Added Apr 9 2009 11:59AM
See U.S. v Dudley---the open display of a firearm in a state which permits this is only evidence of legal activity.The officer can not approach a subject on the basis of his or her openly displaying a firearm---only.There must be some other illegal activity taking place.
The case is one of the arrest of two convicted felons in possession of various firearms to include NFA items.The whole case was lost because the police confronted the two solely on the basis of a firearm in their vehicle---which was perfectly legal in that state.
Be careful and know the law!
The fact that he's advocating stopping someone going peacefully about their business, seizing their property, and then running the numbers from the seized property doesn't strike you as anti-OC? Not to mention calling it "rude" to open carry in an urban environment (though I'm sure he has no problem with officer's doing do). If the officer, a citizen, has the right to OC, why not the other citizens of the same society?It didn't really strike me as being anti-OC, more an admonition to other police that - like it or not - this is permissable conduct, which is what we've been saying all along.
I would like to read this Dudley ruling - never heard of someone getting out of a supposed NFA violation.
-ljp
Maybe I read it wrong, but it seemed to me like he was presenting a hypothetical situation - (if) you stop some guy and then the case gets tossed, don't be surprised... etc. I'm certainly not going to defend cops who perform arbitrary stops and arrests based on misunderstanding of the law (been there). I missed the "rude" remark anyway, so I'm willing to believe you're right. I am trying to read all this with continual interruptions at work.Legba wrote:The fact that he's advocating stopping someone going peacefully about their business, seizing their property, and then running the numbers from the seized property doesn't strike you as anti-OC? Not to mention calling it "rude" to open carry in an urban environment (though I'm sure he has no problem with officer's doing do). If the officer, a citizen, has the right to OC, why not the other citizens of the same society?It didn't really strike me as being anti-OC, more an admonition to other police that - like it or not - this is permissable conduct, which is what we've been saying all along.
I would like to read this Dudley ruling - never heard of someone getting out of a supposed NFA violation.
-ljp
*edit*
In fact, the above would be like stopping someone riding a bicycle, taking the bicycle from them, and running the serial number to see if it's stolen. I would call that behavior "anti cyclist," wouldn't you?
He explained that the first step was to control the firearm—(CRIMINAL ACTION #1)separate it from the citizen, secure it for the length of the interaction. On any armed encounter back-up was a routine request. (CRIMINAL ACTION #2) Generally the firearm would be run NCIC while the situation was further handled. If the situation played out with no further criminal action (COMMITTED BY THE OFFICERS) , the firearm, emptied, would be returned to its owner who could reload it and re-holster it after the departure of the CRIMINAL officers>>>>>>>>>He explained that the first step was to control the firearm—separate it from the citizen, secure it for the length of the interaction. On any armed encounter back-up was a routine request. Generally the firearm would be run NCIC while the situation was further handled. If the situation played out with no further criminal action, the firearm, emptied, would be returned to its owner who could reload it and re-holster it after the departure of the officers.<<<<<<<<<<
What !?!?
Illegally confiscate it from the Law Abiding citizen.
Run it thru NCIC !?!?
No further Criminal Action !?!?
:cuss:
Then he goes on to say that he agrees with an armed society, just as long as it doesn't hurt anyones feelings and you hide it.
:?
This sentiment is not very different than what we advocate on this and other 2A boards.It's a new world for us. Carry options are greater for citizens and officers than ever before. We need to stay on top of these changes, to ensure we are responsive to our populations as well as to enjoy the expanded options ourselves. Our support of responsible carry among law abiding citizens is reflected with increased recognition of our ability to carry; for those of us who agree with Heinlein, an armed society is, indeed, a polite society.
Indeed, the map of open carry states is surprising, when one realizes that pistol permit bearers in such states as Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland, and New Jersey may carry openly, and that even California law permits open carry in rural areas.
Open carry has further meaning for us. Whether you live in the state, or are visiting, if it is a full open carry state you are covered. On the one hand, it really is rude to carry open in an urban setting. On the other hand, when in the back country, it is very reassuring, whether you may encounter snakes, mortally injured cattle and deer, or ne'er do wells looking to prey on the unwitting.
Indeed, it is a Brave New World for us. People are realizing the rights they have are being withered away. The only way to keep them is for Citizens and LEOs alike to respect each others' rights and follow the law. Law Enforcement Officers do need to support Law Abiding Citizens. Not a bad close to this op ed piece.It's a new world for us. Carry options are greater for citizens and officers than ever before. We need to stay on top of these changes, to ensure we are responsive to our populations as well as to enjoy the expanded options ourselves. Our support of responsible carry among law abiding citizens is reflected with increased recognition of our ability to carry; for those of us who agree with Heinlein, an armed society is, indeed, a polite society.
I have sent an email to Mr. Laska:
Mr. Laska,
After reading your essay I have a few comments to make:
1. I only speak for my experience in Virginia, where open carry is legal, well understood by the populace and LEO's, where I am a resident and also run a website explaining the ins and outs of gun carry by law abiding citizens.
2. I have never had anyone tell me that my practice of open carry in an urban environment (Northern VA, Fairfax County, just west of D.C., the second most affluent county in the nation) is "rude". In fact, I have never had anyone say anything negative to me about open carry at all. What I have had conveyed to me... by unknown citizens and shopkeepers, is a heartfelt "thank you" for my decision to responsibly carry a sidearm. Or I may get questions such as "Are you a cop?", "Why do you carry?". I take the opportunity to explain my actions and educate about gun rights and responsibilities. My right to carry does not cease or become negated simply because I don't live in the country.
3. Some states like VA do not allow concealed carry in an establishment that serves alcohol (such as Applebee's), and open carry is the only legal option for the gun carrier. See http://www.vcdl.org/letters/ABC_Letter.pdf and http://www.vcdl.org/letters/VASP_OPEN.pdf for more info. The citizen openly carrying is those establishments is simply obeying the law and not attempting to be "rude".
4. I take umbrage at your belief that open carry constitutes probable cause for a Terry stop. If no law is being violated, the officer may not stop and disarm me for the purposes of having a non-consensual "chat". Departments in VA understand this and have been trained accordingly. What I *do* support is the officer instigating a consensual conversation with the armed citizen. This has happened to me on multiple occasions, I have audio of one such encounter: http://vaguninfo.com/media/chick.mp3 I support the officer speaking with the citizen for the purpose of determining the mental state of mind, is the person acting nervous, shifty, or evasive. On the flip side of this argument, the officer should be prepared for the citizen to simply tell the officer it's none of his business why the citizen is openly carrying a firearm. I am not cut from that cloth myself, I prefer to be on good terms with the local officers and I enjoy speaking to them about open carry if they ask.
5. If the officer has no PC that the openly carried gun is stolen, what gives the officer the power (notice I said "power" and not "right") to run a serial number through NCIS? I Think you know the answer to this question. This also varies from state to state depending on local laws. But, here in VA simply openly carrying a firearm is not sufficient PC to stop a citizen, disarm him or her and run the firearm through NCIS. That is considered a violation of the 4th amendment and any negative discovery through NCIS would be invalidated in court.
6. Further info on open carry in VA can be found here: http://vaguninfo.com/pages/opencarry.htm
In closing, I gathered from your essay that you recognize a citizen's right to openly carry a firearm and the purpose of your column was to inform line officers what to expect and how to react if and when they encounter someone like myself. I appreciate your information but we also must ensure that officers don't feel they can go on a "fishing trip" and molest a citizen for simple legal gun carry.
If you ever find yourself in the Northern VA area feel free to contact me. I'll gladly introduce you to the open carry crowd here in VA (where the opencarry.org movement was born) for a dinner out on the town. It's something we do regularly and we enjoy new faces and different perspectives.
Vr,
Nakedshoplifter
vaguninfo.com
Put electrical tape over the serial number. No numbers to run. Want to see the numbers? Get a warrant.Legba wrote:The fact that he's advocating stopping someone going peacefully about their business, seizing their property, and then running the numbers from the seized property doesn't strike you as anti-OC? Not to mention calling it "rude" to open carry in an urban environment (though I'm sure he has no problem with officer's doing do). If the officer, a citizen, has the right to OC, why not the other citizens of the same society?It didn't really strike me as being anti-OC, more an admonition to other police that - like it or not - this is permissable conduct, which is what we've been saying all along.
I would like to read this Dudley ruling - never heard of someone getting out of a supposed NFA violation.
-ljp
*edit*
In fact, the above would be like stopping someone riding a bicycle, taking the bicycle from them, and running the serial number to see if it's stolen. I would call that behavior "anti cyclist," wouldn't you?
Seeing that makes me feel better all around, as it shows that there are some LEOs out there who are willing to step up in their "in-house" forums and tell the jerks to knock it off.Added Apr 9 2009 11:59AM
See U.S. v Dudley---the open display of a firearm in a state which permits this is only evidence of legal activity.The officer can not approach a subject on the basis of his or her openly displaying a firearm---only.There must be some other illegal activity taking place.
The case is one of the arrest of two convicted felons in possession of various firearms to include NFA items.The whole case was lost because the police confronted the twosolely on the basis of a firearm in their vehicle---which was perfectly legal in that state.
Be careful and know the law!
4sooth Alert Moderator
Added Apr 9 2009 5:17PM
Can you give us a list of open carry, concealed carry, and "thou shalt not carry" states.
ted Alert Moderator
Added Apr 9 2009 6:43PM
See OpenCarry.Org..This site has a good handle on open,concealed and no carry rights in the many states.
There are forums for each state as well as general discussion,court cases and ongoing activism in other regions.
4sooth Alert Moderator
Added Apr 9 2009 10:01PM
This article is a start, but hey, knock off the "rude" comments dude.Were you one to the police officers in the 60s after segregation was ended told blacks it was rude to hang out near white folks' neighborhoods??
And what's with the advice for police to take guns and run SN checks - that's ILLEGAL, unless, you had proper grounds (reasonable suspicion of crime afoot) to stop the individual to begin with, AND you have cause to believe that the person is both armed AND dangerous - did you see the tw "ANDs"?
majstoll
Great letter, but for future reference you should remember that NCIC != NCIS != NICS.I have sent an email to Mr. Laska: