Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Some Officers Views/Thoughts on the OCer from Racine

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Not on this website, USA
    Posts
    2,482

    Post imported post

    http://forums.officer.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=129417

    It's interesting reading both sides of the paper...

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Kent Co, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    398

    Post imported post

    "Opencarry.org is a site full of paranoid redneck morons. I'm surprised most of them know how to operate a computer."
    Says the guy who wears a nametag to work......



    Ouch. I for one am not a redneck. I work in a top floor office in downtown...thanks.


  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Not on this website, USA
    Posts
    2,482

    Post imported post

    sevenplusone wrote:
    "Opencarry.org is a site full of paranoid redneck morons. I'm surprised most of them know how to operate a computer."
    Says the guy who wears a nametag to work......

    Ouch. I for one am not a redneck.

    Same here! I'm currently attending a well known University to become a teacher.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chesterfield, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    111

    Post imported post

    T Vance wrote:
    sevenplusone wrote:
    "Opencarry.org is a site full of paranoid redneck morons. I'm surprised most of them know how to operate a computer."
    Says the guy who wears a nametag to work......

    Ouch. I for one am not a redneck.

    Same here! I'm currently attending a well known University to become a teacher.
    Whoops. I'm wearing my Johnny Cash Folsom Prison tshirt and drinking chocolate milk out of a mason jar. Then, of course there was that inbreeding situation way back in the day on Stinking Creek. Busted, I guess.

    There are LEOs on that linked thread commenting as to why in the world would oc'ers carry voice recorders. Must be either paranoia, or a means of 'setting up' LEOs for some sort of self gratification. That's what I got out of it anyway.

    Gee officer, I wonder. It couldn't be all the stories of police brutality, 2A and 4A rights infringments, and hearing you guys slapping each other on the ass about ways to jam us up on FOIA'd recordings and talking about how you just love it when we make it Constitutional.





  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Not on this website, USA
    Posts
    2,482

    Post imported post

    How about this comment on this post...

    http://forums.officer.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=129511

    "I'm a little stunned. We have a superviser who reviews arrest reports for content (Probable Cause). That is the only hurdle to clear when making an arrest. I would think that an ADA (Assistant District Attorney)would want to look past the Probable Cause standard and attempt to try the case at the time of the arrest."

  6. #6
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756

    Post imported post

    T Vance wrote:
    How about this comment on this post...

    http://forums.officer.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=129511

    "I'm a little stunned. We have a superviser who reviews arrest reports for content (Probable Cause). That is the only hurdle to clear when making an arrest. I would think that an ADA (Assistant District Attorney)would want to look past the Probable Cause standard and attempt to try the case at the time of the arrest."
    Perhaps this post above is one reason why folks carry a voice recorder? Perhaps those who carry a voice recorder do it for the same reason police interactions are recorded... so the facts, not unreliable memory, are available?

    If police are aware that open carry by citizens is legal (where it is legal) and that those who choose to engage in this legal activity are not committing any crimes....... why is there so much negativity from police concerning legal open carry?

    What exactly is it that some police officers find objectionable about legal open carry by civilians?

    Responding to "man with a gun" calls can't be any more annoying than responding to "McDonalds ran out of Pepsi and I want my Pepsi!" calls. Can it?
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    Bikenut wrote:
    T Vance wrote:
    How about this comment on this post...

    http://forums.officer.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=129511

    "I'm a little stunned. We have a superviser who reviews arrest reports for content (Probable Cause). That is the only hurdle to clear when making an arrest. I would think that an ADA (Assistant District Attorney)*would want to look past the Probable Cause standard and attempt to try the case at the time of the arrest."
    Perhaps this post above is one reason why folks carry a voice recorder? Perhaps those who carry a voice recorder do it for the same reason police interactions are recorded... so the facts, not unreliable memory, are available?

    If police are aware that open carry by citizens is legal (where it is legal) and that those who choose to engage in this legal activity are not committing any crimes....... why is there so much negativity from police concerning legal open carry?

    What exactly is it that some police officers find objectionable about legal open carry by civilians?

    Responding to "man with a gun" calls can't be any more annoying than responding to "McDonalds ran out of Pepsi and I want my Pepsi!" calls. Can it?
    Bikenut, that's exactly what I've not been able to understand. Especially considering there are cops that are happy to see people exercising their rights and being able to defend themselves. Concealed carry seems to be extremely accepted statewide but for some reason there are some police that can't handle the fact that they're not the only ones who can legally open carry. It is quite apparent that concealed carry is accepted while OC has a mixed reaction. With that mixed reaction we see cops going out of their way to literally break the law in some cases and/or go out of their way to make something out of people who are law abiding citizens doing nothing wrong. I feel the only way we will see an impact to the lawless cops is to win some large lawsuits. Cash makes their job go around. If cops lose lots of city money the police chiefs and city commissioners will make sure that police officers and departments are trained properly rather then to act like idiots and improperly handling situations. This is the same kind of crap that people deal with in the city of Los Angles. It took video proof making headline news as well as them loosing millions of dollars to criminals for the city to crack down on cops. With large cash settlements and video proof making the news we'd have a good chance in seeing some changes state wide.

  8. #8
    Regular Member KittyBomb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    32

    Post imported post

    Then there are these quotes from LEO's

    "Idiots. They literally are idiots. They are trolling for trouble. All they care about is media attention, they don't give a damn about protecting themselves or their families."

    Oh really??

    This one on not identifying themselves to a LEO.

    "What you guys do if a person doesnt want to ID himself while your investigation criminal or suspicious activity in your state night shift?

    Over here in FLorida, we are able to detain someone and take him to fingerprints/warrants if a person does not want to ID themselves while we are on official duties or investigating criminal or suspicious activity. Once ID, we can let them go. But it works out well because 100% of the time ive ever done this, the subject ended up having warrants, or ended up giving me false information in the first place."

    Glad I don't live in Florida then.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756

    Post imported post

    I've supported police officers for years because I believe their job of tracking down criminals and arresting them (getting them off the streets and therefore preventing future crimes) is a noble and honorable profession. I still believe that.

    In fact, during a very trying time involving a violent criminal the county police force went out of their way to offer me as much protection as was possible. Several individual officers helped me on their own time!

    So please understand that I am pro police... not anti. Nor am I attempting to paint all police everywhere, positively or negatively, with a broad brush.

    But this recent trend to use carefully crafted psychological techniques to lead someone into inadvertently either saying something that can be construed to be incriminating or to allowing themselves to be cited or arrested for something that actually didn't happen........... against folks the officers KNOW are not doing anything illegal just because a legally carried gun is involved..... is disturbing.

    I asked in an earlier post:

    "What exactly is it that some police officers find objectionable about legal open carry by civilians?"

    and I think it goes beyond all the tired old canards about "man with a gun calls are a waste of police time and resources" and "OC results in being shot first" and "OC scares/intimidates people" and all the rest of the weak justifications folks use to prop up the fear of OC.

    I've just begun to think about this and here are my first thoughts..........

    I think (that means this is a personal opinion with no facts to back it up) some officers consider their openly carried sidearm part of their uniform and therefore a part of their presentation of authority. Hence... a private citizen with an openly carried sidearm is an insult to... and a symbol of perceived trespass... upon that authority. Perhaps some officers have the opinion that citizens openly carrying are trying to be "wannabe cops"?

    To be fair......... perhaps some people actually are openly carrying in order to be "wannabe cops" hoping to momentarily bask in the respect and deference ordinary folks give to real officers.

    To my mind (another opinion) neither an antagonistic perspective from police about citizen legal open carry... nor having citizens open carry in order to play "wannabe cop" are acceptable.

    Anyone have additional thoughts on this?
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Kent Co, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    398

    Post imported post

    It is my opinion that the majority of police officers feel they are A. above the law B. somehow better than the average citizen morally and socially C. should have more rights than the average citizen. It's even the way they reference us, we are not citizens, we're "civilians." They forget that they are also civilians. They shouldn't have any more rights and privileges than I do...but they disagree. I like many police officers and have several that are person friends. However, I still don't agree with many of their practices. They don't spend enough time fighting crime and too much harassing people who are trying to go about their business peacefully.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    In a way, the government has forced us into being "wannabe cops" of a sort. Since the government only wants cops and criminals to be armed and enjoy the right to keep and bear arms uninfringed (since no law can infringe on a criminal, they'll just do it anyway)...

    Which would we rather want to be, so we can exercise the RKBA that is not protected for 100% of law-abiding, non-sworn civilians? Cops, or criminals?

  12. #12
    Regular Member PDinDetroit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    SE, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,336

    Post imported post

    To my mind (another opinion) neither an antagonistic perspective from police about citizen legal open carry... nor having citizens open carry in order to play "wannabe cop" are acceptable.
    I am grateful that 1A is being exercised by all who wish to, whether I agree with them of not. I do not agree with most of the LEO Comments, but understand that they deal with a terrible aspect of the human condition, day in and day out. I believe that this colors their interactions with others - none are innocent!

    I had a couple of interactions with LEO way before I started OC'ing that left me feeling that LEO's are not to be trusted, one of which I met with the Police Chief over. I try to remember that not all LEO's are the same.

    I have generally found that there are 3 sides to any story: one side, the other side, and the truth somewhere in between.


    Rights are like muscles. You must EXERCISE THEM to keep them from becoming atrophied.

  13. #13
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337

    Post imported post

    I often tell some of my students that at some point they need to decide if they want to be a person who sits in the back seat of a police car or the front seat... I have a few acquaintances that, if they were not accepted as officers, would have been on the other side of the Plexiglas for sure.

    Police officers are, regrettably, much like a large part of the population: very unfamiliar with firearms. I have known officers who support 2A rights... but those people are becoming a rarer creature. Most LEOS, especially in the larger metro areas, are people who have little to no experience w/ firearms and therefore see the use of weapons as purely a law enforcement prerogative. Very few of the newer recruits are experienced shooters, and I think these numbers are dwindling. In fact, my experience with the sheriff reserves is that most new officers take little interest in firearms. They often shoot as little as possible and do not see the need to carry outside of the requirements of their jobs. Therefore, the response that one gets while carrying is related to the idea that only criminals have guns; the "average" firearms owner is just a criminal in waiting, so to speak. Since we are all "criminals", if only in the mind of some leos, we are treated as such. This needs to change.
    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.

Posting Permissions

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