TFred
Regular Member
You were lied to by a police officer. Sadly, I wish this was an unusual event, but I cannot honestly say that it is.
You should have asked for him to provide you the code section.
TFred
-
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.
-
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.
This Gives Open Carry a Bad Image
- Thread starter celticredneck
- Start date
You should have asked for him to provide you the code section.
TFred
We've got dingdongs in every group. Seems like the guy mentioned in this thread is one of them.
Question here... when you guys organize open carry get togethers, do you issue rules or at least "suggestions" as to certain standards e.g. minimum level 2 holsters or no t-shirts with profane messages on them, etc?
I would guess that most people here wouldn't wear a t-shirt with a profane message while open carrying, of course.
I have yet to hear of a single incident of anybody trying to forcibly disarm an OC'er (has anybody),but having a decent retention holder just seems to be common sense to me.
As for the above statement, maybe he was lied to or more likely (imnsho) assuming the officer is incorrect (I'm not familiar with laws in that jurisdiction) , maybe the officer just was ignorant of the specifics of the law. Many states have statutes that have a subjective aspect to them (such as my state's brandishing statute) about carrying a firearm in a way that "warrants alarm". So, while there is no specific statute prohibiting an OC'er in my state from carrying his handgun by duct-taping it to the back of his head, I think an argument could be made that carrying in such a manner warrants alarm (iow a reasonable and prudent person would be alarmed by such a method of carry... It's a silly example, so whatever.
For those people who live in jurisdictions where it seems some officers are ignorant of the laws regarding open carry, why not volunteer to attend a police roll call and offer instruction in open carry case law etc? I've arranged for outside (non law enforcement groups) to provide roll call training before and it's been quite successful. Reaching out and trying to work with law enforcement can often reap good results.
I arranged a roll call once and used a member of my weightlifting team to demonstrate some strength training techniques and it was pretty successful.
A good way to get an "in" in regards to the roll call training thang is to request to do a ride along and then when you do, and you guys are sitting at lunch or whatever, to bring up the topic. Despite what it sometimes seems
officers don't WANT to be ignorant of the law but often stuff gets passed on by osmosis (especially by ill informed training officers ) and it just sticks in the person's brain. It's harder to unlearn bad habits or information than it is to learn the right stuff from scratch.We had a roll call on open carry and initially there was some hostility from a few officers towards the idea that - yes you cannot stop somebody and investigate open carrying, no matter HOW MANY people complain about it (and trust me we can sometimes get a dozen calls in a minute or two on the same guy open carrying). But it worked. After that roll call, we had the advantage of being armed with info and now not only do people act in compliance with the law, but a few guys even took up the practice of open carrying on their own off duty.
I transferred here to WA from one of the most restrictive, anti-gun states in the country. During my FTO I saw some guy open carrying and fortunately my FTO was well schooled (this was 15 yrs ago before it became routine to see OCers in WA) and told me that yes - open carry was legal. I was lucky to have a good FTO.
I would bet dollars to doughnuts that if one of the open carry groups went to a local precinct of their open carry state and offered to provide roll call training, resources etc. regarding open carry, that they just might get a positive response. What's the worst thing that can happen? The guy says "NO". bfd
TFred
Regular Member
Thanks for your very thoughtful post. I'll let others respond to most of it, but just to fill you in on some of the local issues here, the LEOs in Henrico are notoriously anti-gun. Now, they are still in Virginia, so when I use that phrase, it's all relative, they aren't shooting open-carriers in the streets like you might find in some states, but if you read the sticky thread at the top of this forum that starts "The Tale of Henrico..", you will see that they don't exactly follow the law, either, and they seem to have a little help with that on the judicial side of the house as well.
TFred
nuc65
Activist Member
If I wore a T-shirt with the word FREEDOM, or an OCDO message, or a quote by Thomas Jefferson many liberals would decry it as a profane message.
So by who's definition should I go in order not offend any of the holy rollers, or HMFWICs of open carry, or fashion police? I may not agree with the message but the 1st amendment still holds, protected by the 2nd amendment on the field of battle.
Yawn. Nobody is infringing on the second amendment when one criticizes certain speech (like an OCer wearing a shirt with a profane message.) This silly stance comes up again and again. Somebody opines that as ambassadors of open carry, the OCer should not engage in activity X because it tends to reflect negatively on us and/or turn people away from our cause and the respnse is something like "yea, but the 1st amendment protects the right to do X"
No kidding . duh. Nobody is claiming that is not the case. There is ample case law that wearing a shirt that simply says F U C K is entirely protected activity. It does not therefore follow that it's a prudent idea to wear such a t-shirt while trying to promote open carry.
Grok the distinction?
I agree with you about how some liberals react to speech. Recall the controversy over the open carrier who wore the shirt with th e quote about ""The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Some "progressives" at DU were claiming that by open carrying and wearing such a t-shirt, that same person was "inciting" or some other such anti-1st amendment hogwash.
I recall also the same yahoos claiming that Bill OReilly should be brought up on "incitement to murder" charges for referring to Dr. Tiller the abortionist as "Tiller the baby killer" since somebody murdered him, therefore Oreilly was criminally and civilly responsible. Lol
I am sure there will be plenty more examples of somebody opining that X form of expression reflects negatively on us, with the totally irrelevant "yea, but the 1st amendment protects X"
Maybe if you are looking for what words not to wear on a t-shirt while open carrying, just refer to the Carlin but about the 7 dirty words you can't say on television... that's a start.
The ultimate point is that appearance matters. You can show up in traffic court looking like a slob and as long as you don't violate certain rules about courtroom decor (like some courts forbid the wearing of hats), you are well within your rights to do so. But I can guarantee you, with many judges and/or juries you will be viewed with less credibility and sympathy.
How about this for a metric? don't dress in a way that you would avoid if sitting down for lunch with your mother, grandmother, and adolescent kids.
That works for me.
Phoenix David
Regular Member
That would be a Battle Dress Uniform in woodland or desert pattern or jeans and a belt.
+1
WUBAs for me. (Working Uniform, Blue, Alpha)
And service dress whites or blues on weekends!
half_life1052
Regular Member
I am going to start off by qualifying what I have to say. I am not trying to pick a fight or criticize. I am trying to provoke thought.
The original subject of this thread was not an advocate as we are. That young man is part of the norm for his generation. His actions are part of our desired outcome. That being that "normal" people carry a firearm as part of their daily life.
We collectively seem to be judging someone for their "message" when sending a message was probably not their intent.
Maybe we instead should just be happy that our "message" appears to be getting across?
The original subject of this thread was not an advocate as we are. That young man is part of the norm for his generation. His actions are part of our desired outcome. That being that "normal" people carry a firearm as part of their daily life.
We collectively seem to be judging someone for their "message" when sending a message was probably not their intent.
Maybe we instead should just be happy that our "message" appears to be getting across?
This. I tend to dress more "urban", which I think normalizes OC better than dress clothes due to the fact I'm a normal person OCing. I don't look like someone that might be a LEO, just your average 26yo.
Sent from the back of a black van
richarcm
Regular Member
richarcm
Regular Member
If the point of open carry is to normalize then the point should also be not to dress up too well. Whenever I dress up and open carry i get mistaken for an officer. Especially when near DC because of all the federal agents. It does me a lot of good to dress that way. I never get questioned. But it does the movement no more good than if I chose to conceal carry.
Likewise I see PLENTY of people at Lobby Day and other open carry events wearing camo, NRA tshirts, jeans and everything else you can imagine. Some have piercings, tattoos, smoke cigarettes, eat junk food, swear, wear their pants too tight, aren't clean shaven, etc.
But....you are REAL people practicing your rights. I'd rather see a young man open carrying with droopy pants than in a suit. At least if the point is normalization.
Likewise I see PLENTY of people at Lobby Day and other open carry events wearing camo, NRA tshirts, jeans and everything else you can imagine. Some have piercings, tattoos, smoke cigarettes, eat junk food, swear, wear their pants too tight, aren't clean shaven, etc.
But....you are REAL people practicing your rights. I'd rather see a young man open carrying with droopy pants than in a suit. At least if the point is normalization.
Last edited:
color of law
Accomplished Advocate
Looks like someone is kissing a police officer's butt. I believe that is against forum rules. And I don't need your permission to respond to someones post.
Good luck with your local issues.
jmelvin
Founder's Club Member
I like your perspective half_life! I've had times when I've seen folks OCing who are not necessarily up to my expectations for dress, but then I've stopped and thought the same thing you just said. If those of us who OC as ambassadors really wish to normalize OC in everyday life, we should expect people to OC in just the same attire as they may wear without a sidearm.
Real nice Color!
You take a post of one of the more thoughtful and politically active members of this board, which is the Virginia forum BTW.... and jump his azz for giving the facts.
Yes I reluctantly and begrudgingly agree, that is an outstanding way to look at it.
It pains me to go along with it.....but you're absolutely right!
That from one of the smoking, swearing, bearded, blue jean wearing, Lobby Day Patrons.:uhoh:
richarcm
Regular Member
Yes I reluctantly and begrudgingly agree, that is an outstanding way to look at it.
It pains me to go along with it.....but you're absolutely right!
That from one of the smoking, swearing, bearded, blue jean wearing, Lobby Day Patrons.:uhoh:
DocWalker
Regular Member
Ok you went there; I can understand the dingdong reference but you aren't helping the cop stereo-typing with the doughnuts reference.....
OC for ME
Regular Member
BS again. But not regarding what you might think. If a cop saw that there would be RAS, in his mind, to investigate (a Terry stop) because of the exact image that citizen presented. The underlying facts, the truth, is irrelevant at that moment to a cop. The truth of the matter is likely the last thing on a cop's mind given the presentation presented before him.
Nope, that citizen would have been subjected to a very interesting investigative stop, just to make sure he was legit in a cop's mind.
