Open carry interactions with officers

Rusty Young Man · Apr 19, 2014

DaveT319 said:
Tell me, where would they have kept their rifles while seated? A rifle is cumbersome in daily, non-military life. And in a dark theater it wouldn't be seen to have a deterrent effect.

While anyone there would have taken a rifle over nothing in that instance, I don't think you can really tell me that it would have been BETTER than a handgun.

Now, I would never tell someone that they couldn't carry a rifle if they wanted. But I think they are wholly impractical for when you're out in public.

Here's the hierarchy of weapons for self-defense, as I see it:

1) No event ("The supreme art of War is to subdue the enemy without fighting" - Sun Tzu, The Art of War)
2) An entire legion of avenging angels :lol

NOTE: available only to God's favorite Son {just a little humor, I know He loves us all})
3) An entire army fully outfitted with battle gear

Besides #1, only the following are available to use mere citizens:banghead::
4) All your buddies, fully armed, if only with semi-autos

5) Your semi-auto RIFLE
6) Your primary PISTOL
7) Your secondary, tertiary, quaternary..... pistol

8) Your knife
9) Your bare limbs
10) Cowering in fear and begging to be let go :uhoh: (choice preference for hoplophobes and so-called "pacifists" who wish to disarm everyone because of their repressed urges and insecurities).

Rusty Young Man · Apr 19, 2014

DaveT319 said:
Tell me, where would they have kept their rifles while seated? A rifle is cumbersome in daily, non-military life.SNIP.... I think they are wholly impractical for when you're out in public.

The same argument could be made for our Rights, Freedoms and Liberties.:uhoh:

I would say that in general, defending one's Freedoms and Liberties can be more than a little cumbersome, and standing up for one's Rights can be impractical given one's daily routine.
But I'll be damned if our Rights aren't worth the tense, awkward moments and every inconvenience that comes along with their defense. But I'm really not the one to ask, seeing as I haven't ever had to risk or lose my life in their defense.

DaveT319 · Apr 19, 2014

Rusty Young Man said:
The same argument could be made for our Rights, Freedoms and Liberties.:uhoh:

I wish you guys would stop using that straw man. I said very clearly that I would never tell tell someone that they couldn't carry one if they wanted. I just think a rifle is impractical as a defensive weapon while out in public doing daily activity.

Rusty Young Man · Apr 19, 2014

DaveT319 said:
I wish you guys would stop using that straw man. I said very clearly that I would never tell tell someone that they couldn't carry one if they wanted. I just think a rifle is impractical as a defensive weapon while out in public doing daily activity.

Not attacking you, or attacking you by a strawmen proxy. I apologize if it came off that way. That's the reason I sometimes overuse smileys, so that people know I'm not trying to be confrontational.

I think we're just trying to point out the double-standard that has rubbed off on you from all the statist propaganda that citizens are bombarded with. I can say that for myself, at least. Not too long ago, Citizen (or was it WalkingWolf?

) pointed out something I posted that REALLY stopped me and got me thinking. I'd been tainted by the Dark Side, and am glad he pointed it out so I could purge it from my system.:lol:

Rusty Young Man · Apr 19, 2014

davidmcbeth said:
--Moderator edited/deleted quote--

Another rare-ish gem from you. I know it felt weird when I first started carrying my 1911 (bumping things, poking, etc.), but now it is Second

p) nature. I've no doubt the same carries over to rifles, and we would probably find it to be the case should we ask people who are denied the OC of their sidearm.

OT: Hope the OP wasn't discouraged by my reply or the others.

FreeInAZ · Apr 19, 2014

The reason most here don't just give cops their ID is multiple. (1) It reinforces the action of cops who often are acting outside of the law. (2) It adds you to a database [LEIN], that never goes away. This means every time you should get pulled over or be identified, etc.. the cop will see a contact involving a previous MWAG call. This is something we all should want to avoid. Some cops are already "juiced up" enough, last thing you want is them expecting to see a gun or perceive you as a threat when you are not.

My spider senses are sending up all sorts of red flags on this thread, as this forum seems to have a rash of one hit wonder posters as of late that post a provocative thread and vanish. I hope this is not another.

Giving the benefit of the doubt - I will say there are many ways to handle a "police contact" in a positive manner. This depends on your state laws, so know them inside out. Most states are NOT stop and ID. So in the past I have simply stated "hey guys I'd be happy to talk about: sports, current events, politics, the weather...however I do not answer questions of an investigative nature." If the officer insists on pushing for ID, I have nicely said "Well since I am not required to show ID, yet you are insistent on placing my name in a national database for a legal activity, I will gladly provide you with my information if you give me your drivers license, which I will photograph post to a national database that law-abiding citizens can access." I have yet to have a officer or city official agree to this. So they have a agenda and that is to identify and label (rightly or wrongly) as many citizens as possible, while keeping their own information secret. Wonder why? After all - if they are doing nothing wrong, then they have nothing to hide, right?

Or there is the tried and true WASH/RINSE/REPEAT:

Am I being detained? No = Have a good day/night & leave. Yes = Under what reasonable articuable suspicion of a crime am I being held? If the officer simply says "You are carrying a gun." ask for a supervisor and invoke your right to an attorney and to remain silent. If the officer continues to press for information repeat your requests in a calm and pleasant manner. Remember they are always recording you. Pretty hard to say you caused a ruckus when they're screaming profanity at you and you are calm and respectful.

In the past this technique has worked in making the officer seek legal confirmation that what he/she is doing is or is not within the law. Remember police are the only citizens in this country who can get away with using the excuse they were ignorant of the law.

Grapeshot · Apr 19, 2014

(14) LONG GUN CARRY IS OFF-TOPIC: This web site is focused on the right to openly carry properly holstered handguns in daily American life. We do NOT promote the carry of long guns. Long guns are great! OCDO co-founders John & Mike and most of the members of this forum own at least one long gun - but due to urban area issues of muzzle control, lack of trigger guard coverage, and the fact that the long gun carry issue distracts from our main mission to promote the open carry of handguns in daily life, we will leave long gun carry activism in the capable hands of the future founders of web sites about long gun carry. Exception: This rule does NOT apply to discussions about long gun carry in jurisdictions which ban handgun carry but not long gun carry and thus require long gun carry as a matter of public policy.

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules

Off topic posts will contribute to potential thread lock.

protias · Apr 19, 2014

DaveT319 said:
You think a rifle would have been superior to a handgun in that instance?

Have you ever tried to shoot at a target with a handgun more than 50'+ away? It is kind of difficult. With a rifle, it is really easy.

Grapeshot · Apr 19, 2014

protias said:
Have you ever tried to shoot at a target with a handgun more than 50'+ away? It is kind of difficult. With a rifle, it is really easy.

There are those who regularly man size targets at 100+ yards - I find it quite easy. Not much practice to determine either.
http://survival.outdoorlife.com/pho...06/sight-alignment-long-range-pistol-shooting

Milk jugs at 50 yards is fun! :banana:

protias · Apr 19, 2014

Grapeshot said:
There are those who regularly man size targets at 100+ yards - I find it quite easy. Not much practice to determine either.
http://survival.outdoorlife.com/pho...06/sight-alignment-long-range-pistol-shooting

Milk jugs at 50 yards is fun! :banana:

No doubt it can be done, just more difficult, especially if you don't practice it at all.

davegran · Apr 19, 2014

Grapeshot said:
There are those who regularly man size targets at 100+ yards - I find it quite easy. Not much practice to determine either.
....

Gee, if I perceived a threat 100 yards away I'd be heading in the opposite direction, not taking pot shots at it....

WalkingWolf · Apr 19, 2014

davegran said:
Gee, if I perceived a threat 100 yards away I'd be heading in the opposite direction, not taking pot shots at it....

I don't think that is what he meant. Bob Munden when he was alive could hit a target at 300 yards with a snubnose revolver. I doubt he would have attempted that in any self defense situation. Police snipers try for the closest shot that can be safely taken, most times much less than the distance that they train for.

Being able to hit a target at 100 yards would IMO increase the odds of being able to hit a eye socket at 10 yards.

rightwinglibertarian · Apr 19, 2014

FreeInAZ said:
The reason most here don't just give cops their ID is multiple. (1) It reinforces the action of cops who often are acting outside of the law. (2) It adds you to a database [LEIN], that never goes away.

i'll be over there in about 5-6 weeks and the first thing i'm going to do is buy a firearm. The question is what about §968.24?

After having identified himself or herself as a law enforcement officer, a law enforcement officer may stop a person in a public place for a reasonable period of time when the officer reasonably suspects that such person is committing, is about to commit or has committed a crime, and may demand the name and address of the person and an explanation of the person's conduct. Such detention and temporary questioning shall be conducted in the vicinity where the person was stopped.

Clearly forcing a person to identify themselves in unacceptable but I fear we are paying the price for compromise and liberalism.

Firearms Iinstuctor · Apr 19, 2014

protias said:
Have you ever tried to shoot at a target with a handgun more than 50'+ away? It is kind of difficult. With a rifle, it is really easy.

The old PPC qualification course of fire had a 50 yard stage those of us that were the better shots were place most of are rounds into the X ring at that range.

More then 50 feet is only 16.666 yards should be easy beans for a good pistol shot. Training and practice is what it takes.

I had a couple of clients tell me it was impossible to make good hits at 56 yards with 6 inch 357 as was the case in a Texas shooting.

I set them up 42 yards away had them shoot my 6 inch 357 off a improvise rest and watch them each shoot 6 shots into around 8 inches dead center of an standard ISPC target.

Training practice practice practice

rightwinglibertarian · Apr 19, 2014

Nightmare said:
Don't confuse identification with the surrender of identification documents. §968.24 is satisfied by your verbal identification. If the cop wants your documents then force him to arrest you to document the unwarranted seizure.

Thank you! That sounds like just the tactic i'd go for. For reference do you have any precedents for citation? I'm told the area i'll be going to is a right libtard haven and i'm going to need to learn how to chew these guys up and spit them out Kokesh style

cds0699 · Apr 19, 2014

I personally choose to be of a friendly nature and cooperate with law enforcement. I realize I have the right to tell them nothing, I just choose to give them a little info so that they can go on about their job and I can get on with whatever I'm doing. Last time I open carried I had 7 different officers walk by me and none said a word about my gun, so it hasn't been an issue for me. If they ask, I will cooperate to a point.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

Rusty Young Man · Apr 19, 2014

cds0699 said:
I personally choose to be of a friendly nature and cooperate with law enforcement. I realize I have the right to tell them nothing, I just choose to give them a little info so that they can go on about their job and I can get on with whatever I'm doing. Last time I open carried I had 7 different officers walk by me and none said a word about my gun, so it hasn't been an issue for me. If they ask, I will cooperate to a point.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

No one is saying anything to the contrary; the issue stems when an LEO starts asking for things you aren't obligated to provide and EXPECTS you to comply with those "requests" (demands).

The problem with being "friendly/cooperative" and handing over your ID and/or sidearm when you aren't required to is that the LEO just had his ego reinforced, and the next guy that gets stopped but doesn't comply further than the law requires is automatically seen as confrontation by the LEO.

It trains LEOs the wrong way if 50 citizens gladly bend over, but the 51st stands up for his Rights and only complies to the extent required by law.

Also, it isn't the citizens' job to make their life easier. If you aren't committing any crime, and you aren't suspect of having committed a crime (Probable Cause, not the RAS crap they invented), they have NO REASON to stop you. The "proactive policing" idea doesn't hold up, and reminds me to much of the moving Minority Report; it assumes everyone is a criminal who just hasn't committed the crime yet.

rightwinglibertarian · Apr 19, 2014

Nightmare said:
What precedents, case law stare decisis? They are in the annotations at your cited URL. Hiibel is on point.

Case law will only address significant arguments that reach an appeals court's attention. That there may not be any in Wisconsin and noted at this statute suggests only that an appeal on these particular grounds has not reached that level.

I-ANAL and do not have the resources to search all of Wisconsin case law.

so they are. Ok I've had coffee now and on the PC, so I can actually see whats going on properly

cds0699 · Apr 20, 2014

Rusty Young Man said:
No one is saying anything to the contrary; the issue stems when an LEO starts asking for things you aren't obligated to provide and EXPECTS you to comply with those "requests" (demands).

The problem with being "friendly/cooperative" and handing over your ID and/or sidearm when you aren't required to is that the LEO just had his ego reinforced, and the next guy that gets stopped but doesn't comply further than the law requires is automatically seen as confrontation by the LEO.

It trains LEOs the wrong way if 50 citizens gladly bend over, but the 51st stands up for his Rights and only complies to the extent required by law.

Also, it isn't the citizens' job to make their life easier. If you aren't committing any crime, and you aren't suspect of having committed a crime (Probable Cause, not the RAS crap they invented), they have NO REASON to stop you. The "proactive policing" idea doesn't hold up, and reminds me to much of the moving Minority Report; it assumes everyone is a criminal who just hasn't committed the crime yet.

You have a valid point and I wouldn't take kindly to demands. I guess it depends on the situation.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

Law abider · Apr 22, 2014

protias said:
Have you ever tried to shoot at a target with a handgun more than 50'+ away? It is kind of difficult. With a rifle, it is really easy.

I just started summer practice with my 357 revolver. my target: 2 logs , diameter 6 inches, 1.5 foot long stacked on on top of another, stacked on top of a large tall plastic bucket, 2 feet tall with a pie plate as the head. I shoot from 30 feet with 38s, hit the top log just below the head, when aiming for head. Need to adj. 2 weeks ago, shot quart bottles and 2liter filled with H2O. Shot low and hit them at the base. Then put the entire site on the bottle so it disappeared and blew them up at 30 feet. Sights not adjustable. Bottles were on snow drift about 4 feet high.
Any advice on how to stop low shots. I hit the targets but in order to hit dead center, gun has to be placed on target so it is out of view. Then i get them.

Open carry interactions with officers

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member