imported post
The part where he states I attended is incorrect, but I did have eyes and ears there.
http://www.examiner.com/x-18561-Grand-Rapids-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m10d7-Open-Carry-Making-Headway
Open Carry Making Headway
October 7, 8:44 AM
Grand Rapids Gun Rights Examiner
Skip Coryell
A few days ago I got a call from a Michigan Sheriff who told me: "The Michigan Municipal League is making a presentation on open carry at the Sheriff's convention. I'll let you know what they say." This is the same municipal league who fought hard against the concealed carry law, so naturally I thought the worst. I just assumed they'd found a new strategy for arresting open carriers. (The old strategy wasn't working because sometimes when a misguided LEO arrests someone here a lawsuit against the municipality is filed.)
I called Brian Jeffs, President of Michigan Open Carry, and gave him a heads up thinking that he might want to attend the meeting. He did attend and afterward sent me the following email:
"Boy did you get it wrong. The talk wasn't about how to arrest OCers, just the opposite. It was about how you can't arrest them without facing a law suit."
"Okay, so I got it wrong. Would you believe that was the first time? Actually, this was one instance where I was thrilled to be wrong. Five years ago I was rabidly anti-Open Carry, but I've done a full about face since then and now support it to the max. Aside from being a basic human right, I believe it's a very important tool in the PR struggle to regain the hearts and minds of the public. There's nothing like a sunny picnic with kids playing on the swings, the smell of burgers on the grill, good talk with friends and family, and a gun strapped to every hip. I've become so supportive of open carry that I included five chapters on the topic in my last book "RKBA: Defending the Right to Keep and Bear Arms".
Brian emailed me a copy of the powerpoint presentation given by two Michigan Municipal League Attorneys and I read and viewed it with interest. The presentation started with an historical overview of court precedence including cases like "Terry Vs Ohio", "People Vs Champion" and "People Vs Oliver". The presentation said:
"The First Amendment protects a significant amount of verbal criticism and challenge directed at police officers.... The freedom of individuals verbally to oppose or challenge police action without thereby risking arrest is one of the principal characteristics by which we distinguish a free nation from a police state."
That last sentence was music to my ears, not that I believe people should be harassing police, but rather because I believe police should not be harassing citizens simply because they're lawfully carrying a firearm. While the powerpoint presentation was biased against the act of open carry (They don't like it.) It dida great job at teaching officers where their legal and civil limits are. This is a huge step in the right direction.
I know a lot of cops, and the vast majority of them believe in our right to keep and bear arms whether openly or concealed and will not only "not harass" us but will vehemently defend our civil rights. Have I had bad experiences with cops who went too far? Of course! Live long enough and free enough and that's going to happen. But the important thing to me is that, at least here in Michigan, the police are being educated as to our civil rights and their limits.
Whether you believe open carry is good or bad, you have to agree that police knowing the law and upholding our right to keep and bear arms is a very good thing. After all, without that, we are nothing more than a police state. Yes, this was one time I was very happy to get it wrong.