Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Article on LawOfficer.com cites to Opencarry.org

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    http://www.lawofficer.com/news-and-a.../carry_on.html

    Unfortunately the article is not perfect - calls us rude and mistakenly suggests police can disarm and run SN checks at will.

    but it is not all bad either - hopefully articles like this in the future will be better.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    SNIP Unfortunately the article is not perfect - calls us rude and mistakenly suggests police can disarm and run SN checks at will.

    but it is not all bad either - hopefully articles like this in the future will be better.
    +1

    I'm glad that fourth commenter got in the information about Terry requirements.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  3. #3
    Regular Member vermonter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    In reference to this post "mistakenly suggests police can disarm and run SN checks at will". How do you feel about Bloods and Crips Open Carrying if they have no criminal history...... yet?

    Personally if I saw someone like that approaching me with a weapon (holstered or not) I would take up a serious defensive stance. Read into that Weapon Drawn!

    How do you make OC legal (no harassment) for us LAW ABIDING citizens, yet restrict the Crips, Bloods and Black Panthers (who started the whole ban in CA in the first place).

    Some how it's always people like that who give the liberals ammo to say "see, people can't handle the responsibility of carrying in public"!

    The "attached" better not show up in front of my house OC!!!

    The anti's do have a point.... You have to draw the line somewhere, and thebelow photo it my bottom line!




  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    560

    Post imported post

    vermonter wrote:
    How do you make OC legal (no harassment) for us LAW ABIDING citizens, yet restrict the Crips, Bloods and Black Panthers (who started the whole ban in CA in the first place).
    No, the Black Panthers didn't "start" the whole gun ban in CA, neither did the Bloods or Crips.

    As for your photo, the gang sounds more like the problem than the firearms. If it was just a group of black guys walking down the street past your house, legally armed (and holstered) would there still be a problem?

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama, ,
    Posts
    1,338

    Post imported post

    Well you could require a 6th grade education to carry and you will really
    limit the gangs abillity to carry.
    But is there such a thing as that old in a gang without a criminal record?

    The problem is the MS-13 OC'ing, since Kalifornia will not keep records on
    illegals, they will never have a criminal record to be banned with.

    But the good thing is with gangs UOC'ing they will not be able to
    get into heated arguments that send lead flying, as they will need to load
    the gun first.
    That should be funny as h*ll, you are walking along the street at 1am,
    and two big groups of thugs start pulling out thier clips and racking the slides back.
    I know he isn't suggesting that they would violate the law and OC loaded.:what:

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Indiana, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    674

    Post imported post

    vermonter wrote:
    How do you feel about Bloods and Crips Open Carrying if they have no criminal history...... yet?

    Personally if I saw someone like that approaching me with a weapon (holstered or not) I would take up a serious defensive stance. Read into that Weapon Drawn!
    For starters, I fully support the rights of ANYONE to carry, regardless of whether they're a white man in a fine suit, or the revived corpse of Tupac Shakur with a bandana on its head breakdancing down the street.


    Secondly, I'm sorry you're a bigoted racist, but could you please not spew your bile all over? Thanks.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Buffalo Gap, South Dakota, USA
    Posts
    193

    Post imported post

    Anyone of any color who respects my space and rights and does not hate me or want to kill me or my family or loved ones for my beliefs or the color of my skin is welcome within my zone.

    Anyone of any color who hates me or wants to hurt or kill me, my family or loved ones for any reason is going down....hard.

    In the meantime, anyone who wants to exercise their 2A rights lawfully, I'm in favor.

    Plain and simple.

    If they look like gangbangers at first, I look for smiles. If there are smiles, chances are there are no threats.


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    38

    Post imported post

    vermonterwrote:

    How do you make OC legal (no harassment) for us LAW ABIDING citizens, yet restrict the Crips, Bloods and Black Panthers (who started the whole ban in CA in the first place).



    It was the Black Panthers back in the seventies who squirrled LOC in CA.



  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    vermonter wrote:
    SNIP How do you make OC legal (no harassment) for us LAW ABIDING citizens, yet restrict the Crips, Bloods and Black Panthers (who started the whole ban in CA in the first place).
    You don't restrict them from carrying guns. You penalize them for committing crimes.

    The error lies in wanting to restrict them. Or, more precisely, in authorizing government to restrict a fundamental right.

    Government has shown beyond any shadow of a doubt that it cannot be trusted with regulating fundamental rights.

    Kenneth Royce, in his book You and the Police, points out something I had also concluded myself. That government can cause far more damage than criminals. Royce takes it one step further than I did for myself. He says he can deal with a criminal far more easily than a bad government.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Buffalo Gap, South Dakota, USA
    Posts
    193

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    vermonter wrote:
    SNIP How do you make OC legal (no harassment) for us LAW ABIDING citizens, yet restrict the Crips, Bloods and Black Panthers (who started the whole ban in CA in the first place).
    You don't restrict them from carrying guns. You penalize them for committing crimes.

    The error lies in wanting to restrict them. Or, more precisely, in authorizing government to restrict a fundamental right.

    Government has shown beyond any shadow of a doubt that it cannot be trusted with regulating fundamental rights.

    Kenneth Royce, in his book You and the Police, points out something I had also concluded myself. That government can cause far more damage than criminals. Royce takes it one step further than I did for myself. He says he can deal with a criminal far more easily than a bad government.
    Well put, Citizen, enforce the crimes, don't restrict the freedoms.
    :celebrate

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Moscow, ID
    Posts
    218

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    vermonter wrote:
    SNIP How do you make OC legal (no harassment) for us LAW ABIDING citizens, yet restrict the Crips, Bloods and Black Panthers (who started the whole ban in CA in the first place).
    You don't restrict them from carrying guns. You penalize them for committing crimes..SNIP....He says he can deal with a criminal far more easily than a bad government.
    Exactly. Something about those wanting security over freedom comes to mind. And self-reliance while we're at it.

  12. #12
    Regular Member vermonter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    First of all you are making it into a "black and white" issue. Why don't you take it up with the Bloods and Crips and tell them they need to become more diverse and include some white guys in thir photos! No I would not be upset if black guys walked down my street carrying. I would be upset if people who dress hip-hop or in colors do. Remember "cop killer" by Ice Cube? Do you think those who sing that mantra respect life be they black, brown OR white? Here there are plenty of white "hoodlums" who dress like the photo. I would not trust them with guns either. If you look like a gang banger you idolize that lifestyle of drugs, crime and violence AND I DO NOT TRUST YOU! We are not talking about the right for a balck person to wear a native Dashiki, or a Tibetian to wear an achuba. We ar talking about a method of dress and lifestyle that extolls violence as a way of life. Fine punish the behavior! So I guess all you "liberals" that defend that dress and behavior in the earlier posts abhor what the guy did in Texas telling the dispatcher he was going to go out and kill the Mexicans who were breaking into the neighbors home?

    People have the right in this free country to dress any way they want. If you dress in a hood, with a swastika or in gang wear you will be mistrusted as a violent hateful person not to be trusted with guns, or as neighbors!

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    492

    Post imported post

    as a rule, I don't trust anyone that I don't personally know. Clothing means nothing. Obama is in a well tailored suit.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Saint Louis, Missouri, United States
    Posts
    292

    Post imported post

    the term gang could be loosely defined honestly...

    i mean...you and your buddies standing together hanging out could quite possibly label you as a "gang" to someone else as well....

    ..."gang" is merely some value we put on something as we do on many other things....it's the actions of those individuals or group that determine the outcome....that group could very well have been called the pope or ronald mcdonald house....bloods / crypts are just words....it's their actions that are questionable...i mean, the dollar is only worth a dollar because we say it is right?

    not that you should trust everyone or lower your guard any...

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    949

    Post imported post

    A poster purporting to be the author of the article showed up over at GeorgiaPacking.Org to comment on the thread.

    http://www.georgiapacking.org/forum/...1&p=410918

    Know way of knowing for sure if he is legit, but it appears to be.

  16. #16
    Regular Member demnogis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orange County, California, USA
    Posts
    912

    Post imported post

    If the people in the photo above have criminal records that disqualify them from possessing or owning firearms (felony charges, etc), then they should not be carrying.

    Otherwise, they have the same rights and liberties as the rest of us.

    Would an officer profile them? Assuredly, yes. Would an officer detain them and check their names/ID's? Definitely. Would the officer run their firearms' serial numbers? Don't know. Would an officer falsely arrest them? Don't know.

    Keep in mind there are prohibitions of firearms possession to those who have been convicted of crimes and are known gang associates (in California).

    Should we dress up in "thug attire" for the next meet?

    I don't know, but it would be HILARIOUS.
    Gun control isn't about guns -- it is about control.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509

    Post imported post

    vermonter wrote:
    The "attached" better not show up in front of my house OC!!!
    Yeah, because Burlington is practically Compton these days.

  18. #18
    Regular Member vermonter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    Ok let's examine this... I know it is a different topic, but is this guy a racist and did he murder in cold blood, or is he a hero?

    http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/stor...882&page=1

    1) Bloods and Crips by the nature of their official affiliation are criminals.

    2) Armed criminals (known to be armed by OC) approaching me will be considered a threat.

    Let's see: House breakers shot in back, or known violent criminals approaching with arms? Are both justified, one over the other, or NEITHER? Or does it depend on the state you live in, or is it a MORAL issue?

    I am Pro OC, but the Anti's are right about one thing. There has to be a way to keep guns from criminals. We carry to protect ourselves from violent criminals. Criminals carry anyway. If they are known criminals by way of gang colors doesn't that make them an armed threat if they were to approach you with guns on their hips?

    Yes Burlington VT is now compton! I work at a conv store and if 5 males came in in hoods, gangwear WHATEVER carrying I would take up a ARMED defensive position.

    The way I see it is Crips and Bloods OC around LA will cause such an uproar that there are sure to be bans on OC and tighter CC. More fuel for the antis!

    There is an unritten moral code in this society.

    Dress in a suit and tie and no one will look.

    Dress like a cowboy/redneck and people will say thats part of his "attire"

    Dress like a gangbanger and you will be thought of as a criminal

    I didn't write these rules! It's just the way it is!


  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Monrovia, Maryland, USA
    Posts
    24

    Post imported post

    Vermonter,

    Seeing as Vermont is one of the States that require no permit at all to CC or OC, and it is an "argueable accepted" common opinion that those who choose to OC would be lesslikely to be "prohibitted" due to the attention an OC sidearm might bring, I would be much more wary of those same folks if I DIDN'T see a gun. SARCASM ON/ Because as we all know you loose all element of surprise when you open carry. /SARCASM OFF.

    It is my opinionthat there is a reason that concealed carry requires a permit in most States. Concealed carriers afterall are hiding something, at the very least it's their firearm.

    mikev



  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Indiana, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    674

    Post imported post

    vermonter wrote:
    Ok let's examine this... I know it is a different topic, but is this guy a racist and did he murder in cold blood, or is he a hero?

    http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/stor...882&page=1

    1) Bloods and Crips by the nature of their official affiliation are criminals.

    2) Armed criminals (known to be armed by OC) approaching me will be considered a threat.

    Let's see: House breakers shot in back, or known violent criminals approaching with arms? Are both justified, one over the other, or NEITHER? Or does it depend on the state you live in, or is it a MORAL issue?

    I am Pro OC, but the Anti's are right about one thing. There has to be a way to keep guns from criminals. We carry to protect ourselves from violent criminals. Criminals carry anyway. If they are known criminals by way of gang colors doesn't that make them an armed threat if they were to approach you with guns on their hips?

    Yes Burlington VT is now compton! I work at a conv store and if 5 males came in in hoods, gangwear WHATEVER carrying I would take up a ARMED defensive position.

    The way I see it is Crips and Bloods OC around LA will cause such an uproar that there are sure to be bans on OC and tighter CC. More fuel for the antis!

    There is an unritten moral code in this society.

    Dress in a suit and tie and no one will look.

    Dress like a cowboy/redneck and people will say thats part of his "attire"

    Dress like a gangbanger and you will be thought of as a criminal

    I didn't write these rules! It's just the way it is!
    Words fail me.

    Please stay in Vermont.

  21. #21
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337

    Post imported post

    vermonter wrote:
    Ok let's examine this... I know it is a different topic, but is this guy a racist and did he murder in cold blood, or is he a hero?

    http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/stor...882&page=1

    1) Bloods and Crips by the nature of their official affiliation are criminals.

    2) Armed criminals (known to be armed by OC) approaching me will be considered a threat.

    Let's see: House breakers shot in back, or known violent criminals approaching with arms? Are both justified, one over the other, or NEITHER? Or does it depend on the state you live in, or is it a MORAL issue?

    I am Pro OC, but the Anti's are right about one thing. There has to be a way to keep guns from criminals. We carry to protect ourselves from violent criminals. Criminals carry anyway. If they are known criminals by way of gang colors doesn't that make them an armed threat if they were to approach you with guns on their hips?

    Yes Burlington VT is now compton! I work at a conv store and if 5 males came in in hoods, gangwear WHATEVER carrying I would take up a ARMED defensive position.

    The way I see it is Crips and Bloods OC around LA will cause such an uproar that there are sure to be bans on OC and tighter CC. More fuel for the antis!

    There is an unritten moral code in this society.

    Dress in a suit and tie and no one will look.

    Dress like a cowboy/redneck and people will say thats part of his "attire"

    Dress like a gangbanger and you will be thought of as a criminal

    I didn't write these rules! It's just the way it is!
    Define "criminal" as used in "keep guns from criminals". I think you are giving out the same argument that the antis do. DO you mean to imply that association with an organization within which people have committed "criminal" acts denies any member the right to carry. So if an OCer/ member of this forum in Massachusetts is arrested for violating one of their firearm laws, we are all members of a criminal "gang" and should be denied a right to carry?

    I am not arguing that you should not be vigilant if anyone concerns you, for whatever reason. Individually, anyone's vigilance is their call. However, to place a blanket exception to the second Amendment based upon the clothing one wears, the color of one's skin, or the associates with whom one socializes, absent actual criminal activity committed by that person, is an anathema to those who hold the Constitution dear. You seem to be spouting the same "party line" that many of the antis do. Assuming you are a supporter of Ron Paul, perhaps we should just say that your connection with his supporters makes you ineligible to carry a firearm. Although I agree with what he stands for, I think some of the antis may find his and your ideas "dangerous".


    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    736

    Post imported post

    Dear Vermonter,

    Why do you hate freedom?

    Sincerely,

    Grshnav

Posting Permissions

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