• 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.

Excellent video and article on open carry confrontation with police

rcawdor57

rcawdor57

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
1,643
Location
Wisconsin, USA
imported post

LOL! My paranoia reminds me of a hypochondriac. I try not to let it get the best of me but sometimes I get a feeling and I go with my instincts. I hope she can break out of that bubble! :cool:
 
J

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Lammie wrote:
What's the matter with you guys. You missed the points of the video.

1. Cops will try to intimidate you into following their orders even to the extent of lieing.

2. The cops admitted that open carry is legal but continued to harass.

3. Video taping cops or an encounter is not illegal.

4. You are not required to present an ID even if ordered.

5. If you have not committed a crime or given probable cause you are free to walk away from the encounter.

C'mon, see the forest for the trees instead of turning every post into an argument.
Click to expand...
I see the forest but, I also seen this guy walk up on an officer during a stop too.
Like I said he would have benn perfectly within his rights to stand on the opposite side of the road and film the entire incident.

Approaching the officer only provoked the harassment. We already get harassed enough we don't need any more.

Like I said in my earlier post. Anyone here that knows me should know I have no love loss for LEO. I have no doubt that they lie, cheat, steal or anything else they can do to get what they want. That is not the point I was trying to make.

The Point is, if we give them a reason, then how can we complain?
 
B

blaze

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
242
Location
Above the tension line
imported post

hunter9mm wrote:
Good video -- All-in-all.

I guess I'd have done a few things differently, but it does indeed, show how the LEO's lie to get what they want, and how you do have rights in a case like this.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I watched this video quite a few times. The guy mentions twice that the person stopped by LEO was his girlfriend, maybe she had a previous bad encounter with LEO so the guy is documenting with camcorder.

Later in the video the two cops try to close in on the guy. Perhaps trying to provoke something?

Uniformed cop has his hand on his weapon the the whole time of encounter. Not very diplomatic. Maybe trying to get a rise out of guy, maybe not.
 
D

DKSuddeth

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
833
Location
Bedford, Texas, USA
imported post

Master Doug Huffman wrote:
rcawdor57 wrote:
We are allowed to video record any public official as long as we do not interfere with whatever is happening, just as news reporters do.
Click to expand...
Buiishlt. Try TSA. Trivial but puts the lie to "any public official".
Click to expand...
its been done, and proven. when the DB comes back up, check out 'blogofbile.com'. TSA is not any different than any other law enforcement organization.
 
M

MadisonRebel

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
61
Location
Madison, WI
imported post

rcawdor57 wrote:
Why is it that when a person exercises a right that is protected by the Constitution that he is an idiot?
Click to expand...
Just because you have the right to do something, doesn't mean that is a smart thing to do. You have the right to call someone much bigger and mean looking than you a foul name. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.

This guy approached a cop from an advantageous angle, videotaping him while OCing. This was pure instigation, and he was looking for a confrontation. This kind of asshattery just makes cops more hostile, and hurts the OC movement as a whole.

Knowing what your rights are, and exercising them, does not negate the fact that you can still be an asshole in the process. The cops were liars, and took the bait. However, the guy was still fishing. What a jerk. If you're going to open carry as a political statement rather than as protection, then don't whine and cry when you get called on it.
 
KansasKraut

KansasKraut

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
116
Location
Verona, WI
imported post

Hey guys, quick question:

Does one's right not to identify oneself to law enforcement apply across state lines, or do certain states absolutely require that you identify yourself when asked/commanded? I know about the OCer in Racine who just got $10,000 from the city, but was that a precedent-setting decision? What's the deal here in WI?
 
rcawdor57

rcawdor57

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
1,643
Location
Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Lot's of different opinions about the video. Sorry it is not the perfect open carry vs LEO video for those of you that are still outraged by what the guy did.

When I find the perfect one and post it I am sure there will still be those of you who will whine and cry and get all flabbergasted at what they see and hear.

About the only way we are ever going to see a "perfect video" of an open carrier encounter with a LEO is if we MAKE it. And even then you guys will tear it apart.

Same thing happens with just about every video link posted on this site. Some of us use it wisely and learn from it whether we agree with the content or not. Some of us attack the person who posted the link and attack the open carry person in the video.

Look at Protias's video he posted about the incident at China Wok in Sussex. Look at all the negative posts about how Protias "baited" the cops and all the other negative comments many of you made. You guys slammed his car, slammed his antennae, slammed his radar gun, slammed his radio equipment, slammed his character. Some of you guys live for the moment to slam dunk anything you see or hear that crosses your line of judgment. I will bet that those of you who slammed Protias did NOT go to the open carry event/demonstration in support of Protias in Sussex.

This forum has gone from a sounding board between fellow open carriers to an assault and insult forum for a handful of you.

THE VIDEO LINK WAS POSTED SO WE CAN LEARN HOW TO USE OUR RIGHTS LEGALLY JUST LIKE THE OTHER VIDEO LINKS THAT HAVE BEEN POSTED. DID EVERYONE AGREE WITH EVERY VIDEO THEY WATCHED ABOUT OPEN CARRY? OF COURSE NOT! TAKE THE POSITIVE SIDE OF THE VIDEO AND STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS. YOU CAN'T STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS IF YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE.


And now some of you out there have sent me PM's asking me what I do for a living, where my business is and that you want to "visit" and what law enforcement training I have. SOME OF YOU GUYS ARE DOWNRIGHT SCARY.


Keep in mind that there will NEVER be a perfect post. Not every single person will ever agree 100% with everything they see, read or hear. So take a deep breath when your adrenalin rushes through your body and RELAX.
 
M

MadisonRebel

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
61
Location
Madison, WI
imported post

Screaming at the board en masse, then telling them to relax, doesn't really make you appear rational. Just my opinion.

Nobody is asking for the perfect OC video. There are much better ones, that's for sure. If you happen to have a video camera around while simply OCing for your protection, and not approaching a goddamned LEO from the rear while he's engaged in a traffic stop, surprising him and putting him in a situation where he will likely feel threatened...then the video will come out fine.

Otherwise, you're instigating an encounter where the officer has been made to feel wary. It was a stupid move on his part.

That is my opinion. I disagree with yours. You are the only one having a cow about the fact that we disagree.
 
J

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

rcawdor57 wrote:
Lot's of different opinions about the video. Sorry it is not the perfect open carry vs LEO video for those of you that are still outraged by what the guy did.

When I find the perfect one and post it I am sure there will still be those of you who will whine and cry and get all flabbergasted at what they see and hear.

About the only way we are ever going to see a "perfect video" of an open carrier encounter with a LEO is if we MAKE it. And even then you guys will tear it apart.

Same thing happens with just about every video link posted on this site. Some of us use it wisely and learn from it whether we agree with the content or not. Some of us attack the person who posted the link and attack the open carry person in the video.

Look at Protias's video he posted about the incident at China Wok in Sussex. Look at all the negative posts about how Protias "baited" the cops and all the other negative comments many of you made. You guys slammed his car, slammed his antennae, slammed his radar gun, slammed his radio equipment, slammed his character. Some of you guys live for the moment to slam dunk anything you see or hear that crosses your line of judgment. I will bet that those of you who slammed Protias did NOT go to the open carry event/demonstration in support of Protias in Sussex.

This forum has gone from a sounding board between fellow open carriers to an assault and insult forum for a handful of you.

THE VIDEO LINK WAS POSTED SO WE CAN LEARN HOW TO USE OUR RIGHTS LEGALLY JUST LIKE THE OTHER VIDEO LINKS THAT HAVE BEEN POSTED. DID EVERYONE AGREE WITH EVERY VIDEO THEY WATCHED ABOUT OPEN CARRY? OF COURSE NOT! TAKE THE POSITIVE SIDE OF THE VIDEO AND STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS. YOU CAN'T STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS IF YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE.


And now some of you out there have sent me PM's asking me what I do for a living, where my business is and that you want to "visit" and what law enforcement training I have. SOME OF YOU GUYS ARE DOWNRIGHT SCARY.


Keep in mind that there will NEVER be a perfect post. Not every single person will ever agree 100% with everything they see, read or hear. So take a deep breath when your adrenalin rushes through your body and RELAX.
Click to expand...
If you are going to make accusation then please give the names of those involved.
I have not insulted you or threatened you in any way. I merely stated the truth. Yes the OCer baited the cops and yes the cops lied. However baiting them does not help our cause. It only makes other people think we are only looking for trouble so we can sue someone. That is not what tis is all about, although sometimes that is the only way the cops will learn.
 
M

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

rcawdor57 wrote:
http://republicbroadcasting.org/?p=7466
Click to expand...
I don't think that this is what I would call "openly carrying properly holstered handguns in daily American life."

The open carry movement is not an anti-police movement - maybe some people get confused because many of us encourage folks stopped without cause by police in their daily lives to consult a local lawyer and consider sueing for possible Fourth Amendment violations.

The idea is to open carry WITHOUT causing the police to take notice that somthing is highly odd or threatening to them or others.
 
C

Cobbersmom

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
179
Location
Minocqua, Wisconsin, ,
imported post

Mike wrote
The open carry movement is not an anti-police movement - maybe some people get confused because many of us encourage folks stopped without cause by police in their daily lives to consult a local lawyer and consider suing for possible Fourth Amendment violations.
The idea is to open carry WITHOUT causing the police to take notice that somthing is highly odd or threatening to them or others.
Click to expand...
+1
 
Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman

Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
1,197
Location
, ,
imported post

KansasKraut wrote:
Hey guys, quick question:

     Does one's right not to identify oneself to law enforcement apply across state lines, or do certain states absolutely require that you identify yourself when asked/commanded? I know about the OCer in Racine who just got $10,000 from the city, but was that a precedent-setting decision? What's the deal here in WI?
Click to expand...

My understanding (and I'm not a lawyer either) is that civil law does not set legal "precedent" in the context of stare decisis the same way that criminal/common law does.

In addition there was no "decision" in this case, meaning the judge didn't write out a legal decision, rather there was a judgement in favor of WCI and our co-plaintiff.

My understanding is the "precedent" set by this case is more persuasive in nature. More of an awareness and something noteworthy where other municipalities will see "what happens" when your police officers operate outside their authority.

But you won't see "Wisconsin Carry v Racine" cited in other actual legal cases.
 
J

johnfenter

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
209
Location
, ,
imported post

Officer nuke school class 8006 (Orlando), S3G Prototype, S5W on 627 (Gold), qualified Eng and back to S3G as a LEOOW, then S6G on 699 and 722. Remember how to torture ignorant anti-nuke protesters with the "4 cookie question" on radiation?

You all are going through some freedom growing pains in WI; all I can say is that if you keep up the good work, you can achieve a great deal. Look at what has been done in VA over the last 15 years...
 
M

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman wrote:
KansasKraut wrote:
Hey guys, quick question:

Does one's right not to identify oneself to law enforcement apply across state lines, or do certain states absolutely require that you identify yourself when asked/commanded? I know about the OCer in Racine who just got $10,000 from the city, but was that a precedent-setting decision? What's the deal here in WI?
Click to expand...

My understanding (and I'm not a lawyer either) is that civil law does not set legal "precedent" in the context of stare decisis the same way that criminal/common law does.

In addition there was no "decision" in this case, meaning the judge didn't write out a legal decision, rather there was a judgement in favor of WCI and our co-plaintiff.

My understanding is the "precedent" set by this case is more persuasive in nature. More of an awareness and something noteworthy where other municipalities will see "what happens" when your police officers operate outside their authority.

But you won't see "Wisconsin Carry v Racine" cited in other actual legal cases.
Click to expand...
Most case law arises from civil, not criminal actions - common law is simply a form of law (i.e., judge made law), not a way to bring an action.

The ongoing lawsuit challenegs the school zone prohibition on open carry right? This will result in presumably a summary judgement decision one way or the other and probably be appealed to a court of record, the decision of which will be citeable - all opinions are citeable, but an opinion of the Wisconsin appeals or Supremem court binds the trial courts of Wisconsin on that point of law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top