Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I haven't got the foggiest clue. Your question is impossible to answer. All I know is that there is a person in front of me with a gun on their hip that isn't a uniformed police officer. Their intentions, criminal or otherwise, will not be abundantly clear at the offset. In that case I am going to use common sense and assume that the person with the gun means to do harm to me or someone else.
It's like if I see a snake in the woods. I know some are non-venomous but upon inital discovery I am going to react as if it's a venomous one. You know that old saying....."Better safe than sorry"
To use a term from my childhood....NO DUH. It's also completely possible that a rather wiley criminal will begin to open carry if it's widely know that open carriers are not "hassled by the man", as you and so many other have suggested need to take place.
Use to be as in Old West times? Like when Billy the Kid roamed the streets?
Why are you going to assume some stranger is out to hurt you? Do you assume everyone walking down the street is out to hurt you too? I guess you better because you should also assume they are all carrying concealed weapons which is legal. Maybe stay inside where it's safe.
Why are you going to assume some stranger is out to hurt you? Do you assume everyone walking down the street is out to hurt you too? I guess you better because you should also assume they are all carrying concealed weapons which is legal. Maybe stay inside where it's safe.
Absolutely. As are you. If you actually knew what the definition of prejudice was you'd understand that it's not necessarily a bad word.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm
in other words rather than take the time to educate yourself, you would rather jump to conclusions regardless of the situation. gotcha.
Wow. you really are reaching aren't you? Even a trained professional would tell you not to attempt to pick up a snake in the wild. So in your mind being cautious is an uneducated jump to conclusions? Gotcha
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm
really? you think that criminals will start to open carry their weapons, despite the fact that if they are caught illegally carrying a weapon, especially a firearm, that they are looking at 5 years in prison just for having the weapon? do you really think they are that stupid?
Absolutely I do. You don't give criminals a lot of credit do you? Talk about being prejudiced....
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm
yeah, and as little as 15 years ago as well. try educating yourself instead of getting hysterical just because you see someone openly carrying a firearm.
I'm not getting hysterical. Nice try princess. If it was such common place 15 years ago for folks to carry .45's on their hips in AZ what changed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25
Why are you going to assume some stranger is out to hurt you? Do you assume everyone walking down the street is out to hurt you too? I guess you better because you should also assume they are all carrying concealed weapons which is legal. Maybe stay inside where it's safe.
Actually KU, I think I'm going to come to your neck of the woods where people still leave their doors unlocked. Sounds like a swell place to live. Apparently there are no bad people there.
I've come across people I don't know with a gun on their hip. I don't assume that they're up to no good. If they wanted to shoot me, then they probably would carry concealed without a license. It doesn't scare me, nor do I think that it should be disallowed. I'd rather people openly carry than carry concealed, because then we'd all know what's up.
He's not going to win a damn dime. Key words here- "He was in an area where there have been recent reports of suspicious activity", which encompasses just about 99.9% of American streets. Due process is as fable.
I'm not sure where you live, but I don't want to go there. In my neighborhood, there is no suspicious activity.
Police are not allowed to investigate crime without probable cause.
A police officer has a right to detain you long enough to see whether probable cause exists to arrest you. ~ Jeffery K. Rubenstein, Criminal Defense Attorney
Ms. Monkey I want to assert that I am not in any way a police state apologist. I recognize current judicial maneuvering to justify unconstitutional (ie. illegal) police actions. While I will act in a practical manner to avoid provoking potentially dangerous and violent behavior by police, I do not want to imply that I recognize or respect the legitimacy of their authority.
I think the deeper issue this incident illustrates is the basic disconnect and lack of respect law enforcement officers (LEO(s)) have for the citizens of this country. We live in a police state, this is my unequivocal opinion where politicians, federal agents and police officers are to a large degree immune to the very laws they create and enforce.
Police are trained to completely control and dominate any and all situations. This attitude and action disregards any respect for citizens as individuals with rights. People in this country have been brought up to believe, incorrectly, that police are here to "serve and protect". It's not hard to see with this environment where this disconnect originates.
Should the police have treated this man with respect - contrary to their training, and this man responded with trusting compliance - contrary to our experience with current law enforcement, the situation could have been resolved amicably with mutual respect and dignity.
Unfortunately, the police acted true to form completely disregarding any respect for the citizens rights and dignity with aggression and violence. (ie. to completely control and dominate the situation) Worse, the police follow up by insinuating the citizen is asking for trouble and should call the police (ask permission) when he plans on exercising his constitutional rights.
I do hope the gentleman wins his suit against the police but more important, we need to take back control of our legal system. There is an unholy laundry list of illegal police powers justified under the guise of protecting us from ourselves, "The War on Drugs" and from an international boogey man "The War on Terror".
Indefinite Detainment, torture, the use of Military Personnel in violation of the Posse Comitatus to support domestic law enforcement, no knock raids, TSA, armed federal raids on commercial enterprises, coercion of commercial enterprises to "spy" on customers.
Our country and our way of life is under attack and in very real danger of disappearing. This incidence is not a cause, but a symptom of much greater issues. I know there are those who will accuse me of extremism but I truly believe we need to keep repeating these truths until people, in spite of their fear and antipathy open their eyes and see what is happening under their very noses.
To my original statement - I reiterate, rbohm posted "question him as to why he has a firearm on his hip. that is a legitimate police action"
This statement, whether I completely agree or not, is not unreasonable.
PS: I think your username is very cool and I have some house apes of my own, so while teasing you by addressing you as Ms. Monkey I don't intend any disrespect.
Not quite. They need probable cause to make an arrest. Reasonable Suspicion is enough to investigate.
I stand corrected. I should have said reasonable suspicion, and since carrying a firearm in the open is a legal activity, I cannot for the life of me understand how that leads a reasonable person to belive a crime has been or may be comiited.
A police officer has a right to detain you long enough to see whether probable cause exists to arrest you. ~ Jeffery K. Rubenstein, Criminal Defense Attorney
Ms. Monkey I want to assert that I am not in any way a police state apologist. I recognize current judicial maneuvering to justify unconstitutional (ie. illegal) police actions. While I will act in a practical manner to avoid provoking potentially dangerous and violent behavior by police, I do not want to imply that I recognize or respect the legitimacy of their authority.
I think the deeper issue this incident illustrates is the basic disconnect and lack of respect law enforcement officers (LEO(s)) have for the citizens of this country. We live in a police state, this is my unequivocal opinion where politicians, federal agents and police officers are to a large degree immune to the very laws they create and enforce.
Police are trained to completely control and dominate any and all situations. This attitude and action disregards any respect for citizens as individuals with rights. People in this country have been brought up to believe, incorrectly, that police are here to "serve and protect". It's not hard to see with this environment where this disconnect originates.
Should the police have treated this man with respect - contrary to their training, and this man responded with trusting compliance - contrary to our experience with current law enforcement, the situation could have been resolved amicably with mutual respect and dignity.
Unfortunately, the police acted true to form completely disregarding any respect for the citizens rights and dignity with aggression and violence. (ie. to completely control and dominate the situation) Worse, the police follow up by insinuating the citizen is asking for trouble and should call the police (ask permission) when he plans on exercising his constitutional rights.
I do hope the gentleman wins his suit against the police but more important, we need to take back control of our legal system. There is an unholy laundry list of illegal police powers justified under the guise of protecting us from ourselves, "The War on Drugs" and from an international boogey man "The War on Terror".
Indefinite Detainment, torture, the use of Military Personnel in violation of the Posse Comitatus to support domestic law enforcement, no knock raids, TSA, armed federal raids on commercial enterprises, coercion of commercial enterprises to "spy" on customers.
Our country and our way of life is under attack and in very real danger of disappearing. This incidence is not a cause, but a symptom of much greater issues. I know there are those who will accuse me of extremism but I truly believe we need to keep repeating these truths until people, in spite of their fear and antipathy open their eyes and see what is happening under their very noses.
To my original statement - I reiterate, rbohm posted "question him as to why he has a firearm on his hip. that is a legitimate police action"
This statement, whether I completely agree or not, is not unreasonable.
PS: I think your username is very cool and I have some house apes of my own, so while teasing you by addressing you as Ms. Monkey I don't intend any disrespect.
Thank you for the thoughtful and intellegent post. I can't find it right now, but I did read some time ago that obeying the law can never be considered suspicious behavior for purposes of investigating crime. If I can locate the article I'll do an update.
And it's Mr. momonkey.
"momonkey" is short for Mopar monkey, as in grease monkey, as in auto mechanic. I'm a Chrysler Technician.
Just some attention craving idiot , this shouldn't even be newsworthy. get real, your gonna open carry a sidearm out in public and not expect some heat from the cops. This right wing lug nut has been watching to many Clint Eastwood spaghetti westerns......probably has life size poster of Ted Nugent on his bedroom ceiling.
I expect he has a copy of the Contitution as well.
This kind of thread makes me wish we were actually a police state for a year or two just so people like the OP could understand what a police state actually is, stop throwing around terms they don't understand, and learn to actually respect what we have in this country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm
make them live in russia for a couple of years, then let them come back here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm
no more like $600,000 for violating the mans civil rights. if the guy was legally allowed to own a firearm, and there is no law against open carry, then why are the police even bothering the man? and even if they had a "concerned citizen" make a 911 call, the officers did not have to force the man to the ground at gun point to find out that he was a law abiding citizen exercising his constitutional rights.
uhm, where was i advocating for a police state? what i was saying take all the people who claim the US is sime kind of heavy handed police state, and have them live in russia for a couple of years, and then come back home and note the differences. remember in russia there is NO freedom of speech, and NO right to keep and bear arms. instead of trying to spin what i say into your own fantasy, try some reading comprehension once.
If I misunderstood your intent, I certainly apologize.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not getting hysterical. Nice try princess. If it was such common place 15 years ago for folks to carry .45's on their hips in AZ what changed?
