Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Open Carry Opinion/Story

  1. #1
    Regular Member Outdoorsman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Genesee County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    273

    Open Carry Opinion/Story

    http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/...pen_carry.html

    "Rich Kinsey column: Open carry advocates can put police in tough situations"

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Rich Kinsey is a retired Ann Arbor police detective sergeant who now writes his "Semper Cop" column about crime and safety for The Ann Arbor News.
    http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/...pen_carry.html
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Rusty Young Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Árida Zona
    Posts
    1,648
    At least it's not blatantly biased against armed LACs.

    “Officer” it is now “go” time. Time to approach. Stay focused; look for cover and concealment as you approach in case things go bad in a hurry. Always watch the hands, they can kill you.

    “Officer” as you approach you call out to the person with the holstered, open carried pistol, “Hello sir or ma’am how are you today?”

    “Good,” says the deranged gunman, felon illegally in possession of a firearm or law-abiding open carrying citizen.

    “What are you doing there sir or ma'am? I see you have a firearm, what’s up?”

    “Nothing, I am just enjoying this fine Michigan day,” replies the deranged gunman, felon illegally in possession of a firearm or law-abiding open carrying citizen.

    “OK I understand, but may I see some identification?”

    “Why? I haven’t done anything wrong! I am just exercising my second amendment constitutional right to bear arms. I therefore do not have to show you any identification. Am I being detained?” This is the response you receive “officer,” from the deranged gunman, felon illegally in possession of a firearm or law-abiding open carry citizen.

    Therein lies the problem. How are you, the “officer” to know which category of individual you are dealing with?
    I carry to defend my loved ones; Desensitizing and educating are secondary & tertiary reasons. Anything else is unintended.

    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” - Frederic Bastiat

    "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." - Edmund Burke

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Maybe the guy is deranged ... and not a felon. Or is a felon and not deranged.

    The author of the story should just commit suicide ... end the author's misery.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    ... end the author's misery.
    ... end our misery!
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361
    Now let’s consider that same person talking to themselves walking down the street with a holstered handgun. Would you think this was odd or suspicious? What if that person was walking toward a school, mall, place of worship, through a neighborhood, on a beach, in a park or parking lot? Would you call the police?

    In times like these, many of you would call the police, because you would not want to have it on your conscience that something terrible was about to happen and you did nothing. Bravo! You should call and have the police check it out, if you believe that anyone appears out of sorts, armed and potentially dangerous.
    What IF the person covered the holstered handgun with a thin layer of cloth rendering the firearm unnoticeable from general observation, a felon perhaps in possession of a firearm, while walking towards a school, mall, place of worship, through a neighborhood, on a beach, in a park or parking lot? They don't really want you to carry or see that you're carrying, but yet, they want and require you to disclose you're carrying when confronted/stopped.

  7. #7
    Regular Member FreeInAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Secret Bunker
    Posts
    2,573
    Just more irrational fear mongering with a big dose of poor police have to deal with so many nuisances...boo...hoo..!

    Look - MI police stop every person they see mowing their lawn? No, why not? Surely a mower is deadly in the hands of a deranged person, correct? Why no curiosity to ascertain whether or not the person using said mower is not a felon in possession of a stolen mower? The answer - it's not about crime, it's about control. Or maybe all cops are just allergic to grass?
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" by Mahatma Gandhi

    “Your beliefs become your thoughts. Your thoughts become your words. Your words become your actions. Your actions become your habits. Your habits become your values. Your values become your destiny.” by Mahatma Gandhi

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    398
    I would be curious to know how many times as a police officer this guy got a MWAG call for an actual criminal who was openly carrying a holstered gun and who committed an actual premeditated crime with said gun.

    I bet the answer is zero. Practical experience should teach police that criminals don't OC in a holster, so MWAG's for a holstered firearm situation are low risk, not high.

    Also, in most states the police shouldn't even respond to a call like he describes. The 911 operator should screen that call out, our at worst ask for a simple drive by, because nothing criminal is taking place, and as we established, criminals basically never OC, so there is little likelihood this person will commit a crime.

    Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    113
    "If the open carry groups are truly protecting themselves, protecting other citizens, exercising their constitutional rights and really want to work with law enforcement to promote allowing good citizens to properly arm themselves, promote gun ownership and an individual’s rights to defend our communities against criminals, then why are they making officers pawns in their PR program?"

    We aren't MAKING them do anything. We'd much prefer they never talk to us at all.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Evil Creamsicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Police State, USA
    Posts
    1,270
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Young Man View Post
    Therein lies the problem. How are you, the “officer” to know which category of individual you are dealing with?
    Easy, when they actually break a law. Which, in the scenario provided, deranged or not, the individual in question hasn't done. If you aren't sure whether someone is a deranged felon or a law abiding citizen, it means you don't have evidence enough to know that they are for sure a deranged felon, which means you, as an officer, are legally required to assume they are a law abiding citizen.

    This guy was a cop long enough to retire at it, and yet I, a lowly young 'civilian', have a better grasp on this concept than he does. Sad.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Evil Creamsicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Police State, USA
    Posts
    1,270
    Added some to this comment, then commented it on the article:

    You state: "Therein lies the problem. How are you, the “officer” to know which category of individual you are dealing with?"



    The answer, of course, is easy: when they actually break a law. Which, in the scenario provided, deranged or not, the individual in question hasn't done. If you aren't sure whether someone is a deranged felon or a law abiding citizen, it means they haven't done anything [in your presence or witness, at least] that is either deranged or felonious. If you don't have evidence enough to know that they are for sure a deranged felon, then you, as an officer, are legally required to assume they are a law abiding citizen. As a retired Sergeant, I would assume that you know this.

    If you are sick of being 'pawns', the answer to that, too, is simple. Stop knowingly, falsely, and to be frank, feloniously ticketing, arresting, and prosecuting people who haven't broken the law.

    In my experience, I've seen less people commit crimes while open carrying a handgun than I have seen commit crimes while open carrying a badge.

  12. #12
    Regular Member FreeInAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Secret Bunker
    Posts
    2,573
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Creamsicle View Post
    Added some to this comment, then commented it on the article:
    Well said! That should bring the "Fudds" out of the wood work.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" by Mahatma Gandhi

    “Your beliefs become your thoughts. Your thoughts become your words. Your words become your actions. Your actions become your habits. Your habits become your values. Your values become your destiny.” by Mahatma Gandhi

  13. #13
    Regular Member Rusty Young Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Árida Zona
    Posts
    1,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Creamsicle View Post
    Easy, when they actually break a law. Which, in the scenario provided, deranged or not, the individual in question hasn't done. If you aren't sure whether someone is a deranged felon or a law abiding citizen, it means you don't have evidence enough to know that they are for sure a deranged felon, which means you, as an officer, are legally required to assume they are a law abiding citizen.

    This guy was a cop long enough to retire at it, and yet I, a lowly young 'civilian', have a better grasp on this concept than he does. Sad.
    You do realize I was quoting the article and that isn't something I said, right?

    Just want to make that clear, seeing as I don't approve of Minority Report policing (for those of you who never watched it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_Report_(film)).

    But I like what you said; definitely goes back to the concept that you CAN'T bait an honest cop.
    Last edited by Rusty Young Man; 04-28-2014 at 08:29 PM.
    I carry to defend my loved ones; Desensitizing and educating are secondary & tertiary reasons. Anything else is unintended.

    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” - Frederic Bastiat

    "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." - Edmund Burke

  14. #14
    Regular Member MackTheKnife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Maybe the guy is deranged ... and not a felon. Or is a felon and not deranged.

    The author of the story should just commit suicide ... end the author's misery.
    Ha!

    Razor Max Tapatalk.
    Mack The Knife sends.

    "Laech cach fer co bas" (Gaelic- "Everyman a warrior until death")
    "Bas no beatha" (McLean war cry- "Death or life")

  15. #15
    Regular Member MackTheKnife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida
    Posts
    204
    How about the dispatchers who get these calls in OC states tell the caller that this is a lawful activity and not a crime? And as for the legal/moral point he made, legal is what counts. And how is OC or the refusal to show ID immoral or puts the community at risk?

    Razor Max Tapatalk.
    Last edited by MackTheKnife; 04-29-2014 at 01:28 PM.
    Mack The Knife sends.

    "Laech cach fer co bas" (Gaelic- "Everyman a warrior until death")
    "Bas no beatha" (McLean war cry- "Death or life")

  16. #16
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Open carry groups will tell their members that they do not have to identify themselves if the “only reason” for the contact is that they are openly carrying a firearm. Legally they are correct, but are they morally correct?
    Abso-damn-lutely. You, "officer", knowing a person's name and home address tell you nothing about that person's current state that is not apparent to your senses at the moment. Knowing a name and address only allows you to check for current wants&warrants for which to make an arrest.

    But firearms must be somehow special; can you imagine if in the same scenario it wasn't a firearm but someone driving and talking to themselves? or listening to an MP3 player? or reading the Bible and speaking in tongues?
    What makes one legal item, a firearm, exempt from Fourth Amendment rights that exist for cars, MP3 players, and religious literature?



    If there is no harm in a stranger (even one with a badge and gun) knowing someone else's home address, where they and their loved ones sleep, then I guess Officer Friendly won't mind whipping out his state (not county or department) identification,... right?

    Does it make you wonder and go "Hmmmmm, what open carry group might he be referring to?"
    We know they read us, but sometimes... you just gotta wonder if they know we read theirs as well and we see the character assassination that goes on in 'their' forums.
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 04-29-2014 at 01:49 PM.

  17. #17
    Regular Member MackTheKnife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    Abso-damn-lutely. You, "officer", knowing a person's name and home address tell you nothing about that person's current state that is not apparent to your senses at the moment. Knowing a name and address only allows you to check for current wants&warrants for which to make an arrest.

    If there is no harm in a stranger (even one with a badge and gun) knowing someone else's home address, where they and their loved ones sleep, then I guess Officer Friendly won't mind whipping out his state (not county or department) identification,... right?

    Does it make you wonder and go "Hmmmmm, what open carry group might he be referring to?"
    We know they read us, but sometimes... you just gotta wonder if they know we read theirs as well and we see the character assassination that goes on in 'their' forums.
    Agree entirely.

    Razor Max Tapatalk.
    Mack The Knife sends.

    "Laech cach fer co bas" (Gaelic- "Everyman a warrior until death")
    "Bas no beatha" (McLean war cry- "Death or life")

  18. #18
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Instead what happens is the person open carrying a handgun backs the officer in a legal corner and refuses to identify themselves, asks if they are being detained and if not walks away. Terrific, the open carry group has made their point, but at the expense of a community's safety.
    A man with a badge and a gun, likely with a collapsible baton and chemical spray, most likely carrying and Electrical Discharge Weapon, a man carrying a radio with the means to call an entire department's strength down, a man who's been trained and taught to control a situation at all times has just approached and confronted me...


    ... and I've backed him into a corner?
    By DAMN I'm good.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Evil Creamsicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Police State, USA
    Posts
    1,270
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Young Man View Post
    You do realize I was quoting the article and that isn't something I said, right?

    Just want to make that clear, seeing as I don't approve of Minority Report policing (for those of you who never watched it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_Report_(film)).

    But I like what you said; definitely goes back to the concept that you CAN'T bait an honest cop.
    Yeah man, sorry if I wasn't clear. I was criticizing the dude that wrote the article not you.

  20. #20
    Regular Member 2AFriendly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    A man with a badge and a gun, likely with a collapsible baton and chemical spray, most likely carrying and Electrical Discharge Weapon, a man carrying a radio with the means to call an entire department's strength down, a man who's been trained and taught to control a situation at all times has just approached and confronted me...


    ... and I've backed him into a corner?
    By DAMN I'm good.
    LOL never thought of it that way.
    Unfriendly | Neutral | Friendly | OC Friendly

    Rate the places you carry according to their 2A friendliness. Online or with free apps for iPhone and Android.

    Proud sponsor of OpenCarry.org

  21. #21
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    How long do you think it will take for convicted felons, who can not legally possess firearms, to learn the lingo, assert their rights and not identify themselves? They would already be guilty of another felony by possessing the gun. Do you really think they would worry about lying to the police and parroting the open carry group’s motto that they are merely exercising their constitutional rights?
    How long will it be before those convicted of DUI/DWI who cannot legally operate a vehicle upon public highways, assert their rights and demand that they cannot be stopped "just to be sure they're licensed" if they just happen to be seen driving?
    Do you really think the public is made safer by prohibiting law enforcement officers from selecting and stopping any random driver they happen to see without suspicion spot-checking the driver's legal ability to drive?

    How long will it be before those with wants&warrants, who cannot legally just be walking around, begin to learn the lingo and what their rights area and insist on not being randomly and stopped and identified as long as they aren't doing anything reasonably suspicious of illegality?

    Scooter, I get the nagging feeling that you'd be just that much happier if people weren't aware of and didn't exercise their rights. Why is that?

  22. #22
    Regular Member Rusty Young Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Árida Zona
    Posts
    1,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    A man with a badge and a gun, likely with a collapsible baton and chemical spray, most likely carrying and Electrical Discharge Weapon, a man carrying a radio with the means to call an entire department's strength down, a man who's been trained and taught to control a situation at all times has just approached and confronted me...


    ... and I've backed him into a corner?
    By DAMN I'm good.
    When you have it, you have it. Love how the author distorts the situation to make the targeted "MWAG" citizen the aggressor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Young Man View Post
    You do realize I was quoting the article and that isn't something I said, right?

    Just want to make that clear, seeing as I don't approve of Minority Report policing (for those of you who never watched it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_Report_(film)).

    But I like what you said; definitely goes back to the concept that you CAN'T bait an honest cop.
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Creamsicle View Post
    Yeah man, sorry if I wasn't clear. I was criticizing the dude that wrote the article not you.
    No problem.
    Just want to make sure people know I'm not a statist. I'm trying to be more careful since one prominent member misunderstood what I posted to be a criticism of OC. Not sure how that happened.
    I carry to defend my loved ones; Desensitizing and educating are secondary & tertiary reasons. Anything else is unintended.

    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” - Frederic Bastiat

    "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." - Edmund Burke

  23. #23
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Come on, open carry groups, give Marshal Dillon and his real life current counterparts a break and work with us, not against us. Tote your pistols, but if you are legally doing so, show us who you are, so we cops can distinguish the good guys from the bad guys.
    Firstly. Funny, but I don't remember Matt stopping everyone in Dodge City he saw openly carrying a gun, maybe I'll have to watch a few more late night reruns.

    Secondly. This presupposes that those who Openly Carry are the bad guys, which I'm fairly sure is not the case. The "bad guys" don't want to be seen carrying, they conceal. The "bad guys" don't use holsters that can be associated with firearms.

    Since we can safely assume that the "bad guys" prefer to conceal, it only makes sense that in order to increase the number of 'hits' officers should concentrate on anyone they can't see being openly armed. The odds are much better that someone concealing their actions is more likely to be a criminal than someone openly practicing some action.

    Lastly. Here's a fairly good clue about distinguishing between good guys and bad guys, Rich, the bad guys will be doing something that in the totality of the circumstances evinces a reasonable suspicion of criminal conduct. The mere carrying of a legal object, without other indicators, does not support that.
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 04-29-2014 at 02:36 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •