View Single Post
Old March 16, 2010, 12:00 AM   #49
maestro pistolero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,086
Quote:
The police have to be careful because the minute they choose NOT to respond and something goes south then they burn for it.
But they don't burn, really. What's wrong with dispatcher asking a few questions of the caller, such as: Is he threatening anybody? Is he pointing the gun at anyone? Does he seem angry? What is he doing right now? What is he saying? If there is clearly no issue other than an individual lawfully carrying a firearm then there is no reason to dispatch whatsoever.

This is where we are ultimately going if bearing is upheld in future cases, and it is exactly what is done in loaded-open-carry states like Vermont, and Arizona. If we really want to learn what works in the area of policing open carry of guns, why not turn to the folks that do it every day. LE in these pro-carry states are aghast at the way citizens are treated in CA, and other similar places.

As most of us know by now, LE has no duty to protect, but they do have a duty not to violate civil rights.

If an officer proned-out an individual for no other reason than the fact that he/she is lawfully carrying a weapon, they WOULD get burned for it, and they should.

This is what is done in many jurisdictions. So, if LE DOES respond and observes the subject of the call gassing up his car, or mowing the lawn or dropping off dry cleaning, or walking the dog, and no evidence of any threat or a crime exists, or even disorderly conduct, that should be the end of it. If it's CA, the responding officer may elect to do a loaded check, because in that state, for now, the pistol must be unloaded. But THAT'S IT.

Last edited by maestro pistolero; March 16, 2010 at 12:17 AM.
maestro pistolero is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04751 seconds with 7 queries