Neenah PD take on OC.

[GLOCK21GB]

Well, I guess I confirmed my theory. Maybe we can all get together and vote to have the police just disbanded. I'm sure that would be awesome.

Police are needed BUT I would be fine with them just not having the incredible unlimited above the law powers they have. They abuse their powers way too much & too often, 30 years ago Police officers were respected members of the community, 30 years ago they actually did protect & serve the people of the community...Now ?? they are FEARED not respected...NOW ? they protect their own .....OOOOPS !!! CAN'T SAY IT..IT WOULD BE SEEN A COP BASHING.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; (( The People FEAR the Police/Government. ))

 

[jpm84092]

An Alternate Point of View

Let me offer an alternative point of view to the question of Law Enforcement asking for identification during a routine MWAG contact.

Many bad guys are too stupid or too lazy to realize that they can live better with an honest job, but some might just take advantage of our "movement" to plan and execute additional crimes (that will give us a black eye) while open carrying and pretending to be a law abiding citizen. (Believe me, all it will take is one Tuscon-like episode where the bad guy was open carrying before the bad behavior to have the general public galvanized against us.)

When a LEO asks for ID, he will detect if the person exercising open carry is doing so lawfully - or - has wants and warrants out for him. Thus, both as a freedom-loving citizen and an ex-LEO, I do not object to providing identification in support of the fact that I am freedom loving and a law abiding citizen. (I realize that not all of my friends on this forum will agree with me, but that is my opinion - for what it is worth.)

 

[Grapeshot]

Let me offer an alternative point of view to the question of Law Enforcement asking for identification during a routine MWAG contact.

Many bad guys are too stupid or too lazy to realize that they can live better with an honest job, but some might just take advantage of our "movement" to plan and execute additional crimes (that will give us a black eye) while open carrying and pretending to be a law abiding citizen. (Believe me, all it will take is one Tuscon-like episode where the bad guy was open carrying before the bad behavior to have the general public galvanized against us.)

When a LEO asks for ID, he will detect if the person exercising open carry is doing so lawfully - or - has wants and warrants out for him. Thus, both as a freedom-loving citizen and an ex-LEO, I do not object to providing identification in support of the fact that I am freedom loving and a law abiding citizen. (I realize that not all of my friends on this forum will agree with me, but that is my opinion - for what it is worth.)

First, the OCing bad guy is as rare as a chicken with rear molars. Gee, I wonder why?

Will you also support stopping any driver to see if they are legal or have any wants or warrants? How about the person walking down the street wearing a hoody? Where do you draw the line?

I draw it here! If you have no RAS or probable cause, DON"T. Don't even think about it.
You are free to observe me and my actions at any time that I am out and about in public. I do not want to be subjected to "hall monitors" on every block, at every store. Give me a break, please.

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

First, the OCing bad guy is as rare as a chicken with rear molars. Gee, I wonder why?

Will you also support stopping any driver to see if they are legal or have any wants or warrants? How about the person walking down the street wearing a hoody? Where do you draw the line?

I draw it here! If you have no RAS or probable cause, DON"T. Don't even think about it.
You are free to observe me and my actions at any time that I am out and about in public. I do not want to be subjected to "hall monitors" on every block, at every store. Give me a break, please.

What he said.

 

[Venator]

Let me offer an alternative point of view to the question of Law Enforcement asking for identification during a routine MWAG contact.

Many bad guys are too stupid or too lazy to realize that they can live better with an honest job, but some might just take advantage of our "movement" to plan and execute additional crimes (that will give us a black eye) while open carrying and pretending to be a law abiding citizen. (Believe me, all it will take is one Tuscon-like episode where the bad guy was open carrying before the bad behavior to have the general public galvanized against us.)

When a LEO asks for ID, he will detect if the person exercising open carry is doing so lawfully - or - has wants and warrants out for him. Thus, both as a freedom-loving citizen and an ex-LEO, I do not object to providing identification in support of the fact that I am freedom loving and a law abiding citizen. (I realize that not all of my friends on this forum will agree with me, but that is my opinion - for what it is worth.)

This was a fear my former city Chief used as an argument. He said all the gangsters were going to OC. I said that's okay, as long as they are lawful they can. I also added that he was a smart man and if he wanted to check out a gang banger he would find a way.

But after 4 years of the increase in OCing, I have yet to hear of gangsters OCing. They just don't want to be anymore under the eye of the man then they already are.

 

[jpm84092]

First, the OCing bad guy is as rare as a chicken with rear molars. Gee, I wonder why?

Will you also support stopping any driver to see if they are legal or have any wants or warrants? How about the person walking down the street wearing a hoody? Where do you draw the line?

I draw it here! If you have no RAS or probable cause, DON"T. Don't even think about it.
You are free to observe me and my actions at any time that I am out and about in public. I do not want to be subjected to "hall monitors" on every block, at every store. Give me a break, please.

1) Yup, bad guys who open carry are as numerous as chickens who have rear molars - for now.

2) I wrote that I did not object to providing ID to an officer investigating a MWAG contact. I DID NOT write that my opinion was intended to extend to anyone else. This is MY opinion and when I am in WI and open carry, I will provide MY identification to any LEO who asks. Other citizens of WI are free to do what their conscience dictates.

3) No, I DO NOT support a LEO stopping any Driver to see if they have outstanding wants or warrants. However, I support LEOs making such a check once they make a traffic stop based on an observed violation of the law. And, this may get me in a world of hurt on this forum, but I also support LEOs making a citizenship check of any driver they stop for a violation of law.

This forum is NOT a popularity contest. Contributor's opinions may vary from the majority view.

Jim

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

3) No, I DO NOT support a LEO stopping any Driver to see if they have outstanding wants or warrants. However, I support LEOs making such a check once they make a traffic stop based on an observed violation of the law. And, this may get me in a world of hurt on this forum, but I also support LEOs making a citizenship check of any driver they stop for a violation of law.

I have bolded the key.

And while I agree with your right to your opinion, I disagree with your opinion.

I also agree with checking for citizenship on a valid stop for RAS/PC.

 

[McX]

I have bolded the key.

And while I agree with your right to your opinion, I disagree with your opinion.

I also agree with checking for citizenship on a valid stop for RAS/PC.

last i checked i was a natural born US citizen, got kinda an Anglo look about me, do i still need to show papers?

 

[Grapeshot]

1) Yup, bad guys who open carry are as numerous as chickens who have rear molars - for now.

2) I wrote that I did not object to providing ID to an officer investigating a MWAG contact. I DID NOT write that my opinion was intended to extend to anyone else. This is MY opinion and when I am in WI and open carry, I will provide MY identification to any LEO who asks. Other citizens of WI are free to do what their conscience dictates.

3) No, I DO NOT support a LEO stopping any Driver to see if they have outstanding wants or warrants. However, I support LEOs making such a check once they make a traffic stop based on an observed violation of the law. And, this may get me in a world of hurt on this forum, but I also support LEOs making a citizenship check of any driver they stop for a violation of law.

This forum is NOT a popularity contest. Contributor's opinions may vary from the majority view.

Jim

Oh I assure you there was no intent to attack you personally nor criticize your personal choices, in so long as they only effect you.

Not at all sure why you see the association with guns as making civil rights violations more palatable, more indicant of enjoying your cooperation, but as you say that is your opinion.

BTW - when a creditable number of BGs OC or domestic fowl need dentures we shall reopen that discussion.

 

[Deek]

What I got out of the reading of the E-Mail was either the author didnt do the reseach, or made one errors where it could be taken two ways.

As for providing ID... I'll stick with with the way I handled my Home Depot encounter. Me and some friends were shopping when we were stopped in the store for OCing. They wanted to see some ID and I declined, saying unless they could tell me what I was doing wrong, I'd rather not. after several attempts to "guilt" me into it, they left us to go about our shopping. The police were decent about the whole thing....

Hopefully that will be a standard not a exception

 

[Badger Johnson]

We can gripe all we want about giving ID, but the bottom line is, put yourself in their shoes with their job. We have a chance to be educational ambassadors. Let's use it. On the other hand if they want to be bullies (as in some cities), let them pay (SSSS) for the "privilege".

my $.02 worth

What if you forgot your ID? Should you be put in jail on trumped up charges? What if you don't have a lot of money to pay a lawyer in order to 'let them pay'?

Advice/commentary is not worth 2 cents, imo.

 

[phred]

Quote Originally Posted by phred

We can gripe all we want about giving ID, but the bottom line is, put yourself in their shoes with their job. We have a chance to be educational ambassadors. Let's use it. On the other hand if they want to be bullies (as in some cities), let them pay (SSSS) for the "privilege".

my $.02 worth

What if you forgot your ID? Should you be put in jail on trumped up charges? What if you don't have a lot of money to pay a lawyer in order to 'let them pay'?

Advice/commentary is not worth 2 cents, imo.

What if you can be a nice person and choose not to?

btw, Wisconsin Carry, Inc. has supported those carriers that have needed some legal support because their rights have been threatened or denied.

 

[GLOCK21GB]

I honestly could care less about what it's like to walk in the shoes of a police officer & the stresses they have to deal with ?...They chose their profession now we should feel sorry for them ???? NOT

 

[hardballer]

I honestly could care less about what it's like to walk in the shoes of a police officer & the stresses they have to deal with ?...They chose their profession now we should feel sorry for them ???? NOT

Agreed Glock. If they want to pizz and moan about the poor treatment, they can get a job at McDonalds where they can at least have a Happy Meal. I've heard cops pull this cr@p and it does not play with me at all. Like you said, they choose their profession.

 

[IcrewUH60]

I like cops and I'm glad we live in a society where we can employ officers and elect mayors to hold police chiefs responsible for their policies. With that said, I don't trust them and I don't have a reason or need to.

They are public servants with a general responsibility to help us keep our society civil. However, trusting them is like trusting the maid with the keys to the mansion on the first day... without a recommendation or interview. I don't trust them for the exact same reason I like having them around - the power we delegate to them. But they are still servants (to liberty) and not the owner (of my liberty)

what's wrong with this scenario:

Dispatcher: "Charlie Forty-Two - the 17 saw a male/white with a holstered gun walking with female/white on 34th street about 2 minuets ago. The male/white is wearing a black t-shirt with a white emblem of the State of Wisconsin and some kind of gun logo across it. Please Check welfare and advise."
C42: "Charlie Forty-Two, 10-4"
C42: "How ya folks doing today?
Citizen: "I'm doing great officer. How are you?"
C42: "I'm fine, thanks for asking. I see you are wearing a gun on your hip and we got a call."
Citizen: "That's correct officer. We are OK and do not require any assitance.
C42: "What is that logo on your shirt?
Citizen: "It's the Wisconsin Carry, Inc. logo. I'm a supporting member.... Here's a card. You can go to their website for more info and even buy a shirt for yourself. Am I free to go?"
C42: "You folks have a nice day."
Citizen: "Thank you, you too."
C42: "Dispatch, Charlie Forty-Two. Everything is 10-2 and I'm 10-8."
Dispatch: "10-4 Charlie Forty-Two is 10-8."


where was the need to ask for ID again? If it goes any further than that, why should any citizens trust the police? I'd like some input from active duty officers or retired for their point of view. More importantly, I'd like to know where in the job offer was the word trust ever used? Anybody really think we owe our trust to them?

 

[hardballer]

I like cops and I'm glad we live in a society where we can employ officers and elect mayors to hold police chiefs responsible for their policies. With that said, I don't trust them and I don't have a reason or need to.

They are public servants with a general responsibility to help us keep our society civil. However, trusting them is like trusting the maid with the keys to the mansion on the first day... without a recommendation or interview. I don't trust them for the exact same reason I like having them around - the power we delegate to them. But they are still servants (to liberty) and not the owner (of my liberty)

what's wrong with this scenario:

Dispatcher: "Charlie Forty-Two - the 17 saw a male/white with a holstered gun walking with female/white on 34th street about 2 minuets ago. The male/white is wearing a black t-shirt with a white emblem of the State of Wisconsin and some kind of gun logo across it. Please Check welfare and advise."
C42: "Charlie Forty-Two, 10-4"
C42: "How ya folks doing today?
Citizen: "I'm doing great officer. How are you?"
C42: "I'm fine, thanks for asking. I see you are wearing a gun on your hip and we got a call."
Citizen: "That's correct officer. We are OK and do not require any assitance.
C42: "What is that logo on your shirt?
Citizen: "It's the Wisconsin Carry, Inc. logo. I'm a supporting member.... Here's a card. You can go to their website for more info and even buy a shirt for yourself. Am I free to go?"
C42: "You folks have a nice day."
Citizen: "Thank you, you too."
C42: "Dispatch, Charlie Forty-Two. Everything is 10-2 and I'm 10-8."
Dispatch: "10-4 Charlie Forty-Two is 10-8."


where was the need to ask for ID again? If it goes any further than that, why should any citizens trust the police? I'd like some input from active duty officers or retired for their point of view. More importantly, I'd like to know where in the job offer was the word trust ever used? Anybody really think we owe our trust to them?

+1

 

[GLOCK21GB]

I just want everyone here to know that I don't hate Police officers. But I don't like the absolute power they have,The Double standard ( do as we say not as we do ) & I don't like the complete disregard they have for Human life when they "feel" threatened. It's always all about the officers "safety".. so they can shoot a guy going for his cell phone , well I thought he was going for a gun so I an 9 other officers unloaded our mags into him. 2 weeks later it's found to be a justifiable shoot.. Death by cop is what some people chose to call it so in reality by law they are Government backed Judge, Jury & executioner & any oversight the Police get is normally by other cops & that Kinda defeats the purpose. NO I AM NOT COP BASHING, Just stating reality.

NOW >>> If you or I , was walking our dogs down the street & some guy walked up to us & suddenly went for something that turned out to be a cell phone, we draw, fire thus killing him..the cops show up & investigate , they find only a cell phone on the dead guy..Guess what WE ARE GOING AWAY FOR MAYBE THE REST OF OUR LIVES. but if your a police officer....you get desk duty for 2 weeks & maybe unpaid leave. worst case you lose your Job.

 

[Trip20]

I find that not having a default reaction in most cases is the best approach. If I walked in to every police contact situation with a bad attitude and the "you can't make me" chip on my shoulder, I'd probably have a hard time dealing with a number of otherwise very good people.

I was working a gun show in Antigo a few years ago for the Wisconsin Concealed Carry Association. A gentleman came up asking questions -- looked like a regular dude. Wanted to sign our petition, wanted to join the WCCA. Towards the tail end of our conversation we found out the gentleman was a Green Bay police officer. This made a few of us slack jawed because he was so enthusiastic about supporting and furthering our right to carry.

I can contrast that story with one of a bad experience with a power-crazed a$$hole of a state trooper. But I'll spare you the details.

My point is I walk in to the situation with an open mind and my demeanor, cooperation (or lack of), and virtually all other aspects of my behavior is directly related to the person with which I'm dealing. This includes police officers.

I am not perfect. I admit to having a bit of apprehension during the first couple of minutes when dealing with an officer, but I hold back as much preconceived judgment as possible. In the end, I've had far more positive experiences than negative. I think that has a lot to do with how I act.

As far as the OP's letter of response from the PD, I thought it was very polite even if misinformed in a few areas. I can work with polite.

 

[IcrewUH60]

I find that not having a default reaction in most cases is the best approach. If I walked in to every police contact situation with a bad attitude and the "you can't make me" chip on my shoulder, I'd probably have a hard time dealing with a number of otherwise very good people.

Why????? that's exaclty why we have laws. So the Police already know what they can and can't make me do.

My point is I walk in to the situation with an open mind and my demeanor, cooperation (or lack of), and virtually all other aspects of my behavior is directly related to the person with which I'm dealing. This includes police officers.

I walk into every situation as a law abiding citizen. Nothing else needs to be said or done. Escpecially when dealing with the police. If I am not abiding by the law, then I have no argument.

I am not perfect. I admit to having a bit of apprehension during the first couple of minutes when dealing with an officer, but I hold back as much preconceived judgment as possible. In the end, I've had far more positive experiences than negative. I think that has a lot to do with how I act.

I'm far from perfect myself, but I think it is exactly my preconcieved judgements that dictate how I react. Our laws are clear. Ignorance of those laws is no excuse for either myslef nor the responding officer. My preconceived judgement is that I am being contacted by an LEO who wants to gather evidence about a crime I have not commited. Evidence that will only be used against me. They never introduce beneficial evidence on your behalf... that somehow always gets left out of the report.

As far as the OP's letter of response from the PD, I thought it was very polite even if misinformed in a few areas. I can work with polite.

totally agreed. Polite goes a long way, but let's not even begin to think that common courtesy is the same as respect. Are you required to produce ID? No. Then why extend the conversation with the officer any longer? Why would they continue to demand it? Why are they threatening if we don't produce? It's clear to them that I am not legally required, so in retrospect show me some common courtesy, as your employer, and unless I'm breaking the law, leave me alone. Otherwise arrest and charge me with a crime and get back to work.

 

[duckdog]

Whoa. Trip20 must have hit a nerve, but he has every right to his opinion. While I might not act the same as he does in a given situation, I will not pick apart his post for voicing his opinion. If a person wants to clam up and exercise that right, have a nut, but don't rip on a guy because they act different than someone else might.

Seeing the way people are ripped on by some members for voicing their opinions keep me, and I'm sure others, from posting on this site.