UOC in Fremont and Milpitas

imported post

So far I've been UOC in my hometown of Fremont, and the neighboring city of Milpitas. I've been contacted law enforcement agencies in each city I plan on carrying in. So far I've heard back from only the two. Both agencies have knowledgable people answering questions. I've been very impressed with with how well they've handled the whole issue.

I spoke with Det. William Veteran in Fremont after receiving a brief reply to my email from their chief. Det. Veteran and Chief Steckler would prefer that people not carry, but they accept the legality of unloaded open carry. Det. Veteran requested that I send him a photo of myself along with any other information I was comfortable releasing for him to pass around to officers. So hopefully, if they do get called out, they'll at least recognize me. I also inquired as to any additional restrictions on where on could carry; there are none.

In Milpitas I had short conversation with Sgt. Moscuzza regarding the basic issues. There are no additionally carry restrictions in the city, so steer clear of post offices, schools, etc. He did inquire as to the reason I wanted to carry, to which I answered self-defense. I suggested sending in a photo (as was requested by Fremont), and he liked the idea. All in all, a pleasant experience.


Reactions so far have been missing. No hushed murmuring, no hurried phone calls, and no people running for their lives. Today however, this changed.

I've carried in a lot of places (Fry's Electronics (is this also a Kroger company?), 7-11, a day spa, etc), and I've had people look, but that's it. So today I swung by a Wells Fargo ATM (not in the bank, that would be a horrible idea IMO) to deposit a check. I waited in line patiently, and I noticed the next person behind me was at least 8 ft away. When an ATM freed up I advanced to it to conduct my deposit. The ATM next to me became vacant and no one stepped up. I can't speak as to the reason, but maybe they just wanted to give me "space". No phone calls, and no SWAT swarming me, so I'm fine with it. Hell, there were two PD cars, a PD bike, and a SD car just up the street.

Are there other people in the area that have at least tried to UOC?

imported post

Welcome! and great job. Did you end up sending any photos? If they have your name/DOB they can look it up anyway through DMV.

imported post

Welcome jeffw,

Things have been very normal for me too here in Cupertino/Santa Clara. I've been UOC for months now. Most people dont care or notice, a few ask about it. Some ask if it's real, to which I reply "yes, carrying a replica is illegal in California". Others say "In Cupertino?!" as if to imply this is the safest town in America.

You mentioned the ATM. I live a stones throw from 2 banks. The common thing lately has been for desperate people to come up from San Jose assuming this neighborhood is more "well ta do" and stick up folks walking away from the ATM. I'm confident they'd pass me up and wait for the next mark.

If I am ever stuck up at an ATM they're getting the money, as I'm "Unloaded" OC. Actually even if I was locked and loaded, they got the draw on me so same goes for that, they'd get the money.

If you wanna get lunch or a cup of coffee sometime PM me.

imported post

cato wrote:

Welcome! and great job. Did you end up sending any photos? If they have your name/DOB they can look it up anyway through DMV.

Click to expand...

I did send a photo to them along with full name, address, DL number, and the plate number of my car (they can get the rest from that). I want to make it as easy as I possibly can for a law enforcement officer. The last thing any of us want is a tense situation with a LEO.

imported post

bad_ace wrote:

Welcome jeffw,

Things have been very normal for me too here in Cupertino/Santa Clara. I've been UOC for months now. Most people dont care or notice, a few ask about it. Some ask if it's real, to which I reply "yes, carrying a replica is illegal in California". Others say "In Cupertino?!" as if to imply this is the safest town in America.

You mentioned the ATM. I live a stones throw from 2 banks. The common thing lately has been for desperate people to come up from San Jose assuming this neighborhood is more "well ta do" and stick up folks walking away from the ATM. I'm confident they'd pass me up and wait for the next mark.

If I am ever stuck up at an ATM they're getting the money, as I'm "Unloaded" OC. Actually even if I was locked and loaded, they got the draw on me so same goes for that, they'd get the money.

If you wanna get lunch or a cup of coffee sometime PM me.

Click to expand...

I agree about people getting the drop on you. Hell, if someone gets the drop on a person who is CC, they're probably still going to get the money. The only time a person carrying can defend themselves is when they see the threat approaching.

I'd definitely love to meet up at some point. I'll send you a PM tomorrow some time.

imported post

Well done!

In a way, I like your proactivity. One always catches more flies with honey...

Maybe it is I, but something bugs me about the police wanting a picture and personal information. I understand your reasons. However, there is a part of me that wants to tell the police, "how about treating me as a law abiding citizen without prior approval?"

Again, it seems being proactive worked well for you. But I always ask folks to swap out any of their other Constitutional rights for the right to keep and bear arms in a discussion and see if it makes sense.

For example, would you feel it is proper to send a picture and personal information to the police about which church you plan on attending, or what books you want to write, or a speech you want to give, just so they can recognize you when they see you doing it and hopefully leave you alone? It seems silly, I know, but that is what you've done. You have basically asked the police for permission to do something that is legal and is your right, in the hope that they will act properly (read: legally) if they should encounter you.

Some might say it comes across as a quasi-UOC permit, without the paperwork. Kind of a "tell-us-who-you-are-so-we-don't-jack-you-up-when-we-see-you" situation.

Personally, I'd rather politely tell them that I would hope they treat all open carriers as law-abiding citizens, because, well, that's what we are.

Please understand that I am not meaning to brow-beat you, only show a perspective of someone who has not tried to carry in the bay area. Perhaps when one lives within the belly of the beast, it is best to make nicey-nice in a way best suited to the beast (so to speak). I only mean it as constructive criticism, please take it as such.

Nice to have another UOC in the bay area. Please keep it up!

Best regards...

imported post

Sadly, this is how most LEAs are. They prefer people not carry. BUT! They acknowledge the legality of it, and the way you contacted them shows no ill intent. I'm glad they were positive and not dismissive or demeaning about it. This shows a bit of progress. Although, I do disagree with sending in a photo of yourself. I disagree with contacting LEAs and informing them of your intent to carry. But that was your wish and it turned out good for you I also believe there are 1 or 2 other people who are in the bay area and insterested in OCing. Not sure of their names though. Just keep putting it out there and Carry On!

jeffw wrote:

[...] Det. Veteran and Chief Steckler would prefer that people not carry, but they accept the legality of unloaded open carry. [...]

Click to expand...

imported post

jeffw wrote:

Det. Veteran requested that I send him a photo of myself along with any other information I was comfortable releasing for him to pass around to officers.

Click to expand...

Now your photo isprobably in every squad car with the heading "Individual is Armed! Use extreme caution when approaching!"

How about every single member of OCDO get a photo and send it in to Det. Veteran? Never know when we might be in his jurisdiction open carrying. How about we all send our photos and all of our personal information to every single police officer in the entire nation?

Or how about this: The police get it through their heads that when someone OCs it is simply a case of law abiding citizens doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ILLEGAL.

They should treat EVERY person with a gun on their hip as a law abiding citizen until actions proves otherwise, and no a gun on the hip doesn't prove otherwise.

imported post

I give you props for UOCing in Fremont and Milpitas. Anytime a new city is OCed in I love to hear about it. I'm glad you have had such a pleasant report with the LEOs in those cities, and I hope they treat you with respect when they run across you. I don't know if anybody else has really been noting this or not, but the bay area and it's widespread conception of being anti-gun hasn't really played out at all. BadAce and JeffW have had good experiences so far, and I hope it continues on that route.

I'm occasionally down in Milpitas, so I might bring along the holster and handgun next time.

imported post

I think this needs a little clarification because I have the feeling people are getting the wrong idea. Det. Veteran said that it would be helpful if I sent it in a photo; in no way did he state it was required. I did not ask permission to carry open and unloaded, I called to alert them of my carrying.

I do not believe my photo is floating around these two agencies labeled with, "armed and dangerous." I was polite when I spoke to these men, I respected their position and the position this may place them in, and I expect that came across very clearly. I think it says a lot when you are thanked by a LEO for doing something you are not required to... When you do something to at least partially aleviate some stress from what could be a very tense situation.

UOC may be perfectly legal, however a firearm is still a firearm and it can cause damage, intentional or otherwise. I know that the 2nd Amendment and law enforcement communities understand the difference between a firearm and a weapon, but the community at large does not. They see a firearm and think weapon, which evolves into a sense of panic. This is one of the things that needs to change. The proof is in the email from a Captain of Fremont Police Department to myself:

"...The predictably frightened responses it will create in a municipal environment and the associated disruption will be significant."

Yes, we are within our rights to carry a firearm. But there is a cost: 12031(e) and the public. I cannot solve the problem of the public's interpretation of and reaction to a firearm. I can alert the local PD that I will be carrying.

Perhaps in California we should be alerting the law enforcement agencies that we will be carrying. We're not giving up constituational rights, and we're not asking for permission. What we are doing is giving these agencies an idea of the size of the open carry movement, and we're hopefully saving them a stressful stop. I don't know about you, but having a LEO who is stress-free when they stop me, even when I have a firearm, would be awesome.

imported post

Jeff,
I called my local PD and sheriff before I started OCing, asking what their policy and position was.

100% said that I would be drawn on and arrested. I would be charged with a plethora of things. My favorite was an officer at the OC Sheriff's telling me that I would be charged with possession of a deadly weapon and brandishing. They even cited a penal code about the illegal manufacturing of ammunition that was relevant in some way.

Seeing how the personnel at these offices could not even cite a correct penal code in reference to something they just said, themselves, that I would be violating, how do you think that will do when you get your first detainment because of a MWAG call? yes, they may have your photo at the office. They may have your name at the office.

But when you get fresh-outta-camp rookie cop on his first solo beat patrol drawing on you felony stop style, is he going to remember that you're guy XYZ whom lawfully carries?

As I've said before, plan for the worst but hope for the best. It may play out to your advantage. It may not help you in any way. What does work, though, is after your LEO interaction you make it known to the respective LEA of what they did right/wrong. Sadly, it is proven that they have only learned through punitive action. (So far).

jeffw wrote:

[...]
Perhaps in California we should be alerting the law enforcement agencies that we will be carrying. We're not giving up constituational rights, and we're not asking for permission. What we are doing is giving these agencies an idea of the size of the open carry movement, and we're hopefully saving them a stressful stop. I don't know about you, but having a LEO who is stress-free when they stop me, even when I have a firearm, would be awesome.

Click to expand...

imported post

jeffw wrote:

UOC may be perfectly legal..."

Huh? May be? It is perfectly legal!

"...however a firearm is still a firearm and it can cause damage, intentional or otherwise..."

Yes, so can chainsaws, kitchen knives, automobiles and other items that are inherently dangerous. Firearms are inanimate objects, it is the operators with whom the blame lays. I do not call the cops when I am about to cut wood, or drive a car, why alert them to other lawful activities with lawful objects?

I know that the 2nd Amendment and law enforcement communities understand the difference between a firearm and a weapon, but the community at large does not.

Whose fault is that? It is the anti-gun policies of our government and the support of those policies by law enforcement that reinforce said "misunderstanding".

They see a firearm and think weapon, which evolves into a sense of panic.

Which can be easily alleviated by a non-confrontational policy of law enforcement when they encounter law abiding citizens that are... umm, abiding the law!

This is one of the things that needs to change. The proof is in the email from a Captain of Fremont Police Department to myself:

"...The predictably frightened responses it will create in a municipal environment and the associated disruption will be significant."

Again, the frightened responses and disruption lays at the feet of the responding officers, not the law abiding citizens. 911 operators should probably first ask, "sir, what is the man with the gun doing that is illegal or dangerous?" If the man-with-a-gun call is stopped at the PSAP level, or at least dispatched as a "probable legal UOC", officers would then have the correct information provided and would then respond correctly. All of this without one iota of input from the law abiding UOCer.

Yes, we are within our rights to carry a firearm. But there is a cost: 12031(e) and the public. I cannot solve the problem of the public's interpretation of and reaction to a firearm. Yes, you can, one day at a time by UOCing! I can alert the local PD that I will be carrying. Yes, you can, but I ask again, why alert the local PD that you are going to do something legal? "Hi, desk sgt.? Yeah, I was calling to let you know that I am going to chruch services on Sunday at 8am and then I might write a letter to my congressman to complain about spending too much taxpayer money." To which the desk sgt. would say, "Uh, ok, those are all legal things protected by your first amendment rights, why are you bothering to tell me?"

Perhaps in California we should be alerting the law enforcement agencies that we will be carrying.

I would verture a guess, given all the DA and departmental letters being published, and the lurking on here, that they know. If they don't (I've waited a long time to say this) "Ignorance of the law is no excuse". (double edged sword and all that)

We're not giving up constitutional rights, and we're not asking for permission. What we are doing is giving these agencies an idea of the size of the open carry movement, and we're hopefully saving them a stressful stop.

If they can't handle the stress of a person doing something legal, maybe they should find another career?

I don't know about you, but having a LEO who is stress-free when they stop me, even when I have a firearm, would be awesome.

Yes, but relieving their stress is not my job. If you remember anything of my posting remember this very important point: ANYTHING you say to a cop can and will be used AGAINST you in a court of law. It CANNOT help! (due to the rules of evidence, but I am NOT a lawyer... however, I do strongly suggest you search on YouTube for "never talk to the police" and listen to both parts) If a stop by a cop goes south, for some reason, and you've given them LOADS of info about you, and email on your intentions, lawful as they may be, you will be throttled by your lawyer when he gets you alone and asks WTF you were thinking when you sent email and called the cops. Anything you give them will be used and possibly twisted by a DA to try to convict you.

I'd prefer to go about my lawful business and have the cops do the same.

I don't want to discourage you, I just want to point out that the cops are paid to arrest people and the DA is paid to convict people. If they arrest you wrongly, and they have nothing else to go on, you have a better chance of success as compared to giving them leads to track down and dig for something, anything, to use against you.

But your mileage may vary...

Regards!

Click to expand...

imported post

All those who said it was a bad idea to contact the local PDs, please form a line for your "I told you so".

A very non-professional Sgt. Tran (head of SWAT) called me today to ask a few more questions. These were mainly about why I was going to carry, and where I might frequent while carrying. While on the phone my girlfriend was with me and she was applying for a job. A natural part of this is giving your name... You guessed it, he overhead. He thanked me for my time and hung up.

I get to work and my girlfriend calls me saying there was a police officer at her house when she got there. He took down all of her information and her brother's. He asked loads of questions about my mental state. Then he suggested that one day I could snap and shoot everyone. Awesome.

I called Sgt. Tran back and tried to straighten things out. He said that if they get a report of a man with a gun, they'll have at least four on duty officers dispatched, and possibly SWAT. He says that while I might be sane today, I might snap tomorrow and go on a rampage. Even while answering his questions, he was constantly interrupting me. I ended the call after telling him that I did not appreciate being interrupted... multiple times. I told him to have a nice day and that I'd call back tomorrow. Apparently he won't be in tomorrow. I'm fine with that, I'll just speak with a lieutenant.

I don't believe it is in my best interest, or anyone else for that matter, to carry in Milpitas.

imported post

Bummer...

As for the "I told you so", no need, we're all here for the same reason and we here to support each other, not dog each other.

I wouldn't bother to call to "straighten things out". They've shown their shortsightedness. If you decide not to UOC because of his phone call, then they won in their quest to infringe on your rights, all without laying eyes on you.

Just make sure that if you decide to UOC make sure you have a friendly witness, with audio at a minimum, video would be better.

If you encouter one of Milpitas' finest, and they are less than professional, hand 'em a UOC pamphlet and say nothing else. (see my earlier posting about the YouTube video).

I am sorry that you had such an unprofessional phone encounter. Please keep in mind that not all cops are like the guy who called you. Some might say it was good to encounter Milpitas PD over the phone and not in person, given the attitude.

I'd still UOC, just make sure you take every precaution, be professional, and stand firm on your legal rights. There is strength in numbers, so maybe some of the other bay area UOC folks would join you for an outing?

Best regards...

imported post

Sound like they need to have a Freemont/Milpitas Open Carry event.

How do you think they wouldreact to 20Citizens walking around UOC?

imported post

Let's see... one UOC = 4 on-duty officers and possibly SWAT

So 20 UOC x 4 = 80 on-duty officers and possibly SWAT

Do they have that many officers in Milpitas?

Hopefully they are just blowing smoke...

imported post

They most certainly are blowing smoke regarding the threat of SWAT responding. There's very little chance Milpitas or Fremont has a always-ready SWAT team. Usually SWAT team members are on call, so they have to get to the station and then respond to the location. I'd say a minimum of 20 minutes response time, realistically, probably more like an hour.

There's only one reason the head of SWAT would call you and tell you that he's the head of SWAT. To frighten you. He probably got a whiff of you UOCing, and didn't like it. Then since he had your information he called you up to see what he could do to prevent you from doing it. Heard your girlfriend's name which was obviously unique enough to only be one in the city, and then stopped by to send you a message. Sounds like a cop who was crossing his fingers when he swore to uphold the constitution. I'd consider write to your city council members and the chief of police asking if this is how the police department spends their time; harassing law abiding citizens.

This might also be a good time to point out the necessity to inform your loved ones about their rights. Your girlfriend doesn't have to talk to anybody, she should have told the officer to go blow a goat. I'm fairly confident that my fiancee would remain silent if a cop was asking her questions about me.

imported post

Decoligny wrote:

Sound like they need to have a Freemont/Milpitas Open Carry event.

How do you think they wouldreact to 20Citizens walking around UOC?

Click to expand...

+1

Also sounds like someone needs to report this Sgt Tran for threatening to intentionally and systematically deprive The People of their civil right to self-defense. This creates unnecessary civil liabilities for not only the Sgt, but the department and city.

I would definitely talk to a Lt, and then follow up with a formal written complaint, just to make sure it is properly documented.

We need to send a clear message to these departments that we will no longer be intimidated into forfeiting our civil rights. They need to realize there are consequences for oppression.

imported post

jeffw wrote:

I get to work and my girlfriend calls me saying there was a police officer at her house when she got there. He took down all of her information and her brother's. He asked loads of questions about my mental state. Then he suggested that one day I could snap and shoot everyone. Awesome.

I called Sgt. Tran back and tried to straighten things out. He said that if they get a report of a man with a gun, they'll have at least four on duty officers dispatched, and possibly SWAT. He says that while I might be sane today, I might snap tomorrow and go on a rampage.

Click to expand...

What if we did this with every LEO...Go to their family and friends and question them about the LEO'smental stability...After all, they carry, LOADED! They could snap and shoot everyone! :banghead:

Also, I didn't realize that, in the absence of a crime or of a reasonable cause that a crime is being planned, an LEO can make sweeping and intrusive inquiries into one's personal life just because the LEO doesn't agree with individuals desiring to exercise their 2nd amendment right without being harassed.

This is not right, IMO. At a minimum, I'd consider filing acomplaint.

imported post

A compliant will be filed. No doubt about that.

I'm waiting for him to return from his vacation (conveniently taken the day after he causes all this trouble) as I have some questions that only he can answer. In the meantime I've been speaking with some other people at the agency who are all shocked by what he did and said.

Sgt Tran has issues that would seem to stem from his job. Either he is taking his role as leader of the SWAT team so seriously that the it's-already-gone-wrong mentality has leaked over to his every day patrol duties, or he's lost all faith in people to obey the law. Regardless of which it is (or something completely different), I don't believe an open carry event in Milpitas would be in anyone's best interest right now. I do not believe any of us would want to expose ourselves to a department who's SWAT team is headed up by a man who believes anyone with a gun, even unloaded, is a threat to everyone around them because "one day something will happen and (they'll) snap, and shoot everyone around (them)."