Cop-think

Bo · Jan 15, 2011

Well, I didn't really think that I needed to stick around to argue my original post. I merely asked some questions that'd occurred to me (primarily in response to one member's oft-repeated opinions), and offered my own opinion.

self-proclaimed" ? Wondering why you choose to use that word.... no matter.

Click to expand...

What do cops reading Open Carry forums have to do with anything? How do you know every cops motives for doing so?

Eh, the self-proclaimed thing came from the fact that most of you are known only through the internet; having met or knowing only a few of the members here, one has to accept that someone is an advocate of the movement based solely on what's posted on the internet. No reflection intended on the many gentlemen (and ladies) who constitute the bona fide representatives of open-carry, doing all the hard work, putting the public face of OC folk out there, working the gun shows, setting superb examples in Olympia and with the media, having to be dragged unjustifiably through costly legal processes -- these are not the people that create any problems -- it's the posters whose constant, repetitive derogatory jibes at law enforcement no matter in what context LE is mentioned , whose virulent and slanted bias against all things cop come out in almost every single one of their posts (some even make it their sig-lines) -- those are to whom my comments were addressed.

Cops on gun forums? Really? You need to ask? Many, many cops love guns and have a deep respect for anything concerning gun rights. Regrettably, some of you have encountered those that don't share that respect. But it's not the cops on internet forums that you need to be arguing with; if there wasn't some common ground, they (I) wouldn't be here.

We have the LAW on our side. We shouldn't have to persuade cops to uphold the law. And that sir, is the issue.

I don't disagree. But that, sadly, is the reality. OC is a relative new movement that's burgeoned in the past decade. For those of you that love to compare OC's acceptance with the civil rights movement, look how long that took. Further, you've got to look at what's become the cultural norms throughout most of our country and how the liberal, nanny-state PC mentality took hold over our institutions in the past 40 years -- infesting law enforcement leadership -- and our media, television, politics but mostly our public schools -- so look at the new generation coming into the law enforcement professions. Lots of ingrained cultural attitudes to change. Did anyone say it was supposed to be easy?

Really? Do a search and you will see declarations by cops all over the country against open carry.

Click to expand...

An internet search? Woo. Yep, there are some. Far more by CoPs, sheriffs, and the weenie administrators rather than rank-and-file street cops. But many more thousand far more virulent statements toward cops (statists, jack-booted thugs, etc.) by supposed gun people than from cops toward gun people.

I don't notice a lot of cops on gun forums making blanket statements that gun-owners and gun-carriers cannot be trusted, that they lie and love taking away the legal rights of citizens.

Look inward first.

Click to expand...

Really now? That's quite the pithy little jab. I'll have to ponder that ...

Bobarino · Jan 15, 2011

Bo, I'm going to play devil's advocate for a minute or two.

As others have stated, we shouldn't have to convince the police to respect our rights. When a LEO gets on here and starts defending another LEO's actions that were clearly in the wrong, it sets a tone for LEO's. Of course they do no represent every LEO out there, but it gives at least a small cross section of reference. From what I've seen, cops really only get bashed when they attempt to defend the indefensible in the name of "officer safety" and other bogus statements used to violate someone's rights. Cops are a group that are extremely reluctant to call out their fellow officers. That just worsens the problem.

As for filing truthful reports, I believe all cops are capable of doing so, but some choose not to. Take a generic negative encounter that you might see posted on these boards for instance. Do you really think the cop is going to put in his report:

"On 26 May at 1300 hours, I illegally detained a Caucasian male who was openly carrying a pistol, secured in a holster on his waistband, illegally seized the weapon and the man's ID, performed an unwarranted background check and check of the serial number of the gun. Before handing it back to the man and telling him to not reload the gun until I was gone, I illegally attempted to coerce the man not to open carry using threat of arrest in direct violation of 42USC242 and exposing the department to possible liabilities under 42USC1983."

Or would you expect to see something more like this:

"On 26 May at 1300 hours, I observed an armed man acting suspiciously and detained him, disarmed him and ran a check for warrants and a possible stolen weapon because I felt he was a threat to my safety and the safety of the public. No wants or warrants were found but I advise the person that openly carrying a firearm is dangerous and inadvisable."

There is copious amounts of CYA that happens in police reports. Just look at the John Williams shooting as evidence of that.

ALWAYS keep in mind, that it's illegal for you to lie to the cops, but they can lie to you all the live long day and it is legal. They are very well aware of their ability to lie without repercussion and even if they are caught, qualified immunity will likely protect them.

The solution here is even more simple than you're suggesting. It's not for OC'ers to build bridges, or warm up to LEO's, or show respect. The solution is for LEO's to quit violating peoples' rights.

Citizen in right on when he says it's more a matter of 4A rights than 2A rights.

The hot head cops aren't great in number, but they do give the rest a bad name and bad reputation. I think the main problem with modern police is their training. They are trained and taught that they are the THE FINAL word on the street, regardless of what the law says. They are taught to lie to get people to confess. They are taught to treat virtually everyone they encounter as a suspect, even the victims of crimes.

The change that we seek starts at the top and works it's way down to the beat cop. To get to the top, we use the remedy of law suits and injunctions. That's how the system is set up. We didn't make the rules, we just play by them.

We've all seen how effective it is to argue with a cop on the street, so the bottom line remains, get them trained properly to quit violating peoples' rights and we won't have a problem.

Bobby

amlevin · Jan 15, 2011

Bobarino said:
Bo, I'm going to play devil's advocate for a minute or two.

As others have stated, we shouldn't have to convince the police to respect our rights. When a LEO gets on here and starts defending another LEO's actions that were clearly in the wrong, it sets a tone for LEO's. Of course they do no represent every LEO out there, but it gives at least a small cross section of reference. From what I've seen, cops really only get bashed when they attempt to defend the indefensible in the name of "officer safety" and other bogus statements used to violate someone's rights. Cops are a group that are extremely reluctant to call out their fellow officers. That just worsens the problem.

As for filing truthful reports, I believe all cops are capable of doing so, but some choose not to. Take a generic negative encounter that you might see posted on these boards for instance. Do you really think the cop is going to put in his report:

"On 26 May at 1300 hours, I illegally detained a Caucasian male who was openly carrying a pistol, secured in a holster on his waistband, illegally seized the weapon and the man's ID, performed an unwarranted background check and check of the serial number of the gun. Before handing it back to the man and telling him to not reload the gun until I was gone, I illegally attempted to coerce the man not to open carry using threat of arrest in direct violation of 42USC242 and exposing the department to possible liabilities under 42USC1983."

Or would you expect to see something more like this:

"On 26 May at 1300 hours, I observed an armed man acting suspiciously and detained him, disarmed him and ran a check for warrants and a possible stolen weapon because I felt he was a threat to my safety and the safety of the public. No wants or warrants were found but I advise the person that openly carrying a firearm is dangerous and inadvisable."

There is copious amounts of CYA that happens in police reports. Just look at the John Williams shooting as evidence of that.

ALWAYS keep in mind, that it's illegal for you to lie to the cops, but they can lie to you all the live long day and it is legal. They are very well aware of their ability to lie without repercussion and even if they are caught, qualified immunity will likely protect them.

The solution here is even more simple than you're suggesting. It's not for OC'ers to build bridges, or warm up to LEO's, or show respect. The solution is for LEO's to quit violating peoples' rights.

Citizen in right on when he says it's more a matter of 4A rights than 2A rights.

The hot head cops aren't great in number, but they do give the rest a bad name and bad reputation. I think the main problem with modern police is their training. They are trained and taught that they are the THE FINAL word on the street, regardless of what the law says. They are taught to lie to get people to confess. They are taught to treat virtually everyone they encounter as a suspect, even the victims of crimes.

The change that we seek starts at the top and works it's way down to the beat cop. To get to the top, we use the remedy of law suits and injunctions. That's how the system is set up. We didn't make the rules, we just play by them.

We've all seen how effective it is to argue with a cop on the street, so the bottom line remains, get them trained properly to quit violating peoples' rights and we won't have a problem.

Bobby

Well written. Good Job.

FMCDH · Jan 15, 2011

amlevin said:
Why should he stick around with comments like these. If we want some diversity of opinions here why not address his comments.

Why do you assume "comments like these" are intended in a negative fashion?

My opinions on this topic have already been recorded in the other 2 dozen threads that have been started or transformed to this debate over the last 2 years. I have no interest in re-stating the obvious, but I do like to read the debates and opinions none the less.

Carry On!

MamaLiberty · Jan 15, 2011

Lots of documented proof of police misconduct and "immunity" from accountability.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...ronguns.blogspot.com&lr=lang_en&aq=f&aqi=&oq=

From David Codrea's WaronGuns

http://waronguns.blogspot.com/

About "The Only Ones"
The purpose of this feature has never been to bash cops. The only reason I do this is to amass a credible body of evidence to present when those who would deny our right to keep and bear arms use the argument that only government enforcers are professional and trained enough to do so safely and responsibly. And it's also used to illustrate when those of official status, rank or privilege, both in law enforcement and in some other government position, get special breaks not available to we commoners, particularly (but not exclusively) when they're involved in gun-related incidents.

And then, there are the fake "cops": http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2011/01/were-fauxnly-ones_10.html

And we're supposed to know the difference instantly, at night, when our doors are kicked in - because if we actually defend ourselves and they turn out to be "only ones" indeed, then we probably die or spend the rest of our life in prison.

I'm not a mind reader, and neither are you.

Citizen · Jan 15, 2011

Bo: No one's putting the onus for reconciliation on the OCers, dude. I was duly noting the tenor of posts in threads that mentioned law enforcement.

OK. Point taken. I re-read your post. You were not, as I put it, putting all the responsibility for reconciliation on OCers.

Bo: How so? Simply stating that the anti-cop statements do nothing to further your cause, nor help build bridges. It's not the cops on these forums making the extreme statements, buddy.

It absolutely is some cops on this forum making extreme statements. I have personally read numerous anti-rights and anti-freedom (thus, anti-American) commentary from various cops on this forum. Determinedly, doggedly hammering their fallacious, self-serving comments into a corner, and driving them into ad hominem attacks and evasions to show the emptiness of their words is hardly extreme; it is defense of the ideas that founded this country.

Bo: Finally -- we are trying to build bridges here in Washington;

It is police who owe it to us and every other citizen to build bridges, not the other way around. And, those bridges need to be deeply rooted in a sincere recognition of individual liberties and rights, not built on a foundation of smooth public-relations throw-away phrases. If any cops want to build bridges to me, all they have to do is begin an effective campaign to dismantle the Blue Wall of Silence, and start ridding their ranks of the rights-violators. I will let the police who do that build an abutment on my side of the river for further bridge-building on their part.

Others who already recognize personal rights--all rights, not just 2A--will hear little from me. They can put down all the bridge decking they want.

Any, who try to cross with anti-rights attitudes and smooth misrepresentations will be repelled as uninvited boarders--vigorously.

Citizen · Jan 15, 2011

fire suppressor said:
SNIP Bo I'm going to agree with you it seems like so often on this forum we jump to labeling all LEO's the same...

To my knowledge, this has not happened in some time. Cop-bashing--generalized anti-cop sentiments--is not tolerated on this forum.

In fact, it is so infrequent, that cop-supporters have had to resort to moving the line, redefining cop bashing to include criticism that is in fact not generalized anti-cop commentary.

Please make an effort to distinguish criticism and dissent from generalized bashing.

Citizen · Jan 15, 2011

Bo said:
SNIP f you are typical of those in the OC movement in Virginia, citizen, no wonder you're having trouble getting support.
Puh-leeze, indeed.

Got news for you, Mr. Know-it-all Conclusion Jumper. We don't have any trouble getting support for OC in Virginia. This is where it all started--literally. Both in 1607 with the founding of Jamestown and 2006 with the launch of this forum. (Talking about the OC movement; no disrespect to those who were OCing for years before the forum.)

The only trouble we've had here in VA is convincing a few local governments and their personnel that their usual attitudes and tactics weren't going to work on us. That is to say, we demanded compliance with existing law, and got it. The other side of this coin is that we have found many more people support OC than oppose it. I personally have received dozens of pro-gun comments from strangers in public, while I can still count on one hand the number of negative comments.

slowfiveoh · Jan 15, 2011

I am a human being.

I have a right to defend myself.

I have a right to defend myself from immediate attack.

I have a right to equitable means of defending myself from immediate attack.

I should not have to wait for another to come to my aid or render assistance.

I should not be disarmed, and made to wait for said assistance.

I alone am responsible for my well-being.

I find it troubling that officers state they are made to be targets by putting the uniform on, yet so many of my countrymen die just the same, every year, in far greater numbers than the total of all dead police officers.

Yet I am to be disarmed, or tactically handicapped, while they carry openly.

Why am I not worth it? Why am I not allowed to defend myself and my family?

Will the audible wail of an approaching siren bring my wife, or my daughter, or myself, back to life?

Does the discomfort of seeing a firearm, by those who are nervous of that with which they are unfamiliar, or conditioned to believe is "evil", reign supreme over the smile of my wife, and the welfare of my family?

I wait for no policeman. Not now. Not ever.

My life is my responsibility.
My family, is my responsibility.

Citizen · Jan 15, 2011

slowfiveoh said:
SNIP I am a human being...My life is my responsibility...

Ha! Two serious fallacies in one post!

Your existence is important only insofar as you fulfill the needs and requirements of the state. You do not exist outside of the state. Your responsibility is to fulfill your role for the state. This includes accepting anything the state or its agents tells you without question.

[/sarcasm off.]

The Twilight Zone: The Obsolete Man http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vow6I1fV4q4

(The state declared his profession to be unneeded, thus he was killed for obsolesence. His humanity and ability to think ideas counted not only for nothing, but the latter was dangerous to the state. "The state has no use for your kind," rants the judge. However, the man has a very good way of unmasking the state.)

Ruby · Jan 15, 2011

slowfiveoh said:
I am a human being.

I have a right to defend myself.

I have a right to defend myself from immediate attack.

I have a right to equitable means of defending myself from immediate attack.

I should not have to wait for another to come to my aid or render assistance.

I should not be disarmed, and made to wait for said assistance.

I alone am responsible for my well-being.

I find it troubling that officers state they are made to be targets by putting the uniform on, yet so many of my countrymen die just the same, every year, in far greater numbers than the total of all dead police officers.

Yet I am to be disarmed, or tactically handicapped, while they carry openly.

Why am I not worth it? Why am I not allowed to defend myself and my family?

Will the audible wail of an approaching siren bring my wife, or my daughter, or myself, back to life?

Does the discomfort of seeing a firearm, by those who are nervous of that with which they are unfamiliar, or conditioned to believe is "evil", reign supreme over the smile of my wife, and the welfare of my family?

I wait for no policeman. Not now. Not ever.

My life is my responsibility.
My family, is my responsibility.

So true, so true. Beautifully written, thank you. We need to be reminded from time to time that our rights come from our Creator and that the Constitution, and Bill of Rights are there to REMIND GOVERNMENT of what our God given rights are, not to confer those rights on us. I can't imagine the terror people must feel who live in countries such as Great Britain and Australia who have no effective means of defending themselves from harm. Those governments have denied basic human rights to their citizens; we must never let that happen here.

BigDave · Jan 16, 2011

When the push comes to shove, I am sure you want to be treated the same as any officer does as well.
No one here wants a label put on them nor does Law Enforcement but we have those (both sides) that advocate a consistent negative hat on them, don't fall into the same bs.

Citizen · Jan 16, 2011

BigDave said:
When the push comes to shove, I am sure you want to be treated the same as any officer does as well.
No one here wants a label put on them nor does Law Enforcement but we have those (both sides) that advocate a consistent negative hat on them, don't fall into the same bs.

Ummm. No. I do not want automatic respect and compliance with my demands just because I wear a badge, regardless of the legality of my demands as some police do.

Nor, have any of my fellow OCers required or requested that I practice silence when they screw up, or lie to cover for them.

As for labels, some police earn their labels. And, apparently many others seem willing to tolerate the actions that earned those labels. They may not like what the others are doing, but they seem unwilling to root it out themselves. At some point, the label has to slop over. We are not out of line for pointing out that police owe it to the citizens to protect the citizens from cops as well as violent criminals.

BigDave · Jan 16, 2011

BigDave said:
When the push comes to shove, I am sure you want to be treated the same as any officer does as well.
No one here wants a label put on them nor does Law Enforcement but we have those (both sides) that advocate a consistent negative hat on them, don't fall into the same bs.

Citizen said:
Ummm. No. I do not want automatic respect and compliance with my demands just because I wear a badge, regardless of the legality of my demands as some police do.

Nor, have any of my fellow OCers required or requested that I practice silence when they screw up, or lie to cover for them.

As for labels, some police earn their labels. And, apparently many others seem willing to tolerate the actions that earned those labels. They may not like what the others are doing, but they seem unwilling to root it out themselves. At some point, the label has to slop over. We are not out of line for pointing out that police owe it to the citizens to protect the citizens from cops as well as violent criminals.

WOW you get all that out of a little statement directed toward not just making assumptions of groups or people you come contact with.

Kind of like making a mountain out of mole hill.

Citizen · Jan 16, 2011

BigDave said:
WOW you get all that out of a little statement directed toward not just making assumptions of groups or people you come contact with.

Kind of like making a mountain out of mole hill.

If it is a mole-hill, why did you use this language:

"but we have those (both sides) that advocate a consistent negative hat on them, don't fall into the same bs." (emphasis added by Citizen)

Mine was a reply to illustrate the missing perspective of yours. Mine is only as much mountain as yours. Especially considering you used the term I underlined in the preceding quote.

BigDave · Jan 16, 2011

Citizen said:
If it is a mole-hill, why did you use this language:

"but we have those (both sides) that advocate a consistent negative hat on them, don't fall into the same bs." (emphasis added by Citizen)

Mine was a reply to illustrate the missing perspective of yours. Mine is only as much mountain as yours. Especially considering you used the term I underlined in the preceding quote.

No missing perspective on my part, I am very content with it.

Cop-think

Bo

Regular Member

Bobarino

Regular Member

amlevin

Regular Member

FMCDH

Regular Member

MamaLiberty

Regular Member

Citizen

Founder's Club Member

Citizen

Founder's Club Member

Citizen

Founder's Club Member

slowfiveoh

Regular Member

Citizen

Founder's Club Member

Ruby

Regular Member

BigDave

Opt-Out Members

Citizen

Founder's Club Member

BigDave

Opt-Out Members

Citizen

Founder's Club Member

BigDave

Opt-Out Members