This guy stayed really calm and did a great job...thought some of you would enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXwP02Dkp7A&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXwP02Dkp7A&feature=related
-
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.
Man confronted for open carry, video
- Thread starter eringdf
- Start date
tim12232
Regular Member
would i go up and video tape a cop stop while OCing? probably not, but you are right he stayed pretty cool. I am glad even the cops remained semi cool about it. It doesnt take much searching on youtube to find OC videos where cops or civilians have lost there cool. Good post!
Tim
Tim
Large Caliber Kick
Regular Member
This guy went out looking to get involved in a conversation with a leo and he went about it the wrong way. If you want to talk to the cops while carrying then hang out where most of them take their coffee breaks and greet them as you would anyone else. People like this give us a bad name by pulling stunts like that and makes it worse by posting it on youtube.
carsontech
Activist Member
I'm not up to chasing police around with a camera...yet. I skipped around in the video because I've seen videos like this before, I believe most of us have. I'm not into this stuff, but I support the right to do it.
Part of me is saying, "why on earth would I put myself in a situation to be close to LEOs when I know what they can get away with?" Another part of me is saying "who will watch the watchmen?"
Part of me is saying, "why on earth would I put myself in a situation to be close to LEOs when I know what they can get away with?" Another part of me is saying "who will watch the watchmen?"
Last edited:
Curtis C
Regular Member
that mans silly, if i was a cop i would raise questions. man comes up with a camera and a gun. he brought himself to that situation. he wasn't minding his own he went meddling. dudes a trouble maker. he confronted the police.
SouthernBoy
Regular Member
As innocent and non-threatening as it appears, this is never a good idea. Some would call it flaunting, some baiting, and some deliberately confrontational. Regardless of the labels that could be attached and even if nothing comes of it. it is not a good idea to deliberately and without apparent reason to do something like this. You are only going to be viewed as someone who is looking for a confrontation.
We who OC on a regular basis do not need, nor do we want, to have unnecessary attention drawn to ourselves just because we have a visible firearm on our person. If I happen to encounter an LEO while going about my business armed, that's entirely different. Or if I have an honest reason to approach an LEO while armed, that is also fine in my opinion (I have done this perhaps twice in 4 1/2 years). But I am not about to "bait" an officer in the hopes of getting good copy for video presentation on some website. This serves no valuable purpose and only gives credence to those who are fully against OC'ing.
Best is to think of carrying a firearm the same as carrying a cell phone. It's there for a reason and you are not of a mind to flaunt it or make a scene because you are armed. It's a tool, plain and simple, and has it's purpose on your person. And part of that purpose is not to be antagonistic, threatening, or in plain English, an a--hole.
We who OC on a regular basis do not need, nor do we want, to have unnecessary attention drawn to ourselves just because we have a visible firearm on our person. If I happen to encounter an LEO while going about my business armed, that's entirely different. Or if I have an honest reason to approach an LEO while armed, that is also fine in my opinion (I have done this perhaps twice in 4 1/2 years). But I am not about to "bait" an officer in the hopes of getting good copy for video presentation on some website. This serves no valuable purpose and only gives credence to those who are fully against OC'ing.
Best is to think of carrying a firearm the same as carrying a cell phone. It's there for a reason and you are not of a mind to flaunt it or make a scene because you are armed. It's a tool, plain and simple, and has it's purpose on your person. And part of that purpose is not to be antagonistic, threatening, or in plain English, an a--hole.
SavageOne
Regular Member
Let me say that this is not something I could see myself doing. With that said. Would it have been different had the person had a hammer hanging off their belt? I believe there was just a story in the news were a guy with a hammer was attacking people at a mall. The simple truth is that any "tool" can be used as a weapon. Would the facts of the situation have been different if the man had been CCing? The facts are(as I see them) a man who is carrying a weapon goes to a film a traffic stop.
This man chose to film the police during a traffic stop. The fact that he chose to exercise his right to carry a firearm, while doing so shouldn't enter into it. I often hear people saying they are trying to make OC more acceptable to the general public. Do you not realize that if we continue to say that "there's a time and place for it" that we are saying that there should be limits to how and when we exercise our rights. Are we saying that in this case it would have been better to CC rather than cast OC in a bad light? If that's the case then we are arguing appearances not rights.
It is true that labels may be attached to him for what he did. I would point out that those same labels are already attached to us by those who don't agree with how we chose to exercise our rights. You can be as clean cut and pleasant you like, there are still going to be those(even those who say they support the 2A) who are going to label you derisively.
This man chose to exercise two rights at the same time, and while I might not agree with how he did them, I will not condemn him for either. Some can label him activist, others can label him A-hole, I'm just glad to see people exercising rights lest they atrophy and die. As for the activist to A-hole scale, I view this guy somewhere in the middle, but recognize all points of it have rights.
This man chose to film the police during a traffic stop. The fact that he chose to exercise his right to carry a firearm, while doing so shouldn't enter into it. I often hear people saying they are trying to make OC more acceptable to the general public. Do you not realize that if we continue to say that "there's a time and place for it" that we are saying that there should be limits to how and when we exercise our rights. Are we saying that in this case it would have been better to CC rather than cast OC in a bad light? If that's the case then we are arguing appearances not rights.
It is true that labels may be attached to him for what he did. I would point out that those same labels are already attached to us by those who don't agree with how we chose to exercise our rights. You can be as clean cut and pleasant you like, there are still going to be those(even those who say they support the 2A) who are going to label you derisively.
This man chose to exercise two rights at the same time, and while I might not agree with how he did them, I will not condemn him for either. Some can label him activist, others can label him A-hole, I'm just glad to see people exercising rights lest they atrophy and die. As for the activist to A-hole scale, I view this guy somewhere in the middle, but recognize all points of it have rights.
MilProGuy
Regular Member
The fellow was foolish to approach an officer who was conducting a routine traffic stop, with a gun on his side and a video camera rolling.
He set out to get noticed with his gun, just sayin'.
He set out to get noticed with his gun, just sayin'.
09jisaac
Regular Member
OC is right, in my opinion. If anyone is just filming a confrontation by cops they're justified, they're trying to protect themselves/others. If someone is displaying a firearm most of us here think that they're just trying to protect themselves/others but as soon as you combine the two, they're "a--holes"? He complied with the officers request to step away from the traffic stop. He wasn't OCing a rifle. He might have wanted a confrontation, but that is his right to do.
It is our right to watch those that "watch" us. It is also our right to carry a firearm around in everyday life. So why is it so stupid to do them both? Most cops realize that they enforce the law. Out of my limited dealings with officers none has ever tried to be the law, one tried his best to find a law I was breaking. So we need to make it plain to these cops that they are being watched and they are under scrutiny. Unless something is very sensitive then we should film everything that LEOs do in official business.
I want people to think of the open carry community as normal people who go about there day doing normal things - they just carry their gun openly instead of concealed.
But this guy ruins that image, in my opinion. He isn't just going about a normal routine openly carrying, he is interrupting a police officer conducting a traffic stop. You know how we all talk about increased situational awareness when we are open carrying? Well that is what is on the cops mind while he is in the middle of a traffic stop. It's not like the cop just saw a man walk by while open carrying during the traffic stop, the guy intentionally threw himself into the situation (walked right up the front of the car). This cop didn't see an open carrier, he saw a man walk right up to the ******* car during his traffic stop, and for the cherry on top the individual who was being disruptive just happened to have a firearm.
Look, I don't want a cop all up in my face while I'm conducting my everyday business, and out of respect I don't throw myself into their business.
Now after the fact, the cop seemed to be pissed about it and wanted to confront the young man again. This was wrong, but this could have been avoided by not being a jackass in the first place.
Yes, this man was within his rights, and so are the funeral protesters with the westboro baptist church.
But this guy ruins that image, in my opinion. He isn't just going about a normal routine openly carrying, he is interrupting a police officer conducting a traffic stop. You know how we all talk about increased situational awareness when we are open carrying? Well that is what is on the cops mind while he is in the middle of a traffic stop. It's not like the cop just saw a man walk by while open carrying during the traffic stop, the guy intentionally threw himself into the situation (walked right up the front of the car). This cop didn't see an open carrier, he saw a man walk right up to the ******* car during his traffic stop, and for the cherry on top the individual who was being disruptive just happened to have a firearm.
Look, I don't want a cop all up in my face while I'm conducting my everyday business, and out of respect I don't throw myself into their business.
Now after the fact, the cop seemed to be pissed about it and wanted to confront the young man again. This was wrong, but this could have been avoided by not being a jackass in the first place.
Yes, this man was within his rights, and so are the funeral protesters with the westboro baptist church.
William Fisher
Regular Member
Why did he leave on foot when he arrived in (what appeared to be) a step van or whatever it was? He could have full well recorded from the vehichle BUT (I believe) he seemed to want the LEO to SEE his firearm. This kind of thing makes OCers look like confrontational Red Necks.
SavageOne
Regular Member
Foolish he may have been, but I don't think that foolishness rose to the level of RAS for the officer to stop him and demand ID. Do you believe the officer was correct in stopping the man and demanding ID? If so, what do you believe was the RAS to do so? Would it be filming the officer during a traffic stop? Openly carrying a holstered firearm? Exercising both rights at in concert? Or do you believe that simply being "foolish" should be enough to stop someone and demand they ID themselves?
Another point I noticed, during most of the stop of the man, the officer stood there with his hand on his holstered gun. If I had done that while talking to to someone in my state, I would be charged with brandishing , or making a terroristic threat. If the officer has the right to be at the ready while talking to someone with an openly displayed firearm, why don't we?
As to setting out to get noticed. Many people set out to get noticed while exercising their right to free speech. Many people set out to get noticed while exercising their right to assemble. Many people set out to get noticed while exercising any number of their rights. Why should their 2A rights be so sacrosanct in this regard.
SouthernBoy
Regular Member
I was not referring to the fellow in the video as an a--hole, but rather some of the ones we have all seen in youtube videos where it is very obvious they are doing nothing more than trying to get a rise out of an LEO just to get it on camera. Those are the ones I have a problem with. Deliberately going out of one's way to confront and antagonize anyone in the hopes of getting negative attention when armed is just not something we want to see taking place.
SavageOne
Regular Member
I understand what you're saying but, we have to realize that not everyone who OC's is trying to improve our image. There are those who OC who are simply exercising their right. Not everyone cares about the "movement", some only care about the "right". I may not like the fact that this man portrays OC in a unfavorable light, but I accept the fact that he has the right to carry his gun openly when he deems it fit. That seems the be the problem many here have. We want to exercise our rights and we want the general public to like it as well. I will be satisfied if we get to a point where my right is accepted, if it's liked that's just gravy.
Larry Flynt was no ones poster boy for free speech, but he still helped to protect that right for all. We are going to have to get to a point where we realize that we will never make everyone like OC, but hopefully they will accept it. I have no doubt that the majority of the members here work very hard to help move the acceptance of OC forward, but we cannot condemn those who are simply interested in the exercise of their right, not the ramifications of doing so. If we don't we have lost sight of the true goal.
Your example of the westboro group is spot on. I don't like what they do, but I do accept it. This man deserves the same treatment.
To your point about OCing during your normal routine, as the "Occupy" demonstrations have shown, this could very easily be part of this man's normal routine.
MilProGuy
Regular Member
His right to carry and his right to free speech are fine to exercise, but to interfere with the lawful duties of the LEO along with his "rights", caused him to cross a line and infringe on the officer's right to conduct his stop without interference.
I'm not sure I see what you're getting at with your reply... obviously I have realized that not everyone is trying to improve our image...hence the video here... I have accepted the fact that this man has the right to carry his gun and be an jackass about..... and I'm calling him just that...a jackass...
and how in the world could this be a "normal" routine? He said that it was his girlfriend getting pulled over. So it wasn't something he did everyday at the same time same place aka a routine.
SavageOne
Regular Member
How exactly did the man interfere? When commanded by the officer to back out of the scene, he did so. The stop was occurring on a public street. The man had ever right to be there. The officer felt that he was too close initially and commanded the man to back away, the man complied. I hope you are not suggesting that a person lawfully videoing an officer in public is interference. It is well established that it is not. As to minding his own business, the man states that it was his girlfriend being pulled over, and I can accept his wishing to make a video of the incident for safety. Lord knows, plenty of OCers have videoed their own encounters.
RAS stands for Reasonable Articulable Suspicion. It the standard that an officer must show before they are allowed to stop a citizen and demand their ID(this is a very limited definition I know). A common definition is also the officer must believe the person "has committed a crime, is committing a crime, or is about to commit a crime". Since we established that videoing an officer is not illegal and openly wearing a firearm is not illegal, I fail to see any reason the officer stopped the man the second time. He had already given an explanation for his actions and left the area. I would say that is the reason he did not get back in his vehicle. Had he re-entered his vehicle, he could be "stopped" for a traffic check and had to present his drivers license. Since he was on foot they could not demand his drivers license, without RAS. There are several videos on YouTube of Vermont OCers doing similar things. I am not saying I agree with it, just that I accept it as being within the confines of their rights.
For the record RAS is a lower standard than Probable Cause.
SavageOne
Regular Member
Part of your post was "But this guy ruins that image" in reference to what you want people view the "open carry community" as. That was my point that while you may wish to better the view of "open carry community" in the view of people(and I applaud you for it) not everybody cares. He may not care if he ruins, some image that others are trying to foster, he may simply be OCing because it is his choice. It is also possible that he is OCing to cause confrontation with police, and while I would find that reason distasteful I would have to accept it as his right. Much like "bait cars" don't make people steal cars, wearing an openly displayed firearm doesn't make an officer stop you.
As to the normal routine aspect. There are many people who make it point to video tape police interaction at every opportunity. In that sense, this could have been his normal routine.
MilProGuy
Regular Member
I've learned something new today, and I appreciate your taking the time to patiently and clearly define this for me.
Thank you.