My 23-Feb-2010 Detainment. Great Conversation.

[camsoup]

imported post

greg36ff wrote:

You have put yourself out there in a highly visible way. That was either foolish or brave depending onperspective. You have the responsibility to be an effective ambassador. I guess that means that you are going to have to risk knowing the difference between an opportunity to build a bridge or walking into a trap.

How did you come to this conclusion. All he really has done is carry a firearm within the letter of the law in this state.

Is every person driving a vehicle legally, foolish or brave for doing it. Is every person not committing crimes foolish or brave for following the law?

Someone else has put him out there "in a big way" and made a big deal out of a legal activity.....they don't agree with us and what (legally carrying our firearms) we do, and see US as the enemy.



A small rant about some of the things exposed about the SVPD emails, memos, etc....

If officers feel that every person with a gun is the same, no matter what the circumstances of the encounter are, then they need a reality check and might be in the wrong line of work. Or at least go work in Arizona or Vermont for a week and see that it is possible to allow citizens to exercise their rights.

If departmental policy forces officers to violate rights, or they are told to violate rights to try to get the end they want, and they choose to. They are not fit to be officers, and not fit to "defend the constitution" that they swore to protect.

 

[greg36f]

imported post

camsoup wrote:

greg36ff wrote:

You have put yourself out there in a highly visible way. That was either foolish or brave depending onperspective. You have the responsibility to be an effective ambassador. I guess that means that you are going to have to risk knowing the difference between an opportunity to build a bridge or walking into a trap.

How did you come to this conclusion. All he really has done is carry a firearm within the letter of the law in this state.

Is every person driving a vehicle legally, foolish or brave for doing it. Is every person not committing crimes foolish or brave for following the law?

Someone else has put him out there "in a big way" and made a big deal out of a legal activity.....they don't agree with us and what (legally carrying our firearms) we do, and see US as the enemy.



A small rant about some of the things exposed about the SVPD emails, memos, etc....

If officers feel that every person with a gun is the same, no matter what the circumstances of the encounter are, then they need a reality check and might be in the wrong line of work. Or at least go work in Arizona or Vermont for a week and see that it is possible to allow citizens to exercise their rights.

If departmental policy forces officers to violate rights, or they are told to violate rights to try to get the end they want, and they choose to. They are not fit to be officers, and not fit to "defend the constitution" that they swore to protect.

I understand what you are saying about what he is doing being legal. It’s just that everything that is legal is not normally done. Open carry is a NEW and controversial thing to many, if not most people. If you are going to do this, you have at least some small responsibility to represent the open carry movement and gun owners in general in a good way.

I realize that there are many people that do not agree with that sentiment, butI myself have a strong sense of community and I expect others to also. The open carry movement is a small group at this point and I feel that that sense of community is all the more important because of this.

I also think that some people ignore or minimize the progress that has already been made in such a short time. For years, if not decades "man with a gun" has been one of the worst, most highly charged calls an officer can get.

The open carry movement has spawned a major change in how many Dept's have dealt with man with a gun calls and has drawn the attention to something that many if not most officers and citizens once thought was illegal. Look at the memos that are posted on the opening page of this site. Most of them lean towards recognizing and respecting your (and my) rights. They may not all indicate that they like what you are doing, but the legal basis of what you are doing is presented.

Itseems to me that some people here "want it all and they want it all RIGHT NOW!!!. Life does not work that way, change in attitudes and opinions take some time.

I AM NOT COMPARING THE TWO, but it is probably legal to walk down the street with a bear on a leash, but if you do; you are gonna get a lot of attention. Which isfine, but when you and the bear walk out your front door, you know that you are going to get the attention andyou have no right to be surprised.

Give it some time and let people get used to it and soon you will have lots of people walking their bears with no public attention.

Having said that, I do feel that while the majority of people in the open carry movement are here to educate the public and work towards expanding the rights THAT WE SHOULD ALREADY HAVE; there is a significant group that enjoys the attention and controversy more than they should. They are more interested in fighting the battle than winning the war.

You must see this yourself in the internal battles that I often see played out in these pages (educate / sue, stand down / don't stand down, inform the police before agroup meet / don't inform the police) the list is endless.

 

[MudCamper]

imported post

greg36f wrote:

It’s just that everything that is legal is not normally done. Open carry is a NEW and controversial thing to many, if not most people. If you are going to do this, you have at least some small responsibility to represent the open carry movement and gun owners in general in a good way.

True, and if you look at the actual open carriers out there in the world, you will find that we all do a pretty good job of being diplomatic ambassadors of the pro-gun community. For the most part it's only here in the forums that we express our frustration and wage our ideological battles.

 

[heliopolissolutions]

imported post

Greg...what are you talking about?

 

[yelohamr]

imported post

Hmmm. greg36ff or greg36f. Is there an evil twin or an identity crisis?

 

[greg36f]

imported post

heliopolissolutions wrote:

Greg...what are you talking about?

I talk (some people would say babble) about a lot of stuff. You gotta give me more than this....

 

[greg36f]

imported post

yelohamr wrote:

Hmmm. greg36ff or greg36f. Is there an evil twin or an identity crisis?

I would love to blame some of the stuff that I say on an evil twin, but they are the same person (me).I had trouble loggingon one time and I guess I created an alter ego......

 

[sudden valley gunner]

imported post

I would disagree that it is new it has been around for as long as arms have been around. Concealed permits were created because open carry was acceptable, why would you need to hide your weapon everyone should know you are armed.

It has become uncustomary lately in a relatively short period of time.

 

[greg36f]

imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:

I would disagree that it is new it has been around for as long as arms have been around. Concealed permits were created because open carry was acceptable, why would you need to hide your weapon everyone should know you are armed.

It has become uncustomary lately in a relatively short period of time.

I figured that that would be a bone of contention. WhatI meant was that IT IS NEW TO A GREAT MAJORITY OF PEOPLE. It does not make it any less of a right of course, but I guess you could say that"NEW TO MOST PEOPLE".

I think that all the attention that it has gotten (TV, radio, LE memos, AG opinions, ect.) help make that point.

You don't get that much attention for something that people are familiar and comfortable with.

 

[Gundude]

imported post

I want it all, and I want it yesterday. Realisticly, we aren't going to desensitize the public to seeing someone with a guninone day. We aren't going to get all the stupid gun laws repealed in a day. Persistance will prevail. There is a lot to undo.

Mr. NiceGuy :lol:

 

[coolusername2007]

imported post

greg36f wrote:

sudden valley gunner wrote:

I would disagree that it is new it has been around for as long as arms have been around. Concealed permits were created because open carry was acceptable, why would you need to hide your weapon everyone should know you are armed.

It has become uncustomary lately in a relatively short period of time.

I figured that that would be a bone of contention. WhatI meant was that IT IS NEW TO A GREAT MAJORITY OF PEOPLE. It does not make it any less of a right of course, but I guess you could say that"NEW TO MOST PEOPLE".

I think that all the attention that it has gotten (TV, radio, LE memos, AG opinions, ect.) help make that point.

You don't get that much attention for something that people are familiar and comfortable with.

I know this is probably just semantics, but no, open carry is not new to a great majority of people. Iwould arguevirtually everybody knows what about open carry.

What is new to a great majority of people in CA is experiencing it living color right in front of their eyes. But then again, they have to notice itfirst and the great majority don't.

And a further execption to the rule is the CA folks have to be native CA'ian, immigrants from other states are much more likely to know and have experienced open carry prior to moving here.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

imported post

Very true, even in open carry states, many people have heard about it but haven't seen it.