Yea thats just a bit of an exageration, 9 werent waiting for us there was 1 or 2 waiting, the others showed up piecemeal while UOC'rs were still arriving. I do not believe it was a bait and switch.
-
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.
-
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.
La Mesa Coffee UOC meet
- Thread starter Firemark
- Start date
Yea thats just a bit of an exageration, 9 werent waiting for us there was 1 or 2 waiting, the others showed up piecemeal while UOC'rs were still arriving. I do not believe it was a bait and switch.
Joshua Costa
Activist Member
From my perspective it was pretty clear this was used as training for the officers. I arrived at the coffee shop first and the the black officer who latter checked me was first on scene. Through out the whole check he was the only one doing any talking, other officers showed up as time went by but it was basically his show.
You have to realize that the police station is right across the street. The way i see it is the call went over the radio and any officer that wasn't doing anything came over to gain some knowledge on the subject.
Ultimately we educated the officers and a few citizens. We let them know that citizens have the right to carry firearms and contrary to popular opinion we make our community safer in doing so. At the end of the day this is what's important.
Sometimes it seems OCers get muddled up in the details of an encounter. It's understandable because it's our job to pick apart these situations with a fine tooth comb, but sometimes taking a step back to see the big picture can put it all into perspective.
Thats my 2 cents.
Also my wife got really pissed when she saw the cop flag everyone with my pistol. As much as I harp on her about weapon safety, to see this cop acting so recklessly really shocked her. Maybe I should type up a draft letter stating our request for re-training for this department and have a bunch of people send letters in to get our point across.
You have to realize that the police station is right across the street. The way i see it is the call went over the radio and any officer that wasn't doing anything came over to gain some knowledge on the subject.
Ultimately we educated the officers and a few citizens. We let them know that citizens have the right to carry firearms and contrary to popular opinion we make our community safer in doing so. At the end of the day this is what's important.
Sometimes it seems OCers get muddled up in the details of an encounter. It's understandable because it's our job to pick apart these situations with a fine tooth comb, but sometimes taking a step back to see the big picture can put it all into perspective.
Thats my 2 cents.
Also my wife got really pissed when she saw the cop flag everyone with my pistol. As much as I harp on her about weapon safety, to see this cop acting so recklessly really shocked her. Maybe I should type up a draft letter stating our request for re-training for this department and have a bunch of people send letters in to get our point across.
Last edited:
ConditionThree
State Pioneer
Hmm...
If I were to arrange an open carry meeting and inform the police because they lead me to believe that they are supportive and the entire second shift shows up to conduct (e) checks, I would think that would be the last time I informed them of my plans.
Were I in the planner's shoes, I think I would compose a polite letter congratulating them on their 'free training' and conclude by indicating the next training session wont be 'free'.
If I were to arrange an open carry meeting and inform the police because they lead me to believe that they are supportive and the entire second shift shows up to conduct (e) checks, I would think that would be the last time I informed them of my plans.
Were I in the planner's shoes, I think I would compose a polite letter congratulating them on their 'free training' and conclude by indicating the next training session wont be 'free'.
I thought you would have been the last person on this forum to spread FUD
. Shame on you, not knowing what was arranged or spoken about and with what parties beforehand you draw some pretty contrite conclusions. There are plenty of UOC'rs who use the angry and untrusting method, dont be so quick to judge an approach that is in the spirit of Martin Luther King :idea:. The enemy is not LE, the enemy is the left wing liberal democrats that wants all our rights gone, dont forget that...
it's just a bit early to see what fruit will bear from this planted seed. And if it doesnt work, then by all means go to La Mesa and teach them a lesson, nothing is stopping you!
And that E check by the way garnered 3 business owners who have invited us to patronize their establishments, no problems whatsoever. Because of how we all acted
Hearts and minds people...Hearts and minds...
ConditionThree
State Pioneer
I thought you would have been the last person on this forum to spread FUD
The enemy is not LE, the enemy is the left wing liberal democrats that wants all our rights gone, dont forget that...
it's just a bit early to see what fruit will bear from this planted seed. And if it doesnt work, then by all means go to La Mesa and teach them a lesson, nothing is stopping you!
And that E check by the way garnered 3 business owners who have invited us to patronize their establishments, no problems whatsoever. Because of how we all acted
Hearts and minds people...Hearts and minds...
I'm at a loss to explain where someone might conclude my prior post contained 'FUD'. I simply explained what I would do in circumstances where police are being informed of the activity, invited to attend or observe, and it turns out that the authorities want to take this opportunity to demonstrate how an (e) check is conducted.
Are you saying that this was planned out in advance so that all the participants were aware police were invited to practice conducting 12031(e) inspections? It didn't seem like the uocr's on the video were looking forward to being searched. Perhaps I may not be recieving all the facts or they may not have been communicated as clearly as they could have.
Nevertheless, I believe it is still reasonable to give a department one free look,... after that, it's on them to know what their limitations are. We have to keep in mind that at some point, it will no longer be reasonable to ask us to endure repeated contact investigating the same non-crime.
Iopencarry
Regular Member
Firemark
I, for one, understand what went down here. I have set many of these type of events up. The first part of last year, we did at least twice a month. Sense about July, we have not had to call in advance, have not had any event e-checks.
The local PD's around here know us, and do not cause a problem. They know we all we be polite, professional, and that we know the laws we need to know.
Just this past Nov. I had between 65-75 supporters at a Toy Drive and the local PD did a drive by, waved, and then stopped and told the anti's/protesters to get out of the street or they would face arrest.
This is what good PR can do.
I, for one, understand what went down here. I have set many of these type of events up. The first part of last year, we did at least twice a month. Sense about July, we have not had to call in advance, have not had any event e-checks.
The local PD's around here know us, and do not cause a problem. They know we all we be polite, professional, and that we know the laws we need to know.
Just this past Nov. I had between 65-75 supporters at a Toy Drive and the local PD did a drive by, waved, and then stopped and told the anti's/protesters to get out of the street or they would face arrest.
This is what good PR can do.
Last edited:
hgreen
Regular Member
I do think Mark and the other OCers in the video handled themselves really well. Good work!
However, police interactions where they elect to do the "optional" e-check shows an anti-2A attitude from the top to the bottom of the force. No one holds a gun to the officers head and says you must check these OCers.
In Manhattan Beach where the CHIEF initially PUBLICLY threatened to arrest OCers who attended a city fair, ended up having ZERO e-checks despite HEAVY HEAVY police detail at the fair and over 20 OCers. Why? Because the captains and actual on patrol officers believe in an armed citizenry (confirmed by personal encounters on multiple encounters since the fair).
I don't think any "e-check" can be "positive" experience, neutral to negative AT BEST. It is simply a showing of a leftist superiority complex of law enforcement over law abiding citizens, exhibited by the lead LEOs comments stating that it was their "right" to check the guns.
I have nothing but positive things to say about the OCers who were there, but really think we need to address e-checks for what they are, not try to sugar coat them. Saying any e-check is good, proves to the rest of America that the anti-2A agenda has truly and completely penetrated the minds of even the most strong 2A advocates.
However, police interactions where they elect to do the "optional" e-check shows an anti-2A attitude from the top to the bottom of the force. No one holds a gun to the officers head and says you must check these OCers.
In Manhattan Beach where the CHIEF initially PUBLICLY threatened to arrest OCers who attended a city fair, ended up having ZERO e-checks despite HEAVY HEAVY police detail at the fair and over 20 OCers. Why? Because the captains and actual on patrol officers believe in an armed citizenry (confirmed by personal encounters on multiple encounters since the fair).
I don't think any "e-check" can be "positive" experience, neutral to negative AT BEST. It is simply a showing of a leftist superiority complex of law enforcement over law abiding citizens, exhibited by the lead LEOs comments stating that it was their "right" to check the guns.
I have nothing but positive things to say about the OCers who were there, but really think we need to address e-checks for what they are, not try to sugar coat them. Saying any e-check is good, proves to the rest of America that the anti-2A agenda has truly and completely penetrated the minds of even the most strong 2A advocates.
Yes Harley, I agree no sugar coating or saying E checks are good. But Everyone has to remember and think back to the very first time you heard of or learned about Open Carry. We have lots of first hand personal experience now, the vast majority of Law Enforcement officers have close to none. And so we have to remember that sometimes the officers that come to investigate the call for MWAG have not learned all the lessons we have, they have no vested interest in civil rights, laws regarding guns, politics. They may be lucky to remember the 15 minute poorly written bulletin they got 2 years ago about what to do with UOC'rs and now they are on the spot and have to deal with something they havent seen and figured was a fad that went away and they might never see.
So put yourself in their shoes, if some citizens are hardend and snippy and frustrated and angry and up in their face about all the things LE SHOULD be doing, or what they are doing wrong, the beat cop in front of you only hears attitude and resistance and sees a firearm on your hip. They see criminal, not LAC. And if your being firm in espousing your rights, at that moment to them you probably look like a criminal type trying to control the situation and cause trouble. They are most likely not up on gun rights and current events going on that we can recite from memory with vigor.
So this time, they had their first E check, they did ok, not great but ok ,next time it will go easier, we will talk with them more explain things to them when they are more apt and willing to listen and not feel scared and threatend. Tell them about unconstituionality of E checks and the racist history of gun laws in the PRK. And eventually after a few times they may just wave from a distance or not even check anymore. Give them the chance to figure out and unlearn the liberal anti gun brady propoganda of the last few decades.
Hey im not telling anyone out there how to work you fight for gun rights, this is just my way of doing it, and I present it here so others can read about it and judge for themselves and either dismiss it or incorporate some or all of it.
Im a fan of Sun Tzu, you want to accomplish a goal and win a battle, sometimes not locking horns but going around and knowing you opponent and how they think means you get to pick the battlefield and be victorious. My 2 cents.
So put yourself in their shoes, if some citizens are hardend and snippy and frustrated and angry and up in their face about all the things LE SHOULD be doing, or what they are doing wrong, the beat cop in front of you only hears attitude and resistance and sees a firearm on your hip. They see criminal, not LAC. And if your being firm in espousing your rights, at that moment to them you probably look like a criminal type trying to control the situation and cause trouble. They are most likely not up on gun rights and current events going on that we can recite from memory with vigor.
So this time, they had their first E check, they did ok, not great but ok ,next time it will go easier, we will talk with them more explain things to them when they are more apt and willing to listen and not feel scared and threatend. Tell them about unconstituionality of E checks and the racist history of gun laws in the PRK. And eventually after a few times they may just wave from a distance or not even check anymore. Give them the chance to figure out and unlearn the liberal anti gun brady propoganda of the last few decades.
Hey im not telling anyone out there how to work you fight for gun rights, this is just my way of doing it, and I present it here so others can read about it and judge for themselves and either dismiss it or incorporate some or all of it.
Im a fan of Sun Tzu, you want to accomplish a goal and win a battle, sometimes not locking horns but going around and knowing you opponent and how they think means you get to pick the battlefield and be victorious. My 2 cents.
devildoc5
Regular Member
I understand what you are saying, not that I agree, but at least I can see your point of view. That being said I can think of about 45 million things that could have gone differently there. (ok maybe just a few but still...)
What a LOT of departments starting doing in WA was asking some of us OCers to come out one day to their station and help train them (be dummies, give lectures, explain our views, yadda yadda yadda.) That would be a MUCH more effective use of resources than having the entire 2nd shift show up and form a perimeter around a bunch of OCers and letting 1 friggin officer do all of the checks.
I think this should be something we should be willing and offering to local departments when we approach them about their training deficiencies. Explain that you will take time out of your day with no compensation to attend one of their shift meetings to let them run through various scenarios with you and actually get hands on training and knowledge without depleting the number of officers out in the field on patrol.
Just an idea.....
ConditionThree
State Pioneer
And a good one at that... This is an effort I would generally be supportive of and would net superior results than being swarmed by police for no other reason than to get a look. Perhaps we should develop a curriculum and a training packet to distribute.
Last edited:
Devilinbp
Regular Member
While i agree that offering to be a training aide for LEO's at shift meetings and such is a good idea AND i am even willing to be such a guinea pig......i hope that in the long run 12031 goes by the wayside and we get loaded carry instead of this UOC farce.
devildoc5
Regular Member
Agreed, however when we are trying to treat a disease we must first relieve the patients symptoms, then we can attack the disease itself
(felt all metaphory today :banana::banana::banana
Devilinbp
Regular Member
If you haven't already done so, take a gander at this link on Calguns for this video and the responses. I am totally amazed at the wild assumptions some of the posters make.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=395757
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=395757