• 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.

Best defense show 2/09/11

MackTheKnife

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
198
Location
Jacksonville, Florida
The first segment of the show concerned OC. After a few "what not to do scenarios" involving LEOs, the last one demonstrated the "proper response". The LEO asked the OC'er to produce ID (Michael Pincus of Spyderco) which he promptly did. During all of the scenarios, Mike constantly reaffirmed his right to OC but caved when asked for ID. I tried to post to Best Defense (Downrangetv.com) but the server went down. As we all know, under Terry vs. Ohio, a LEO cannot ask for ID without PC.
 

Rob Pincus

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2010
Messages
17
Location
, ,
Actually, that was Mike Janich... I'm Rob Pincus... we're close friends, but not married. :)

Thanks for watching the show!

The program wasn't about what you "can" do under the law, it was about what we think you "should" do as a reasonable citizen carrying a gun for personal defense, not as a political statement.

-RJP
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
I am glad you posted. I also watched your show yesterday.

In the first scenario, the citizen acted like a moron. You don't touch your properly holstered gun unless and until you reasonably believe that you are in a self-defense situation. Clearly, he wasn't.

In the second scenario, the citizen handled it perfectly. He should obtain a lawyer and sue the department and the officers. He should cite St. John v. McColley which, all though probably not controlling in that jurisdiction, would be compelling, putting the individual officers at personal financial risk.

In the third scenario, the citizen voluntarily allowed the officers to violate some of his rights in order to prevent them from violating more of his rights. This mind-set is what got us into the situation where officers routinely violate citizens' rights. It is his choice to make, but we all suffer because of folks making choices like his.

I think you should have presented the last two scenarios as reasonable, to be chosen based on one's values. Instead, you presented the third as the best choice.

I, and most posters here, would respectfully disagree. I hope you choose to edit that segment.

I don't want this criticism to detract from you show as a whole. You guys know your stuff and present it interestingly and professionally. Last night I watched your show for the first time. I DVR it now.
 

golddigger14s

Activist Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
2,068
Location
Lawton, OK USA
OC on BD

Actually, that was Mike Janich... I'm Rob Pincus... we're close friends, but not married. :)

Thanks for watching the show!

The program wasn't about what you "can" do under the law, it was about what we think you "should" do as a reasonable citizen carrying a gun for personal defense, not as a political statement.

-RJP
Glad to have you on the forum. I'm glad you finally had an OC show, it's been so much "conceal, conceal, conceal". Maybe it could have been stated what state the scenario took place, since the laws vary state to state as to producing an ID. Thanks for the show, and don't be a stranger on the Forum. Also would you like to be a guest speaker at our 2A rally on 30 April in Olympia WA??
 

turbodog

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
566
Location
Independence, Louisiana, USA
The program wasn't about what you "can" do under the law, it was about what we think you "should" do as a reasonable citizen carrying a gun for personal defense, not as a political statement.

-RJP

Rob, I say this with absolutely no intent of insult to yourself or the show, but I feel that first example was moronic.

I posted in another forum regarding this exact same episode, that all I saw is an example of suicide-by-cop.

I just think the guy could have been portrayed as just being argumentative and confrontational rather than having a deathwish.
 
Last edited:

Mr. Y

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2006
Messages
485
Location
Super Secret Squirrel Bunker, Virginia, USA
Context

The scenarios were staged to in the context of strict personal defense purely to make some points. Sometimes, situationally there are factors that make open carry impractical defensively. There are times that there is a strategic value to open carry that is significant.

I agree though, scenario one was beyond overdone. More over, under what legal authority was there a detention in that scenario? What law was broken? I realize that when LE is called there is a duty to respond and investigate crimes, however there's also a duty to follow the law and it needs to be restated that armed doesn't mean dangerous or illegal.

We've seen, heard of and read about these encounters before and in at least one aspect the show did present a "scared straight" moment in scenario number one. However, where I think this particular episode did a disservice to the viewers was the portrayal of Law Enforcement as the on the street arbiters of life and death. IMO, the show reinforced the mentality of the LEO being able to enforce their will, right or wrong, on the citizenry at large.
 

Yarddawg

New member
Joined
Dec 13, 2010
Messages
4
Location
VA
However, where I think this particular episode did a disservice to the viewers was the portrayal of Law Enforcement as the on the street arbiters of life and death. IMO, the show reinforced the mentality of the LEO being able to enforce their will, right or wrong, on the citizenry at large.

While I have the utmost respect for LEO's (they routinely deal with that element of society that most do not want to), unfortunately, too many LEO's believe that they are within their rights to impose their will on the citizenry. I have seen this for myself more times than I care to recount.
 

Felix

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
186
Location
VA
... I have seen this for myself more times than I care to recount.

I guess I now know why I have trouble relating to these many, many negative LEO stories...40 years of carrying and nothing but a couple traffic stops...one speeding ticket and one warning...and stopped a few times when in OC mode but was quickly on my way.

All my encounters have been professional and I have no complaints despite having lived in several states as a result of numerous military moves when on active duty. But I'm intentionally non-confrontational and it doesn't bother me to show an ID to an LEO when requested even if state law doesn't obligate me to do so. I'm not out to try to push the envelope and "educate" the LEOs. If it seems to be a reasonable request from a guy trying to do his job, I cheerfully comply. That sort of an attitude has served me well.
 

turbodog

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
566
Location
Independence, Louisiana, USA
it doesn't bother me to show an ID to an LEO when requested even if state law doesn't obligate me to do so. I'm not out to try to push the envelope and "educate" the LEOs. If it seems to be a reasonable request from a guy trying to do his job, I cheerfully comply. That sort of an attitude has served me well.

Completely agree with you bro.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Completely disagree, bros.

However, I respect your right to choose to allow LE to violate your 4A rights. When you do, though, you help cement the practice, which negatively affects those of us who will not allow an officer to make demands he has no lawful authority to make.

To facilitate my ability to defend my rights, I OC sterile. My CPL and my DL remain in my car (both being required when I drive while packin'.) If an officer demands ID, I simply tell him that I have none on me. The last time this happened, on of the officers who surrounded me (four of them) said he could arrest me for not having a photo ID. I asked him to point to the code where it says that. Of course, he couldn't.

The encounter was civil and courteous, but my rights were violated. I don't need to be an *** about it, but I won't tolerate it either. I hope you bros respect that choice.
 

Smith45acp

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
434
Location
NC
When I go to downrangetv.com and click on any of the links it just sends me to some crappy search engine.

How can I view the episode ya'll are talking about here? Link?

Never mind, just figured out the OP posted the wrong address. It's downrange.tv close though!

Ok, I watched it and I have to agree with the camp that doesn't think giving up your 4A rights to POSSIBLY make the encounter go more smoothly is in your best interests or the right thing to do.

The commentator says (roughly quoted) "When officers show up, that is not the time to take a stand. When you are called into question, you need to cooperate"

You know, that's fine if that's the way you want to handle things, but I think it's actually pretty bad advice. Especially since you don't explain the other option. I would no more show my ID for simply carrying a holstered handgun than I would attempt to prove that it was actually MY daughter I was pushing the swing for in a public park and that I'm not some perv. To me it's the same thing. You better have a good, articulable reason that you suspect what I'm doing is unlawful. I only trust Matlock when it comes to hunches, his record is awesome.

I can personally vouch to the fact that things might not always go smoothly if you stick up for your rights, but if you know what you're doing things will shake out in the end and you can still feel like the free and sovereign individual you were supposed to be at birth.
 
Last edited:

Smith45acp

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
434
Location
NC
If it seems to be a reasonable request from a guy trying to do his job, I cheerfully comply. That sort of an attitude has served me well.

That's fine and I respect your personal decision to handle things however you feel appropriate.

However I disagree that stopping me and demanding my ID is reasonable. Bad guys don't carry guns in holsters where everyone can see them. LEO's KNOW this. But you don't look like all the other sheep so you pique their interest. That's fine with me to a point, observe me for 30 seconds and you can usually tell exactly what I'm up to.

"Ok now he's picking up eggs. Now it looks like he's choosing a cereal. Whoa, he just looked at me and gave me a cheerful smile. Ok he still isn't robbing the joint let's move on down the beat."
 

Felix

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
186
Location
VA
What will you do if you feel the "request" is unreasonable?

The same thing several of the other replies have advocated...knowing full well the action will likely raise the tension level a notch or two. It's one of those many judgment calls we all make daily. Luckily, I haven't yet had an LEO encounter with anyone whom I assessed as being anything other than a cop trying to do his job without getting shot or stabbed or otherwise assaulted in the process.

You've seen me reference previously the Rich Banks debacle in Dickson City, PA. He was minding his own business, eating dinner and OCing in a restaurant with six other OCs. Spouses and children were also at the table. Cops responded to a MWAG call to 911 and requested to see some IDs. The other six complied and that was the end of it for them. Banks was obstinate and refused to produce since state law didn't require it...and got cuffed and stuffed in a patrol car for his attempt to 'educate' the officers on the finer points of PA OC laws. And then once the cops got riled up over Banks, everyone had the 'opportunity' to have their weapon serial numbers recorded/checked. There's a lot more to it than this but you got a very abbreviated one paragraph CliffsNotes version.

A civil suit continues in federal court with Banks as the plaintiff against the city and the lead cop and the police chief (I think) but he's lost a couple key rulings to date before the case has even been placed on the docket. Even money has it the Banks suit will fold due to lack of financial resources to pursuit it to trial to even get a ruling on exactly how far the cops can go when requesting identification. Problem is, state law may say you don't have to produce IDs just because you're OCing but a refusal has a way of morphing into a charge of disorderly conduct or disturbing the peace or some similar charge. So while I applaud those who wish to stand on principle, few have the resources to follow through so it's typically an idle armchair threat.
 

carracer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
1,108
Location
Nampa, Idaho, USA
Typical response of "we're here, gotta charge someone with something."

The Pennsylvania part of the states forum has a huge thread worth reading on the "Dickenson Dozen."
 

buster81

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
1,461
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
The same thing several of the other replies have advocated...knowing full well the action will likely raise the tension level a notch or two. It's one of those many judgment calls we all make daily. Luckily, I haven't yet had an LEO encounter with anyone whom I assessed as being anything other than a cop trying to do his job without getting shot or stabbed or otherwise assaulted in the process.

You've seen me reference previously the Rich Banks debacle in Dickson City, PA. He was minding his own business, eating dinner and OCing in a restaurant with six other OCs. Spouses and children were also at the table. Cops responded to a MWAG call to 911 and requested to see some IDs. The other six complied and that was the end of it for them. Banks was obstinate and refused to produce since state law didn't require it...and got cuffed and stuffed in a patrol car for his attempt to 'educate' the officers on the finer points of PA OC laws. And then once the cops got riled up over Banks, everyone had the 'opportunity' to have their weapon serial numbers recorded/checked. There's a lot more to it than this but you got a very abbreviated one paragraph CliffsNotes version.

A civil suit continues in federal court with Banks as the plaintiff against the city and the lead cop and the police chief (I think) but he's lost a couple key rulings to date before the case has even been placed on the docket. Even money has it the Banks suit will fold due to lack of financial resources to pursuit it to trial to even get a ruling on exactly how far the cops can go when requesting identification. Problem is, state law may say you don't have to produce IDs just because you're OCing but a refusal has a way of morphing into a charge of disorderly conduct or disturbing the peace or some similar charge. So while I applaud those who wish to stand on principle, few have the resources to follow through so it's typically an idle armchair threat.


I think you missed my point. A police officer "requesting" to see the ID of someone who has broken no laws, isn't really making a request. As you have pointed out in your example, they are demanding to see ID. Choose to deny their "request" and risk loosing your liberty. Not very reasonable at all. Let's hope that the measure of what is reasonable (to some) doesn't move farther in the wrong direction. Do you think it's reasonable to go about your daily activities without ID at all?
 
Last edited:

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Q? Do you think it's reasonable to go about your daily activities without ID at all?


A! HeII yes I do!
and refusing to ID yourself, unless your are being charged with a crime is 5th amendment right!

Yep, I carry sterile.

Plus I am not "raising it up a notch" by refusing to give or carry ID, the cop is and that is his problem not mine.
 
Top