LEOs wetting themselves over OC...

davidmcbeth said:

Good post, as most people have the viewpoint "what's the harm?". I think I have outlined what the harm is.

Click to expand...

I'm thinking this may have been due to my typo that I mentioned above. Just to reiterate, I'm not suggesting that any one submit to interrogation for exercising their rights. Hardly a good day. What I am suggesting is that not every cop is out to get you. If they drive by and take a look, they're doing their job. If they detain or arrest you without cause, they're not doing their job. If they confirm that there's no danger, they're doing their job. If they create a scene and accidentally discharge your firearm, or point theirs at you, etc, they're not doing their job.

There's a happy medium here.

mwaterous said:

I'll respond to your post, because I can respect that you generally debate from an open minded pov as opposed to some of the jackals who will be all over this thread... HA! You must not remember me from the amputee thread! J/K first off, no I'm not a LEO. Second, there was a grievous typo in that last post; I meant to say, "Didn't give your name", not "did". I am not advocating that anyone give up their rights, or the belief that you should just cordially answer any question posed simply because there is no apparent animosity. I think you should keep your name to yourself and exercise your rights to the fullest extent. I don't think your typo was grievous, and I personally have no problem exchanging pleasantries with a cop in passing. I'm a very polite person. I don't think I could stop my self from saying "Hi there!" to someone that greeted me even if I wanted to. But I won't be giving up any rights if I am illegally detained
There are a large amount of people here though that do the open carry movement a huge disservice with their blind hatred of anything LEO. I think what you may not understand is people who OC generally have to love their freedom and rights before that decide to exercise one of those rights that are so unusual like OC. So any mistrust (read understanding for how LEA operate) for cops OCers have, almost certainly showed up before the OC began.So I'm musing. I don't think they should have the right to check the ID of any one simply because they are carrying a weapon; but I do think they should show up at the scene of any reported MWAG, each and every time, no matter how commonplace it gets. Why? Because the gun might be owned by a bad guy? The guy might be planning a crime? The guy might be a felon that forgot to hide his gun? I think if you really think about exactly what kind of advantage the BG has by OCing that he did not have CC you'll realize that insisting cops respond to every MWAG call as if a crime is happening just propagates the belief that the act of OC itself is a crime. Now if the cop has finished his 5-0 flog behind his favorite bill-board and is bored I don't care if he wants to go do a drive by. But if there's no RAS evident he should be discouraged from fishing for RAS in the hope of caging someone. That could be as simple as driving by. That could be as intense as observing the person in question for a few moments before approaching them to see if they run or do something stupid. If that approach consists of "How goes?", "Great officer, yourself?" and the person in question chooses to end it there, the officer would be in the wrong to continue pressing the situation. Is it really that painful to be asked how your day is going?

Click to expand...

Answers in blue.

davidmcbeth said:

I would not be happy answering every policemen's series of non-ending questions all day just because I OC. You want to spend 1-2 hrs every day doing this? There's a cop on every street corner.

"Bad intent" does not matter Bad Actions do and this is shown by the bad actions. Police are not mind readers.

"what is wrong with saying "not bad, how about yours"? What business is it of a cop on how my day is going? And if I want people to know my name, I'll wear a name tag, thank you very much.

I would not feel happy if every cop I crossed stopped me and did his standard 20 questions quiz .. I would be very perturbed.

Reports of man with rifle? They can certainly observe such a person without harassing or bothering him, right? Seems like the cop does not know how to do police work.

Good post, as most people have the viewpoint "what's the harm?". I think I have outlined what the harm is.

Click to expand...

+1 "What's the harm?" This is such a loaded question it is almost unbelievable. But, when it is answered by a LAC, the LEOs get upset.

mwaterous said:

Come on, this isn't grade school. There are some people that can articulate just fine in person but have a huge problem with written; this is not always directly their fault, but a huge issue with our public education system.

I'm curious if there's any historical evidence from "the wild west" of how many of our famous cowboys were disarmed by unarmed citizens? I'm wondering if there's any evidence from anywhere of people being strategically disarmed? Thinking a retention holster is your first line of defense is as silly as thinking open carry loses you a major tactical advantage. I know how to use my blackhawk, so I also know how to use yours.

That being said, I'm going to devils advocate myself. One officer made an excellent point; what happens when it gets so commonplace that reports of a "man with a rifle" go quiet and people with bad intent can walk around undeterred? Now before all the LEO haters jump me for even suggesting one may have a point, I'm not saying we give up any other rights; if you're a law abiding citizen, and you get asked how your day is going by a LEO who is curious if you're a law abiding citizen or not, what is so wrong with saying, "Not bad officer, how about yours?". You can be happy that he's doing his sworn job to keep people safe, WHILE also being happy that you didn't give him/her your name, or any reason to detain you.

Click to expand...

No...this is not grade school...it is the "real world" such as it is in cyberspace.

I would also counter with asking for what's the evidence that OC has caused ANY problems ANYWHERE other than heartburn in the Anti-2A crowd or discomfort among the sheeple? This isn't the Wild West, nor is it likely to become so just because of OC.

As for it becoming common place for so many people to be armed...so what??? Then if there is one evil-doer out there among the multitudes of LAC, it sounds like an incident report for the police with fewer victims compared with the one evil-doer and a crowd of unarmed sheep.

I have no problem being polite with the police... "hello" etc... I do have a problem with "proving myself" to them on request.

Edit:

Just saw your other posts... Consider this a general response to those that ask...not directed at you.

mwaterous said:

I'm thinking this may have been due to my typo that I mentioned above. Just to reiterate, I'm not suggesting that any one submit to interrogation for exercising their rights. Hardly a good day. What I am suggesting is that not every cop is out to get you. If they drive by and take a look, they're doing their job. If they detain or arrest you without cause, they're not doing their job. If they confirm that there's no danger, they're doing their job. If they create a scene and accidentally discharge your firearm, or point theirs at you, etc, they're not doing their job.

There's a happy medium here.

Click to expand...

+1

mwaterous said:

but I do think they should show up at the scene of any reported MWAG, each and every time, no matter how commonplace it gets.

Click to expand...

Honestly??

The only reason the police show up at "MWAG" is because it's unusual.
If you will forgive me for digressing to a straw-man argument... Would you REALLY want the police to show up 'each and every time' should carrying arms become so commonplace that ..oh, say 98% of the populace does it? What would it accomplish to respond to the commonplace? Police response should be reserved for Criminal Activities, not just because someone happens to be wearing something legal but unusual.

One time I had a cop berating me for open carrying and I said "I open carry for the same reason YOU open carry".

He then said "cops need guns though" so I said "not in britain or china or japan" and the cops said "yeah but we are in america" and I said "not anymore".

So how long have convicted felons been banned from owning firearms?

I know that in AZ there is/was a law stating that after you got released from prison after some period of time, that you were/are supposed to be handed a double barrel shotgun and a mule.

Are felons, after they are released, really not human? Since when do we get to deny someone the right to defend themselves even if the corrupt government has convicted them? I understand disarming them while they are locked up but once they are released they have a natural right to defend themselves and yes that includes owning the means to do so.

If the right is not a natural right after all and the government's ban on convicted and freed felons from owning guns is constitutional then they government can ban everyone from owning guns because it could not be a natural right after all.

Government convicts you of felony.
You serve your time and get released.
Now you have no rights. Does that mean you are no longer human? OR does it mean that the right to defend yourself is not a natural right after all?
If it is not a natural right then the government owns you and can do anything it wants with you.

mwaterous said:

I'll respond to your post, because I can respect that you generally debate from an open minded pov as opposed to some of the jackals who will be all over this thread... first off, no I'm not a LEO. Second, there was a grievous typo in that last post; I meant to say, "Didn't give your name", not "did". I am not advocating that anyone give up their rights, or the belief that you should just cordially answer any question posed simply because there is no apparent animosity. I think you should keep your name to yourself and exercise your rights to the fullest extent.

There are a large amount of people here though that do the open carry movement a huge disservice with their blind hatred of anything LEO. So I'm musing. I don't think they should have the right to check the ID of any one simply because they are carrying a weapon; but I do think they should show up at the scene of any reported MWAG, each and every time, no matter how commonplace it gets. That could be as simple as driving by. That could be as intense as observing the person in question for a few moments before approaching them to see if they run or do something stupid. If that approach consists of "How goes?", "Great officer, yourself?" and the person in question chooses to end it there, the officer would be in the wrong to continue pressing the situation. Is it really that painful to be asked how your day is going?

Click to expand...

I disagree with this statement. I think there are a lot of OCers who have a blind hatred of being pointlessly harassed while doing nothing more than exercising their 2nd amendment rights.

I'll never understand the mind or thinking of an OCF: OC Fudds who constantly belittle other gun owners just because of their chosen method of carry. Thank god there are people like this making OC more and more prevalent and eventually common place.

That article just cycles me back to the DOJ's Violent Encounters manual. 3% or less of offenders that were in a partiuclar study stated that they would even risk OC....because it draws LE contact. (well freaking duh!) Sadly, departments STILL ignore this statstic, some with a very specific reason in mind.

That reason is that if they allow OC to go unchallenged then criminals will begin to OC and they too will go unchallenged. My response is always: Yeah, and? I like where Utah is heading with their carry does not constitute a crime. I hope they gave it some razor blades for teeth by making it a heavily penalized issue if a LEO fails to have RAS and attempts to make an issue out of nothing.

My MP background and conditioning are irrelvant to the reality of this mythical problem that has been created by LEOs. Fortunately, there are some great LEOs on this forum as well as others that have kept their eyes open. But, we have to remember that forcing a LEO contact (seeking it out) is the WRONG way to go about bringing attention to 2A.

mwaterous said:

I'll respond to your post, because I can respect that you generally debate from an open minded pov as opposed to some of the jackals who will be all over this thread... first off, no I'm not a LEO. Second, there was a grievous typo in that last post; I meant to say, "Didn't give your name", not "did". I am not advocating that anyone give up their rights, or the belief that you should just cordially answer any question posed simply because there is no apparent animosity. I think you should keep your name to yourself and exercise your rights to the fullest extent.

There are a large amount of people here though that do the open carry movement a huge disservice with their blind hatred of anything LEO. So I'm musing. I don't think they should have the right to check the ID of any one simply because they are carrying a weapon; but I do think they should show up at the scene of any reported MWAG, each and every time, no matter how commonplace it gets. That could be as simple as driving by. That could be as intense as observing the person in question for a few moments before approaching them to see if they run or do something stupid. If that approach consists of "How goes?", "Great officer, yourself?" and the person in question chooses to end it there, the officer would be in the wrong to continue pressing the situation. Is it really that painful to be asked how your day is going?

Click to expand...

Doing a perfectly legal activity should NOT be a reason for the dispatch of a LEO,

911 call For example "OGM there is a man here with a Cellphone, it is in a case and he isn't touching it, please have an officer come by and contact him to make me feel safer."

does that sound like a worthwhile use of our tax dollars?

I had an encounter that resulted in a charge being filed. That cop asked me 20 questions and I refused to answer making him upset. When it came to court I asked him one of the questions he asked me. He had no answer (because I did not tell him) and his "I dunno" answer sunk his case.

Its impossible to know what answer can be useful in court to the police/state in a prosecution.

So not answering any question you are not mandated by law to answer is simply wise from a legal standpoint. Most cops get pissed off when you won't answer their questions.

Not every skunk will spray but when you see one, you clear a path, don't you. Is this being mean to a stunk? No, its being smart.

open sometimes.

if for example; i see a bunch of street urchins hangin round the front of a store im about to enter, i can either go elswhere or, accidentaly expose my gun.
in my state it is leagal to open carry but, at the same time it is also leagal to fart in public. i try not to fart in public. but cant claim total innocence on that either.
i dont think i could out draw an oc weopon against a gun pointed at me. i dont want to give a bg reason to single me out .
i also beleive, situational awareness is more impotant than method of carry. i have accidentaly exposed my wheapon and have seen good results.
i have also gone elswhere and seen good results. this works for me. but may not be for you. i dont try to convince anyone else to do as i do.

bellyfat said:

i dont want to give a bg reason to single me out .

Click to expand...

Why would you think he would? Think about what you know about BGs. Do you really think a hold up man is going to pick the most well armed victim? Of course not. He's going after the weakest looking victim because he is scum.

IMO OC is a huge deterrent.

Vitaeus said:

Doing a perfectly legal activity should NOT be a reason for the dispatch of a LEO,

Click to expand...

Too easy. Doing a perfectly legal act that cannot ever be illegal is no reason for the dispatch of a LEO. Chewing bubble gum, and scratching your buttocks should never result in an interested party. Carrying a gun, which could easily be done by us (law abiding citizens) and is also done by "gangsters" is no reason to get your panties in a bunch if an interested party drives by to confirm that the situation is safe. That's their job. This quickly becomes a discussion of RAS - if there is none, the officer is continuing to do his/her job if s/he leaves you alone. If however they drive by and see you brandishing... or leaving a corner store at a high rate of speed... then s/he's also doing his job by detaining you.

Those people who are illegaly harassed are perfectly justified in being upset. Those people who go out and cause trouble only to try and prove their point outta be kicked in the nuts for being morons. Goes for both sides.

Not every skunk will spray but when you see one, you clear a path, don't you. Is this being mean to a stunk? No, its being smart.

David, this analogy is spot on. Not every LEO is a skunk, but I cannot tell the difference visually.

I could make the argument that a uniformed police officer is more likely to get shot in a robbery than a plain clothes officer open carrying, I promise it is not the gun drawing the robbers attention. This is what kills me police officers say OC makes you more of a target, I disagree I rarely have people see my gun because they are not looking for it but sometimes there line of sight catches it but thats ok. But I have come to realize that if OC is such a bad idea then why dont police officers wear plain clothes and conceal, OC is bad right?

They act like we are making there job hard or something, that OC makes it impossible for them to tell if your up to no good. Thank the good lord there are some cops that are for OC and recognize its ability to deter crime, educate citizens, and hopefully make there job a little easier. Put it this way usually when I meet with police to roust drunk or high homeless off of properties I manage I OC and have yet to see an officer be against it especially considering the type of people we are dealing with.

Has anyone ever heard of a non-LEO OCing that has had their pistol taken in a robbery, or been shot at the beginning of a robbery?

Sounds like a completely hypothetical situation to me....

carolina guy said:

Has anyone ever heard of a non-LEO OCing that has had their pistol taken in a robbery, or been shot at the beginning of a robbery?

Sounds like a completely hypothetical situation to me....

Click to expand...

It is. Almost.

I think there have been two incidents. One at a gas station, which may not have really been an OCer, but someone who exposed their concealed gun at the onset of threat. And, another where a fella at a motel was robbed of his OCd gun.

There is a third report on the Fairfax County PD website, but the police long ago acknowledged it was erroneous information. Its been quite awhile; the PD may have taken down the report by now.

Even so, two incidents, even if both occurred, among 20K+ OCers with hundreds of thousands of hours OCing amounts to a risk rate lower than being struck by lighting. Way, way below statistically insignificant.

mwaterous said:

Come on, this isn't grade school. There are some people that can articulate just fine in person but have a huge problem with written; this is not always directly their fault, but a huge issue with our public education system.

I'm curious if there's any historical evidence from "the wild west" of how many of our famous cowboys were disarmed by unarmed citizens? I'm wondering if there's any evidence from anywhere of people being strategically disarmed? Thinking a retention holster is your first line of defense is as silly as thinking open carry loses you a major tactical advantage. I know how to use my blackhawk, so I also know how to use yours.

Click to expand...

Then you should also know how if you don't have the button fully depressed and attempt to pull up the gun gets caught and you either have to pull very hard (or at least on mine) or else have to push it slightly down and finish pressing the button in before pulling back up. In fact I had a friend make a very similar comment. I had him try to grab my weapon, followed by me moving my leg (simulate walking). Result? He couldn't draw the weapon before I could have easily reacted. Then there's the fact that you either need to be practically on top of the person from the rear to try and naturally grab the weapon from the holster, or else you have to go for a funky grab if coming at any angle other than directly behind them. Not that it isn't impossible to get disarmed while using something like a SERPA (or other lvl II+ retention holster), but the criminal is either going to need to practice disarming someone or else they are going to need to have their victim already subdued.

That being said, I'm going to devils advocate myself. One officer made an excellent point; what happens when it gets so commonplace that reports of a "man with a rifle" go quiet and people with bad intent can walk around undeterred? Now before all the LEO haters jump me for even suggesting one may have a point, I'm not saying we give up any other rights; if you're a law abiding citizen, and you get asked how your day is going by a LEO who is curious if you're a law abiding citizen or not, what is so wrong with saying, "Not bad officer, how about yours?". You can be happy that he's doing his sworn job to keep people safe, WHILE also being happy that you didn't give him/her your name, or any reason to detain you.

Click to expand...

Simply asking how my day is is fine. The second he starts asking more questions is when I'm looking to terminate the contact as I'm going to take it he is fishing because that is what cops do. You also say "give up any other rights" which implies that we give some rights. Why do I have to give up any rights? And while yes, some criminals at some point might OC if it common enough, that is no different than them CCing right now and being unsuspected. And even if OC were that common I would fully expect such actions to be very rare given that it seems a lot of people get that "bad vibe" from people who are going to cause trouble before they actually cause any. And as such OCing would draw even more attention/scrutiny than the "bad feeling" air of a supposedly unarmed person.