Detained by Royal Oak police officer while open carrying

PALO said:

Yawn. More trolling. Devolving to personal attacks vs. the discussion of issues.

If I asserted something that was incorrect, I have no problem admitting error. That's what adults do. Nobody is perfect. I have no idea which assertion you are referring to, so whatever.

The name calling is typical of those with no point to make e.g. "statist cop". It's the childish type of behavior I was warned about by a few here when I first started posting last year. It may affect those with thinner skin, but I hardly fear the keyboard brigade. You can call me a statist all you want, the record speaks for itself. I'm not going to devolve to your level and call you a statist or other such insults, but feel free to continue playing

Click to expand...

Bwhahhahahahahhahahaa!!

Is he really trying to pretend that he wasn't using ad hominem attacks himself? Really?

Aaaaahahahahahhahahahahahahhaaaaa!!

PALO said:

Generally speaking, people that have nothing useful to say devolve to personal attacks. Like you just did

Click to expand...

Like you have been doing this whole thread? Also, if you think my observation of you is a personal attack well you have some pretty thin skin.

You can wank all you want, imo the record is pretty clear I came in her discussing concepts and a few posters turned it into an attack fest. Did I reply in kind? to some extent, yes. Nobody is perfect. But this childishness is boring. Circle jerk all you want, I'm not interested in it. I'm interested in promoting open carrying, not playing rhetorical games. The thread history speaks for itself. You can believe what you want to believe. It's a free country and all. I'll go back to discussing issues and concepts, you can continue with the "did you hear what Johnny said today at recess?" stuff. More power to ya!

I enjoy discussing open carry and learning from posters who post in good faith. I don't enjoy listening to childish wanking. So as far as that goes, nuff said n stuff! rock on.

Thanks a lot PALO, now everytime I hear this, I will no doubt think of you...no fair, no fair!

[video] www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5TV4tmbjbE[/video]

PALO said:

You are most welcome. At least you can learn a little and maybe mature a bit above and beyond personal attacks.

cheers

Click to expand...

PALO said:

You can wank all you want, imo the record is pretty clear I came in her discussing concepts and a few posters turned it into an attack fest. Did I reply in kind? to some extent, yes. Nobody is perfect. But this childishness is boring. Circle jerk all you want, I'm not interested in it. I'm interested in promoting open carrying, not playing rhetorical games. The thread history speaks for itself. You can believe what you want to believe. It's a free country and all. I'll go back to discussing issues and concepts, you can continue with the "did you hear what Johnny said today at recess?" stuff. More power to ya!

I enjoy discussing open carry and learning from posters who post in good faith. I don't enjoy listening to childish wanking. So as far as that goes, nuff said n stuff! rock on.

Click to expand...

WARNING! CREDIBILITY FAILURE IN PROGRESS ABOVE!

And I'll respond to your assertion that you are interested in promoting open carrying... because your own posts show that the only open carrying you are interested in promoting is the manner of open carry that you personally think is "acceptable". And it is clear, again from your own posts, that there are some types of open carry that you personally think is ... unacceptable.... and is not a good idea to do.

Once again I stand by my statement:

Originally Posted by Bikenut
And.. here is the important thing...

Anyone who champions restricting the right to bear arms in any way at all.... is actually pro gun control as long as that control matches their opinion of what is "reasonable", "appropriate", "wise", and "acceptable".

Click to expand...

Your own posts in this entire thread show that you are in favor of restricting LGOC because you don't think it is a good idea and that you think it will harm "the cause". Your own posts are posters for the oft heard concept of "Just because you can doesn't mean you should because I don't think it's a good idea!"

You are entitled to your opinion and you are being allowed to express that opinion on this website by the private property owner of this website... and as you should have realized by now... everyone else is entitled to express their opinion of your opinion.... and so far the private property owner of this website is allowing that too.

I must admit I am curious why this discussion hasn't been shut down by the owner and/or his representative(s) yet.

PALO said:

You can wank all you want, imo the record is pretty clear I came in her discussing concepts and a few posters turned it into an attack fest. Did I reply in kind? to some extent, yes. Nobody is perfect. But this childishness is boring. Circle jerk all you want, I'm not interested in it. I'm interested in promoting open carrying, not...

Click to expand...

That is what I saw happening.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

eye95 said:

That is what I saw happening.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

1. Do you have an articulate refutation for my analysis of Terry? If so, lets hear it.

2. PALO is attempting more misdirection. "I'm interested in promoting OC...[blah, blah, blah]." For a guy interested in promoting OC, he's spends a lot of time commenting (misdirecting and evading) on the 4A.

I was merely addressing PALO's observation of the reaction to his posts.

Based upon the nature of those reactions, I knew that rational discussion in this thread was currently impossible, so I stopped participating on topic.

I still won't participate on topic.

While I disagree with a lot of what PALO says, he does present what he says in a respectful manner, and deserves respectful replies, even in vehement disagreement. Until folks here start reacting that way, I don't see any upside to participating in the discussion.

This guy ain't a CaP or a troll. He deserves to be treated better than they. He is member, like the rest of us, who has some common views and some contrary views. Let's hear him out and respond with the same level of rationality and courtesy as he originally presented his ideas. When that starts happening, I will rejoin the on-topic discussion.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Any Follow-Ups?

shawnixon said:

Hello, I was unlawfully detained by Royal Oak PD while openly carrying my rifle and sidearm this past weekend. I posted the video of the encounter on YouTube. I would like advice on whether or not I should file a complaint on the first officer. Thank you!
My YouTube channel is:
shyama1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HfADytcBNk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Click to expand...

Did you file any complaints, and were your complaints took seriously by anyone? I have to wonder if the officer learned anything from the experience. Maybe his partner pulled him aside and talked with him? I remember hearing about the young man who was carrying a rifle legally in nearby downtown Birmingham... you'd think officers in the surrounding areas were brought up to speed on the laws because of that particular incident. Maybe not.

You are probably referring to Jonathon Norris, a friend of mine. He was playing chess with a homeless man in a park in B'ham while carrying a rifle and a handgun. That scared some cops, and they arrested him for disorderly conduct or one of those other catchalls. He was convicted in municipal court, appealed, and charges were dropped with an agreement that he would not sue.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

I would guess they're probably referring to Sean Combs, the young gentleman from Troy who was arrested in Birmingham MI.

A jury of his peers found him not guilty on all charges.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy IIIs using Tapatalk 2.

Mosnar87 said:

I would guess they're probably referring to Sean Combs, the young gentleman from Troy who was arrested in Birmingham MI.

A jury of his peers found him not guilty on all charges.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy IIIs using Tapatalk 2.

Click to expand...

I thought so too, then i Googled this. But once again I could be wrong.

http://alabamaopencarry.com/forum/index.php?topic=3511.0

Seems like Birminghams all over the US are having problems understanding the law?

That would be the Jonathon Norris story.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

eye95 said:

You are probably referring to Jonathon Norris, a friend of mine. He was playing chess with a homeless man in a park in B'ham while carrying a rifle and a handgun. That scared some cops, and they arrested him for disorderly conduct or one of those other catchalls. He was convicted in municipal court, appealed, and charges were dropped with an agreement that he would not sue.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

Man, how one appeal can turn the tides. What if he did not have the money to appeal? Then instead of them trying to barter their way out of being sued, he'd have a criminal record? Ridiculous. I hate municipal court. Not that I have a lot of experience with them, but my limited experience leads me to believe that for the most part they are not much more than a circus. Obviously that's a dramatic generalization - I'm sure there's plenty of decent municipal judges in places.

You do not need any money to appeal from municipal court. The appeal is automatic if you want it, and "if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed." The municipal court trial is essentially taking the place of the preliminary hearing or the grand jury for minor offenses. It's main intent is to determine whether the bother and expense of a real trial is worth it to the State. The defendant, if convicted, has the absolute right to say that a jury trial is worth it.

Not justifying this system, but the system is not the flaw. Those who abused it, the police, the prosecutor, and the judge, are the flaws.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>