• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Open Carry Opinion/Story

Rusty Young Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
1,548
Location
Árida Zona
At least it's not blatantly biased against armed LACs.:rolleyes:

“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?
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
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.
 

SpringerXDacp

New member
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
3,341
Location
Burton, Michigan
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. :banghead:
 

FreeInAZ

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
2,508
Location
Secret Bunker
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? ;)
 

arentol

New member
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
383
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
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
 

jeffrey-r

Regular Member
Joined
May 21, 2013
Messages
110
Location
Warren, MI
"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.
 

Evil Creamsicle

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
1,264
Location
Police State, USA
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.
 

Evil Creamsicle

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
1,264
Location
Police State, USA
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.
 

Rusty Young Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
1,548
Location
Árida Zona
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:

MackTheKnife

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
198
Location
Jacksonville, Florida
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:

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
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:

MackTheKnife

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
198
Location
Jacksonville, Florida
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.
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
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.
 

Evil Creamsicle

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
1,264
Location
Police State, USA
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.
 

2AFriendly

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
76
Location
Midwest
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.
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
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?
 

Rusty Young Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
1,548
Location
Árida Zona
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.

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.

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.:confused:
 
Top