Mr. Colionoir on Open Carry and video encounters.

An interesting commentary showed up on The Gun Wire...

http://thegunwire.com/blog/youtube-video-mrcolionnoir-open-carry-demonstrations/

He works for the NRA. Not the most open carry supportive of groups.

Calling Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard.

I pretty much agree on principle with almost everything this guy says--including in this video. He makes good points and communicates them well. Usually he is a tad more animated.

eye95 said:

I pretty much agree on principle with almost everything this guy says--including in this video. He makes good points and communicates them well. Usually he is a tad more animated.

Click to expand...

Agreed. As I mentioned in the thread in the Texas forum which covers the event that spawned this video, I only find one fault in what he's saying. He makes the point twice that the second amendment doesn't protect the right to be an *******, when actually there is an amendment just right above the second that does offer protection in that department. No, I don't like an ******* either, but being one doesn't justify breaching that person's liberty. At the very end of the video, he at least did say that he thought it was pretty ridiculous that they were charged with disorderly conduct.

Who was acting badly? Wasn't it the police in this instance that escalated matters and invented a violation in order to be bully's?

Calling Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard.

kurt555gs said:

Who was acting badly? Wasn't it the police in this instance that escalated matters and invented a violation in order to be bully's?

Calling Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard.

Click to expand...

I agree ... that Kolinar guy is just a smart A** ...

kurt555gs said:

Who was acting badly? Wasn't it the police in this instance that escalated matters and invented a violation in order to be bully's?

Calling Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard.

Click to expand...

Yep. Noir got this one wrong. I wonder what he'd think of my most recent police encounter. Probably think I was an A***** because I didn't give ID, name, nothing and intitially asked "am I being detained" and then just turned around and left when told NO. Unfortunately they followed (officer and a LT) and then the freaking Chief showed up.

But yeah, I was probably the as******.

We-the-People said:

Yep. Noir got this one wrong. I wonder what he'd think of my most recent police encounter. Probably think I was an A***** because I didn't give ID, name, nothing and intitially asked "am I being detained" and then just turned around and left when told NO. Unfortunately they followed (officer and a LT) and then the freaking Chief showed up.

But yeah, I was probably the as******.

Click to expand...

:lol:...you are my kind of A-hole.

People are so conditioned into an obey and submit that the fundamental refusal and desire to be left alone is now a foreign idea, extreme and since ignorance breeds contempt (this works with all kinds of bigotry) they are also A-holes.

sudden valley gunner said:

:lol:...you are my kind of A-hole.

People are so conditioned into an obey and submit that the fundamental refusal and desire to be left alone is now a foreign idea, extreme and since ignorance breeds contempt (this works with all kinds of bigotry) they are also A-holes.

Click to expand...

you think people like that who after a mass shooting happens takes their black rifle for a walk by the nearest elementary schools really just wants to be left alone? somehow I doubt that very much......

EMNofSeattle said:

you think people like that who after a mass shooting happens takes their black rifle for a walk by the nearest elementary schools really just wants to be left alone? somehow I doubt that very much......

Click to expand...

Your miss of the and was on purpose? Why the concentration on black rifle?

They have the right to be, even when exercising a fundamental right of bearing arms and coincidentally making a an exercise of freedom of expression at the same time. Even if they wanted to draw attention it isn't the duty of our servants to go beyond their constitutional restrictions in reacting unconstitutionally.

Edit to ad, if there is any validity in copy cat shootings, then right after a mass shooting is probably the most pertinent time to be carrying your rifle.

sudden valley gunner said:

Your miss of the and was on purpose? Why the concentration on black rifle?

They have the right to be, even when exercising a fundamental right of bearing arms and coincidentally making a an exercise of freedom of expression at the same time. Even if they wanted to draw attention it isn't the duty of our servants to go beyond their constitutional restrictions in reacting unconstitutionally.

Click to expand...

I agree with this.

It is our RIGHT to draw attention to ourselves if we want to.

It is our right to be jerks if we want to.

The free speech part of the constitution wasn't written so people could say "have a nice day". It was specifically written to protect things that would upset others and offend others.

If you listen carefully to his commentary...he does not say you should not stand up for your rights, but if you are like MarkedGuardian(youtube) who purposefully go out with the intention of a Police Encounter, and(not including MarkedGuardian from what I have seen) the intent to be the biggest pain in the ass as possible, you arent helping.

Yep. Noir got this one wrong. I wonder what he'd think of my most recent police encounter. Probably think I was an A***** because I didn't give ID, name, nothing and intitially asked "am I being detained" and then just turned around and left when told NO. Unfortunately they followed (officer and a LT) and then the freaking Chief showed up.

But yeah, I was probably the as******. .

Click to expand...

Were you out to video tape the encounter and make the police look bad? Or was it just an encounter that happened because some idiot called them or they spotted you? Was your intent in carrying that day to have a police encounter?...

I think I agree, idiots out to just harass the police arent helping us...people doing the legal thing and sticking to their rights are what we need...

onus said:

I agree with this.

It is our RIGHT to draw attention to ourselves if we want to.

It is our right to be jerks if we want to.

The free speech part of the constitution wasn't written so people could say "have a nice day". It was specifically written to protect things that would upset others and offend others.

Click to expand...

Why is it that some think that free speech only applies to them being jerks? It applies to those pointing out that you are being a jerk too!

He never said you don't have a right to be a jerk. He is simply asking you not to be. I ask that too; I just don't expect you not to be.

I disagree with some of what Noir says. But at least he is rational--blunt, but still rational.

45 Fan said:

SNIPPED Were you out to video tape the encounter and make the police look bad? Or was it just an encounter that happened because some idiot called them or they spotted you? Was your intent in carrying that day to have a police encounter?...

I think I agree, idiots out to just harass the police arent helping us...people doing the legal thing and sticking to their rights are what we need...

Click to expand...

I never go out to video police encounters. I go out in the hope that there will be NO encounter with police and that other citizens will ask about the right to bear arms. The vast majority of the time (I have encountered police 3 times in 4 years and I carry every day) there is no police encounter. Still, I carry recording devices because, as we all know, if you aren't carrying one there is only one "credible" side to the story AND that's when you're going to be unlawfully detained or worse.

As I always say when there is no police encounter, or there is and no rights are violated, "it's been a good day". To date, I have not had my rights violated in they eyes of the law but I have been harassed by law enforcement (stopping a law abiding citizen doing nothing unlawful is harassment in my opinion).

If I were to call 911 and report "a black man just walked past my house" or "a guy just walked by talking on the phone and he had a turban on" or "a guy just walked by with his dog and he didn't have a license on the dogs collar" I would be told "911 is for emergency calls only" and they'd probably dispatch a police car to me, the caller, to explain that I am abusing the 911 system.

Why isn't that done with open carry which is just as lawful as all of the above situations? Because it's politically incorrect. However, the 1st amendment allows us the freedom of expression to be politically incorrect, the 2nd to carry that weapon, and the 4th to tell the police to pound sand when they attempt a "consensual" encounter.

So....if I'm being totally within the law and my rights, HOW is that harassing, baiting, or otherwise "messing with" the police? The proper and constitutional view is that the police are harassing the citizen for constitutional, but unpopular to some, activity......PERIOD. The government is specifically prohibited from doing so.