Originally Posted by Badey
You are free to agree with him, but he is an officer, and acting in an official duty; he is not paid for his opinions, he is paid for law enforcement. If he doesn't like OC, he is free to have that opinion, but he shouldn't be putting it forward while in his official capacity, JMO.
Wasn't addressed to me but here goes. I do not accept being yelled at or rudely lectured by others so why would I allow it from a public servant? I do not care who you are. If you are having a bad day deal with it but leave me out of it. If you have seen to many tragedies in your time on the job and can no longer deal with it them maybe its time to move on.
I still fail to see any advantage to an officer to know my name if I am not breaking the law. Asking for ID when there is no law being broken is just an act of bullying by the officer. Showing the citizen who has the authority and who is in charge. Works in Russia, not in the USA.
I don't expect an LEO to be perfect, but bad day or no, he has no right to use his badge to try to pressure me to cover my sidearm. If he wants to yell at me or swear at me while off duty, that is one thing, but while on duty he is held to a different standard.
Similarly, when I worked in customer service, I had to play nice, regardless of whether or not my dad was in the hospital, or the cat puked on the brand new carpet. I even had to listen while anti-2A people talked about banning guns (which I thought was stupid). When I was off the clock, I was free to say whatever and be rude to whomever I wanted to, but on the clock, I was expected to be kind and courteous, regardless of the circumstances.
All that said, I personally do not see enough of an advantage to OC vs CC. I prefer to avoid the looks, stares, and possible hassles with the police. Again, the difference between me and the liberals is this, I don't care to or want to OC, but I defend your right to CHOOSE what YOU see fit to do. Hope that makes sense.
I do understand many see those who stand up for all of our civil rights as trouble makes. Just as Rosa Parks sitting in the front of the bus and Franklin McCain, Joseph McNeil, Ezell Blair Jr. and David Richmond for sitting at the white counter, were called trouble makers. Just like those other trouble makers who stared all this rights and freedom crap so many here seem to find so objectionable. You know them George Read, Caesar Rodney, Thomas McKean, George Clymer, Benjamin Franklin, Robert Morris, John Morton, Benjamin Rush, George Ross, James Smith, James Wilson, George Taylor, John Adams, Samuel Adams, John Hancock, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry, Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton, Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery, Lewis Morris, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, William Floyd, Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton, Richard Henry Lee, Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Jefferson, George Wythe, Thomas Nelson, Jr. , William Hooper, John Penn, Joseph Hewes, Edward Rutledge, Arthur Middleton, Thomas Lynch, Jr., Thomas Heyward, Jr., Abraham Clark, John Hart, Francis Hopkinson, Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Samuel Huntington, Roger Sherman, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott, Charles Carroll, Samuel Chase, Thomas Stone, William Paca the jerks who signed that trouble making Declaration Of Independence.
Personally I would take great pride to be considered a trouble maker rather than being a complacent coward handing my paperwork over to those with a Gestapo mindset because it is the most convenient thing to do.
TITLE 21 § 1290.8 POSSESSION OF LICENSE REQUIRED-NOTIFICATION TO POLICE OF GUN
A. Except as otherwise prohibited by law, an eligible person shall have authority to carry a concealed handgun in this state when the person has been issued a handgun license from the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation pursuant to the provisions of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act provided the person is in compliance with the provisions of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act, and the license has not expired or been subsequently suspended or revoked. A person in possession of a valid handgun license and in compliance with the provisions of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act shall be authorized to carry such concealed handgun while bow hunting or fishing.
B. The person shall be required to have possession of his or her valid handgun license and a valid Oklahoma driver license or an Oklahoma State photo identification at all times when in possession of an authorized pistol. Any violation of the provisions of this subsection may be punishable as a criminal offense as authorized by Section 1272 of this title or pursuant to any other applicable provision of law. In addition to any criminal prosecution which may result from not carrying the handgun license and the required identification with the authorized pistol as required by the provisions of this subsection, the person may be subject to an administrative fine for violation of the provisions of this subsection. The administrative fine shall be Fifty Dollars ($50.00) and shall be assessed by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation after a hearing and determination that the licensee is in violation of the provisions of this subsection. Any second or subsequent violation of the provisions of this subsection shall be grounds for the Bureau to suspend the handgun license for a period of six (6) months, in addition to any other penalty imposed.
Upon the arrest of any person for a violation of the provisions of this subsection, the person may show proof to the court that a valid handgun license and the other required identification has been issued to such person and the person may state any reason why the handgun license or the other required identification was not carried by the person as required by the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act. The court shall dismiss an alleged violation of Section 1272 of this title upon payment of court costs, if proof of a valid handgun license and other required identification is shown to the court within ten (10) days of the arrest of the person. The court shall report a dismissal of a charge to the Bureau for consideration of administrative proceedings against the licensee.
C. It shall be unlawful for any person to fail or refuse to identify the fact that the person is in actual possession of a concealed handgun pursuant to the authority of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act when the person first comes into contact with any law enforcement officer of this state or its political subdivisions or a federal law enforcement officer during the course of any arrest, detainment, or routine traffic stop. No person shall be required to identify himself or herself as a concealed handgun licensee when no handgun is in the person’s possession or in any vehicle in which the person is driving or is a passenger. Any violation of the provisions of this subsection shall, upon conviction, be a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not exceeding Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00), by imprisonment in the county jail for a period not to exceed ninety (90) days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. In addition to any criminal prosecution for a violation of the provisions of this subsection, the licensee shall be subject to a six-month suspension of the license and an administrative fine of Fifty Dollars ($50.00), upon a hearing and determination by the Bureau that the person is in violation of the provisions of this subsection.
D. Any law enforcement officer coming in contact with a person whose handgun license is suspended, revoked, or expired, or who is in possession of a handgun license which has not been lawfully issued to that person, shall confiscate the license and return it to the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation for appropriate administrative proceedings against the licensee when the license is no longer needed as evidence in any criminal proceeding.
E. Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize a law enforcement officer to inspect any weapon properly concealed without probable cause that a crime has been committed.
I'll start by saying that cops who harass law abiding citizens for any reason should be the subject of an internal investigation, and probably shouldn''t be a cop anymore becuase they've obviously forgotten what their purpose is in the first place.
That being said there are several factors that can come into play with this type of scenario. First off, depending on the jurisdiction (WA is one of these), the "brandishing" law(s) are written deliberately vauge. Basically, if someone else can see that you have a firearm, and they claim that it intimidated them, then that technically is a crime. HOWEVER, most cops are going to figure out that you are not America's Most Wanted and leave you with a "Have A Nice Day Sir." Going into the situation is a different story however. From the perspective of the badge, it's not as issue of open carry. It's simply: Some called 911 on you. It's my job to appraoch you, and talk to you, I can see you have a gun. I'm going to want to know who you are and whether or not you're actually committing a crime. If I ask you for your license, and you refuse or try to deflect, then congrats! You've made me incredibly nervous, becuase for my safety I have to assume you're withholding your identity becuase you're hiding something.
However if you're cooperative, show me your ID, I run your name and you come back clean. Then I'll thank you for your patience/cooperation. Plus in the future I'm going to remember you as being cooperative and respectful, and thus I won't freak out everytime I see you OC'ing. I will also pass my experience with you on to the other officers in my squad.
Long story short: You're not doing anything wrong, so where's the sense in making the cops think that you are.
" Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004), held that statutes requiring suspects to disclose their names during police investigations did not violate the Fourth Amendment if the statute first required reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal involvement. Under the rubric of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), the minimal intrusion on a suspect's privacy, and the legitimate need of law enforcement officers to quickly dispel suspicion that an individual is engaged in criminal activity, justified requiring a suspect to disclose his name."
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
I really don't have any problem showing my permit to a LEO if he asks to see it because he got a MWAG call. He's just doing his job. There are states where you are not required to show ID if you are not doing anything illega but in TN you are required to show your permit if requested.