Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 33

Thread: Why Police Open Carry?

  1. #1
    Regular Member mach1chris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    130

    f

    f
    Last edited by mach1chris; 06-15-2011 at 09:51 PM.
    False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Thomas Jefferson

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    fl
    Posts
    1,835
    Assuming you're talking about uniformed officers....because they're uniformed officers, how else would one expect them to carry?

    Not trying to be mean,but..this argument for why they can/we cant just fails,it's been tried already

  3. #3
    Regular Member Rich7553's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SWFL
    Posts
    516
    In order of significance, IMHO:

    1. Deterrence. Between the uniform, badge, and visible firearm, the "look" of a police officer portrays authority. Detectives use concealed carry and no uniforms in order to put at ease those whom they are interviewing. People are more talkative when they are not intimidated.

    2. Speed. Open carry subtracts on average a second on draw speed over concealed carry. That second could mean one's life.

    3. Tradition. Open carry of uniformed officers has a traditional element stemming from when the lawman's firearm was typically too big to conceal.

    That's my take on it.
    Rich
    MSgt, USAF Ret.
    Executive Director
    Florida Carry, Inc.
    www.floridacarry.org
    Glock 23 RTF2
    Mosin Nagant M91/30 (1942 Izhevsk)
    _____________________________________
    Want to do something about your gun rights?
    PITCH IN, QUIT B*TCHING!

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich7553 View Post
    In order of significance, IMHO:

    1. Deterrence. Between the uniform, badge, and visible firearm, the "look" of a police officer portrays authority. Detectives use concealed carry and no uniforms in order to put at ease those whom they are interviewing. People are more talkative when they are not intimidated.

    2. Speed. Open carry subtracts on average a second on draw speed over concealed carry. That second could mean one's life.

    3. Tradition. Open carry of uniformed officers has a traditional element stemming from when the lawman's firearm was typically too big to conceal.

    That's my take on it.
    Everyone open carried in those days, somewhere along we lost our right!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris View Post
    Open carry is also a right earned for a Police Officer.
    A right earned?

  6. #6
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Judging by what's been reported here and what I've heard personally - -

    "You're creating a disturbance because someone is frightened."
    "You'll be the first one shot if anything happens."
    "You're inviting someone to just shoot you."

    I'd say they do it because they're antagonistic, situationally unaware, and possibly suicidal.



    And, by the way, officers don't earn rights, they are awarded authorities and privileges.

  7. #7
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    OC shows you're willing and able to use force. The visible presence of firearms is a civilizing force, obviating violence. Also, the state must show that it is willing to murder any violators of its countless "laws." From amish farmers selling raw milk to harmless cannabis smokers to an unpaid "speeding" ticket, the state has to send the message that continued resistance to any of its laws will eventually result in death.
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Prince William Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    And, by the way, officers don't earn rights, they are awarded authorities and privileges.
    And by us, no less.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member Jojo712's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris View Post
    Having to go through the academy for 6 months in my opinion is a right thats earned...
    Yeah, but eight years in the military and when you go back into The civilian world you still haven't "earned" the right to openly carry.

  10. #10
    Regular Member ~*'Phoenix'*~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    538
    Reasons why:
    1. Practicality - it's more readily available, there's less delay or chance of getting hung up on your shirt, pocket etc.
    2. Comfot - IWB, ankle holster, pocket, belly band, all are FAR less comfortble than a real holster, especially for all-day wear.
    3. Prevention - people don't screw with someone they know is armed. CC is virtually asking people to think you're unarmed, and 'surprise!' (ooh, the tactical element of surprise!) would-be-victim has a gun (that they may or may not be able to access and present in time to save themselves) and a bloody conflict ensues, shots fired, people going to hospitals and/or graves. Openly carrying let's would-be attackers know what they'd be in for, and 9 times out of 10 will prevent the need for the deadly force situation, saving everyone a lot of bloodshed and misery.
    4. Image - no one feels a great and pressing need to show extra respect to an unarmed cop. Gun-at-your-side let's them know you're in control and things will get ugly if you try anything bad; and that's how it should be. Not only for cops, but all legally armed citizens.
    American Government 101:
    The Executive branch's job is to provide celebrity figureheads for the pandering populace.
    The Legislative branch's job is to progressively destroy our freedoms for the "safety" of "We the Sheeple."
    The Judicial branch's job is to look like they're defending our freedoms against the abuses of the Legislative branch, only by token gestures that do not interfere is this pivotal process, but enough to deceive "We the People" into a false sense of security.

  11. #11
    Regular Member ~*'Phoenix'*~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    538
    As for rights, you have earned your rights to carry openly as a LEO, because you do need and get extra training and experience with use, retention etc. You need and should have it - you're knowingly going into potentially dangerous situations on a regular basis, and whereas an armed civilian may need to us his or her gun in self defense once or twice in a lifetime, there's a good chance, because of your line of work, that you'll have to do that much more frequently.
    However: all of us, LEO and civilian alike, were given our rights by God/inherently have them by rights of being human, etc, etc, whatever you believe. Those rights cannot be earned, they are had by all human beings and upheld by the Constitution. Rights to carry as related to military or law enforcement duties are earned, as these are special positions of authority that entail additional responsibilities. But when you're off duty, on leave, or retired from it, you just have the rights, the same rights, as every other citizen you've served to protect, to carry for self defense and defense of others.

    I hope that comes across the right way. LEO's and military have my respect as they deserve for their service to all of us, it's just that although any carry rights you have related to that service were earned by you, the right to carry altogether is automatic, as it is for everyone else.
    Last edited by ~*'Phoenix'*~; 06-04-2011 at 03:49 PM.
    American Government 101:
    The Executive branch's job is to provide celebrity figureheads for the pandering populace.
    The Legislative branch's job is to progressively destroy our freedoms for the "safety" of "We the Sheeple."
    The Judicial branch's job is to look like they're defending our freedoms against the abuses of the Legislative branch, only by token gestures that do not interfere is this pivotal process, but enough to deceive "We the People" into a false sense of security.

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member Jojo712's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by ~*'Phoenix'*~ View Post
    ?...all of us, LEO and civilian alike, were given our rights by God/inherently have them by rights of being human, etc, etc, whatever you believe. Those rights cannot be earned, they are had by all human beings and upheld by the Constitution. Rights to carry as related to military or law enforcement duties are earned, as these are special positions of authority that entail additional responsibilities. But when you're off duty, on leave, or retired from it, you just have the rights, the same rights, as every other citizen you've served to protect, to carry for self defense and defense of others.
    I couldn't agree more. 100% on the money.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Rich7553's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SWFL
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris View Post
    I completely understand where your coming from and what your saying... Its amazing what we can learn from one another.

    I never took it upon myself to think of it as a privilege.
    Chris, I'd have to say it is a privilege, not a right in the sense that the practice of OC by a LEO is codified in Florida Statute. And amazingly enough, it's the very same statute that allows OC while fishing, camping, and hunting!

    §790.25 F.S.:

    (3) LAWFUL USES.—The provisions of ss. 790.053 and 790.06 do not apply in the following instances, and, despite such sections, it is lawful for the following persons to own, possess, and lawfully use firearms and other weapons, ammunition, and supplies for lawful purposes:

    (d) Sheriffs, marshals, prison or jail wardens, police officers, Florida highway patrol officers, game wardens, revenue officers, forest officials, special officers appointed under the provisions of chapter 354, and other peace and law enforcement officers and their deputies and assistants and full-time paid peace officers of other states and of the Federal Government who are carrying out official duties while in this state;

    (h) A person engaged in fishing, camping, or lawful hunting or going to or returning from a fishing, camping, or lawful hunting expedition;
    You should have seen the look of disbelief on the face of a Fort Myers PD officer who questioned the legality of OC'ing while fishing when I told him that both he and I were authorized to OC under the same statute. It was almost as good as when I proved it to him. Priceless!!!
    Rich
    MSgt, USAF Ret.
    Executive Director
    Florida Carry, Inc.
    www.floridacarry.org
    Glock 23 RTF2
    Mosin Nagant M91/30 (1942 Izhevsk)
    _____________________________________
    Want to do something about your gun rights?
    PITCH IN, QUIT B*TCHING!

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Prince William Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    105
    I don't see it as either a right or privilege for police to carry in any form. It's simply a piece of safety equipment.

    They're building a new house down the street from me. The framing guys have neither a right nor a privilege of using a pneumatic nail gun, but they had better know what they're doing with it in their professional duties before using it or their contractor is going to ask them to find a new line of work. The same would hold true for the police academy. Academy instruction is to provide a margin of safety for the officer and a liability buffer for the department.

    I carry a sidearm in my day job. It is neither a right nor a privilege. It is simply another piece of safety equipment the government has decided I should carry.

    It's different for the citizenry: the Constitution says that the people have a right to bear arms. Doesn't say anything about needing to go to the police academy. Doesn't say anything about joining the military.

    There is no police or military "right" or "privilege" that the population does not already have. Any thought to the contrary is delusional. The population gives us the authorities we exercise "for them."
    Last edited by AIC869; 06-04-2011 at 04:08 PM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    West Texas
    Posts
    596
    Quote Originally Posted by j4l View Post
    Assuming you're talking about uniformed officers....because they're uniformed officers, how else would one expect them to carry?

    Not trying to be mean,but..this argument for why they can/we cant just fails,it's been tried already
    I agree with the they can but we can fail.
    I will also say it doesnt matter what they , the cops, do. I will also say that our right to the 2nd amendment should not involve Law Enforcement either. The simple fact that our rights are being restricted is what makes people look for argument.

    To answer the OP, cops open carry because "GUNS DETER CRIME". It is also easier to draw your weapon when you need it vs. trying to get it out of your pants or shirt.
    I see many Enforcement officers carry openly even when their not in a uniform. Most every DEA or FBI guy I ever seen does.
    Myself, I dont know of any LE that conceals unless their off duty. That depends mostly on department policy or state law. I dont know of any off duty Texas cops who open carry and the only reason for it is policy. " I dont think they can".
    When you want to ask "Why cant I open carry", keep the question based on the infringement to your rights.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris View Post
    jajaja!! maybe he missed that part when he was studying for the state exam...
    Once again another cop that is ignorant of the law. These are the guys that cause problems..........Not referencing you Mach1, I am referring to the cop involved in the incident.
    Last edited by 10x; 06-05-2011 at 03:27 PM.

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris View Post
    Having to go through the academy for 6 months in my opinion is a right thats earned...
    I went... Granted, I was disgusted with the anti-rights and anti-citizen attitude to the point that I quit... But, it wasn't that tough.

    I'm not trying to be degrading, but it really isn't a big, difficult accomplishment. I think most anyone can swing it. If you can do basic math and have read at least 2 books without pictures in your lifetime; the FDLE academy is well within your reach.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris View Post
    Sorry to hear that man... I find that shocking and really hard to believe that the academy will teach anti-citizen and anti-right additudes bro... Im not saying your a liar but some people join the academy not expecting that they are going to have to change their ways.
    I signed up with big dreams and a belief that there was good in the world and I was going to be part of it. When I found myself in a den of snakes, and that I signed up to be one of them, I was crushed. And for the reasons I cited when leaving (they asked me in an 'exit interview'), well, I've told that story... Their wrath continues to this day.

    I didn't think evil of that magnitude existed in the US of A. But it does, and it wears a badge and uniform in Circus County.

    Anyways, my point was that if someone wanted to 'be part of the solution,' they shouldn't be intimidated by the material. Anyone can do it. It's the unwritten part you have to watch out for...
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3
    First off, certain rights are guaranteed at birth and cannot be "earned". 25 years in the Corps earned me nothing aside from a decent pension and health benefits. Nowhere does the Constitution say that law enforcement personnel have a different right than the average citizenry and that document supersedes everything else. Sort of the reason it was created to begin with.

    When I grew up in Manhattan, the police were forced, under the uniform rules of the time, to carry their service revolvers under winter cover garments from October to April. Saw more than one poor soul flounder to retrieve the thing, and under enough pressure the NYPD at long last changed these ludicrous stipulations, just as all other ludicrous stipulations that prevent all men of good will from exercising a Constitutional right should also be changed.

  20. #20
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Speed of draw is important. Just ask these guys:

    http://www.pixiq.com/article/MIami%2...%20Hand%20Over
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567

    Post

    Your - possessive
    You're - You are

    There - Adverb: In, at, or to that place or position
    Their - possessive
    They're - They are



    That is all.

  22. #22
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich7553
    You should have seen the look of disbelief on the face of a Fort Myers PD officer who questioned the legality of OC'ing while fishing when I told him that both he and I were authorized to OC under the same statute. It was almost as good as when I proved it to him. Priceless!!!
    A person engaged in fishing, camping, or lawful hunting or going to or returning from a fishing, camping, or lawful hunting expedition.
    LOL! Good for you, & for him for actually being willing to learn.
    So if someone is aware enough to carry fishing equipment in the car & know of a place they could reasonably be coming from or going to, they could OC everywhere, right?

    BTW, if OC is the privilege granted by statute, then why isn't cc the right... with no gov't interference, no tax, no permit, no registration, etc.? One of them has to be free & not under gov't control.
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  23. #23
    Regular Member ~*'Phoenix'*~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    538
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    BTW, if OC is the privilege granted by statute, then why isn't cc the right... with no gov't interference, no tax, no permit, no registration, etc.? One of them has to be free & not under gov't control.
    That's basically my argument: We shouldn't have to screw around with the unreliable legislature. The state by it's own constitution may regulate the manner of bearing arms, not ban both methods. They could ban one or the other, or require a license for one or the other, or restrict places, but that's it. They've done all that plus banning both except for allowing you to buy the privilege of a CWFL and carry concealed.
    Last edited by ~*'Phoenix'*~; 06-06-2011 at 06:20 PM.
    American Government 101:
    The Executive branch's job is to provide celebrity figureheads for the pandering populace.
    The Legislative branch's job is to progressively destroy our freedoms for the "safety" of "We the Sheeple."
    The Judicial branch's job is to look like they're defending our freedoms against the abuses of the Legislative branch, only by token gestures that do not interfere is this pivotal process, but enough to deceive "We the People" into a false sense of security.

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Quote Originally Posted by Schlitz View Post
    Your - possessive
    You're - You are

    There - Adverb: In, at, or to that place or position
    Their - possessive
    They're - They are

    That is all.
    This.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  25. #25
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by ~*'Phoenix'*~ View Post
    That's basically my argument: We shouldn't have to screw around with the unreliable legislature. The state by it's own constitution may regulate the manner of bearing arms, not ban both methods. They could ban one or the other, or require a license for one or the other, or restrict places, but that's it. They've done all that plus banning both except for allowing you to buy the privilege of a CWFL and carry concealed.
    I don't think it has ever been challenged, but it should be. Current law is obviously unconstitutional. If I win the lottery.....

    It is impossible to have a right and not have a right at the same time and in the same relationship. They could say that I have to carry in a holster and that is about it. If it said the state may regulate the manner of bearing arms and said nothing about a right to bear before that, then the legitimacy of current law would be tenable.
    Last edited by 77zach; 06-06-2011 at 07:47 PM.
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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