "Please watch that muzzle, officer. I don't want to get hurt." The goal is to portray OC as a legal and "normal" behavior, not to convince people that you're a know-it-all.
IMO, the best way for the cop to have handled the situation would have been to just chat the guy up...
The cop didn't have the chance as the guy was being a dick about everything and showing off. He did however tell the guy that he was called in by a concerned citizen (liberal jack ass) and that they were responding to the call.
Inconel710
06-23-2012, 21:55
The cop didn't have the chance as the guy was being a dick about everything and showing off. He did however tell the guy that he was called in by a concerned citizen (liberal jack ass) and that they were responding to the call.
Ah, but that was after he took the guy's gun. From what the video shows, it looks like the cop started off heavy by taking the gun THEN talking to the civilian. It's just speculation, but I think a different opening move might have ended differently. Note - I do agree the civilian is expecting trouble and found it.
10mm-man
06-23-2012, 21:59
All he had to do was ask what he was being stopped for, hand over his gun and wait for his background check to pass. It could have been a whole hell of a lot easier for all of them. I see the guy as an educated jack ass personally. Why the hell would you be a dick and give the cops a hard time when all they are doing is their job responding to some retards complaint? It wasn't the cops fault!
Any officers want to chime in on how that guy handled it and how you as an officer would have handled him?
Hand over your gun? To Illegal search and seizure???
I think his point was that under the law he quoted; he couldn't be stopped for just "open carry"!! The cops were in the wrong the whole time!! that is why the supervisor said that he was free to go. I think the stop was "bullshit" and he made sure they knew....
We can't stand for harassment no matter how minor it is, the subservient attitude is what got us into this mess in the 1st place.... The cop shouldn't have made the stop unless he was "breaking the law" which he wasn't. The cop could have followed him observed him and then if he did something wrong stop him. Listen to the law he was quoting....
mcantar18c
06-23-2012, 22:21
The civilian talked alot, but I think that was adrenaline.
Ah, but that was after he took the guy's gun. From what the video shows, it looks like the cop started off heavy by taking the gun THEN talking to the civilian. It's just speculation, but I think a different opening move might have ended differently. Note - I do agree the civilian is expecting trouble and found it.
Which one? I'm pretty sure everybody involved in this incident is a civilian...
BushMasterBoy
06-23-2012, 22:25
If you don't have a military identification card showing your rank, then you are a civilian!
Somebody help me out here, when a cop is called because of a "suspicious person" AKA a guy with a holstered gun, what is that called?
Now, my thing on this, is the cop has to respond to it. You then have a few choices, one, argue and try to make your point like that guy did in the video. Two, be nice and let the cop do what he is there to do which is to make sure you are legal to carry. Or three, have a nice calm conversation with the cop explaining everything in a calm manner (unlike Mr. Gun Rights Guy) with the cop letting him know that you know your shit. Now, I'm not an expert on this, but I thought in those situations, a cop has the right to check you out? I know what NRA guys say considering that they have taught at my school and I have heard from them while at the NRA center down here. I also know that everyone has their agenda and will tell others to "fight the good fight" if you will about "standing your legal ground" in situation like this. I want to hear from an officer on this board, what they can legally do if someone calls in a suspicious person with a gun? I think that would be helpful. [Beer]
Here's the dictionary definition of civilian:
1. A person who is not on active duty with a military, naval, police, or fire fighting organization.
Just letting you know. [Beer]
Eggysrun
06-23-2012, 22:41
Generally if you use tact when speaking with a police officer in situations like this they aren't gonna be dickheads. I open carry sometimes, even with police around Ive never been harassed nor did I give the public a reason to be concerned. When I open carry I use discretion (like ccw) and tact if people say anything
This video proves oregons public ignorant to gun laws (thus calling the cops) and douche bags open carrying to prove points on the internet, stirring shit up rather than protect himself.
I didn't watch the video, but is this the same guy that's known for putting himself in situations like this just so he can video it and put it on YouTube? The guy I'm thinking of is kind of a "baiter", in my opinion. Seen him baiting cops and Border Patrol officers before so he can spout and spew about his rights and quote laws, and get it all on camera.
<edit> Just watched a bit of it, sure sounds like the same asshole. Excercising your rights is fine, but doing it so you can bait cops and try your damnedest to piss 'em off ain't right. You can't tell me he's not doing that, because he's always prepared to video it, so that shows intent to cause a confrontation, IMO.
mcantar18c
06-23-2012, 23:20
Here's the dictionary definition of civilian:
1. A person who is not on active duty with a military, naval, police, or fire fighting organization.
Just letting you know. [Beer]
The US gov doesn't seem to recognize whatever dictionary that came from. As I understand it, peace officer is a civilian who has been trusted by the rest of their society to uphold and enforce the rules and laws that we have created to keep our society civil. LEOs are civilians, period. Sure, there's a distinction between a regular civilian and one that is a sworn officer, but they're still civilians and any officer that thinks otherwise is sorely mistaken.
Put it this way... If a cop refuses to do what their boss tells them, they get fired. If I refuse to do what my boss tells me, I could be facing an Article 15, a chapter separation, a Court Marshall, and time in a military prison, depending on how serious the offense is. A cop can quit anytime they want. If I decide I don't want to do my job anymore, tough shit cause I'm govt. property. A cop answers to local and state entities. Military answers to the Dept. of Defense.
Also, that definition would mean that all the Nat. Guard and Reserve personell would be considered civilians, not military, and I'm pretty sure that's not the case.
ETA: The Oxford American Dictionary defines a civilian as anyone not serving in the armed forces. Says nothing about police, or fire departments, and makes no distinction between those on active-duty or reserve status.
speedysst
06-23-2012, 23:22
I didn't watch the video, but is this the same guy that's known for putting himself in situations like this just so he can video it and put it on YouTube? The guy I'm thinking of is kind of a "baiter", in my opinion. Seen him baiting cops and Border Patrol officers before so he can spout and spew about his rights and quote laws, and get it all on camera.
<edit> Just watched a bit of it, sure sounds like the same asshole. Excercising your rights is fine, but doing it so you can bait cops and try your damnedest to piss 'em off ain't right. You can't tell me he's not doing that, because he's always prepared to video it, so that shows intent to cause a confrontation, IMO.
My thoughts exactly. It seems to me he wanted a confrontation.
I'd have fallen to the ground after the first contact from a club or a tazer. Where do these guys find such patient peace officers. That camera must have been big and in plain view with lots of witnesses around...that's what I think.
Sharpienads
06-23-2012, 23:40
This is how this should have gone down:
Concerned Citizen: "Hi, 911? Yeah, um there is a guy walking around with a gun."
911: "Ok, what is he doing?"
CC: "He's walking around with a gun on his hip."
911: "Is he doing anything suspicious?"
CC: "Yeah, he's walking around with a gun in a holster on his hip."
911: "That's not illegal. Goodbye."
Flatline
06-23-2012, 23:47
Yeah, him and deagler.
ETA: It's a sad day when anybody, especially members of a gun forum, would call an informed, law abiding citizen who is exercising his God given, 2A protected rights an "ass".
I don't know why you would identify yourself with someone who is clearly behaving poorly with the intent to cause a confrontation with the police in order to gain some sense of self satisfaction.
I am not saying that the officers involved followed the statutes verbatim in regards to open carry, however they were called to a suspicious man with a firearm. I do not believe that it was the officer's intent to impede this mans rights in any way.
I would like to strongly emphasize that this man was not defending your gun rights. He went out to either cause a confrontation with the police or satisfy some other pathological objective through his actions.
If he was protecting his/your gun rights, he would have explained what he was doing, given his identification, and done so in an appropriate and cordial manner. Because he instead acted in a self serving, rude, and confrontational manner I maintain that he is an ass.
Just to be clear, since you seem to have taking this personally, I am not calling you or anybody else in general an ass for open carrying and defending their rights. I am calling him an ass because of of his apparent intent and behavior.
Sharpienads
06-24-2012, 00:02
You guys keep saying he was acting suspicious. What was he doing that was suspicious? Open carrying? Or did somebody who thinks guns are scary call the cops and say he was acting suspicious based solely on the fact that he had a gun? As far as I can tell, he didn't do anything wrong.
Would I open carry just so that I could spout off some legal cases to the first cop that stopped me? No. And if that is the only reason he did it, maybe he is a bit of an ass. But that doesn't mean he did anything wrong, nor does it justify the cop forcing the guy to do anything he doesn't have to do.
Flatline
06-24-2012, 00:59
You guys keep saying he was acting suspicious. What was he doing that was suspicious? Open carrying? Or did somebody who thinks guns are scary call the cops and say he was acting suspicious based solely on the fact that he had a gun? As far as I can tell, he didn't do anything wrong.
I never stated that he was acting suspicious not am I accusing him of being a criminal.
Would I open carry just so that I could spout off some legal cases to the first cop that stopped me? No. And if that is the only reason he did it, maybe he is a bit of an ass. But that doesn't mean he did anything wrong, nor does it justify the cop forcing the guy to do anything he doesn't have to do.
That is exactly my point. If I thought he was a criminal I would accuse him of being a criminal. He is an ass, I called him an ass because that is what he is.
And on the cop bit, I think that the cop was not trying to impede on his rights, I think that he was called to a suspicious male with a gun (yes, the citizen who called in/call taker considered his apparent legal actions to be dangerous without there seeming to be a basis of any need for the police) and acted in a manner to protect his own safety while responding to a potentially dangerous call (most calls for a man with a gun do not turn out to be a person trying to make some type of political statement or other self serving behavior). It seems that the cop did not follow statute verbatim, but instead acted in what seemed to me to be a reasonable nature in response to the nature of the call.
I apologize if my earlier statements had mislead you.
Here's the dictionary definition of civilian:
1. A person who is not on active duty with a military, naval, police, or fire fighting organization.
Just letting you know. [Beer]
Also, that definition would mean that all the Nat. Guard and Reserve personell would be considered civilians, not military, and I'm pretty sure that's not the case.
ETA: The Oxford American Dictionary defines a civilian as anyone not serving in the armed forces. Says nothing about police, or fire departments, and makes no distinction between those on active-duty or reserve status.
I'm pretty sure the National Guard and the Reserve fall under either military, or naval (National Guard) in my quote.
You know it's funny. The higher up the ranks, or, I don't know how to put this right now (not trying to offend anyone). I'll explain in a different way... My friend, a Ranger, was a Ranger, thinks a talk like this is retarded. He sees it as he went and chose to do something, now he's back, and he doesn't think any highly of himself than anyone else. None of this "civilian" crap (basically just thinking you're better than everyone because you serve, or served) is of any importance, and is actually annoying to him and most other respected military guys. We've had this talk before. He's had that talk many times, and many of the guys he served with and still talks to, have had those talks. They discuss the maturity level of some in the armed forces, and the need to stand out with stupid descriptions like that (the basic attitude involved) is one of their biggest things that pisses them off.
Now I'm not trying to ruffle your feathers or anything(really I'm not), I'm just pointing out the military guys I've been around, and where I get my view points from. Trying to separate yourself like that though (again I'm used to modest and humble guys) bugs me. It's the "I'm better than you" attitude that goes with it. As some of those guys are like my "brothers from another mother" so to speak, I've taken to their way of thinking.
mcantar18c
06-24-2012, 05:30
That "better than thou" attitude that goes with that separation is exactly why it irritates the hell out of me when I hear/see people use "civilians" to refer to the people that aren't cops when talking about LE situations... especially when the one doing it IS a cop.
As for the military side of it... right now, I am not a civilian, and there IS a distinction. My job is not a job but a lifestyle, I can't go home whenever I want to, I even have to live by different laws than a civilian does (UCMJ), and so on. When I get out, I will no longer be on this side of the fence. I will be a civilian, just like you. Am I "better" than a civilian? I don't know, that's not for me to decide.
Your quote specifies it as "on active duty with a military, naval ... organization." the DoD has a clear separation between Active Duty personell and those in the Army Nat. Guard or the Army/Navy/AF/USMC Reserve. Different pay levels, benefits, funding, etc. They're all considered military, but only active duty are active duty.
I would've never had to "handle" anything because I carry my f**king firearm CONCEALED as it should be. That is all.
Birddog1911
06-24-2012, 08:57
I carry concealed 99% of the time, but I see no reason to say "as it should be". This is still supposed to be a free country, and a free state, and I'll carry open, should I so choose.
wctriumph
06-24-2012, 09:02
[QUOTE=Flatline;515069]I don't know what the laws are in Oregon, but here that could be considered brandishing a weapon if citizens are calling in concerned for their safety that a man is walking with a gun. It would would not hold up in court, but would be enough for an officer to stop you, take your weapon to protect their safety, and run a NCIC search.
This guy is walking around in broad daylight with a gun on his hip in a manner or place that it would not be considered normal (hence the phone call to the police from the public) and had a video camera, a list of court proceeding, and some statutes that benefit his side only ready for when he was contacted by the police.
This guy was clearly being an ass and trying to cause some type of legal or civil issue with the police department.
Once again I don't know about Oregon, but here an officer can detain and transport a person for failure to provide identification.
Move on, nothing to see here. Rejoin your occupy group.
TEA
palepainter
06-24-2012, 09:24
Honestly, I was more impressed with how the officer handled him self than the guy carrying. I probably would have given the guy my ID just to ease him with knowing that I am not a felon and am in my rights to open carry.
BlasterBob
06-24-2012, 09:54
If that "open carry " guy lives in the Portland area, he'd better make damn sure that he NOW complies with ALL traffic ordinances when he is driving in that city..
[Tooth]
Always nice to have popcorn handy to enjoy these threads. . .
Only time I can see myself open carrying is while hunting or at one of those special BBQ events with friends.
I am in the group of folks that think it's better when packing to be concealed versus open carry. I would give a "-1" to the cop for gun on how he handled the loaded firearm. I would give a +1 to the guy for the good references to case law. One of the points that the guy gave was the reference that open carry in that area was not considered brandishing.
I would've never had to "handle" anything because I carry my f**king firearm CONCEALED as it should be. That is all.
[LOL] .....Just wondering if I should drag this thread out now..... [ROFL1]
It could have been a whole hell of a lot easier for all of them. I see the guy as an educated jack ass personally. Why the hell would you be a dick and give the cops a hard time when all they are doing is their job responding to some retards complaint? It wasn't the cops fault!
I believe that argument was used by many of the regimes that committed war crimes as well. "I was just doing my job".
I'm sure that if we would all just do what the cops say, regardless of the legality, it will all work out better for everyone. After all, cops are perfect in judgement at all times, right?
Waywardson174
06-24-2012, 13:02
So let's say this guy is out to make himself the center of the issue. He is drawing attention to a prevalent anti-gun culture in this nation. There are more than 300 million firearms in this nation, but many more than half of us don't own a firearm. Talking to classmates, they relate "that time they shot a .22 once" as their entire firearm experience. This guy was less than polite, but he was right on every point. An officer cannot detain (that is restrain from free movement) a person without reasonable suspicion (a belief that goes beyond a hunch based on articulable facts that a person is or has committed a crime).
When open carry is legal, it is legal and cannot be a fact on which the suspicion is based without a separate indication of unlawfulness.
Yes, police officers have a tough job to do. But their responsibility to uphold the citizens' right is as important as enforcement of statutes. This cop did not have a reasonable suspicion to stop a this guy. An anonymous tip IS NEVER enough without something more.
The only way to educate people about our and their rights is by acts of exercise. Whether I open or conceal carry, if it is legal then it is my right. If I am subjected to violations of that right then I have a responsibility resist the violation.
If believe you have a right to carry, then whether you agree or not with his tactic you must support the principle, otherwise you are just another citizen slowly observing the erosion of your ability to possess, carry, and use the firearms we all hold dear.
As an aside, the idea this guy was spoiling and ready for a confrontation is ludicrous based on the video. Few of us walk around w/o a camera phone in our pockets. If this guy were really looking to make a stink of it and get famous he would have a) focused more on capturing quality images of the confrontation, b) brought a buddy to video as a third party, or c) had a camera crew following along at a distance and mic'd himself up. The guy who "invaded" ACORN did so with pretty good hidden cameras which are obviously not present here.
I thought this guy new his stuff. I'm sure he was upset for being stopped doing nothing wrong and being withing his rights. I know we all don't want to be harassed when walking down the street legally open carrying a firearm and probably are shocked when we know more laws then the officers who are there to enforce them but this guy could have been more respectful to the officer doing his job and just said everything a little more calmly and respectfully. He was just possibly warming himself up to giving the officers a reason to arrest him.
El Caballo Loco
06-24-2012, 13:30
When I see vids like this, I dream that the piece of shit making the video is getting ass raped like a doll a few days later and the same cop is the responding officer.
Boo on the cop for his performance but boo even more on baiting a cop and then being an ostentacious prick.
This is what happens when the extreme right has an illegitimate birth child.
Sharpienads
06-24-2012, 13:34
I still don't understand why he was stopped in the first place.
Flatline
06-24-2012, 15:08
Move on, nothing to see here. Rejoin your occupy group.
TEA
How is it that everyone on this board says how they would spank their children, be slapped, never would have happened ... etc in response to the 4 kids bullying the elderly lady but the moment that I suggest that this man is an ass because he is rude, self serving, and confrontational to a cop subjects me to accusations of being a liberal or hating gun rights.
I guess I'll put this in bold since you did not read it the first time.
This man is not here to protect anybodies second amendment rights. He is likely some undergraduate pre-law student trying to cause a confrontation with the police, while using a hot button issue like gun rights to precipitate his objectives.
This man is not helping your rights, he is hurting them. What will liberals and moderates think when they see this video? 'Hey a gun owner, and he is being disrespectful and and ass to the cop who is just doing his job,' NOT 'look at the respectful gun owner who is protecting his rights and being trotted on by the police.'
And FYI, gun owners are not the majority in our country(in a recent gallup pole only 3/10 Americans own a gun personally, and 4/10 have one in the household), so it does matter what the liberals and moderates think, as well as how they vote. If you deny this you are simply uneducated on how American politics work.
So to reiterate he is an ass because of his actions; not for carrying a gun, not for telling the cop about his rights, not citing case law precedents. He is an ass because he baited a confrontation with the police, and then treated the responding officer with disrespect and self severing and confrontation behavior.
El Caballo Loco
06-24-2012, 15:10
Naive, ignorant, pussified Americans?
Cops are not the enemy.
Eggysrun
06-24-2012, 15:38
(in a recent gallup pole only 3/10 Americans own a gun personally, and 4/10 have one in the household)
Link?
How is it that everyone on this board says how they would spank their children, be slapped, never would have happened ... etc in response to the 4 kids bullying the elderly lady but the moment that I suggest that this man is an ass because he is rude, self serving, and confrontational to a cop subjects me to accusations of being a liberal or hating gun rights.
I guess I'll put this in bold since you did not read it the first time.
This man is not here to protect anybodies second amendment rights. He is likely some undergraduate pre-law student trying to cause a confrontation with the police, while using a hot button issue like gun rights to precipitate his objectives.
This man is not helping your rights, he is hurting them. What will liberals and moderates think when they see this video? 'Hey a gun owner, and he is being disrespectful and and ass to the cop who is just doing his job,' NOT 'look at the respectful gun owner who is protecting his rights and being trotted on by the police.'
And FYI, gun owners are not the majority in our country(in a recent gallup pole only 3/10 Americans own a gun personally, and 4/10 have one in the household), so it does matter what the liberals and moderates think, as well as how they vote. If you deny this you are simply uneducated on how American politics work.
So to reiterate he is an ass because of his actions; not for carrying a gun, not for telling the cop about his rights, not citing case law precedents. He is an ass because he baited a confrontation with the police, and then treated the responding officer with disrespect and self severing and confrontation behavior.
Being the Po-Po, means that people will bait you. Its not "if" it is "when" that will happen during your career. Because a citizen baits you, does not give you the authority to violate their rights.
Some jurisdictions allow open carry. Some do not. Where it is legal, the police within that jurisdiction should be aware that there are citizens who will exercise that right. The police either will act lawfully and recognize those rights or they will learn. Learning can be easy (as it seemed to be in this video) or it can be rough and expensive.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Just because I have an opinion, that doesn't entitle me to be right.
Be safe.
I believe that argument was used by many of the regimes that committed war crimes as well. "I was just doing my job".
I'm sure that if we would all just do what the cops say, regardless of the legality, it will all work out better for everyone. After all, cops are perfect in judgement at all times, right?
Stone, aren't you a cop? I really do want to hear from someone on the board about this. What are the police supposed to do in a case where someone is called in for being a suspicious person with a gun? I want clarification for myself mainly. If I am wrong here on what the cops are supposed to be able to do, or do, whatever, I would like to hear it from an officer. This doesn't mean that I am going to turn around and act like that clown in the video, but I will be able to have a conversation with the officier that might in the future pull me to the side about my holstered firearm
BlasterBob
06-24-2012, 16:22
spyder, next time you take a stroll down Main Street (here in town) and see a cop walking patrol, perhaps you wouldn't mind asking him what he'd do IF you were carrying openly and he received a radio message that there is a guy "with a gun" walking down Main. I am not going to push my luck by asking any of our local LEO's but maybe you'd like to give it a try.[Tooth]
Stone, aren't you a cop?
Apparently I am a Certified Sex Therapist.
Open carry for someone in my profession has a completely different meaning. [ROFL2]
Apparently I am a Certified Sex Therapist.
Open carry for someone in my profession has a completely different meaning. [ROFL2]
Per your title, I think if someone related to your titles profession open carried... the stops would be a lot more fun to hear about, well, sometimes....[Coffee]
spyder, next time you take a stroll down Main Street (here in town) and see a cop walking patrol, perhaps you wouldn't mind asking him what he'd do IF you were carrying openly and he received a radio message that there is a guy "with a gun" walking down Main. I am not going to push my luck by asking any of our local LEO's but maybe you'd like to give it a try.[Tooth]
I have walked past pretty much all of them down here while carrying with nothing happening. I see them, they see me and my Hk, all goes well. I think the cops down here have a little more insight into the whole carry thing. I will ask one though next time I have a chance how they are trained to handle it, or if they are even trained on the topic. [Beer]
BlasterBob
06-24-2012, 18:03
OK spider, I am anxious to hear the results of your conversation with one of our local LEO 's. Would also be interesting to get the comments of one of Sheriff's deputies.[Beer]
I would like to hear from an officer as well. I would like to think if an officer is called and told there is a guy walking down the street that they have to stop you just to check it out. Being disrespectful and bating the officer like it appears in this video is not cool and I am sure would cause some kind of an issue.
Sharpienads
06-24-2012, 18:59
I'm curious as well to find out if an officer has to make contact with you just because somebody called a complaint.
Jolly Green
06-24-2012, 20:23
I think it was handled reasonably from both sides. The officer had to check on the guy to ensure public safety, and the citizen knew his case law very well.
After talking to the guy for a minute, it was obvious that he was a law abiding citizen who knew his rights, was respectful of authority, and didnt want to cause any problems. Usually the open carry types are the ones that dont have to be worried about.
10mm-man
06-24-2012, 20:58
I believe that argument was used by many of the regimes that committed war crimes as well. "I was just doing my job".
I'm sure that if we would all just do what the cops say, regardless of the legality, it will all work out better for everyone. After all, cops are perfect in judgement at all times, right?
WOW! Someone who get's it.........
All others "Just Bow Down"....... IT'll be best for all involved!!
10mm-man
06-24-2012, 21:01
The officer had to check on the guy to ensure public safety, and the citizen knew his case law very well.
Public Safety? Were was the public in jeopardy? Please do explain how a guy "legally" carrying "open" is a threat to society? The police thinking they can detain someone for doing what is their right is more of a thread to society then that guy.
The cop should have followed him (and observed him for an illegal activity), he stopped him illegally and detained and seized his property "without cause!" BULLSHIT.......
10mm-man
06-24-2012, 21:08
Being disrespectful and bating the officer like it appears in this video is not cool and I am sure would cause some kind of an issue.
What is not cool is; that you can be stopped, detained, have your property seized without reason and everyone thinks it's ok!! REALLY?
Did you guys miss the part of the law he quoted that said the "Police" couldn't do it?
I'm also curious if police are supposed to respond or not. It seems to me like they are, since the police show up when some a-hole calls 911 because a fast food restaurant doesn't have the food item that they want (has happened more than once in the news).
I have a different question for police on the board. How do you respond to a "man running with a gun?" I was running and slightly open carrying the other day and a couple of police cars drove by and I covered my gun up before they passed me. I don't think I'd like to be contacted in that situation though, mostly because of where I live and how frequently the police show up. I was clearly jogging, but since I wasn't wearing spandex, a race number, and it was at 11:00 pm at night, I have to wonder how the police would have responded.
BlasterBob
06-25-2012, 06:59
When a police dispatcher receives a "man with a gun" call, I'd guess the caller normally does NOT indicate if the gun guy appeared to be a nut case/wacko or if the gun appeared to be a handgun, rifle, shotgun or a machine gun or even a bazooka. I believe most of the liberal public doesn't give a shit what type it is, just that it's a damn gun, capable of doing some serious harm and some guy is out on the street with it. I believe the cops really have to check out what's going on. If they did NOT investigate, and the carrier shot someone soon after the call, there would be more than a few complaints ("well, I called the cops and they did nothing about my citizen complaint/warning").
For the cops, it's hell if they do and hell if they don't. I believe they'd rather go with the safest method and just routinely check the guy out. Also, just because he (the open carry guy) cites some laws indicating that open carry is legal in that area, that does NOT mean that he is certainly a law abiding citizen. You can bet that a lot of guys who are currently incarcerated are very familiar with many many laws and can easily cite them but that doesn't suddenly make them "good guys".
A cop/friend of mine told me many years ago that a cop frequently may have to make some quick/split second decisions that may take the courts months or even years to unravel and figure out.
What is not cool is; that you can be stopped, detained, have your property seized without reason and everyone thinks it's ok!! REALLY?
Did you guys miss the part of the law he quoted that said the "Police" couldn't do it?
Nope, I caught that part. If that is a true law there then YES he shouldn't even have been stopped. Still the officer has to respond to the call but maybe then the appropriate thing for the officer to have done is drive by and if the guy was acting in any manner that gave the officer a reason to stop him (like he asked the officer if he was stopping him for any criminal reason) However he phrased that exactly. Obviously he wasn't doing anything so the officer should of kept on his way.
What is not cool is; that you can be stopped, detained, have your property seized without reason and everyone thinks it's ok!! REALLY?
Did you guys miss the part of the law he quoted that said the "Police" couldn't do it?
See, and I'm not arguing the point that the cops can just stop you for no reason. I'm wondering what the case is if someone calls you in. What do the cops have to do? What are they trained to do? By all means from most of the arguements, I can go rob someone and just start walking down the streets and the cops can't do anything right? At the moment I started walking down the street normally, I wasn't doing anything to provoke contact, I should be good.... Per what the guy in the video was saying, that is how it would work right?
cop: "I'm going to have to detain you sir for suspicion of a robbery that someone called in." < I don't know what they would actyally say lol
robber: "Was I doing anything illegal right now to give you a reason to contact/detain me?"
cop: "Well no, not technically right now, we just got a call about a robbery done with a gun, and then we got a call about you walking in the area."
robber: "So are you detaining me? Did I do something illegal? You said it yourself I haven't done anything illegal......" < starts spouting off all the crap the guy on the video did...
I would think there is a point where the cops are able to see if you are a BG or not. I might not have used the best situation above, but I hope people get the point of what I'm saying. We even have people on the board here that call in others for doing something "suspicious" and start a new thread about it. We have neighborhood watch's for "suspicious" people, yet when the tables get turned every once in a while we get all upset? The confrontation should last maybe two minutes at most if you work with them. This is why I want to know what they are trained/told to do in a situation like this. If a cop just stops you because you have a gun, that's BS, I know that and I think most others do, but if someone calls you in and says you are acting suspicious and have a gun, what are the cops supposed to do?
I'm also curious if police are supposed to respond or not. It seems to me like they are, since the police show up when some a-hole calls 911 because a fast food restaurant doesn't have the food item that they want (has happened more than once in the news).
I have a different question for police on the board. How do you respond to a "man running with a gun?" I was running and slightly open carrying the other day and a couple of police cars drove by and I covered my gun up before they passed me. I don't think I'd like to be contacted in that situation though, mostly because of where I live and how frequently the police show up. I was clearly jogging, but since I wasn't wearing spandex, a race number, and it was at 11:00 pm at night, I have to wonder how the police would have responded.
They'd have treated you like a King....
Rodney King.
[LOL]
I have heard (and will try and confirm) that how El Paso County 911 treats MWAG calls is to ask the caller what the man is doing (which is reasonable in any case). If it sounds suspicious, they roll, if not they ask a few follow-up questions along the lines of "Is the gun holstered?" "Is he just going about his business?" and if they can reasonably determine that it's just an OC carrier, they explain to the caller that what the person is doing is perfectly legal -- and don't roll.
O2
Yeah you would get the royal treatment alright, especially in Westminster!
Chad4000
06-25-2012, 10:48
interesting thread... I actually kinda like seeing these videos..
never had any weird experiences myself..
10mm-man
06-25-2012, 10:56
See, and I'm not arguing the point that the cops can just stop you for no reason. I'm wondering what the case is if someone calls you in. What do the cops have to do? What are they trained to do? By all means from most of the arguements, I can go rob someone and just start walking down the streets and the cops can't do anything right? At the moment I started walking down the street normally, I wasn't doing anything to provoke contact, I should be good.... Per what the guy in the video was saying, that is how it would work right?
cop: "I'm going to have to detain you sir for suspicion of a robbery that someone called in." < I don't know what they would actyally say lol
robber: "Was I doing anything illegal right now to give you a reason to contact/detain me?"
cop: "Well no, not technically right now, we just got a call about a robbery done with a gun, and then we got a call about you walking in the area."
robber: "So are you detaining me? Did I do something illegal? You said it yourself I haven't done anything illegal......" < starts spouting off all the crap the guy on the video did...
I would think there is a point where the cops are able to see if you are a BG or not. I might not have used the best situation above, but I hope people get the point of what I'm saying. We even have people on the board here that call in others for doing something "suspicious" and start a new thread about it. We have neighborhood watch's for "suspicious" people, yet when the tables get turned every once in a while we get all upset? The confrontation should last maybe two minutes at most if you work with them. This is why I want to know what they are trained/told to do in a situation like this. If a cop just stops you because you have a gun, that's BS, I know that and I think most others do, but if someone calls you in and says you are acting suspicious and have a gun, what are the cops supposed to do?
I think we should keep the video in context; Police get call of someone walking with gun. They drive up see guy, walking open carry, holstered, minding his own business. NO LAWS BROKE! MOVE ALONG......
Of course if guys J-Walks (illegal to do) stop him, site him and while your at it, you have his ID check him out......
Laws he quoted said they couldn't do what they did! Give them an ear full, post it everywhere, and have the officer reprimanded or better yet, have him sent to "Re-education", not the other way around...
10mm-man
06-25-2012, 10:59
So let's say this guy is out to make himself the center of the issue. He is drawing attention to a prevalent anti-gun culture in this nation. There are more than 300 million firearms in this nation, but many more than half of us don't own a firearm. Talking to classmates, they relate "that time they shot a .22 once" as their entire firearm experience. This guy was less than polite, but he was right on every point. An officer cannot detain (that is restrain from free movement) a person without reasonable suspicion (a belief that goes beyond a hunch based on articulable facts that a person is or has committed a crime).
When open carry is legal, it is legal and cannot be a fact on which the suspicion is based without a separate indication of unlawfulness.
Yes, police officers have a tough job to do. But their responsibility to uphold the citizens' right is as important as enforcement of statutes. This cop did not have a reasonable suspicion to stop a this guy. An anonymous tip IS NEVER enough without something more.
The only way to educate people about our and their rights is by acts of exercise. Whether I open or conceal carry, if it is legal then it is my right. If I am subjected to violations of that right then I have a responsibility resist the violation.
If believe you have a right to carry, then whether you agree or not with his tactic you must support the principle, otherwise you are just another citizen slowly observing the erosion of your ability to possess, carry, and use the firearms we all hold dear.
As an aside, the idea this guy was spoiling and ready for a confrontation is ludicrous based on the video. Few of us walk around w/o a camera phone in our pockets. If this guy were really looking to make a stink of it and get famous he would have a) focused more on capturing quality images of the confrontation, b) brought a buddy to video as a third party, or c) had a camera crew following along at a distance and mic'd himself up. The guy who "invaded" ACORN did so with pretty good hidden cameras which are obviously not present here.
AS STATED ABOVE! I couldn't have said it better, THANKS![Beer]
10mm-man
06-25-2012, 11:04
I dream that the piece of shit making the video is getting ass raped like a doll a few days later and the same cop is the responding officer.
Or the ones attempting to do the ass raping are laying dead because the guy legally exercised his rights to protect his person!
Well, I'm home from lunch for a few seconds. I talked with one of the guys I go to school with, he is a 25 year vet of the LA swat team, sniper. Of course we all know that Commiefornia is different... When the cops got a call about someone with a gun, they rolled up most of the time with their guns drawn. Wasn't too friendly of an interaction as he put it. Sometimes they would stop and scope the person out though to see how to handle the situation, most of the time they were busy and would just have to go in and make quick work of the call so they could go do "important" things. But that is how they handled it down there. Still waiting to see a cop here that I can ask. [Beer]
10mm-man
06-25-2012, 13:45
Well, I'm home from lunch for a few seconds. I talked with one of the guys I go to school with, he is a 25 year vet of the LA swat team, sniper. Of course we all know that Commiefornia is different... When the cops got a call about someone with a gun, they rolled up most of the time with their guns drawn. Wasn't too friendly of an interaction as he put it. Sometimes they would stop and scope the person out though to see how to handle the situation, most of the time they were busy and would just have to go in and make quick work of the call so they could go do "important" things. But that is how they handled it down there. Still waiting to see a cop here that I can ask. [Beer]
Maybe you should find out what city the guy (in the video) was from. Irrelevant IMO how the "police" do it here or in Cali, since this video is in a different state. Or listen to the laws he was quoting and base it on that.
Maybe you should find out what city the guy (in the video) was from. Irrelevant IMO how the "police" do it here or in Cali, since this video is in a different state. Or listen to the laws he was quoting and base it on that.
The police cruiser said" Portland Police" on the side, so that narrows it down an bit...Based on accents, I'm guessing Oregon
The police cruiser said" Portland Police" on the side, so that narrows it down an bit...Based on accents, I'm guessing Oregon
Portland, Maine
Here is a link that is allegedly from the citizen in the video: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2898083/posts
I have not confirmed the information in the blog posts above, but the video looked more like Portland, ME than Portland, OR, and yes I've visited both, but do not claim to know much about either.
Be safe.
My thoughts: The gentleman that made the video obviously went out to "make a point", and tried to provoke the officer into doing something improper. Open carry is obviously legal at that location, otherwise the stop would have gone quite differently. That being said, IMO he did nothing to improve the relationship between OC proponents and the police with his adversarial attitude. I get the whole open carry thing, even though I choose not to do so, but being rude and adversarial with a police officer that is merely trying to have a conversation with you is not accomplishing anything except possibly souring that officer's opinion of OCers in general.
10mm-man
06-25-2012, 14:40
My thoughts: The gentleman that made the video obviously went out to "make a point", and tried to provoke the officer into doing something improper. Open carry is obviously legal at that location, otherwise the stop would have gone quite differently. That being said, IMO he did nothing to improve the relationship between OC proponents and the police with his adversarial attitude. I get the whole open carry thing, even though I choose not to do so, but being rude and adversarial with a police officer that is merely trying to have a conversation with you is not accomplishing anything except possibly souring that officer's opinion of OCers in general.
Agreed on the;" he did nothing to improve the relationship between OC proponents " but if I am not mistaken, the law he quoted said that the police couldn't do that. Therefore; illegal stop, illegal search and seizure! I thought I read somewhere that the Supreme Court" ruled citizens could defend themselves "to the point of death" against "illegal search and seizure"...
In that case he did good as " and OC proponent" and as others have said "it was a good day for all involved....... Wish more would stand up for their rights instead of being cowards and letting others step on them...
10mm-man
06-25-2012, 14:43
Portland, Maine
Here is a link that is allegedly from the citizen in the video: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2898083/posts
I have not confirmed the information in the blog posts above, but the video looked more like Portland, ME than Portland, OR, and yes I've visited both, but do not claim to know much about either.
Be safe.
NICE FIND! [Beer]
Jus' sayin', it's possible to "stand up for your rights" without being a dick.[Tooth]
Jus' sayin', it's possible to "stand up for your rights" without being a dick.[Tooth]
I'm sure that George III thought that George Washington was a dick. [LOL]
Sharpienads
06-25-2012, 14:59
I'm sure that George III thought that George Washington was a dick. [LOL]
Yeah, I remember reading that in the history books:
Mr. George Washington hath been quite a dick these last few months...
King George III's diary entry, July 4, 1776
10mm-man
06-25-2012, 15:37
I'm sure that George III thought that George Washington was a dick. [LOL]
[ROFL1][ROFL2][ROFL3][LOL][Flower]
I'm shocked! Does no one here, with not much regard to how it was handled in the video, have a freaking clue about CRS? During a stop, and IIRC it doesn't need be a traffic stop, a LEO can ask you to surrender your weapon during the duration of contact for his/her safety and must return it to you after the stop is complete if you are not to be detained. It is NOT unlawful seizure, it is simply the CO legislature putting in rules that protect our LEOs. If you are stopped while OCing and the cop asks you to surrender your weapon he is not seizing it, he's not trampling your rights, he's not violating you, he is just doing so for his protection because he doesn't know you from the next guy. Also, handing over your ID so the PD may rest assured you're not a wanted felon is OK! You're not having your rights eroded. I wish people would chill on this... one minute you're all saying that disrespecting cops is a no go (especially killing them) but then the next when one of them is simply investigating a "suspicious person with a gun" as called in by our stupid masses fellow humans, you lose your cool.
Now, granted, there was no reason for contact to begin with as our gun-toting friend here was doing not a single thing wrong, but I don't know how Portland PD operates and they might have an SOP dealing with Person With A Gun calls, we don't know. The man handled it okay, but honestly, this whole "stick to your guns, don't give them anything" is bullshit. Okay? Plain and simple bullshit. If you're ever stopped, walking down the street, open carrying, and the cop asks for your ID to make sure you're not a felon in possession of a gun, or what have you, just comply. What does it hurt? It helps him go about his business more soundly and costs you what? A minute or two of your precious time- probably takes a lot less time than arguing with the cop for 10 minutes... I'm with Flatline in saying this guy was an ass. Good on him for knowing the law, but fuck him for being a dick to that officer who was just following up on a call in about a guy with a gun. Okay, being a smart-ass is only going to make you look like a POS. Exercise some restraint, it doesn't hurt to cooperate with LEOs if they're not actually infringing upon your rights, and last time I checked, them trying to ensure their safety by asking to surrender your gun during the duration of contact wasn't some jack booted Nazi march towards oppression.
MTFBWY.[Beer]
I'm shocked!
You realize that the incident in the video did not occur in Colorado right? CRS only applies in Colorado.
As far as surrendering your weapon, I stand by my opinion that you should not get into an argument with a uniformed cop... unless you are in Mexico [Beer]
Be safe.
You realize that the incident in the video did not occur in Colorado right? CRS only applies in Colorado.
As far as surrendering your weapon, I stand by my opinion that you should not get into an argument with a uniformed cop... unless you are in Mexico [Beer]
Be safe.
Oh I'm aware... And I realize this incident happened in Maine. I'm stating for us, ya know, those of us living in CO (sorry Byte! Still love ya!) how it would apply. I can't speak for a state I don't live in, or intend to live in, I can only say know the law here, this situation, as it applies to us CO residents and how we should handle it. [Beer]
Like you say, be safe! I always try to be, especially when it comes to LEOs who are already under enough stress.
10mm-man
06-25-2012, 16:24
I'm shocked! Does no one here, with not much regard to how it was handled in the video, have a freaking clue about CRS? During a stop, and IIRC it doesn't need be a traffic stop, a LEO can ask you to surrender your weapon during the duration of contact for his/her safety and must return it to you after the stop is complete if you are not to be detained. It is NOT unlawful seizure, it is simply the CO legislature putting in rules that protect our LEOs. If you are stopped while OCing and the cop asks you to surrender your weapon he is not seizing it, he's not trampling your rights, he's not violating you, he is just doing so for his protection because he doesn't know you from the next guy. Also, handing over your ID so the PD may rest assured you're not a wanted felon is OK! You're not having your rights eroded. I wish people would chill on this... one minute you're all saying that disrespecting cops is a no go (especially killing them) but then the next when one of them is simply investigating a "suspicious person with a gun" as called in by our stupid masses fellow humans, you lose your cool.
Now, granted, there was no reason for contact to begin with as our gun-toting friend here was doing not a single thing wrong, but I don't know how Portland PD operates and they might have an SOP dealing with Person With A Gun calls, we don't know. The man handled it okay, but honestly, this whole "stick to your guns, don't give them anything" is bullshit. Okay? Plain and simple bullshit. If you're ever stopped, walking down the street, open carrying, and the cop asks for your ID to make sure you're not a felon in possession of a gun, or what have you, just comply. What does it hurt? It helps him go about his business more soundly and costs you what? A minute or two of your precious time- probably takes a lot less time than arguing with the cop for 10 minutes... I'm with Flatline in saying this guy was an ass. Good on him for knowing the law, but fuck him for being a dick to that officer who was just following up on a call in about a guy with a gun. Okay, being a smart-ass is only going to make you look like a POS. Exercise some restraint, it doesn't hurt to cooperate with LEOs if they're not actually infringing upon your rights, and last time I checked, them trying to ensure their safety by asking to surrender your gun during the duration of contact wasn't some jack booted Nazi march towards oppression.
MTFBWY.[Beer]
Well CRS says you have to, but........ were this happened it was illegal!
So If it is illegal search and seizure your saying "hand over your weapons?" Just want to clarify your stance on this.
Chad4000
06-25-2012, 16:45
well now I'm confused. so in Colorado, the cops can just come up to you for no reason and demand your weapon? I think I would prefer the officer chat the person up. I trust them to be able to gauge the person they are talking to. they do it all day every day. but I hate the idea of them just assuming that they are in danger because they are talking to another human.
I'm shocked! Does no one here, with not much regard to how it was handled in the video, have a freaking clue about CRS? During a stop, and IIRC it doesn't need be a traffic stop, a LEO can ask you to surrender your weapon during the duration of contact for his/her safety and must return it to you after the stop is complete if you are not to be detained. It is NOT unlawful seizure, it is simply the CO legislature putting in rules that protect our LEOs. If you are stopped while OCing and the cop asks you to surrender your weapon he is not seizing it, he's not trampling your rights, he's not violating you, he is just doing so for his protection because he doesn't know you from the next guy. Also, handing over your ID so the PD may rest assured you're not a wanted felon is OK! You're not having your rights eroded. I wish people would chill on this... one minute you're all saying that disrespecting cops is a no go (especially killing them) but then the next when one of them is simply investigating a "suspicious person with a gun" as called in by our stupid masses fellow humans, you lose your cool.
Now, granted, there was no reason for contact to begin with as our gun-toting friend here was doing not a single thing wrong
This is the argument. He was invoking his 4th amendment right to unreasonable search and seizure while the officer was detaining him and confiscating his weapon against his will. Everything stated before this wouldn't come into play if the officer had not detained him in the first place!
I guess I don't understand all of the "he should do what the cops say because it would be easier for everyone" or the "he is an ass looking for attention". Really? So despite not breaking any known law, he should forfeit his rights so the officer is happy? What country is this?
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin
This is a quote from the link Cstone provided:
"What is sad is that in America the Cops count on our ignorance of the law and take from us what they are not allowed to..."
Can anyone say with a straight face that had this gentlemen not know his rights and been quick on the cell phone camera that the officer(s) involved wouldn't have jeopardized his rights further?
Also it appears that this is at least the second time he was detained against his will for open carry. It's long and only sound but ends with the same result. It also doesn't appear that the officers involved in this one confiscated his weapon so I imagine they do not have a similar law in Maine.
Ifv5qfuXmKQ&feature=plcp
Here is the original
jfdEbe7e9GE&feature=plcp
Chad4000
06-25-2012, 17:32
^^ ahh.. so it was the same guy. (I hadnt researched it)
so what's his point? obviously baiting the cops. which I actually think im ok with... but is he doing something to get more attention then a normal person would be when they OC? (Im talking before the cops get there)
There is no malevolent, unified, conspiracy by law enforcement to prey upon the ignorance of citizens. If there is, someone left me off of the distribution list and I have some catching up to do.
Some people go about their business and never have any contact with law enforcement. Some people are involved in incidents that are outside of their control and they become involved in contact with law enforcement. Some people go out of their way to seek contact with law enforcement.
There are so many laws on the books within any jurisdiction that they have specialist within the legal profession who debate what all of them mean at any given time. There is no possible way that anyone can claim to have the complete, end all, be all, in legal knowledge and also claim to be sane.
Cops don't know it all. Citizen activist don't know it all.
I learned this years ago, and I share it with anyone willing to listen or read, free of charge: You can do everything right, and still be wrong. The example I often use is the motorcyclist that does not yield the right of way to an on coming tractor trailer.
I believe that there are things worth dying for. IMO, being right all of the time is not one of them.
A wise soldier chooses his battles wisely.
Be safe.
Maybe you should find out what city the guy (in the video) was from. Irrelevant IMO how the "police" do it here or in Cali, since this video is in a different state. Or listen to the laws he was quoting and base it on that.
Very true and that is why I was wanting to know what the cops here were trained to do. That way I know exactly how to handle things on my end. [Beer] I just want to be as informed as I can be.
There is no malevolent, unified, conspiracy by law enforcement to prey upon the ignorance of citizens. If there is, someone left me off of the distribution list and I have some catching up to do.
Some people go about their business and never have any contact with law enforcement. Some people are involved in incidents that are outside of their control and they become involved in contact with law enforcement. Some people go out of their way to seek contact with law enforcement.
There are so many laws on the books within any jurisdiction that they have specialist within the legal profession who debate what all of them mean at any given time. There is no possible way that anyone can claim to have the complete, end all, be all, in legal knowledge and also claim to be sane.
Cops don't know it all. Citizen activist don't know it all.
I learned this years ago, and I share it with anyone willing to listen or read, free of charge: You can do everything right, and still be wrong. The example I often use is the motorcyclist that does not yield the right of way to an on coming tractor trailer.
I believe that there are things worth dying for. IMO, being right all of the time is not one of them.
A wise soldier chooses his battles wisely.
Be safe.
Time to catch up on your continuing education (Bad Cop 205-Being an ass for no reason) [Tooth]
You could not have stated the point better: "I believe that there are things worth dying for. IMO, being right all of the time is not one of them.
A wise soldier chooses his battles wisely."
Can badgering a cop for trying to do his job become reasonable suspicion if you seem to be evading the simplest of questions? Probably not, if the cop had no legitimate reason to contact you in the first place. I have to wonder if the OCer in the video was actually the one that called himself in as a MWG just to provoke a confrontation for the benefit of the camera...
Well, haven't come across any cops here in Trinidad as of yet, and now I'm heading to the Springs to catch a flight to Florida. If I get a chance, I'll ask one of the cops in the Springs also. [Beer]
There is no malevolent, unified, conspiracy by law enforcement to prey upon the ignorance of citizens. If there is, someone left me off of the distribution list and I have some catching up to do.
Some people go about their business and never have any contact with law enforcement. Some people are involved in incidents that are outside of their control and they become involved in contact with law enforcement. Some people go out of their way to seek contact with law enforcement.
There are so many laws on the books within any jurisdiction that they have specialist within the legal profession who debate what all of them mean at any given time. There is no possible way that anyone can claim to have the complete, end all, be all, in legal knowledge and also claim to be sane.
Cops don't know it all. Citizen activist don't know it all.
I learned this years ago, and I share it with anyone willing to listen or read, free of charge: You can do everything right, and still be wrong. The example I often use is the motorcyclist that does not yield the right of way to an on coming tractor trailer.
I believe that there are things worth dying for. IMO, being right all of the time is not one of them.
A wise soldier chooses his battles wisely.
Be safe.
Well put. I didn't mean to come off saying cops are the bad guys and out to get you, just that this particular officer had alreadly violated some of this mans rights, whether he did that knowingly or not we will never know. If this individual didn't know his stuff who knows what else could have happened or what rights may have been violated? He didn't do anything to warrant police activity, he knew it and the supervisor ultimately knew it.
You think that happens quite often ocing? Thats f'ed up.
I would have just given ID and been on my way. Even after he pointed the loaded weapon at me while clearing it. Allegedly
Now this cop has gotten a lesson on law and will hesitate when there is a person ocing on there way to commit a crime.
We have a right to wear masks everywhere we go. Do we?
Keep it concealed.
KevDen2005
06-25-2012, 21:08
I'm shocked! Does no one here, with not much regard to how it was handled in the video, have a freaking clue about CRS? During a stop, and IIRC it doesn't need be a traffic stop, a LEO can ask you to surrender your weapon during the duration of contact for his/her safety and must return it to you after the stop is complete if you are not to be detained. It is NOT unlawful seizure, it is simply the CO legislature putting in rules that protect our LEOs. If you are stopped while OCing and the cop asks you to surrender your weapon he is not seizing it, he's not trampling your rights, he's not violating you, he is just doing so for his protection because he doesn't know you from the next guy. Also, handing over your ID so the PD may rest assured you're not a wanted felon is OK! You're not having your rights eroded. I wish people would chill on this... one minute you're all saying that disrespecting cops is a no go (especially killing them) but then the next when one of them is simply investigating a "suspicious person with a gun" as called in by our stupid masses fellow humans, you lose your cool.
Now, granted, there was no reason for contact to begin with as our gun-toting friend here was doing not a single thing wrong, but I don't know how Portland PD operates and they might have an SOP dealing with Person With A Gun calls, we don't know. The man handled it okay, but honestly, this whole "stick to your guns, don't give them anything" is bullshit. Okay? Plain and simple bullshit. If you're ever stopped, walking down the street, open carrying, and the cop asks for your ID to make sure you're not a felon in possession of a gun, or what have you, just comply. What does it hurt? It helps him go about his business more soundly and costs you what? A minute or two of your precious time- probably takes a lot less time than arguing with the cop for 10 minutes... I'm with Flatline in saying this guy was an ass. Good on him for knowing the law, but fuck him for being a dick to that officer who was just following up on a call in about a guy with a gun. Okay, being a smart-ass is only going to make you look like a POS. Exercise some restraint, it doesn't hurt to cooperate with LEOs if they're not actually infringing upon your rights, and last time I checked, them trying to ensure their safety by asking to surrender your gun during the duration of contact wasn't some jack booted Nazi march towards oppression.
MTFBWY.[Beer]
Hey man, calm down...Don't give yourself an aneurysm.
But in all seriousness...I havent' read this entire thread and rarely do when it comes to matters like this because of all the experts generally...I would like to point out that no one really knows what happened prior to video running and no one really knows how or in what way the call was reported to law enforcement or how it was dispatched to law enforcement. Take that for what you will...maybe just a little food for thought.
Everyone has their opinions and their rights to them. I also, like Cstone, have never heard of this club of law enforcement officers going out just to revoke rights...if it exists they may have not trusted me enough to join. Also, it's better to win the battle in court later than be harmed no matter how wrong the officer is, so I have to jump on Cstone's thought again and say complain later, speak to a lawyer later, avoid getting hurt and going to jail now. Sometimes these situations can only be escalated and we should all try to avoid that...so some additional food for thought.
Hey man, calm down...Don't give yourself an aneurysm.
But in all seriousness...I havent' read this entire thread and rarely do when it comes to matters like this because of all the experts generally...I would like to point out that no one really knows what happened prior to video running and no one really knows how or in what way the call was reported to law enforcement or how it was dispatched to law enforcement. Take that for what you will...maybe just a little food for thought.
Everyone has their opinions and their rights to them. I also, like Cstone, have never heard of this club of law enforcement officers going out just to revoke rights...if it exists they may have not trusted me enough to join. Also, it's better to win the battle in court later than be harmed no matter how wrong the officer is, so I have to jump on Cstone's thought again and say complain later, speak to a lawyer later, avoid getting hurt and going to jail now. Sometimes these situations can only be escalated and we should all try to avoid that...so some additional food for thought.
So, Kev, how do you as a LEO feel about asshats like this that seem to be obviously baiting officers by "dangling a carrot", so to speak, just so they can make a video spouting about rights and other BS? I'm all for people exercising their rights, and I'm all for LEO's knowing about those rights and recognizing them, but LEO's still have to respond to MWAG calls regardless. But a-holes like this guy only hurt the cause for both sides, IMO.
Just curious about your perspective from your side of the issue.
KevDen2005
06-25-2012, 22:00
So, Kev, how do you as a LEO feel about asshats like this that seem to be obviously baiting officers by "dangling a carrot", so to speak, just so they can make a video spouting about rights and other BS? I'm all for people exercising their rights, and I'm all for LEO's knowing about those rights and recognizing them, but LEO's still have to respond to MWAG calls regardless. But a-holes like this guy only hurt the cause for both sides, IMO.
Just curious about your perspective from your side of the issue.
Maybe go get a job and stop wasting everyone's times, especially the tax payers just to make a statement.
I get paid either way, whether you disagree with me or not and I know I'm not going to violate your rights in the eyes of the court. But where I work, I would probably be writing a report on the incident because of the fact this guy and similar guys want to make a statement. And where I work you may be recording me...you can count that I'm recording you
Kev, if you get in a call of a suspicious person carrying a gun walking down the street, how do you handle it? How were you trained to deal with that situation?
KevDen2005
06-26-2012, 08:01
Kev, if you get in a call of a suspicious person carrying a gun walking down the street, how do you handle it? How were you trained to deal with that situation?
Every situation is different. Really is all I can say. It really depends on what 'type' of suspicious this person is and where they are and how they are acting. Is there anymore information than just a guy walking with a holstered gun?
I have been to numerous calls like this all different with different sets of criteria. Depending on the circumstances I have removed a person's firearm for the duration of the contact. Other situations I have let them keep it holstered and said keep your arms crossed and don't put your hand near the gun. This is your only warning while I am contacting you on that...if they don't follow instructions I take it. None of these have been consensual contacts, they have been contacts.
I did last year see a guy walking across the middle of the road and I thought my mind was playing tricks on me in the middle of the night. I flipped around and contacted him. As soon as the guy came over to me on his own free will he told me (and I saw) that he was open carrying a pistol. I said, "I see it" and we had a short conversation.
Every situation is different.
KevDen2005
06-26-2012, 08:07
And I can't believe I finally caved in and let you guys drag me into this conversation.
[Coffee]
Ok, well, there we have it. Thanks Kev. [Beer]
I guess one last question, if someone calls in a guy with a gun, are you (the PD in general) required to check it out? Lets say a lib says that there is a suspicious guy walking down the street with a gun on his hip.
Thanks from me to you Kev, and all other LEO's and military folks here for doing the difficult and dangerous jobs you do to serve and protect all us unwashed schlubs.
Thanks from me to you Kev, and all other LEO's and military folks here for doing the difficult and dangerous jobs you do to serve and protect all us unwashed schlubs.
Hey, I took a shower this morning.
Cylinder Head
06-26-2012, 08:44
This sounds like the same guy who was doing this in PA about a year ago. He literally tries to bait cops into this kind of confrontation to illustrate what he sees as the PD's lack of understanding of the law.
I PA he was correct, the police had no idea he could OC legally, and when they found out they were in the wrong they were not very happy.
Portland, however, seems different. The police officer was courteous and did his best not to pistol whip this insolent little jerk. Should the cop have pulled out his own weapon beforehand? Maybe, maybe not. I would have (not a cop but I'm also not Doc Hollywood).
With the advent of bath salts, care should be taken at all times.
Well CRS says you have to, but........ were this happened it was illegal!
So If it is illegal search and seizure your saying "hand over your weapons?" Just want to clarify your stance on this.
If it's illegal then it's illegal, and compliance should be subject to the discretion of the individual. I was speaking from the stand point if contacted by a LEO here in our great state, knowing what I do (not a helluva lot in the law but enough to survive first contact with the police), I would comply with any legal orders given by the police. If asked, for mutual safety, to surrender my weapon during the duration, as per the guidelines of the CRS, I would gladly do so. If it was not legal, and he asked to search my person without PC or a warrant, I would, respectfully, decline as is per the 4th. That's my stance, I'll follow the law, and allow any LEO to do so as well, but when he wants to violate said law- either by ignorance or on purpose- I will then as tactfully and respectfully inform him of such.
Kev, I really like what you said, you can't dictate every situation to be the same, and I appreciate what you do, at least we know you're one of the good ones! Sure cops make mistakes, it's inherent in being human, and we shouldn't expect all LEOs to be 100% up on every law, but we can judge them based on how they react to being politely informed that they are about to violate basic rights when it happens. Notice in the video the cop asked to search him and he declined and the cop didn't press the issue, he simply said "Ok."
To clarify, I get peeved when people go out of their way to make a difficult job more difficult. Your rights aren't being stripped away when a cop asks to see your ID. Granted, unless you're driving, you have the option to decline, but really, I see it as a slap in the face when you refuse to even give your first name. My few friends in JCSO are nice, good, decent, hard working guys and I'm sure they would be respectful, but also a bit confused as to why someone wouldn't even give their first name. I'm not saying volunteer and give up your rights or what have you, I'm only stating that the way you deal with other people hypothetically will help dictate how you are dealt with. Be nice, be safe, and it won't kill you to be respectful... That's all I'm really saying here.
jackthewall81
06-26-2012, 10:00
And I can't believe I finally caved in and let you guys drag me into this conversation.
[Coffee]
Thanks for your insight. It is good to hear it from someone in the know.
jackthewall81
06-26-2012, 10:00
If it's illegal then it's illegal, and compliance should be subject to the discretion of the individual. I was speaking from the stand point if contacted by a LEO here in our great state, knowing what I do (not a helluva lot in the law but enough to survive first contact with the police), I would comply with any legal orders given by the police. If asked, for mutual safety, to surrender my weapon during the duration, as per the guidelines of the CRS, I would gladly do so. If it was not legal, and he asked to search my person without PC or a warrant, I would, respectfully, decline as is per the 4th. That's my stance, I'll follow the law, and allow any LEO to do so as well, but when he wants to violate said law- either by ignorance or on purpose- I will then as tactfully and respectfully inform him of such.
Kev, I really like what you said, you can't dictate every situation to be the same, and I appreciate what you do, at least we know you're one of the good ones! Sure cops make mistakes, it's inherent in being human, and we shouldn't expect all LEOs to be 100% up on every law, but we can judge them based on how they react to being politely informed that they are about to violate basic rights when it happens. Notice in the video the cop asked to search him and he declined and the cop didn't press the issue, he simply said "Ok."
To clarify, I get peeved when people go out of their way to make a difficult job more difficult. Your rights aren't being stripped away when a cop asks to see your ID. Granted, unless you're driving, you have the option to decline, but really, I see it as a slap in the face when you refuse to even give your first name. My few friends in JCSO are nice, good, decent, hard working guys and I'm sure they would be respectful, but also a bit confused as to why someone wouldn't even give their first name. I'm not saying volunteer and give up your rights or what have you, I'm only stating that the way you deal with other people hypothetically will help dictate how you are dealt with. Be nice, be safe, and it won't kill you to be respectful... That's all I'm really saying here.
Are you prescribed adderal?
Are you prescribed adderal?
[LOL] No, but I was once prescribed ritalin... Why, are you offering? [Coffee]
palepainter
06-26-2012, 10:54
And I can't believe I finally caved in and let you guys drag me into this conversation.
[Coffee]
Always great to hear the opinions and thoughts of the guys who have to deal with this stuff daily. Thanks!!
KevDen2005
06-26-2012, 11:03
Ok, well, there we have it. Thanks Kev. [Beer]
I guess one last question, if someone calls in a guy with a gun, are you (the PD in general) required to check it out? Lets say a lib says that there is a suspicious guy walking down the street with a gun on his hip.
Generally yes. It may depend on your jurisdiction, however we respond to every single call for service no matter how selective we would want to be. This goes back to the neutrality and the government service. We can't pick and choose. A citizen called in a suspicious person we will have to respond.
Imagine if it sounded like nothing and we didn't go and this guy shoots up a building full of people...we would be held accountable that we didn't respond and investigate
Are you prescribed adderal?
Now that was funny! [ROFL1]
After reading Ronin, I now have John Lennon in my head singing All we are saying... Is give peace a chance.
Someone please make it stop. [Help]
Life doesn't come with an instruction booklet and if it did, it would be in English written by someone from North Korea.
Roll your dice and move your mice.
Be safe.
SouthPaw
06-26-2012, 11:13
Hey man, calm down...Don't give yourself an aneurysm.
But in all seriousness...I havent' read this entire thread and rarely do when it comes to matters like this because of all the experts generally...I would like to point out that no one really knows what happened prior to video running and no one really knows how or in what way the call was reported to law enforcement or how it was dispatched to law enforcement. Take that for what you will...maybe just a little food for thought.
One of my criminal justice teachers could not say this enough in his classroom. Students all the time would bring articles, stories, videos of police acting on a certain subject asking what he would have done. His anwer simply was something along the lines of "I was not personally there and there is too many what if's."
jackthewall81
06-26-2012, 11:24
[LOL] No, but I was once prescribed ritalin... Why, are you offering? [Coffee]
No offer, I just could not fathom consistently writing books like you do without being on adderal.
No offer, I just could not fathom consistently writing books like you do without being on adderal.
My mind does move fast... try to keep up! [Coffee]
KevDen2005
06-26-2012, 12:03
One of my criminal justice teachers could not say this enough in his classroom. Students all the time would bring articles, stories, videos of police acting on a certain subject asking what he would have done. His anwer simply was something along the lines of "I was not personally there and there is too many what if's."
I have two friends who happen to be horrible drivers. Every time they get pulled over, whether they get a ticket or not, they complain to me and ask me about it. I of course hate this because I wasn't there and I couldn't possibly begin to determine what the officer saw. On top of that I am only getting their half of the story, which I have no doubt, is skewed in their direction. In fact on of my friends was stopped for speeding, the officer showed him the radar, which I don't do and am not required to do, but some do just to save the argument. My friend at this point, the only vehicle on the road in the middle of the night, has declared this police corruption because he believes the unnamed department has made their equipment 'lie' in their favor just for revenue building. I just simply responded with, maybe slow down and avoid it all together.
10mm-man
06-26-2012, 12:26
Generally yes. It may depend on your jurisdiction, however we respond to every single call for service no matter how selective we would want to be. This goes back to the neutrality and the government service. We can't pick and choose. A citizen called in a suspicious person we will have to respond.
Imagine if it sounded like nothing and we didn't go and this guy shoots up a building full of people...we would be held accountable that we didn't respond and investigate
Thanks for getting dragged into the conversation! So you have to respond, how about initiate contact? The guy in this video quoted a couple case laws alluding to Police not able to stop someone for open carry, based on just OC. I think Spyder meant to ask "Initiate Contact" if a call came in about a suspicious person OC, but I could be wrong.
Thanks again!
SouthPaw
06-26-2012, 12:27
I have two friends who happen to be horrible drivers. Every time they get pulled over, whether they get a ticket or not, they complain to me and ask me about it. I of course hate this because I wasn't there and I couldn't possibly begin to determine what the officer saw. On top of that I am only getting their half of the story, which I have no doubt, is skewed in their direction. In fact on of my friends was stopped for speeding, the officer showed him the radar, which I don't do and am not required to do, but some do just to save the argument. My friend at this point, the only vehicle on the road in the middle of the night, has declared this police corruption because he believes the unnamed department has made their equipment 'lie' in their favor just for revenue building. I just simply responded with, maybe slow down and avoid it all together.
I hear ya. A few of my friends are LEO and the only time they here from their "friends" is when they get a ticket asking if the cop did something wrong, how they could get out of it, or what they should do about it. I have rightfully deserved almost every ticket I have recieved. I can recall two, maybe three that were BS but that is what court is for.
IMHO, the guy CLEARLY went out looking for contact with LEO and he got it. If that is what he prefers to do with his free time, so be it. Good for him for being well eduactated on the matter (or talk like he is), and excersising his rights. I actually enjoy watching this videos on youtube. For some reason I get a kick out of them whether its is from LEO or the OC'er.
KevDen2005
06-26-2012, 12:34
Thanks for getting dragged into the conversation! So you have to respond, how about initiate contact? The guy in this video quoted a couple case laws alluding to Police not able to stop someone for open carry, based on just OC. I think Spyder meant to ask "Initiate Contact" if a call came in about a suspicious person OC, but I could be wrong.
Thanks again!
Just because someone doesn't make a phone call doesn't mean police contact results in only a consensual contact. If police can articulate a reasonable suspicion ton contact a person they don't need consent. Often times I will also ask for consent so I can articulate in my report later that there were circumstances that allowed me to contact this person AND I got consent.
10mm-man
06-26-2012, 12:49
Just because someone doesn't make a phone call doesn't mean police contact results in only a consensual contact. If police can articulate a reasonable suspicion ton contact a person they don't need consent. Often times I will also ask for consent so I can articulate in my report later that there were circumstances that allowed me to contact this person AND I got consent.
That's kinda what I was thinking; even if the law says that LEO can't stop someone solely for OC, if the LEO really wants to stop you, they could wait until they could justify "reasonable suspicion" or until maybe you "jaywalked".
So maybe I am missing something and sorry if it's spelled out "between the lines", but if a call came in and you had to respond (to the OC guy) would you have to initiate contact by law? Or is it up to you at that point?
Thanks![Beer]
KevDen2005
06-26-2012, 12:57
That's kinda what I was thinking; even if the law says that LEO can't stop someone solely for OC, if the LEO really wants to stop you, they could wait until they could justify "reasonable suspicion" or until maybe you "jaywalked".
So maybe I am missing something and sorry if it's spelled out "between the lines", but if a call came in and you had to respond (to the OC guy) would you have to initiate contact by law? Or is it up to you at that point?
Thanks![Beer]
Generally yes I would need to contact him, but this goes back to what I was saying about information provided. What did the caller say? What did dispatch tell you?
10mm-man
06-26-2012, 13:05
Generally yes I would need to contact him, but this goes back to what I was saying about information provided. What did the caller say? What did dispatch tell you?
Gotcha! Thanks..........[Beer]
Generally yes I would need to contact him, but this goes back to what I was saying about information provided. What did the caller say? What did dispatch tell you?
This kinda goes back to what was said earlier, sometimes it seems that it's beyond an officer's control and the blame somewhat lies with the dispatcher- it should be SOP to determine the context of any suspicion or threat:
Caller: "There is a man with a gun on the sidewalk."
Dispatcher: "What is he doing with the gun?"
C: "Nothing, it's in a holster."
D: "Is he threatening anyone or presenting a danger to the public?"
C: "No, he's just walking, but that gun is a danger to the public!"
D: "Calm down, he's well within his rights and seems to be just minding his own business, it's fine that he has a gun and he is being responsible, nothing to worry about. Have a nice day." click!
This kinda goes back to what was said earlier, sometimes it seems that it's beyond an officer's control and the blame somewhat lies with the dispatcher- it should be SOP to determine the context of any suspicion or threat:
Caller: "There is a man with a gun on the sidewalk."
Dispatcher: "What is he doing with the gun?"
C: "Nothing, it's in a holster."
D: "Is he threatening anyone or presenting a danger to the public?"
C: "No, he's just walking, but that gun is a danger to the public!"
D: "Calm down, he's well within his rights and seems to be just minding his own business, it's fine that he has a gun and he is being responsible, nothing to worry about. Have a nice day." click!
Never happen. Dispatch isn't there to decide if a call is worth responding to. That is how lawsuits are formulated. The best they can do is to pass the info along to the responding officers, who can make an assessment on the scene about what action (if any) to take.
Never happen. Dispatch isn't there to decide if a call is worth responding to. That is how lawsuits are formulated. The best they can do is to pass the info along to the responding officers, who can make an assessment on the scene about what action (if any) to take.
Ah you're right... I guess in a more perfect world the call wouldn't even occur...
njb6X-nmW2M
This video is a little long, but it gives some examples of the types of contact officers make all over the country with all types of people.
The issue doesn't have to be "open carry."
Some people want contact with LE. Some people only post the bad contact they have with officers because it fits their agenda. Some people (like the last contact in the video) actually post the good contact. There are other videos available on the Internet documenting good contact. I wish there was more. Both the good and the bad videos make good training aids for officers.
Their are hundreds of thousands of laws and millions of citizens dealing with tens of thousands of LEOs. Math makes my head hurt, and probability of getting everything right given the numbers of variables just makes me happy when everyone walks away without any serious injury.
IMO, the greatest violation of Constitutional rights is to unlawfully deprive a citizen of their life.
Be safe.
njb6X-nmW2M
This video is a little long, but it gives some examples of the types of contact officers make all over the country with all types of people.
The issue doesn't have to be "open carry."
Some people want contact with LE. Some people only post the bad contact they have with officers because it fits their agenda. Some people (like the last contact in the video) actually post the good contact. There are other videos available on the Internet documenting good contact. I wish there was more. Both the good and the bad videos make good training aids for officers.
Their are hundreds of thousands of laws and millions of citizens dealing with tens of thousands of LEOs. Math makes my head hurt, and probability of getting everything right given the numbers of variables just makes me happy when everyone walks away without any serious injury.
IMO, the greatest violation of Constitutional rights is to unlawfully deprive a citizen of their life.
Be safe.
I will say this, they were trying to progress their agenda but some of those cops were a little difficult to deal with. I'm just upset that they're trying to push their "9/11 Truth" BS and that they're from Denver. But the last Deputy was awesome.
I will say this, they were trying to progress their agenda but some of those cops were a little difficult to deal with. I'm just upset that they're trying to push their "9/11 Truth" BS and that they're from Denver. But the last Deputy was awesome.
Everyone supports "free speech" that they agree with. The Constitution calls for support of "free speech" regardless of who agrees with the speaker. The Founding Fathers were sometimes amazing in their forethought [Beer]
Everyone supports "free speech" that they agree with. The Constitution calls for support of "free speech" regardless of who agrees with the speaker. The Founding Fathers were sometimes amazing in their forethought [Beer]
That's not entirely true... I support all free speech (as long as it doesn't inspire infringement or directly infringe on other's rights- like I don't support "free speech" that calls for illegal bounties to be placed on legal gun owners exercising their right to defend themselves when getting beaten up). I even, after being spit on, told a lady who called me a "goddamned baby killer" that I would gladly give my life to defend her right to say such vile, hate filled things, because that's her right (now the getting spit on part I did address separately and she apologized for that). [Beer]
Chad4000
06-26-2012, 15:50
.... after being spit on, ...
wow... I really wish that was something from the past.. sorry that happened to you man..
wow... I really wish that was something from the past.. sorry that happened to you man..
Nope, this happened in my home town in 2008, about 7 months or so before I deployed to Afghanistan. Short version- In a bar, with some friends I hadn't seen since I joined the Army, woman overheard my conversation about training and this and that, then decided to take a few minutes out of her life to come voice her anti-war, anti-military, hateful opinion. Gladly this was on my 1st beer and I wasn't angry. After hearing what I said to her in the friendliest of tones, the bartender/bar owner politely asked her to leave... before adding, "I hear Iran is nice this time of year, start packing bitch!"
10mm-man
06-26-2012, 15:53
The Founding Fathers were sometimes amazing in their forethought [Beer]
It's constantly under attack (what the Founding fathers) stood for..........
10mm-man
06-26-2012, 15:56
"I hear Iran is nice this time of year, start packing bitch!"
Not sure what I would have done if a lady spit on me but the words above are very fitting!!!
Chad4000
06-26-2012, 15:56
Not sure what I would have done if a lady spit on me but the words above are very fitting!!!
agreed... wow
Chad4000
06-26-2012, 15:57
Nope, this happened in my home town in 2008, about 7 months or so before I deployed to Afghanistan. Short version- In a bar, with some friends I hadn't seen since I joined the Army, woman overheard my conversation about training and this and that, then decided to take a few minutes out of her life to come voice her anti-war, anti-military, hateful opinion. Gladly this was on my 1st beer and I wasn't angry. After hearing what I said to her in the friendliest of tones, the bartender/bar owner politely asked her to leave... before adding, "I hear Iran is nice this time of year, start packing bitch!"
incredible man.... thats rediculous... thank you for the service if i hadnt ever mentioned it before...
njb6X-nmW2M
Absolutely BRAVO to the last officer. Perfect handling of the situation. As the Israelis figured out a while back, sometimes its just better to talk with people than to come out swinging.
That's not entirely true... I support all free speech (as long as it doesn't inspire infringement or directly infringe on other's rights- like I don't support "free speech" that calls for illegal bounties to be placed on legal gun owners exercising their right to defend themselves when getting beaten up). I even, after being spit on, told a lady who called me a "goddamned baby killer" that I would gladly give my life to defend her right to say such vile, hate filled things, because that's her right (now the getting spit on part I did address separately and she apologized for that). [Beer]
Spitting on someone is not "free speech." It is an assault in most jurisdictions. You chose not to press charges and I have no argument with that.
I did not say that "free speech" was absolute. There will always be some forms of speech that are not permissible by a civilized society. In the incident you have provided, the woman was free to say what she said because of the service that you, I, and millions of other citizens have given to this nation over the past two hundred plus years. The bartender was also within his rights to refuse her service if in his opinion, she was causing a disturbance in a state licensed establishment serving alcohol.
No one should be spit on. Cops get spit on a lot. I've been told by prosecutors as they "no paper" or drop charges on people who have spit on, thrown shit on, kicked, punched, etc... myself and other officers, that this is part of our job and that we knew what we were getting into when we took the job. It's not personal. At the end of the day, you go home to your family and loved ones and you move on to your next shift and your next call. One of the best ways to stay out of trouble as an officer is to remember your last call and the lessons you have learned, but treat the next citizen as if this is the first time they have ever dealt with the police and they are as innocent as you are required to presume they are. Once in a while, this will get an officer killed or seriously hurt. After all, we knew what we were getting into when we took the job. [Luck]
Be safe.
BPTactical
06-26-2012, 21:48
Dupey dupey du - sounds like a Sinatra song [ROFL1]
Gawd yur old- Thats the Oompa Loompa tune from "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory"
No catnip for you!!!
[Muaha]
Seriously though-If you are going to make the choice to OC, you had better be able to deal with what it may bring.....
Seriously though-If you are going to make the choice to OC, you had better be able to deal with what it may bring.....
I agree... regardless of your thoughts and knowledge on the laws regarding OC, some people out there either don't know it's legal, or don't care and just plain dislike guns, and will by ignorance or fear/hatred of guns call 911 on you to report you carrying a gun in public. While this is very angering- I'm sure if I was in a position to confront the RP who called in on my OCing, I would want to know if it was their ignorance or detest of firearms that was the cause and either inform or set them straight on the issue. Something to the effect of "If you don't like the fact that it's perfectly legal to carry a gun in the state of Colorado, feel free to move to England, you'll never encounter that!" These liberal d-bags really get under my skin... [Rant1]
Well damn... this thread grew yesterday! Anyway, I still haven't had time to really "talk" to one of the local cops about this... sorta... I was walking home from work and I had one of my USP's in it's case and the only cop who passed by me yelled out the window "nice sidearm". I think they might be a little more laxed here... [Beer] Still though, I will catch one and ask!
BlasterBob
06-27-2012, 18:49
spyder, run thru a few red lights on Main and you might make contact with one of the local LEO's. On second thought that probably wouldn't work since so few folks here pay much attention to traffic devices.[Rant1]
KevDen2005
06-27-2012, 20:23
Well damn... this thread grew yesterday! Anyway, I still haven't had time to really "talk" to one of the local cops about this... sorta... I was walking home from work and I had one of my USP's in it's case and the only cop who passed by me yelled out the window "nice sidearm". I think they might be a little more laxed here... [Beer] Still though, I will catch one and ask!
You gotta love the jurisdictions that stop you just to bs with you about guns...right?
spyder, run thru a few red lights on Main and you might make contact with one of the local LEO's. On second thought that probably wouldn't work since so few folks here pay much attention to traffic devices.[Rant1]
I was going to say... Isn't that normal here?
You gotta love the jurisdictions that stop you just to bs with you about guns...right?
I can't wait to ask one of them about it honestly. I think it's even better when they yell out at you about your gun when just driving by! [Flower]
KevDen2005
06-28-2012, 07:10
I can't wait to ask one of them about it honestly. I think it's even better when they yell out at you about your gun when just driving by! [Flower]
Was he really that busy that he couldn't stop and chat with you? I mean, come on...[ROFL1]
Forgot to update this... Anyway, I was pulled over yesterday on the way back from Pueblo by a CSP for not having a front license plate, so I talked to the officer about this, I also talked to my new neighbor (trinidad officer) about how he is supposed to handle calls about someone with a gun. Neighbor first.
Local PD says that it doesn't happen that oftern here. When it does though, they do have to respond. When they come up though, they look at the situation to see if your doing anything illegal, or suspicious, and take it from there. If someone is brandishing a gun, well, you can imagine how they would react to that. However, if it is just someone with a holstered gun, they will make contact, BS about the gun a little, and move on. My neighbor has seen youtube videos like the one this thread is about and thinks those cops are "retarded", his word, not mine. [Beer] He also said that all the local officers here are aware of the rights of gun owners.
The statey who pulled me over said basically the same thing, and then told me to go get a front license plate.
Both said however that they have to respond to the call and make contact.
kanekutter05
08-20-2012, 14:46
I totally agree with you. This guy was being a real ass. I guess walking around with a gun isn't considered being "suspicious" of doing something illegal.
Could had just handed his ID over and get it over with instead of rambling his mouth.
I know this was almost two months ago...but that guy couldn't have been serious could he?
Forgot to update this... Anyway, I was pulled over yesterday on the way back from Pueblo by a CSP for not having a front license plate, so I talked to the officer about this, I also talked to my new neighbor (trinidad officer) about how he is supposed to handle calls about someone with a gun. Neighbor first.
Local PD says that it doesn't happen that oftern here. When it does though, they do have to respond. When they come up though, they look at the situation to see if your doing anything illegal, or suspicious, and take it from there. If someone is brandishing a gun, well, you can imagine how they would react to that. However, if it is just someone with a holstered gun, they will make contact, BS about the gun a little, and move on. My neighbor has seen youtube videos like the one this thread is about and thinks those cops are "retarded", his word, not mine. [Beer] He also said that all the local officers here are aware of the rights of gun owners.
The statey who pulled me over said basically the same thing, and then told me to go get a front license plate.
Both said however that they have to respond to the call and make contact.
Isn't there a SC decision stating that officers never HAVE TO respond? Or were they more talking in the vein of departmental procedure?
Rucker61
08-20-2012, 14:59
Isn't there a SC decision stating that officers never HAVE TO respond? Or were they more talking in the vein of departmental procedure?
The latter is my bet.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.