• 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.

Do you want to win or lose your OC fight?

155gr

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
19
Location
King Co., Washington, USA
imported post

It would help me if the original poster would give examples of things a person should do, and also examples of things a person should not do. I appreciate the effort put into the original post, but I don't really know exactly what the OP wants people to do or avoid.

(BTW, I'm new here, been reading the forum off and on for several months.)
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

155gr wrote:
It would help me if the original poster would give examples of things a person should do, and also examples of things a person should not do. I appreciate the effort put into the original post, but I don't really know exactly what the OP wants people to do or avoid.

(BTW, I'm new here, been reading the forum off and on for several months.)
Welcome to OCDO!!
 

Marty Hayes

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
135
Location
, ,
imported post

44Brent wrote:
It's interesting how the opinion enforcement officers are coming out of the woodwork with their message of "don't exercise your rights, or we'll take them away".

Police chiefs are not the only ones who influence public policy. If enough opinion enforcement officers keep pushing their agenda, OCers can put on their "taxpayer"hats and go to city council meetings to demand reductions in property taxes and bloated head counts in police departments. Maybe a halt to salary increases would also be in order for opinion enforcement officers.

Combine head count reductions with budget cuts, and a few lawsuits here and there, and then maybe police chiefs might start informing their underlings that their job is to enforce laws and protect civil rights, not enforce opinions.

44Brent:

The fact remains that the meaning of "warrants alarm" has not been conclusively settled here in WA state. Until that occurs, (which may take a while) the interpretation of that phrase is left to the discretion of the LEO. For example, walking down the street OCing is legal, no other variables involved. But, go into a bank that has just been robbed, and does that raise enough suspicion that your OC would warrant alarm? How about a business suit v. scruffy biker clothing? How about one person carrying into a bank, v. three people? At what point will a jury believe that whatever a person was doing reasonably warranted alarm?

I like the fact that we have OC here in Washington State, although I seldom carry in such a manner. But, if my gun flashes, or I need to take off a coat at some time, it is nice to know I will likely not be arrested for that.
 

Morris

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
173
Location
North of Seattlle, South of Canada, Washington, US
imported post

My purpose of the post was to cause folks who OC to give thought to their actions and words out "on the street" and here in the forum world.

A question was asked about examples. Here's some to consider:

1) You are out in the city park, peacefully carrying and a soccer mom cries to 911. Natural response is to send a cop to investigate. Cop sees you, hopefully observes you and if he/she contacts you, it's on a positive, non-confrontational manner. However, YOUR attitude, regardless of what cop projects or articulates in manner and gestures, will win the fight. Who do you think gets more respect and attracts respect? Cop with a bad day and an attitude to match or the OC'er who is polite, firm but doesn't reciprocate the investigating cop's issues of the moment?

2) You OC in a store, say, like a hardware store. You are confronted by an employee or manager who wants you to leave. Customers are milling around but you can bet your sweet Aunt Fannies' rump they are observing. Who get's the upper hand in positive thoughts? The polite and calm OC'er or the OC'er who raises a voice and acts a bit silly, saying viable but unfortunate things like, "We'll never shop here again!"

Point is, you who OC are the missionaries to this "faith." Due to increased media coverage, folks of all stripes are coming here and other places to see what the big idea is all about. They need to know both the positive and negative interactions that can and will occur. That needs to be discussed calmly. But do you turn off someone because of your big attitude here or an attitude on the street?

(In full discolsure, Marty and I have professionally known each other for some time and I've trained under him and his lovely wife. We also attend training together as well as belong to the same professional organizations and so on. But he's the better looking one . . . ) Marty makes some great points that should be remembered. Folks,despite what the anti-gun crowd crows about, cops are generally supportiveof gun rights and folks owning and carrying guns. In Washington state, the largest LE Firearms Instructor organization was vocally against I-676. In 2007, POLICE Magazine, a top tier trade journal, took a poll in which cops who responded were overwhelmingly supportive of gun rights (true to form, however, top administrators from urban areaswere for more restrictions versus street cops). These attitudes in LE do changebased upon region within a state or region within the Union. A deputy inKlik county will likely view OC in amore supportive light that a cop in liberal Seattle. A cop in a rural farming town in Wyoming will be more positive or not care about OC unlike a cop in say, upstate New York (as an example). Contrary to popular opinion, guns and gun laws DO NOT make up the majority ofbasic cop training in the Basic Law Enforcement Training Academy (BLEA). Some topics, like OC, are briefly mentioned because the time isn't there. Gun training beyond the academy is limited and instructors like Marty or me complain that we wish we could get more into their hands (alas, not so - in downturn economic times, training usually gets to the chopping block first, even with the state mandatory minimums). If you want to educate or get involved with your local agencies and help make policy or attitude changes, start serving on Public Safety Commissions or Committees. Nearly every city has one. Orhave a friendly, non-confrontational meeting with the city attorney,manager or mayor. Small cities have the most approachable of these folks. Again, be the positive missionary to those who may not be aware or forgetful of the laws.

We can deflect our involvement in the process by saying we'll cut taxes and bloated agencies. But the reality is that unless YOU, as an OC'er, are willing to get involved in grassroots efforts like Lonnie and others have done, you are not helping the cause. When you act in a negative manner or boast of your confrontations here, you don't help. When you get into pissing matches with cops or deputies on the street, you don't help. When you do not want to understand that social attitudes differ from yours (urban versus surburban versus rural, as an example), you don't help things. Should you be abused for your maker given rights? No! But the time to fight the improper or wrong action is in the courts or with administration or the corporate heads of the company, not in the face of the employee or poorly informed street cop.

Again, how you project yourself on the street and here in the electronic world goes a long way as to whether someone on the fence over the issue falls. That is the point of my post.
 

44Brent

Regular Member
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
772
Location
Olympia, WA
imported post

When you act in a negative manner or boast of your confrontations here, you don't help. When you get into pissing matches with cops or deputies on the street, you don't help.

Marty Hayes gave a generalized complaint about "jackasses" who open carry, but provided not a single example of such supposed misbehavior. Nor, has Morris provided a single example of such supposed misbehavior.

There is no "need" for OCers to act as missionaries, because OC is not a religion. It is LEGAL.
 

Marty Hayes

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
135
Location
, ,
imported post

44Brent wrote
Marty Hayes gave a generalized complaint about "jackasses" who open carry

Really? Please be so kind as to point that out. I know I am getting old and feeble, but I don't think I would have mis-remembered such a caustic remark.

Also, am going out of town for a couple of days and will be without computer, but will be happy to continue this discussion when I return. Perhaps by then, you will have been able to locate the offending remark.
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

44Brent wrote:
When you act in a negative manner or boast of your confrontations here, you don't help. When you get into pissing matches with cops or deputies on the street, you don't help.

Marty Hayes gave a generalized complaint about "jackasses" who open carry, but provided not a single example of such supposed misbehavior. Nor, has Morris provided a single example of such supposed misbehavior.

There is no "need" for OCers to act as missionaries, because OC is not a religion. It is LEGAL.
44, you are part of the problem not part of the solution. You demand everyone kiss you a$$ over your rights and make more enemies than friends. It's not about legal, religion or even rights. It is about educating the people around you, which includes and LEOs you come in contact with.
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

44Brent wrote:
When you act in a negative manner or boast of your confrontations here, you don't help. When you get into pissing matches with cops or deputies on the street, you don't help.

Marty Hayes gave a generalized complaint about "jackasses" who open carry, but provided not a single example of such supposed misbehavior. Nor, has Morris provided a single example of such supposed misbehavior.

There is no "need" for OCers to act as missionaries, because OC is not a religion. It is LEGAL.

I believe that both tried to point out that while OC is Legal NOW, it could be the subject of a campaign to make it NOT because of actions of Jackasses. As for specific incidents go back and read some of the posts over the last couple of years where OC'ers were openly confrontational and posted detailed accounts of their actions here.

Morris merely tried to point how this kind of action is less than helpful to the cause. While OC may not be totally outlawed it is entirely possible it may be severely restricted under the "reasonable restriction" attitude often mentioned in judicial circles. It is important that one chose carefully which battlefield to play on. One that should be avoided at all times is when confronted by a LEO that is performing his Job. Listen more than talking, gather as many facts as possible, and if you feel you are wronged take it to the proper place. The complaint process or the courts. In cases like this follow the old advice about why the Creator gave us two ears, two eyes, but only one mouth. Look and Listen twice as much as you speak.
 

44Brent

Regular Member
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
772
Location
Olympia, WA
imported post

Marty Hayes wrote:
44Brent wrote
Marty Hayes gave a generalized complaint about "jackasses" who open carry

Really? Please be so kind as to point that out. I know I am getting old and feeble, but I don't think I would have mis-remembered such a caustic remark.

Also, am going out of town for a couple of days and will be without computer, but will be happy to continue this discussion when I return. Perhaps by then, you will have been able to locate the offending remark.
Go back and look at your original post. You wrote:

But these bacon bits will become more resistant to your rights and indeed, champion the elimination of them because someone decided to be a jackass.
 

44Brent

Regular Member
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
772
Location
Olympia, WA
imported post

44, you are part of the problem not part of the solution. You demand everyone kiss you a$$ over your rights and make more enemies than friends. It's not about legal, religion or even rights. It is about educating the people around you, which includes and LEOs you come in contact with.
I disagree. Citizens do not have a responsibility for educating police officers. It is the responsibility of the police academies to train police officers. When the academies are deficient in their training, it becomes the responsibility of police officers' employers to remedy the deficiency, not the OCer who is merely going about his business.

People may also notice "Bear's" statements that "You demand everyone kiss you (sic ) a$$ over your rights". He's probably still a little sore that I contradicted him when he stated that public corporations do not enjoy 1st Amendment Rights. I responded by publishing the verbatim text of the 1st Amendment. Hopefully, he will get over that rejoinder someday, and actually read the unabridged version of the Bill of Rights.

Rather then expecting the police to "kiss you (sic) a$$" of OCers as Bear states, I simply believe people who OC should be left alone by police unless OCers have violated a law.

I have had a number of recent encounters with law enforcement officers lately who KNEW OC is legal, but wanted to know "who", "what", and "why" I was OCing. I even had three police officers show up at my residence once to inform me that someone complained about me OCing. Again, they knew I was a law abiding citizen, but they showed up "just because someone had complained". They wanted to see my driver's license and know what kind of pistol I own. When I asked them why they wanted to know the make and model of my pistol, their answer was "we get paid to ask questions". I terminated the discussion at that point and shut the door.

When police officers get sent out to bulletin boards to express their opinions, and are sent out to peoples' residences to inquire what type of pistols they own, that tells me that they have WAY too much time on their hands. All of this interest of OCers by police reeks of stopping blacks for "driving while black".

The title on this thread is "Do you want to win or lose your OC fight?" I would like to know how police would respond if citizens started posting messages on their forums titled "Do you want to win or lose the fight to keep your job".
 

ghosthunter

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
283
Location
MOUNT VERNON, Washington, USA
imported post

Morris, thanks for replying to my question. Not to change the topic, just a small side trip. I would be interested in your thoughts on tape recording conversations with LEOs. It has been brought up on several threads and since we have you here I think it kinda fits in with this topic. I would like to here your view.

Thank you
:)
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

44Brent wrote:
44, you are part of the problem not part of the solution. You demand everyone kiss you a$$ over your rights and make more enemies than friends. It's not about legal, religion or even rights. It is about educating the people around you, which includes and LEOs you come in contact with.
I disagree. Citizens do not have a responsibility for educating police officers. It is the responsibility of the police academies to train police officers. When the academies are deficient in their training, it becomes the responsibility of police officers' employers to remedy the deficiency, not the OCer who is merely going about his business.

People may also notice "Bear's" statements that "You demand everyone kiss you (sic ) a$$ over your rights". He's probably still a little sore that I contradicted him when he stated that public corporations do not enjoy 1st Amendment Rights. I responded by publishing the verbatim text of the 1st Amendment. Hopefully, he will get over that rejoinder someday, and actually read the unabridged version of the Bill of Rights.

Rather then expecting the police to "kiss you (sic) a$$" of OCers as Bear states, I simply believe people who OC should be left alone by police unless OCers have violated a law.

I have had a number of recent encounters with law enforcement officers lately who KNEW OC is legal, but wanted to know "who", "what", and "why" I was OCing. I even had three police officers show up at my residence once to inform me that someone complained about me OCing. Again, they knew I was a law abiding citizen, but they showed up "just because someone had complained". They wanted to see my driver's license and know what kind of pistol I own. When I asked them why they wanted to know the make and model of my pistol, their answer was "we get paid to ask questions". I terminated the discussion at that point and shut the door.

When police officers get sent out to bulletin boards to express their opinions, and are sent out to peoples' residences to inquire what type of pistols they own, that tells me that they have WAY too much time on their hands. All of this interest of OCers by police reeks of stopping blacks for "driving while black".

The title on this thread is "Do you want to win or lose your OC fight?" I would like to know how police would respond if citizens started posting messages on their forums titled "Do you want to win or lose the fight to keep your job".
The only thing I'm sore about is I get all kinds of flack and called names because I disagree with someone. You on the other handrecommend stupid and moronic ways to deal with an idea that the public as a whole does not yet embrace and not one person here tells you you are a fool, which you are by the way. But you continue to spout theories on how to deal with people that don't know and need to be educated. If we don't do it,who the hell will? No one that's who. But you seem to think the world will learn through osmosis. I guarantee that won't happen, ever. Talk about being wrong.
rolleyes.gif
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote:
The only thing I'm sore about is I get all kinds of flack and called names because I disagree with someone.
Bear, we love ya. :)

The reason you get flack is because you are so... um ...blunt?... forthright? ... cranky?... direct!... yes! that's it, direct! in your disagreement.

Just ignore the younglings with thin skin who give you flak. Their day will come to be direct. :)
 

Ajetpilot

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2007
Messages
1,416
Location
Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
imported post

44Brent wrote:
I even had three police officers show up at my residence once to inform me that someone complained about me OCing. Again, they knew I was a law abiding citizen, but they showed up "just because someone had complained". They wanted to see my driver's license and know what kind of pistol I own. When I asked them why they wanted to know the make and model of my pistol, their answer was "we get paid to ask questions". I terminated the discussion at that point and shut the door.
That is incredible. When LE starts knocking on your door to investigate a legal activity, they have gone way too far. Now,one has to have identification available 24/7 to show to anyone with "authority"? And, you have to start answering questions about personal items that you own? I think not!

 

Jim675

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
1,023
Location
Bellevue, Washington, USA
imported post

I think both sides here are right and making good points.
If I may attempt to summarize:
1. Courtesy does come across better than (suppressed) rage.
2. Police knocking on doors (!) out of curiosity is over the line, several lines even.

But even when the police go out of their way to make an error we should handle it as gracefully as we are able.

Perhaps the two sides here are an example of the old saw:

What do you call a conservative who been arrested?
A liberal.

Simply touching different parts of the same elephant.
 

Ajetpilot

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2007
Messages
1,416
Location
Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
imported post

Ajetpilot wrote:
That is incredible. When LE starts knocking on your door to investigate a legal activity, they have gone way too far. Now,one has to have identification available 24/7 to show to anyone with "authority"? And, you have to start answering questions about personal items that you own? I think not!
What concerns me even more, are the number of people who would have just complied, given the intimidation factor of a man in uniform with a badge and a gun,orthose withthe attitude, "Sure, I don't have anything to hide."
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

Jim675 wrote:
SNIP But even when the police go out of their way to make an error we should handle it as gracefully as we are able.

Hmmmm. OK. Makes sense.

On second thought, no.

I have first hand knowledge of several cops lying to protect a few others. None of the cops present told the truth. Not one.

When the Blue Wall of Silence comes down, or least starts crumbling good, I'll go back to grace. After excluding the very mildest mistakes, I don't think grace is going to solve a given LEOs willingness to exceed his authority, pressure4A rights with intimidation, etc. And as long as so-called good cops tolerate it and conceal it under some nonsense loyalty to each other it won't change. The Blue Wall of Silence enables this nonsense. Cops know who on a shift skirts the line before one of these encounters ever occurs. Their supervisors know their troops. They know who is inclined to be a knot-head. So-called good cops who practice the Blue Wall of Silence are enablers. They owe a stronger loyalty to the citizens in their jurisdictions.

Also, Iwould like to point out that there is a difference betweenpolice support for OC andtolerance for OC. They may tolerate it after we gracefully tell them what the law is, but I doubt grace will buy support. Ifa given police officerdidn't alreadypersonally support it or 2A enough to get past their CC-only attitude, I don't think being nice about it is going to change their opinion.
 

Morris

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
173
Location
North of Seattlle, South of Canada, Washington, US
imported post

Morris, thanks for replying to my question. Not to change the topic, just a small side trip. I would be interested in your thoughts on tape recording conversations with LEOs. It has been brought up on several threads and since we have you here I think it kinda fits in with this topic. I would like to here your view.
---------------------------
Ghost,

I have no issues about it personally. I know some in my career do but in the day and age of YouTube and camera phones, you have to assume someone is video and/or audio taping you, legal or not. As more cameras get into patrol cars in this area, folks will see in an increase in being videotaped (all perfectably legal in conjunction with a traffic stop or performance of duties, per Washington state law).

Speaking of video/audio taping, I know there is a video of me out there somewhere in the Animal Rights wold of contacting a bunch of protestors about their tresspassing. They didn't seem to think I took their videotaping of me seriously enough when I waved to the camera and said, "Am I on TV? WOW! Hi mom!"

One point to make clear to folks: what is legal today can be illegal next legislative session (take cell phone usage, for example).
 
Top