Testing of rights/testing police

[WARRIOR I]

I think this is an issue we all need to work on, since the consequences effect us all. These attempts to provoke the police and to 'make statements' will only hurt us in the long run. Members on all the firearms website forums need to speak out and discourage the practice whenever the issue comes up. Just my opinion.

[Closing The Gap]

I primarily open carry, as does my wife. We also always have a recording device with us when doing so. Both are there for our protection. Neither are ever put out for public consumption. I don't see anything wrong with doing something that isn't illegal. Especially that which is afforded you by our Constitution as a right. The only reason we got our CPL's is that Michigan has idiotic rules about transportation of firearms.

[trg42wraglefragle]

Just because they have a right to do it doesn't mean they should exercise the right in places that are going to attract negative attention.

99% of open carry people are probably decent people and do so in areas where not to out right cause panic and upset people.
And the remaining 1% are willing to push their rights to the very limit until they have the rights removed, do they not realize that the average citizen is not going to agree with them and would be more likely to support gun control?

I am legal allowed to take a firearm on public transport provided it is not loaded, it is suggested that it be in a bag or case but it is not a requirement.
Now if I ever did actually do this without a doubt our equivalent of your SWAT would be there in a flash, I wouldn't get in trouble for it, but no doubt it'd break the news and cause a huge amount bad publicity for gun owners.

Your open carrying a pistol for self defense wouldn't cause much concern but carrying an evil "assault rifle" in public after recent events really isn't going to do much good.
I know if they are within their rights it's not up to me to complain or question them, and I don't even live in the same country. But if their actions effect other gun owners and their rights then I believe I am allowed to say something.

[Closing The Gap]

We have seen two instances where "their"(not sure why our community isn't supporting each other) actions have effected things both positively and negatively. Should we give up the positive to forego the possible negatives? I hate to be cliche but what would Rosa Parks do? Sorry I don't know and people from New Zealand that fought for their rights afforded by its constitution?

Edit: two instances mentioned on this thread. Kalifornia and Ohio open carry.

[noelf2]

These attempts to provoke the police and to 'make statements' will only hurt us in the long run.

Maybe so, but I can tell you that cops see these videos too. And they don't want to star in one (at least in a negative way). I can think of no way that these people making these videos has hurt me in the least. In fact, the video recording of policy officers performing their work has probably had a positive effect in their demeanor, especially when they know they are being recorded. Not saying provoking cops is something I'd do, just saying some make mountains out of mole hills.

[ClydeFrog]

I posted a item a few months ago on TFL where a young woman with a open carry(who was from Texas) recorded her field contact(sometimes called a field interview).
The woman IMO lied about the circumstances with the female LE officer in her YouTube post. She was polite and compliant in the contact then posted mean & condesinding remarks online.
She seemed very immature and not a good example of a concealed carry license holder.

She should get a hobby or start doing crossword puzzles or Sodoku. Lol.

ClydeFrog

[myusername]

This argument is constantly online. I am of mixed feelings. On one hand I really think people need to assert their rights, especially regarding misinformed police.

A lot of the problems are police denying the right to open carry by using knee jerks laws like "creating a public disturbance" "failing to follow officer directions" etc. to restrict open carry. A great example is the Las Vegas Strip. It's legal to OC there - just go ahead and try it. Wait, let me get my video camera I need a good laugh after metro hauls you off to jail for obstructing the sidewalk.

I think the point most people are making it there is a time and a place. The middle of town, or a city council meeting isn't the place to open carry in a sociable society. That is why people started concealing their guns in the first place. But, in a rural environment, hiking, camping, hunting, going to or from it seems perfectly reasonable to me, and I do it frequently.

I usually OC when I'm hiking. I live in a OC state and hold a CC permit. Once in a great while I will OC a 1911 on my way to the range, of if I stop at a gun store on the way. But usually I wait until I reach my destination, otherwise invariably I end up needing to go to the post office or the mall - and nothing makes you look like a stupid neanderthal more than walking around with an empty holster on your belt.

[noelf2]

Just because they have a right to do it doesn't mean they should exercise the right in places that are going to attract negative attention.

A friend of mine told me that he went to a restaurant/bar in Norfolk Virginia many years ago and saw a guy open carrying. He told me he left the place right away and called the police. I told him, very calmly, that the guy wasn't actually breaking the law. He had the right to open carry there, but not conceal (at that time, now it's ok in Virginia to conceal in a restaurant/bar if you aren't drinking). That same friend is now an open carrier himself. He became educated, no longer ignorant and afraid. This happens all the time here, and the laws are getting even better for carry in the vast majority of states for either open or concealed carry. Most people, here, are either not illogical, or simply don't notice or care.

99% of open carry people are probably decent people and do so in areas where not to out right cause panic and upset people.
And the remaining 1% are willing to push their rights to the very limit until they have the rights removed, do they not realize that the average citizen is not going to agree with them and would be more likely to support gun control?

47.2 % of all statistics are made up on the spot. Also, your assumption here should be confined to the boundaries of your country. The opposite seems to be happening here in the states. Additionally, fear of losing a right, by exercising that right, is like not having that right in the first place.

[SgtLumpy]

fear of losing a right, by exercising that right, is like not having that right in the first place.

I don't exercise my right because I have a fear of losing it.

I also don't carry a gun that looks like a selective fire MP down a residential street, inviting neighborhood alarm, then make a YouTube video where I verbally taunt the police.

In Phoenix, right now (it may be over now) we're having a trial about a guy that dressed in Arab garb and stood on a busy street corner with a replica RPG. Tons of people, fearful for their lives, called the cops. Cops came, verified that the RPG was fake, learned that the guy was making a YouTube, cops left.

Later, after a bunch of citizen complaints, the DA charged the father of the actor, whose idea it was to make the YouTube. Those people were genuinely fearful. I would be too. This is a pretty extreme case but it's not a whole lot farther than a guy walking down the street "with a machine gun".

Being a responsible gun owner means exactly that. Be responsible. If you feel you have the need to "teach ignorant cops a lesson" do it responsibly. Confrontation in a field interrogation with both sides armed is NOT an example of RESPONSIBLE.

Come'on. Be a good example for OUR side. Not a good example for the OTHER side.


Sgt Lumpy

[noelf2]

I guess since you quoted me, you are speaking to me about sides..? Read my posts. I don't open carry in public. I don't feel the need to teach someone a lesson. If others do, I really don't care as long as they are lawful. I don't see how I'm being a bad example for anyone. I will not try to keep people from exercising their rights no matter how stupid I think they are. I would prefer for people to be respectful of the law and not harass cops on purpose, but if they are harassed by a cop, I'd like to see the video. Be a good example for the constitution!

[trg42wraglefragle]

I just cannot conceive why one would choose to carry an MP5 or an AR15 down the street just so they can video the police and try make the police out to be the bad guys. It is their right to be able to open carry, but along with rights come responsibilities, and it is within the polices rights, in fact it is their job to make sure you are fulfilling the open carrying citizens are operating within their rights.

It does seem that it is predominantly younger people who are doing it just so they can post videos of so called police harassment and insight a negative view on the police. They seem to know all about their rights, but many people these days forget that with rights come responsibilities, and in this case the police are doing their job to enforce these people are exercising their rights still under the law.

It also surprises me how many comments there are on the Youtube videos with pure hatred towards the police and how much better it would be if they didn't exist. Surely if they took 1 second to think about what would happen if there were no rules and no one to enforce them it would be chaos?

[noelf2]

Well your original post wasn't specific about ARs or MP5s. I find that a bit over the top too, but wouldn't suggest laws against it - and certainly some people can't conceive things that others can. I can't conceive of why anyone would go to church and pray to fantastical entities, but I'm not vocal or bloggy about their right to do so (this post being the exception I guess). I agree that people should be considerate, but I'm not about to order them to be, and what right do you or I have to judge them? Police, however, are public servants. They are paid by us to uphold the law (not to protect us from people exercising their rights). Over here, cops are now being trained not to fall into traps set by irresponsible people exercising their rights for purposes other than self defense. As soon as the cops figure out that you know the law, they know what you're up to. They are getting "trained" and desensitized to this behavior, as are citizens that see people exercising their rights to open carry. I'm sure the videos you see online are far from the norm in any legal open carry area. While you don't see the value in those videos though, I do, and I'm surprised that you've seen so many of them to be able to gather metrics and make assessments (entertaining?). They really are educational IMHO, and I'm somewhere over a half century old.

BTW- you keep saying that "with rights come responsibilities". By far the most important responsibilities regarding rights is practicing them, protecting them, and preserving them. Over here across the pond, our police, military, and federally appointed folks all swear to uphold and protect our constitution. Our "Bill of Rights". And one of those rights is to be left alone unless we are breaking a law.

[dakota.potts]

Rights are unconditional. They come with no responsibilities. I don't have to maintain a credit score to vote.

But it's common sense to handle things a certain way. I'm even for citizens open carrying a long gun. I don't care if it's a SCAR or G36 or AK47. But when you have it on a sling in front of you with your hand on the grip walking down the street looking to confront cops, I think you've gone a little far. You carry what you think will protect you best within the confines of the law. If you're carrying because you honestly think you need it and you're legal in doing so, I don't care if it's an M249. That's your right. But harassing a cop over anything for the entertainment of bored people clicking through YouTube doesn't sit right to me.

[Closing The Gap]

In my opinion the act of walking around with any weapon properly holstered or slung is a 2a right being exercised. The rest is an exercise of 1a and 4a when the police become involved. I believe these exercises are necessary less we sit back and watch our rights disappear in silence.

Dakota as to the idea of having it slung forward with hands on.. I have watched many of the videos since this discussion started. The ones Ive seen involving rifles have been slung to the rear. People keep bringing up the fact that theyre looking for confrontation. In some cases I would agree, however if they're not breaking the law then in my opinion its the police who are looking for a confrontation when they stop an individual exercising their rights. Just because they post something on youtube doesnt a vigilante make. Youtube is a big deal these days. Some young and old folks use it to post all kinds of things in an attempt to gain views. My wife and I record every interaction we have with police but choose to not put it on youtube because for us its not something we are into. I dont need another hobby...

To those of you that will undoubtedly say but the police were called and they have to respond to a frightened citizens pleas. This is true but just like anything else that citizen being ignorant of the laws is not an excuse to abuse the 911 system or for that matter the officer being ignorant of the laws isnt either(for citizens and police alike). Ive watched videos where the police do a drive by and thats it. Or at best they stop, roll down a window, find that the individual isnt a threat and leave within seconds. Why isnt this the model as opposed to the overwhelmig model of stop and confront in force? Why not teach the operators to remind folks of the laws? Some videos state that multiple calls were made to 911. In each call a simple "what were they doing with the firearm?" could be asked and that information relayed to the officer as well as a reminder to the caller that simply walking down the street with a firearm isnt illegal.

Lots of people claim that this is going to cause us to look bad and theyre afraid itll hurt us. I think sitting back and doing nothing is hurting us more than anything. Living in fear isnt part of who I am and wont ever be.

[noelf2]

Rights are unconditional. They come with no responsibilities.

Well, I wouldn't go that far. You may have freedom of speech, but you obviously can be arrested for saying/yelling things that disturb the peace, if that's your goal. So if your goal is to carry an AR15 to disturb the peace, I can't blame a cop for hauling you in and checking you out (psych eval?). But there should be no laws against carrying an AR15 with a 3 point sling if that's all you have, and you can calmly articulate that to a police officer that's checking you out (however you have no obligation to enter a consensual conversation with a cop). They can tell if you are a wacko or a trouble maker based on your attitude and body language. They would like to see your ID, but that's usually an unlawful request and unnecessary anyway. So I think these folks with the cameras do a public service, in a way. I've got better things to do than to get harassed and hauled in to jail, just to be let free in a couple hours with no more than a video to brag about. Maybe if I were younger.....

Lots of people claim that this is going to cause us to look bad and theyre afraid itll hurt us. I think sitting back and doing nothing is hurting us more than anything. Living in fear isnt part of who I am and wont ever be.

Right on, brother! In fact, the opposite seems to be happening in the states. The more 2A is in the limelight, the quicker people are getting educated. For the most part, it seems, in our favor.

[ClydeFrog]

What you can do & what you should do are 2 different things.
As a firearms owner & armed professional for nearly 25 years, I don't think owning or carrying firearms just as fad or political statement is the right thing to do.
I, for one, wouldn't open carry to "engage civil discourse" with other citizens or to be a political figure for 2A causes.
I may update my CC license soon which has a new state law related to it saying open carry is legal under certain conditions(like if you bend over to tie a shoe and a sworn LE officer spots the firearm or if a strong breeze blows your jacket open).
If someone asks me about gun laws or what the state CC regulations are, then I'd tell them but I wouldn't be a shill for the gun industry.
I'd add too that many street cops are more concerned with firearms being stolen or new/entry level gun owners not being able to retain a firearm in a violent assault.
These are valid points to an extent but they(the sworn LE officers) should be aware of the open carry/gun laws or changes. It's not John or Mary Citizen's job to train/brief police officers & a armed citizen can't know or be aware of every safety concern a sworn LE officer may have when they come into contact with them.

[noelf2]

I, for one, wouldn't open carry to "engage civil discourse" with other citizens or to be a political figure for 2A causes.

Me neither, but I don't begrudge those that do.

I'd add too that many street cops are more concerned with firearms being stolen or new/entry level gun owners not being able to retain a firearm in a violent assault.

Can you cite your sources? I've never heard that from a cop before. Heard it from regular Joes now and then though.

It's not John or Mary Citizen's job to train/brief police officers & a armed citizen can't know or be aware of every safety concern a sworn LE officer may have when they come into contact with them.

I disagree (but that's me). If I see law enforcement harassing someone who isn't breaking any law, i think I would let the officer know that I'll be a good witness for the citizen without being confrontational. And, if I have a way to record the event, I certainly would. Difference is that I'm not looking for, or hoping for, a confrontation. I guess there are many people who would like to see someone arrested when they are looking for a confrontation while exercising their right to carry, or video record policy performing their duty, etc. I would get no satisfaction from that at all, the "haha they got what they deserved" reaction. I would get more satisfaction seeing a professional law enforcement officer that handles these situations in a way that is respectful and courteous, even when the citizen isn't. There are lots of those videos too. Oh, and I'm NOT willing to give up any rights because of the concerns of sworn LE officers if/when they approach me.

[Uncle Buck]

I open carry around the homestead and sometimes I have to run into town for something. I have honestly forgotten I had the gun strapped on.

Only once did a police officer approach me and ask for my identification. It was one of those moments when as soon as you spot him, you remember you still have your sidearm strapped to your waist.

He asked for my ID, and although I did not have to give it to him, I did. He told me he (or the police) had gotten a call about an armed man at the shopping complex. We chatted a little while, I put the gun in the truck and went about my business.

As others have mentioned, the police have an obligation to check out things that are reported to them or they face even more problems. (Officer, there is an armed man by the elementary school... OK, I'll look in to it after I finish my lunch.)

[NH_Pilot]

In NH, the larger police departments are doing their job by responding to folks calling in their fears but seem to handle the calls professionally. The seacoast has at least one individual who is exercising the 2nd amendment and NH rights but seems to be patient with folks who do over react and has a relatively good relationship with the law enforcement folks who are obligated to occasionally turn out.

The most recent news article is available for now at http://www.seacoastonline.com/articl...NEWS-306280429

Persistence may result in progress.

Wes

[TXAZ]

One of the great things about living in the United States is that you're allowed to be stupid.

One of the unfortunate things about living in the United States is that your lawful albeit stupid actions may greatly impact others in a very negative way.

One of the great things about having lived and traveled overseas is seeing how other countries 'suffer fools harshly', taking the repercussions of stupidity out on the person exhibiting that behavior, and not the public in general.

I'm happy to reside in the United States, but realize that many of our rights are a single idiot / bozo act away from vanishing. In some ways that puts the onus on the rest of us to encourage restraint.

[thallub]

When the issue of open carry as a political statement comes up i'm reminded by the guy in TN who carried a Draco in the park: He painted the gun orange so the cops would not shoot him. He lost his court case and his concealed carry permit.

[TXAZ]

thallub noted

...painted the gun orange so the cops would not shoot him.

Makes you wonder, and reminds me of the Darwin Awards, and why some don't make the top of the list.

[Tom Servo]

They seem to know all about their rights

The funny thing is, many of them don't. They've memorized a few talking points. Case in point: this officer in Corvalis, who completely turned the encounter in his favor, and who had a better knowledge of basic civics than the guy trying to get a rise out of him.

[Sarge]

Just a few of thoughts from an old cop.

Legal is legal. Period.

Legal activities aren't necessarily smart ones.

Intentionally tying up officers, to make a point, is an unnecessary diversion of manpower and can lead to a delayed response to an actual emergency.

If you play that game on enough cops, sooner or later it's going to end badly for at least one of you. Murphy is everywhere.

A hidden gun attracts no negative attention, it offers one the option of fading away unnoticed- or the element of surprise. Never underestimate the value of any of them.

[ClydeFrog]

To answer post #42, author & sworn LE officer Massad Ayoob wrote a recent gun press article about weapon rentention holsters/open carry. He brought up some of the points I made here.
The NRA also quoted a Florida county sheriff(who has since retired) who testified before the Florida Assembly. The sheriff; Coates or Caoetes(who I think was in Pasco County for many years) griped about how private citizens lacked formal skill training and their firearms would be snatched or stolen in real confrontations, .
There are 2 Florida sheriffs with similar names(but different spellings) so don't hold me to it.

As for the "good witness" bit, Id advise contacting the LE agency's non emergency phone # then requesting a area supervisor or patrol supervisor/watch commander. You can speak with them & explain what you saw or heard. Many sheriffs & police chiefs now have emails or direct lines to address citizen complaints.
NOTE: Not all police supervisors or commanders will be honest & many use the ole CYA mindset, . Be ready to go to the media or hire a atty if things go sideways.
BTW, Im not "cop bashing", I had a dispute with a small PD chief(30 sworn LE officers) in the late 1990s. The same chief was later convicted on several felony counts for stealing drug $$$. I can provide more details by PM if you want to research the details.

Id close by saying that many chiefs & supervisors are making efforts to improve conditions. Sanford Florida(the site of the Zimmerman-Martin event) hired a new police chief from IL who went to the highly respected FBI National Academy. Chief Smith started a new SOP requiring Sanford PD officers to wear a small DV camera & recording of all field interviews/traffic stops.

ClydeFrog