• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Police encounter at softball game

ManInBlack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,551
Location
SW Idaho
When the OCer "out-polites" the hoplophobe, every observer sees who is and is not "reasonable like me." When you are confronted by the police, and the contact becomes casual and friendly, the observer then takes a more jaundiced view of whoever it was to thought that there was a problem.

Or, just as likely, the observer says, "THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW, DAMNIT!"

I prefer to educate the public in the same types of settings that I prefer all my other activities: voluntary, far from any agents of the State.
 

ManInBlack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,551
Location
SW Idaho
I see a solution to both sides being presented; instead of having the police approach the Ocer, why not have the police observe, note there is nothing to investigate, and approach the citizen who called? Surely then the citizen could still be educated to the legality of OC, and be more likely to believe it when they hear it directly from the horse's mouth.

This. It is the job of the police to educate the complainant that there is no crime being committed, and that she is not to contact the police again unless she needs actual assistance.
 

DVC

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,185
Location
City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
I see a solution to both sides being presented; instead of having the police approach the Ocer, why not have the police observe, note there is nothing to investigate, and approach (but not the Ocer) the citizen who called? Surely then the citizen could still be educated to the legality of OC, and be more likely to believe it when they hear it directly from the horse's mouth.

The cops will make contact because if they don't, the caller will call again demanding to know where they are, because they've been watching.

In my work, I often get the cops called on my by people concerned that I'm a burglar or stalker. The cops come by, we chat for a moment, then they go on. A couple of years ago, I got a visit from the same deputy every day for an extended period. It got to the point where his dispatcher would simply say that I was near a particular address, the deputy would come by, roll down the window and say "You'll never guess what phone call we got!" then roll away. For the rest of the day, the dispatcher would tell anyone concerned that a deputy had already checked me out and it was nothing to worry about, but the day after, it would happen again.

When the cops get a MWAG call, where all that's happening is that there is a MWAG, lecturing the caller won't help -- there has to be contact or the problem hasn't been resolved. Once the cops walk away, they're covered, the OCer is covered, and a hoplophobe is even more frustrated than before -- I find this MOST enjoyable, and wish that it would happen more!
 

ManInBlack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,551
Location
SW Idaho
The cops will make contact because if they don't, the caller will call again demanding to know where they are, because they've been watching.

Umm...not if the cops make contact with the caller and explain the law...
 

DVC

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,185
Location
City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
Umm...not if the cops make contact with the caller and explain the law...

If there IS a problem and they don't respond, then they get raked over the coals.

I much prefer to have the cops show up, do a couple of minutes of laughing and scratching, then leave with smiles. This drives the hoplophobes nuts and makes them look stupid to everyone who knew that they were calling the cops.
 

ManInBlack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,551
Location
SW Idaho
If there IS a problem and they don't respond, then they get raked over the coals.

They can respond by observing, then making contact with the complainant and advising her not to further abuse the 911 system. This is really very simple. No contact with the OC'er is needed for a response, and the complainant still gets educated, and can be just as butthurt as she wants to be.
 
Last edited:

DVC

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,185
Location
City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
They can respond by observing, then making contact with the complainant and advising her not to further abuse the 911 system. This is really very simple. No contact with the OC'er is needed for a response, and the complainant still gets educated, and can be just as butthurt as she wants to be.

You're looking at it from the wrong direction. When the cops make contact, this is GOOD for OCers:

1), even if the cop is anti-OC, if he just has to walk away that reinforces in his mind the idea that OC is something that he's going to have to live with -- enough such occasions and he will become used to the idea. He may never like it, but he won't be able to keep the mindset that MWAG = criminal.

2), everyone who sees it sees that the OCer doesn't get in trouble, so THEY get a little more used to the idea, and some may also OC.

3), it humiliates the hoplophobe IN PUBLIC and in front of her friends and family.

None of those things happen if the calltaker just says "It's legal here, don't call about it again!"
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Interesting.

I was anonymously censored for cop-bashing, when I wasn't bashing cops, and for being OT when I was promoting being polite to the cops.

I guess I should have mentioned softball or something, thus to be on-topic . . ?

It was not anonymously accomplished. Neither was it intended as a personal insult. Words and ideas were expressed that were not factual nor capable of being cited.

Gratuitous inclusion of the OP would not change anything.

The particular style of editing that we are using for most cases now, does not make the post disappear and allows such to be reread as needed.

IMO - all would benefit from sticking to the facts of a situation and interjecting less opinion as to the character perceived of the actors.
 

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,884
Location
SC
If there IS a problem and they don't respond, then they get raked over the coals.

Respectfully disagree. The S.C. has also ruled so. Public opinion may "rake" them, but that does not affect their pay or policy, so at the end of the day, it doesn't matter.

You're looking at it from the wrong direction. When the cops make contact, this is GOOD for OCers:

I think Mark Fiorno and a few others would disagree with you.

1), even if the cop is anti-OC, if he just has to walk away that reinforces in his mind the idea that OC is something that he's going to have to live with -- enough such occasions and he will become used to the idea. He may never like it, but he won't be able to keep the mindset that MWAG = criminal.

Cops who are anti-OC sometimes do not walk away. I won't say more for fear of being censored for "cop bashing", but the fact of the matter is, there are cases out there that back this up.

2), everyone who sees it sees that the OCer doesn't get in trouble, so THEY get a little more used to the idea, and some may also OC.

This could be accomplished by the police telling the caller there is no reason to approach the OCer.

3), it humiliates the hoplophobe IN PUBLIC and in front of her friends and family.

No, it validates that they have "control" over the police, and can make them do whatever they wish. If I didn't like a guy wearing an offensive t-shirt around my son, the cops would basically tell me to deal with it. The same should apply to law abiding open carriers.

None of those things happen if the calltaker just says "It's legal here, don't call about it again!"

Indeed. So they could instead say "It's legal to OC in _____, and this citizen is not commiting a crime, or exhibiting suspicious behavior giving reasonable suspicion that he is about to commit a crime. Have a nice day."
 

DVC

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,185
Location
City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
Respectfully disagree. The S.C. has also ruled so. Public opinion may "rake" them, but that does not affect their pay or policy, so at the end of the day, it doesn't matter.

Cops are overseen by elected officials -- who DO care, and can make life very difficult for cops who get voters unhappy.

When a voter writes and says "I called in a MWAG and the cops just told me to shut up," that will get attention.

I agree that not every time cops contact an OCer work out well, but most DO. Having spent most of my adult life OCing, I've had plenty of chances to meet cops. Usually it has been only a minor inconvenience, and only one time was it actually a problem.

My goal is to "normalize" gun carry. OC, CCW, whatever -- I want people to accept it as a normal thing, nothing to be concerned about. The more people who see that the cops walk away from the OCer, the more people will think "I guess it's okay, then."
 

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,884
Location
SC
Cops are overseen by elected officials -- who DO care, and can make life very difficult for cops who get voters unhappy.

When a voter writes and says "I called in a MWAG and the cops just told me to shut up," that will get attention.

I agree that not every time cops contact an OCer work out well, but most DO. Having spent most of my adult life OCing, I've had plenty of chances to meet cops. Usually it has been only a minor inconvenience, and only one time was it actually a problem.

My goal is to "normalize" gun carry. OC, CCW, whatever -- I want people to accept it as a normal thing, nothing to be concerned about. The more people who see that the cops walk away from the OCer, the more people will think "I guess it's okay, then."

You can't control how people perceive an encounter from the outside. You may see it that way, but that doesn't mean others will. The majority of people see a cop talking to someone, and the immediate thought is "Oh, he must have done something wrong! Why else would a cop be talking to him?"

IMO, if a cop tells a hoplophobe that this scenario is a non issue, then yeah, that person might get pissed off, and they might complain to their elected official; but if the elected official kowtows to that kind of whining, then they don't deserve to be in office. Cops, citizens, politicians; NONE are above the law. They must follow it as well as enforce it, and not cater to the panic of the sheeple.
 

DVC

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,185
Location
City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
IMO, if a cop tells a hoplophobe that this scenario is a non issue, then yeah, that person might get pissed off, and they might complain to their elected official; but if the elected official kowtows to that kind of whining, then they don't deserve to be in office. Cops, citizens, politicians; NONE are above the law. They must follow it as well as enforce it, and not cater to the panic of the sheeple.

It's one thing for a cop to say it, another for the calltaker to say that. The calltaker isn't there and doesn't see the situation -- the smart thing to do is send the cop. We don't have to like it, but it IS the smart thing, and it IS what's going to happen.

How WE handle it is up to us. If we are polite, and stand on our rights, they have little to argue with, and things generally go well.
 

ManInBlack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,551
Location
SW Idaho
It's one thing for a cop to say it, another for the calltaker to say that. The calltaker isn't there and doesn't see the situation -- the smart thing to do is send the cop. We don't have to like it, but it IS the smart thing, and it IS what's going to happen.

How WE handle it is up to us. If we are polite, and stand on our rights, they have little to argue with, and things generally go well.

Sure, send the cop...to observe lawful, non-suspicious behavior without contact.

I will always handle any police contact the same way to minimize risks to my life, liberty, and property:

"Am I being detained, or am I free to leave?"

"...durr..."

"Smell ya later, officer."
 
Last edited:

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
...but having been at Virginia Tech, I feel better that if someone speaks up that something feels wrong, that it's checked out. If I see someone poking around looking fishy, I call security or the police. ...

Was the shooter at Virginia Tech sitting round minding his own business while open carrying before he started shooting people?

Was the OP in this thread "poking around looking fishy?"

I can appreciate your comments but don't see the connection to this circumstance.
 

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,884
Location
SC
It's one thing for a cop to say it, another for the calltaker to say that. The calltaker isn't there and doesn't see the situation -- the smart thing to do is send the cop. We don't have to like it, but it IS the smart thing, and it IS what's going to happen.

How WE handle it is up to us. If we are polite, and stand on our rights, they have little to argue with, and things generally go well.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
The cops will make contact because if they don't, the caller will call again demanding to know where they are, because they've been watching.

When the cops get a MWAG call, where all that's happening is that there is a MWAG, lecturing the caller won't help -- there has to be contact or the problem hasn't been resolved. Once the cops walk away, they're covered, the OCer is covered, and a hoplophobe is even more frustrated than before -- I find this MOST enjoyable, and wish that it would happen more!


SNIP If there IS a problem and they don't respond, then they get raked over the coals.

I've already addressed this justification earlier in this thread.

Those are political considerations. Rights are not susceptible to political considerations. One of the primary reasons for having a bill of rights in democratic republic is to remove those items from the table, make them no longer susceptible to the political winds (whims).

DVC's is the very same argument--eye dent uh cull--to the arguments used by police on this very forum. It's a tired argument. A trite argument. A specious argument.
 
Last edited:

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
I gotta agree with Merlin on this one. The goal of this group is to educate the populace that OC is legal/normal/safe, is it not? For nervous sheep, seeing police approach an OCer, have a polite conversation that ends with a handshake and no change in behavior by said OCer illustrates that everything was fine. If said interaction occurs in full view of a bleacher-full of people, well that strikes me as being education in bulk. Very efficient.

On the other hand, as others have pointed out, such situations create the opportunity for ignorant/overzealous LEO to do what they do. And seeing the OCer thrown to the ground, cuffed, and hauled away would only serve to reinforce incorrect assumptions about OC's legality.

To invoke some cliches, these situations present both danger and opportunity. Make lemonade.

As with ManinBlack, I owe no one to expose myself to the barely-bridled power of police in order to make a good impression on others. Particularly, when it exposes me to legal and physical danger. Are 95% of cops good? I'll make the decision for myself as to whether to take that chance, whether 95% or 2% are good, thank you very much.

My recipe for lemonade includes the government agents observing from a distance. And, handling their political problems by calling back the complaintant and telling them there was nothing illegal or suspicious observed. I am very firm about what goes in my lemonade. Just a very few grains more of such an ingredient ruins the recipe. It offends my taste for liberty.
 
Last edited:

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
I full recognize that it is only the 95% of law enforcers that give the 5% who are peace officers a bad name... :rolleyes:

I'm willing to recognize that 95% of police officers let the 5% bad apples give them a bad name. Blue Wall of Silence.

I'm willing to entertain that 95% of police officers enable or even encourage the 5% bad apples to give them a bad name. Blue Wall of Silence.
 
Top