-
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.
IMPORTANT!!! Watch Bay Area ABC CH 7 NEWS 6pm UOC story of TODAY !!!
- Thread starter Livermoron
- Start date
coolusername2007
Regular Member
imported post
bigtoe416 wrote:
bigtoe416 wrote:
No its not. But I digress.
Livermoron
Regular Member
imported post
coolusername2007 wrote:
coolusername2007 wrote:
Ok a couple of quick comments...
1. Did anyone else notice the violation with a smile service? I think this LEO thought this was his 15 seconds of fame.
2. I like the UOCer's t-shirt, great interview attire.
3. Am I the only one who thought thise-check seemed awfullycontrived for the amountof firepower in the background along with rolling backup? Could the reporter have been the one who called 911 in fear? Makes a great story doesn't it?
4. Ignore the Brit and his racist remarks against Native Americans! Like the only time we need guns is when indians are afoot. What an elitist remark! Did anyone check to see if he is here legally?!
>>> Livermoron writes:
Hopefully with additional training on the Constitution, and maybe some good operational policy enforcement within LPD, this officer will come around ().
I actually wondered if the news crew had made the call too. But, with the local street corner hecklers around - it could have come from one of them.
Remember it is not cool to profile people from other countries - it is cool however to profile, hassle, and violate, law abiding citizens that choose to exercize their rights :banghead:
N6ATF
Banned
imported post
Next time, can we get the supporter they interviewed on another channel's news? Maybe the cops will think twice about ordering a woman to the wall. Especially if she's with a child (or with child, ha!)
Next time, can we get the supporter they interviewed on another channel's news? Maybe the cops will think twice about ordering a woman to the wall. Especially if she's with a child (or with child, ha!)
imported post
The LEO' just happening to show up in the middle of a TV interview to jack up this single UOC"er as an obvious criminal threat to society? What a complete set up, I have watched better contrived drama in a laundromat!! I wonder which one of those LEO's placed the MWAG call? This fake incident stinks worse than rotten fish.
I think the truly scary part was the overreacting cop with the AR-15. HE did probably scare the crap out of a few locals. When you see a officer walking around with one of those, it would lead you believe a gun battle is about to occur....now that's scary. They need to take those guns away from the field officers before they hurt someone!! Talking about who comes off looking like a cowboy...congratulations Livermore PD for looking like the overreacting fools.
The LEO' just happening to show up in the middle of a TV interview to jack up this single UOC"er as an obvious criminal threat to society? What a complete set up, I have watched better contrived drama in a laundromat!! I wonder which one of those LEO's placed the MWAG call? This fake incident stinks worse than rotten fish.
I think the truly scary part was the overreacting cop with the AR-15. HE did probably scare the crap out of a few locals. When you see a officer walking around with one of those, it would lead you believe a gun battle is about to occur....now that's scary. They need to take those guns away from the field officers before they hurt someone!! Talking about who comes off looking like a cowboy...congratulations Livermore PD for looking like the overreacting fools.
Rusty
Regular Member
imported post
I suspect that the Livermore Police felt they needed to take some sort of action publicly after the event over the weekend. Actually, other then the idiot with the AR-15 this really was not such a bad looking e check.
I also think that this kind of coverage shows the general public that this sort of practice is legal. The scary man talking to reporters with a gun on his hip was in fact not arrested, in fact the cop gave him his gun back and told him to have a nice day.
All in all, not too bad really. Nothing for the anti's there, as he did not get arrested, as he was not doing anything illegal. For the people that are more supportive, they got to see a little bit of an overreaction by the police, and how people are hassled by this silly law.
I think the ideal situation would have been for the officer to come up and just talk to him, instead of this put your hands on the wall crap, but the officer would probably have taken some crap from other officers for not being safe and treating it like a loaded weapon.
But really, as far as things go, this was pretty much a non-issue.
I suspect that the Livermore Police felt they needed to take some sort of action publicly after the event over the weekend. Actually, other then the idiot with the AR-15 this really was not such a bad looking e check.
I also think that this kind of coverage shows the general public that this sort of practice is legal. The scary man talking to reporters with a gun on his hip was in fact not arrested, in fact the cop gave him his gun back and told him to have a nice day.
All in all, not too bad really. Nothing for the anti's there, as he did not get arrested, as he was not doing anything illegal. For the people that are more supportive, they got to see a little bit of an overreaction by the police, and how people are hassled by this silly law.
I think the ideal situation would have been for the officer to come up and just talk to him, instead of this put your hands on the wall crap, but the officer would probably have taken some crap from other officers for not being safe and treating it like a loaded weapon.
But really, as far as things go, this was pretty much a non-issue.
AdnanShahab
Regular Member
imported post
I know I'm really late on this, but I was at work until really late tonight. Just for the record, I attended to UOC meetup in Livermore last Saturday, and I am proud to know the person who was 12031(e) checked in the ABC report that aired earlier.
As a result of the publicity generated by the news story, I am certain that a lot more law enforcement agencies will be monitoring this discussion forum. I realize that this might scare some people away from UOC, and I understand that some people might be reluctant to disclose their identities. I caution people to strongly think about what they post here. Anything and everything you say will be recorded for posterity.
I, for one, strongly believe in Second Amendment rights. I also know that UOC is legal in the State of California. I will be attending UOC meetups in the future, and I am looking forward to seeing exactly how law enforcement agents behave when they interact with people who are legally exercising their right to bear arms.
And just for any law enforcement agencies that might be reading this, my name is Adnan Shahab. I am running for State Assembly in California's District 20 in 2010.
http://www.Shahab2010.com
I know I'm really late on this, but I was at work until really late tonight. Just for the record, I attended to UOC meetup in Livermore last Saturday, and I am proud to know the person who was 12031(e) checked in the ABC report that aired earlier.
As a result of the publicity generated by the news story, I am certain that a lot more law enforcement agencies will be monitoring this discussion forum. I realize that this might scare some people away from UOC, and I understand that some people might be reluctant to disclose their identities. I caution people to strongly think about what they post here. Anything and everything you say will be recorded for posterity.
I, for one, strongly believe in Second Amendment rights. I also know that UOC is legal in the State of California. I will be attending UOC meetups in the future, and I am looking forward to seeing exactly how law enforcement agents behave when they interact with people who are legally exercising their right to bear arms.
And just for any law enforcement agencies that might be reading this, my name is Adnan Shahab. I am running for State Assembly in California's District 20 in 2010.
http://www.Shahab2010.com
N6ATF
Banned
imported post
bigtoe416 wrote:
bigtoe416 wrote:
Or asking them, finding that the call is not about an actual crime or threat, and sending out officers at a higher priority than ACTUAL crimes, anyway!
Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
Gundude wrote:
Yeah, not too bad of an e stop, but taking time after completeing the load check to memorize the serial number an announce it in public is not legal in my opinion, and under Arizona v. Hicks would lead to evidnce suppression should that SN lead to any kind of criminal charge.
I also still question the validity of the section 12031(e) check scheme - I know a Cal. app. ct. has ruled that this is not unconstitutional, but by analogy, its illegal todrive around with you trunk loaded withdrugs and dead bodies - would a statute that said police can stop car to ake sure trunks are not loaded with dead bodies and drugs be constitutional? of course not.
Gundude wrote:
Yeah, not too bad of an e stop, but taking time after completeing the load check to memorize the serial number an announce it in public is not legal in my opinion, and under Arizona v. Hicks would lead to evidnce suppression should that SN lead to any kind of criminal charge.
I also still question the validity of the section 12031(e) check scheme - I know a Cal. app. ct. has ruled that this is not unconstitutional, but by analogy, its illegal todrive around with you trunk loaded withdrugs and dead bodies - would a statute that said police can stop car to ake sure trunks are not loaded with dead bodies and drugs be constitutional? of course not.
L in Oakland
Regular Member
imported post
He's probably on of the LEO's gathering INTEL. I think the next freedom of information request is to see if any of the LEO's have joined the group harrasing our members. Which would could be construde a harrassment. Check to see whose time there on by the way.
He's probably on of the LEO's gathering INTEL. I think the next freedom of information request is to see if any of the LEO's have joined the group harrasing our members. Which would could be construde a harrassment. Check to see whose time there on by the way.
Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
Can I ask you Cal. unloaded carry folks a question?
Why (apparently) is nobody working the overexuberant e-check issue?
12031e provides that "In order to determine whether or not a firearm is loaded for
the purpose of enforcing this section, peace officers are authorized
to examine any firearm carried by anyone on his or her person or in a
vehicle while in any public place or on any public street in an
incorporated city or prohibited area of an unincorporated territory.
Refusal to allow a peace officer to inspect a firearm pursuant to
this section constitutes probable cause for arrest for violation of
this section."
Let's forget the overexubernat serial number checking thing for now - what about seizing people for open carry? The seizure thing is the low hanging fruit here.
What is the state of the law in California (state and federal interpretations binding on Calif.) re pointing guns at people, cuffing them, ordering them to put their hands up, etc.for administrative inspections? has anyone performed legal research on this general issue? Paid an attonrey to produce an opinin? Contacted the ACLU for help? etc.
Seems to me that the way the statute is written it does not state or imply that carrying a gun openly in an incorporated areaisgrounds to presume that crime is afoot - in fact it states specifically when the presumption of crime occurs, that is, where you refuse to allow a peace officer to inspect your fiream - under the statutory construction doctrine of Expressio unius est exclusio alterius (The express mention of one thing excludes all others)then officers would appear to be barred from seizing people just because hey are open carrying, and further, have no mandtory duty to conduct load inspections anyway.
And what does california law say about police pointing guns at people generally?
I think you all need to focus on this issue ASAP. Has anyone asked the AG's office for help i can;t imagine pro-gun AG brown wants to the police to accidentally shoot a legal open carrier.
Time to put on your thinking hats on this issue.
Can I ask you Cal. unloaded carry folks a question?
Why (apparently) is nobody working the overexuberant e-check issue?
12031e provides that "In order to determine whether or not a firearm is loaded for
the purpose of enforcing this section, peace officers are authorized
to examine any firearm carried by anyone on his or her person or in a
vehicle while in any public place or on any public street in an
incorporated city or prohibited area of an unincorporated territory.
Refusal to allow a peace officer to inspect a firearm pursuant to
this section constitutes probable cause for arrest for violation of
this section."
Let's forget the overexubernat serial number checking thing for now - what about seizing people for open carry? The seizure thing is the low hanging fruit here.
What is the state of the law in California (state and federal interpretations binding on Calif.) re pointing guns at people, cuffing them, ordering them to put their hands up, etc.for administrative inspections? has anyone performed legal research on this general issue? Paid an attonrey to produce an opinin? Contacted the ACLU for help? etc.
Seems to me that the way the statute is written it does not state or imply that carrying a gun openly in an incorporated areaisgrounds to presume that crime is afoot - in fact it states specifically when the presumption of crime occurs, that is, where you refuse to allow a peace officer to inspect your fiream - under the statutory construction doctrine of Expressio unius est exclusio alterius (The express mention of one thing excludes all others)then officers would appear to be barred from seizing people just because hey are open carrying, and further, have no mandtory duty to conduct load inspections anyway.
And what does california law say about police pointing guns at people generally?
I think you all need to focus on this issue ASAP. Has anyone asked the AG's office for help i can;t imagine pro-gun AG brown wants to the police to accidentally shoot a legal open carrier.
Time to put on your thinking hats on this issue.
Streetbikerr6
Regular Member
imported post
Mike wrote:
The State AG has a opinion page on their website.
http://ag.ca.gov/opinions.php
I have submitted an e-mail request for an opinion on the issue. Althought it may seem this is only for agencies around California. Though what agency is going to submit an opinion ontheir ownblatent disregard for civil rights. Hopefully campaigning for Governer in 2010 he would like to appease some CA gun owners hearts.
edit: Yes the opinion request is definitely not for regularcivilian use. I will try to find another way of contact. E-mailed his campaign for his view on the issue as a prospective voter.
EDIT: Got a response...
Dear,
While Jerry is considering a potential run for Governor, he is not a declared candidate. He has said that he will make a decision on the Governor's race by the filing deadline in March, until that time he is focused on his job as Attorney General.
Should he declare a run for Governor, his website will be updated to address all the issues and concerns that Californians will find important in choosing their next Governor.
Jerry Brown 2010
www.jerrybrown.org/action
So we will have to wait to hear any opinions as a candidate.
Mike wrote:
The State AG has a opinion page on their website.
http://ag.ca.gov/opinions.php
I have submitted an e-mail request for an opinion on the issue. Althought it may seem this is only for agencies around California. Though what agency is going to submit an opinion ontheir ownblatent disregard for civil rights. Hopefully campaigning for Governer in 2010 he would like to appease some CA gun owners hearts.
edit: Yes the opinion request is definitely not for regularcivilian use. I will try to find another way of contact. E-mailed his campaign for his view on the issue as a prospective voter.
EDIT: Got a response...
Dear,
While Jerry is considering a potential run for Governor, he is not a declared candidate. He has said that he will make a decision on the Governor's race by the filing deadline in March, until that time he is focused on his job as Attorney General.
Should he declare a run for Governor, his website will be updated to address all the issues and concerns that Californians will find important in choosing their next Governor.
Jerry Brown 2010
www.jerrybrown.org/action
So we will have to wait to hear any opinions as a candidate.
Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
Streetbikerr6 wrote:
Streetbikerr6 wrote:
Try to find a frienldy sheriff or police chief to ask for the opinion - or just one that wants a good excuse to stop these silly e checks and/or not get sued!
cato
Newbie
imported post
Streetbikerr6 wrote:
Streetbikerr6 wrote:
He did his part with his McDonald SCOTUSsupport for ceritori brief. I'd be very surprised if he addresses the issue again before the election.
Streetbikerr6
Regular Member
imported post
cato wrote:
Well that is a seperate issue. One has to do with the 2nd amendment and possession of handguns in their homeand our current issue has to do with violationsofour civil rights by California Law Enforcement. So I hope as the State Attorney General, he has an opinion.
Edit: so I should have rephrased the "winning gun owners hearts", to more of civil liberty supporters hearts.
cato wrote:
Well that is a seperate issue. One has to do with the 2nd amendment and possession of handguns in their homeand our current issue has to do with violationsofour civil rights by California Law Enforcement. So I hope as the State Attorney General, he has an opinion.
Edit: so I should have rephrased the "winning gun owners hearts", to more of civil liberty supporters hearts.
tekshogun
Founder's Club Member
imported post
I saw this as well as some other interesting stuff over at www.opencarryradio.com (especially one gut churning video of LAPD officers harrassing and being smug while detaining some legally UOCing citizens).
What got me the most about this video is the cop with the AR-15. Did I see it wrong or was he almost at the apex of a ready-high firing stance? And then he stood down a little more when he noticed he was being filmed. Absolutely retarded.
And let me point out to some of the people that believe OCer's are showing off or trying to be cool. There is nothing cool about being harrassed by the police or anyone for that matter. Is there something wrong with drawing attention to your self if you are trying to prove a point or to raise awareness? Were black people tryiing to show off how cool they were or just to draw attention to their coolness when they protested, boycotted, and marched for civil rights?
Any belief that no one should carry a gun because one thinks they shouldn't or because one does not like it is poppycock.
To Hell With Not Being Armed
I saw this as well as some other interesting stuff over at www.opencarryradio.com (especially one gut churning video of LAPD officers harrassing and being smug while detaining some legally UOCing citizens).
What got me the most about this video is the cop with the AR-15. Did I see it wrong or was he almost at the apex of a ready-high firing stance? And then he stood down a little more when he noticed he was being filmed. Absolutely retarded.
And let me point out to some of the people that believe OCer's are showing off or trying to be cool. There is nothing cool about being harrassed by the police or anyone for that matter. Is there something wrong with drawing attention to your self if you are trying to prove a point or to raise awareness? Were black people tryiing to show off how cool they were or just to draw attention to their coolness when they protested, boycotted, and marched for civil rights?
Any belief that no one should carry a gun because one thinks they shouldn't or because one does not like it is poppycock.
To Hell With Not Being Armed