The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 23, 2012, 05:49 PM   #1
stealintv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 20, 2010
Location: south chi-town burbs
Posts: 107
Philly cops harass man for open carry

I searched and don't believe this is a repost. Please remove if so mods... thanks/sorry.

A friend sent me this link. I do not intend a drive-by posting. Please watch the video and read the article. Then, read my question to open carriers below.

videohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=agWde2tpfx4

storyhttp://www.newsworks.org/index.php/l...m/47260-guns-/


Since Illinois will probably never let citizens carry, I was wondering how those that open carry feel about a bad guy seeing their firearm and possibly making you the first target. Do you feel you may be targeted, or do you believe by someone seeing your firearm they may be hesitant about going on with their malicious intentions? Is open carry a deterrent in other words? Do any of you that open carry sometimes cover it up? As soon as we get Pat Quinn out of office, Illinois may have a shot at concealed carry again. I've been going to the IGOLD rally for three years, and every year it seems like more people are showing up. Anyway, rambling. On to my thoughts on the video.

I believe the police should question someone at least for a carry permit, but it seems like the second officer had stopped this guy before. PD were just messing with him because they want him to comply with their beliefs and not allow him to do want he wants as the state law says he has the option to do reference open carry.

Thanks for your opinions and sorry, again, if this was a report.

Hope you all had a good turkey day.

Cheers!
__________________
Concealed Carry in Illinois!
The 50th state to recognize the Bill of Rights...
www.illinoiscarry.com

Last edited by Shane Tuttle; November 24, 2012 at 01:20 PM. Reason: Disparaging remark
stealintv is offline  
Old November 23, 2012, 06:35 PM   #2
Master Blaster 2
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2011
Posts: 895
This is old..been posted before. Nothing to do with Chicago. Move to Iowa where i live. No issues. We can carry.
Master Blaster 2 is offline  
Old November 23, 2012, 06:41 PM   #3
chris in va
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 26, 2004
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 12,519
The article states he was "brandishing" which is utter nonsense. Open carry does not constitute brandishing.

The California law was amended to disallow open carry after several groups there staged gatherings and dared LEO's to test their resolve. I encourage open carry, but doing so respectfully is the trick.

I've lived in KY five years. Only twice have I ever seen someone OC. My 15 seconds of fame was a brief interview on a local TV news station during the church OC event, but the pastor has since moved elsewhere and I don't think it caught on very well.
chris in va is offline  
Old November 23, 2012, 06:49 PM   #4
Master Blaster 2
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2011
Posts: 895
I used to open carry a Ruger MK1 in a holster when I rode my bike to the IKE's Club on the edge of town on my bicycle when i was 12 Yr old.
Times have changed.
Havning a Cocealed licence for about 40 years I would never carry open and have not.
But what ever floates you boat.
Master Blaster 2 is offline  
Old November 23, 2012, 07:01 PM   #5
armed_librarian
Member
 
Join Date: July 16, 2011
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 71
Open Carry

I must say, I have conflicted views on open carry. That being said, I live in Indiana and can choose either open or concealed carry. I open carry at least once or twice a week in public. Normally late at night and when I won't find myself visiting highly populated places (like wal-mart or other large stores). I do a lot of driving and it is much more comfortable to leave it on my hip. I can say with quite a bit of certainty that my open carrying of a firearm has deterred at least one crime. I was visiting with a female gas station attendant around 2am and a man, the only other one in the store, was walking around glancing at me as if he was waiting for me to leave. When he caught site of my HK USP he left abruptly without purchasing anything. Was he truly waiting for me to leave? Who knows, probably not. But I like to think I may have prevented something bad from happening to the woman.

As far as making me a target; I don't believe in it. This is the way I look at it, if something is going down I should already consider myself a target. This is where situational awareness comes into play. More and more I find myself constantly scanning the people around me, I try to keep tabs on exits, and I like keeping my back to a wall. I realize saying this is going to make me sound paranoid and who knows what else, but hey, if it saves me or my loved ones some trouble 20 years from now, it was worth every moment of it.
armed_librarian is offline  
Old November 23, 2012, 09:11 PM   #6
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by article
Stanford confirmed that a license to carry firearms affords the bearer the right to carry a concealed weapon in Philadelphia, but also affirmed that police officers have the right to investigate any individual seen carrying a firearm.
However, another case in Philadelphia a few months ago proved that they do NOT have that "right." In fact, the department supposedly stipulated in the settlement that they had begun to retrain officers so they would know that they do NOT have this so-called "right."

Apparently, they lied.

http://forum.pafoa.org/open-carry-14...ladelphia.html
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old November 23, 2012, 09:55 PM   #7
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
I don't think the PPD representative misspoke or lied when he said the PPD has the right to investigate. Going and talking to someone and initiating a consensual encounter is different from detaining someone/performing a Terry stop. Unfortunately, the problem in those types of situations is in practice, people, both LEO and John/Jane Q. Public, frequently don't know/understand the difference between a consensual encounter and a detention/Terry stop.

As for OC making people a target, or being a deterrent I don't think there's enough evidence to make a case for either.
sigcurious is offline  
Old November 23, 2012, 10:02 PM   #8
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,326
When the cop calls for backup, it is not a consensual conversation.

Fundamental rule: Do not -- EVER -- give a Philadelphia police officer the benefit of the doubt.

If you think I'm being overly harsh in that assessment, lurk on the Pennsylvania Firearms Owners Association (PAFOA) forum for awhile and read some of the discussions about how the Philadelphia police illegally harass people who dare to wear firearms within city limits. If a "citizen" doesn't know the difference between a Terry stop and a consensual encounter, that's understandable. If a police officer doesn't know the difference, he or she needs to be off the streets, because that difference is crucial and can mean the difference between a casual conversation and a false arrest.

Terry v. Ohio was in 1968. That means the principle of what constitutes a legitimate "Terry stop" has been firmly established for 44 YEARS. That's essentially two entire GENERATIONS of police officers. It is taught (AFAIK) in every police academy in the country. If a particular officer (or a particular department) hasn't "gotten it," it's because they don't want to get it. And that's intolerable in a self-styled nation of laws.

Last edited by Aguila Blanca; November 23, 2012 at 10:08 PM.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old November 23, 2012, 10:16 PM   #9
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
I'm not saying that it wasn't an unlawful detainment, just pointing out that the basic practice of an officer going and talking to someone isn't unlawful in itself. I think the PPD representative carefully chose his words as to not lie but give the impression that the action was lawful.

Admittedly, I only made it to the portion of the video where the officer decided to ramble about tactics, but in that time the person never asked if he was free to leave, tried to leave, or asked whether or not he was being detained or under arrest for something.

It doesn't make the officers actions any less dubious, but if one is in a locale where officers are known to harass OC'ers it's to one's benefit to know the laws pertaining to encounters with LEO and exercise that knowledge.
sigcurious is offline  
Old November 23, 2012, 10:17 PM   #10
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,258
This is posted in the Law & Civil Rights forum. Discussion of the practicality of open carry belongs in Tactics & Training.

This is the closest I can see in the OP regarding something germane to this forum:

Quote:
I believe the police should question someone at least for a carry permit
That will depend on the locality for the most part. Different states have different laws on carry. Pennsylvania law is pretty clear that there's statewide preemption, but Philadelphia is known for sometimes doing things their own way (there's a weird bit of verbiage about "cities of the first class" IIRC).

Let's keep this thread to the legal concerns.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old November 23, 2012, 10:25 PM   #11
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
That will depend on the locality for the most part. Different states have different laws on carry. Pennsylvania law is pretty clear that there's statewide preemption, but Philadelphia is known for sometimes doing things their own way (there's a weird bit of verbiage about "cities of the first class" IIRC).
Correct. A "city of the first class" under PA law is a city with a population greater than 1 million. Since Pittsburgh is currently only around 300,000 or so, Philadelphia is the only city of the first class in the state, and is probably the only one there ever will be.

The only practical difference this makes to us gun owners is that for most of Pennsylvania, concealed carry requires a license but open carry is legal without any license. In a "city of the first class," ALL carry of handguns requires a license. With a license, both open and concealed carry are legal in Philadelphia.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old November 24, 2012, 12:41 AM   #12
raimius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 1,317
Quote:
I believe the police should question someone at least for a carry permit
Why do you believe that?

There are plenty of other licensed/permitted activities that most people would think it VERY odd for the police to question them. I don't normally see the police stopping people to make sure they have driver's licenses, building permits, medical licenses, etc.
raimius is offline  
Old November 24, 2012, 01:45 AM   #13
hermannr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 24, 2011
Posts: 730
Quote:
I believe the police should question someone at least for a carry permit,
Have you ever read the US Supreme court decision on Prouse v Deleware?

Random stops to check licenses are illegal. Doesn't matter if it is becasue you are driving a car, or OCing...that is as you are assuming you need a license to OC. You do not need a license to OC in 29 states, including WA where I live.

You must be presuming that OC is an unlawful activity...or that it "may" be lawful only if you have a license...the law does not work that way. You are to be presumed innocent, unless proven guilty...you are also to be secure in you private affairs, unless you have done something openly unlawful, and LE can get a warrent for it.

I have OC'd since 1970, and have never been hasseled, I did have one time where someone had open stated he was going to beat me to a pulp (I have no idea why) until he noticed I was armed. and then he could not leave the area fast enough. My carry never left it's holster, but he left and I was safe, that is what counts.

My experience has been, OC and you do not have to worry...the criminals will just go looking for someone that has a much lower likelyhook of doing Them harm.
hermannr is offline  
Old November 24, 2012, 04:34 PM   #14
stealintv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 20, 2010
Location: south chi-town burbs
Posts: 107
Thanks for all the speedy replies. To those that did not like my statement about the police stopping someone at least for a permit. I come from the wonderful South-west suburbs of Chicago. We are not allowed to carry anything. I have no idea what it is like; thus the questions. I appreciate the input. I guess I won't understand the culture without doing it. I am used to being questioned about everything. And you better comply or you will be on the ground. Those Philly cops are just like most of them around Chicago. That is why the video rang so true.

In my original post I said
Quote:
I believe the police should question someone at least for a carry permit, but it seems like the second officer had stopped this guy before. PD were just messing with him because they want him to comply with their beliefs and not allow him to do want he wants as the state law says he has the option to do reference open carry.
I am basing that off of my previous interactions and witnessing others police interactions here in IL. I guess I should have asked if the video was similar police interactions with other OCers in different areas of the USA.

Thanks again for your input and sorry I missed this in the other forum section.

Cheers!
__________________
Concealed Carry in Illinois!
The 50th state to recognize the Bill of Rights...
www.illinoiscarry.com
stealintv is offline  
Old November 24, 2012, 05:03 PM   #15
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
Quote:
I guess I should have asked if the video was similar police interactions with other OCers in different areas of the USA.
Legally speaking, in my state there is no law that makes OC illegal, as such it requires no permit/license that could be asked for(State preemption in regards to firearms law does not allow counties/cities to make their own laws regarding firearms). In the city I live in, Las Vegas, the LVMPD got into trouble enough times, and in the state in general, dedicated people wrote enough letters etc, that interactions like this rarely happen anymore.
sigcurious is offline  
Old November 24, 2012, 07:34 PM   #16
Warrior1256
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 11, 2012
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 156
I've seen numerous videos where police stop and question anyone they see carrying openly. I would have no problem showing the police I.D. (although I am not required by law to do this) but if they continued to question me after that I would ask them if I am being detained or am I free to go.
Warrior1256 is offline  
Old November 24, 2012, 08:18 PM   #17
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warrior1256
I've seen numerous videos where police stop and question anyone they see carrying openly. I would have no problem showing the police I.D. (although I am not required by law to do this) but if they continued to question me after that I would ask them if I am being detained or am I free to go.
And what's your plan when Officer Friendly says you are not being detained but you are not free to leave? (Or, as one officer famously stated in a case I read about over a year ago, "No, you can't leave. I'm investigating an investigation here.")

You certainly can't argue against logic like that ...
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old November 24, 2012, 08:39 PM   #18
scpapa
Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2007
Location: Central South Carolina
Posts: 68
^^^^ If I am not free to go, I want to speak to my lawyer, thank you.

Don't know if it will do any good, but it might make him think again.

Rick
__________________
NRA Training Counselor
NRA Advanced Pistol Instructor
NRA RTBAV Regional Counselor
NRA Benefactor Member
scpapa is offline  
Old November 25, 2012, 02:40 PM   #19
Sharpsdressed Man
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 21, 2009
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 1,176
"If I am not free to leave, what are you going to arrest me for if I DO leave? We might just have to get this ARREST more clearly DEFINED."
Sharpsdressed Man is offline  
Old November 25, 2012, 05:48 PM   #20
Willie D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 24, 2007
Posts: 1,116
Philly police currently have a "stop and frisk" directive aimed at getting illegally carried firearms off scuzzbags who shouldn't be armed. As someone who has to worry about said scuzzbags in my neighborhood I don't think that is necessarily a bad idea.


The problem is that I don't think the PPD has squared that policy with how to deal with OC activists. Do you leave OC'ers alone but go after "suspicious types" hanging out on the corner?

There is obviously a racial element at play here too. Reading accounts on PAFOA you'll frequently see something along the lines of "why are they bothering a clean cut white guy like me?" which suggests that police should simply ignore clean cut white guys with visible weapons and focus on non-whites with suspected weapons which is untenable from a policy standpoint. Indeed the whole "stop and frisk" policy has civil rights issues but one criticism since it's inception has been the policy being applied overwhelming to non-whites (not especially unusual due to demographics of high crime areas). Ignoring well dressed individuals with firearms might in practice be ok from a crime fighting perspective but is probably an ACLU suit waiting to happen.


After losing at least one high profile OC lawsuit the PPD has done some work educating officers about OC but it doesn't appear every officer got the message. There isn't really any excuse for officers who don't know the law but that said if you don't want to be "hassled", CC in Philly.
Willie D is offline  
Old November 25, 2012, 06:48 PM   #21
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
Quote:
Philly police currently have a "stop and frisk" directive aimed at getting illegally carried firearms off scuzzbags who shouldn't be armed. As someone who has to worry about said scuzzbags in my neighborhood I don't think that is necessarily a bad idea.
"Scuzzbag" or not, wantonly committing 4th amendment violations is a bad idea.
sigcurious is offline  
Old November 25, 2012, 07:08 PM   #22
Warrior1256
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 11, 2012
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 156
Bottom line is if you are not free to leave you are being detained.

In order to stop and frisk a police officer has to have reasonable suspicion that you have committed a crime.

Do not ever resist an officer of the law. But you can verbally state that you are not consenting to searches and then see an attorney if you feel that your rights have been violated.
Warrior1256 is offline  
Old November 26, 2012, 04:09 AM   #23
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 2,757
As an outsider to OC culture watching that video a few things occurred to me:

Firstly, I don't think OC would be for me, were it available, but that is just a personal choice.

It seems to me that the police a) did not know the law, b) were pretty in that guy's face: they weren't aggressive, but did start to play the authority card when the video'er raised a point they could not answer.

Bottom line is that the video'er knew the law, and the police did not. There were also the fallacies relied upon by the police: the logic that someone who lacks the appropriate licences/permits would openly carry a firearm for all to see in the first place.

At the end of the day, it seems that whilst it is law that OC is possible, the police have not been appropriately trained in how to manage it. After all, they've been previously trained to only expect a visible gun on a authorised person (LEO, Security, Military) or in a fire-fight.
They have seemingly not transitioned to OC thinking.

I think the video'er's remark about whether they would stop every car hit the mark: the police officer answered "no" unless there was a violation: precisely the opposite that was happening with the OC guy: no evident violation, but being effectively stopped all the same....

I think both sides of the OC fence need to be thoroughly educated as to what it means and represents.
__________________
You cannot wake someone who is pretending to sleep. Stop pretending. Wake up.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.

Last edited by Pond, James Pond; November 27, 2012 at 01:59 AM.
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old November 26, 2012, 11:48 PM   #24
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pond, James Pond
I think the video'er's remark about whether they would stop every car hit the mark: the police officer answered "no" unless there was a violation: precisely the opposite that was happening with the OC guy: no evident violation, but being effectively stopped all the same....
That's the crux of the issue. The police in Philadelphia can't get it through their heads that the mere fact of carrying a GUN! is not a violation. It seems even our friendly local moderator/legal eagle Frank Ettin has fallen into the trap of seeing open carry as a prima facie criminal act, which must be investigated, and the license to carry provides only an affirmative defense. Very simply, that is not the case. What the Philadelphia police can't bring themselves to acknowledge is that, for someone who has a license to carry firearms (LTCF), open carry IS legal. It is no more a violation for me to carry a handgun openly in Philadelphia than it is for me to drive a motor vehicle on the streets of Philadelphia. I have both licenses. Yet the Philadelphia police acknowledge that they can't stop a car and check the license of the driver unless there is evidence of some other violation, yet they do NOT like to acknowledge that they can't stop an open carrier to check for the LTCF unless they have specific, "clearly articulable" (in the words of the U.S. Supreme Court) facts suggesting that the subject does NOT have a LTCF and is therefore engaging in an unlawful activity.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old November 29, 2012, 02:47 PM   #25
noelf2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Location: Stafford, VA
Posts: 1,744
Quote:
It is no more a violation for me to carry a handgun openly in Philadelphia than it is for me to drive a motor vehicle on the streets of Philadelphia. I have both licenses.
Actually, you should have more right to carry openly in Philadelphia than you have a right to drive through it. Carrying a gun on you (openly or concealed) is a constitutional right that, for all intents and purposes, doesn't require a license. Having a driver's license is a privilege, not a right.
__________________
Liberty and freedom often offends those who understand neither.
noelf2 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14494 seconds with 9 queries