Why does it have to be OC Vs. Police?

This is a discussion on Why does it have to be OC Vs. Police? within the Open Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by TN_Mike Well, I see it this way. Back in the 60's, there were a lot of people marching, picketing and doing things ...

Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 249
Like Tree392Likes

Thread: Why does it have to be OC Vs. Police?

  1. #16
    Member Array glocknug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by TN_Mike View Post
    Well, I see it this way. Back in the 60's, there were a lot of people marching, picketing and doing things that were perfectly legal but still getting harassed by the police. Those people happened to be minorities. Did they have an attitude? Yes, I am sure they did. Mainly because they had been harassed and had seen their friends harassed for simply being someplace that the police (government) thought they shouldn't, or acting in a way that the police (government) thought they shouldn't act. They were out there standing up for their civil rights, just as they should. Rights that were protected under the Bill of rights. Rights such as their 1 st amendment right to free speech. Or their 4th amendment right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. And their 15th amendment rights The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. And other rights and demands of equality they had.

    It is very similar to the OC movement. OC is leagl in many states. Perfectly, 100% legal. Yet, many police officers and police departments do not like it. They have a mind set that it should not and must not be allowed. We have seen many videos posted where the person OC'ing was doing so legally, and yet was still harassed by the police and even arrested wrongfully. While I have not been harassed myself, thankfully the Shelby County Sheriffs Department is very OC aware and friendly to it as an institution, there reamain many, many law enforcement agencies that are quite hostile toward the practice reguardless of the fact that it is perfectly legal.

    Should a Jewish person be stopped on the street and asked for ID simply because someone called the police and complained that there is a Jewish person walking down the street and that makes them uncomfortable or frightened? Of course not. Should a black person be stopped and harassed for being somewhere simply because a racist called the police to complain about a black person in an area that they feel they do not belong in? Of course not. So why then, should a person who has a legally carried gun, secured in a holster on their hip, who is not threatening anyone in any way, be stopped by the police, questioned, demanded to show ID and prove they are obeying the law when the police can see no crime is being committed and in fact, is protected by the second amendment of that very same Bill of Rights mentioned above? Answer, they shouldn't. And yet, it happens all the time.

    So you'll have to excuse some of us OC'ers who develop something of an attitude. I for one can completely understand it.
    I understand your concerns and it makes sense to me. Thank you for sharing. How do you think we can educate the public to this so that we are not forced to respond to these rediculous calls? We need to work together here!
    atctimmy likes this.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Ex Member Array Ram Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    13,687
    Quote Originally Posted by glocknug View Post
    I dont think they are "out to give you a hard time". We respond to several dangerous calls, and several BS calls. Either way, we want to go home to our family, just like you. We are on the same team here!
    Not many folks realize this simple fact. There may be similar interests (going home to our families), but the same team aspect is still lacking in the true sense of the words. This is basically why the Army is a big cluster under management and a Seal team is a true team. Same holds true for American jobs......ever since the corporate 'team aspect' showed up......our jobs have been going overseas....simply put.......management has their own ideals for the team and the workers get screwed. Team work is there, it's just which team you're on at the time. Difference in yearly wages can span $30k-$60k a year on contract. Some of the team is compensated well for little effort while the rest of the hard working team becomes complacent thinking about it. Separation seems rather easy at this point. Many corporate leaders have never spent a day on the production floor. A four year college education makes them who they are. Twenty years of working the grind makes us who we are. Who's truly concerned about the company as a whole?
    Last edited by Rock and Glock; July 20th, 2012 at 10:21 AM.

  4. #18
    VIP Member Array chiefjason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Hickory, NC
    Posts
    2,759
    Quote Originally Posted by glocknug View Post
    I dont think they are "out to give you a hard time". We respond to several dangerous calls, and several "what for" calls. Either way, we want to go home to our family, just like you. We are on the same team here!
    First, there are always exceptions. Yes there are OC'ers who may be out looking to instigate something. But a lot of those videos come from areas that are not particularly OC friendly. It's great that you are. It's better that most of your peers in your department are. But that is just not the case everywhere. I did not keep up with all the details, but a member of OCDO got into a real mess with LE in VA a year or so ago. And there have been a few in NC as well. So even in rather gun friendly states you can have LE that have no respect for a lawfully armed citizen. Match that with someone that not only knows they are legal, but knows why and is willing to stand up for it; and it can get to be a messy power struggle in a hurry.

    FWIW, I have had a couple of interactions with LE over the years. I have had no issues with them. I have caught one or two giving me the stink eye from a distance, or the one that turned his car around to try and cut me off but I got in my truck before he got back around. I feel pretty confident I would have had an issue with that particular LE, mainly because of his demeanor in trying to approach me. And the fact that he would have had to probably blue light me to stop me and talk to me when I was doing nothing wrong. Coming out of a gun shop carrying a gun in a holster. Suspicious!
    Last edited by Rock and Glock; July 20th, 2012 at 10:22 AM.
    I prefer to live dangerously free than safely caged!

    "Our houses are protected by the good Lord and a gun. And you might meet 'em both if you show up here not welcome son." Josh Thompson "Way Out Here"

  5. #19
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,720
    Quote Originally Posted by glocknug View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    Really? Then answer me this: Why do the fearful OMG/MWAG type calls require anything but an attempt to confirm behavior that corroborates the unsubstantiated fear evidenced by the caller? And, lacking any such corroborating factors, why is anyone stopped in a "papers please" type deal merely on the baseless fear of a caller?
    Like I said in another reply, I will ask for ID on any call I go on, to see who I am talking to. If you really wanted to say no, then fine. But why? This would be a consensual encounter type situation.
    It shouldn't be a situation at all, that's why. Seems clear that a 'bare fear' call for MWAG is NOT by itself sufficient cause to stop a person, lacking any corroborating evidence the call has justification.

    Being an armed citizen is not a crime. Driving a car is not a crime. Walking down the street is not a crime. Nor should such actions be assumed they are, treated as they are, treated as though such people need investigating, detaining or vetting merely for going about the business of living their lives. This isn't a principle requiring a flip answer. It's a principle requiring deep thought and appreciation, for it's at the core of the whole problem.

    EDIT: BTW, don't misinterpret where I'm coming from. I personally have had no problem with my previous engagements with law enforcement folks. Generally, they've been professional, respectful and accommodating. None of this is about the people involved. Rather, it's about the principles, the procedures and the method of how such calls about citizens simply going about their lives are handled.
    TN_Mike, PIMking, Brad426 and 2 others like this.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  6. #20
    Distinguished Member Array Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Oshkosh, Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,330
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    It shouldn't be a situation at all, that's why. Seems clear that a 'bare fear' call for MWAG is NOT sufficient cause to stop a person, lacking any corroborating evidence the call has justification.

    Being an armed citizen is not a crime. Driving a car is not a crime. Walking down the street is not a crime. Nor should such actions be assumed they are, treated as they are, treated as though such people need investigating, detaining or vetting merely for going about the business of living their lives. This isn't a principle requiring a flip answer. It's a principle requiring deep thought and appreciation, for it's at the core of the whole problem.
    +1^^
    Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable- JFK

  7. #21
    VIP Member Array TN_Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shelby County TN
    Posts
    11,118
    Quote Originally Posted by glocknug View Post
    I dont think they are "out to give you a hard time". We respond to several dangerous calls, and several "what for" calls. Either way, we want to go home to our family, just like you. We are on the same team here!
    That may or may not be true depending on the particular officer. I was a LEO myself once. I knew far too many who had the "I am the Law" complex. They were out to give citizens a hard time. They would happily admit it to brother officers. When I voiced my concern about this, they did not take it well.


    Quote Originally Posted by glocknug View Post
    I understand your concerns and it makes sense to me. Thank you for sharing. How do you think we can educate the public to this so that we are not forced to respond to these rediculous calls? We need to work together here!
    Well, I think a huge help would be for officers such as yourself, who understand that OC is legal and not a threat to the police would take a proactive track inside their departments and work toward changing the training to reflect the truth about OC. Because let's be honest here, I am not a criminal. In fact, I am the exact polar opposite of a criminal. I have not only paid money, in the form of fees, to gain my permit but, I have freely brought myself to the attention of law enforcement. I have willingly given over my finger prints. I have willingly submitted to repeated background checks. I am a certified Good Guy. There is no other civilian more likely to come to the aid of a police officer who is on the ground getting his ass kicked or who is being shot at by a scum bag than me and my fellow OC/CC'ers out here. To harass us and give us a hard time is spitting in the face of the person who is potentially your biggest ally.

    Also, as you said you do, to explain to the sheep who places the MWAG call that the person they complained about is a card carrying Good Guy.

    Plus, the sight of you being polite to the OC'er who was the origin of the MWAG call, saying have a nice day and seeing that person walk on about their business with the gun on will make that sight a little less threatening to them. When a police officer comes up to an OC'er and first thing disarms them or, God forbid, holds them at gunpoint for no reason, that simply reenforces to the sheep that there MUST have been something wrong or the police wouldn't have reacted that way. The more the sheep see people with OC'ed guns, and the more they see the police being cordial to them and not treating them like criminals, the more at ease the sheep will become and the fewer MWAG calls will be made.
    Last edited by Rock and Glock; July 20th, 2012 at 10:24 AM.
    PIMking, ericb327, sgb and 3 others like this.
    ,=====o00o _
    //___l__,\____\,__
    l_--- \___l---[]lllllll[]
    (o)_)-o- (o)_)--o-)_)

  8. #22
    Member Array glocknug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    It shouldn't be a situation at all, that's why. Seems clear that a 'bare fear' call for MWAG is NOT sufficient cause to stop a person, lacking any corroborating evidence the call has justification.

    Being an armed citizen is not a crime. Driving a car is not a crime. Walking down the street is not a crime. Nor should such actions be assumed they are, treated as they are, treated as though such people need investigating, detaining or vetting merely for going about the business of living their lives. This isn't a principle requiring a flip answer. It's a principle requiring deep thought and appreciation, for it's at the core of the whole problem.
    I agree. Instead of giving the LEO a hard time for responding to a citizen complaint, how can we work together to solve this issue?

    I can list a million "what for" calls that I have been dispatched to... I hate going to them... but I am required to!

    If a random citizen was curious about your firearm and asked you about it, wouldnt you politely inform them about it? Why does it have to be different just because they are in uniform?
    Last edited by Rock and Glock; July 20th, 2012 at 10:25 AM.

  9. #23
    Member Array glocknug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by TN_Mike View Post
    That may or may not be true depending on the particular officer. I was a LEO myself once. I knew far too many who had the "I am the Law" complex. They were out to give citizens a hard time. They would happily admit it to brother officers. When I voiced my concern about this, they did not take it well.

    I agree... there are a few bad apples out there. Just like any profession, they cant all be good... but you cant judge everybody based on that! (im not saying you are). I used to be a Field Training Officer. I made sure this point was covered.


    Well, I think a huge help would be for officers such as yourself, who understand that OC is legal and not a threat to the police would take a proactive track inside their departments and work toward changing the training to reflect the truth about OC. Because let's be honest here, I am not a criminal. In fact, I am the exact polar opposite of a criminal. I have not only paid money, in the form of fees, to gain my permit but, I have freely brought myself to the attention of law enforcement. I have willingly given over my finger prints. I have willingly submitted to repeated background checks. I am a certified Good Guy. There is no other civilian more likely to come to the aid of a police officer who is on the ground getting his ass kicked or who is being shot at by a scum bag than me and my fellow OC/CC'ers out here. To harass us and give us a hard time is spitting in the face of the person who is potentially your biggest ally.

    Also, as you said you do, to explain to the sheep who places the MWAG call that the person they complained about is a card carrying Good Guy.

    Plus, the sight of you being polite to the OC'er who was the origin of the MWAG call, saying have a nice day and seeing that person walk on about their business with the gun on will make that sight a little less threatening to them. When a police officer comes up to an OC'er and first thing disarms them or, God forbid, holds them at gunpoint for no reason, that simply reenforces to the sheep that there MUST have been something wrong or the police wouldn't have reacted that way. The more the sheep see people with OC'ed guns, and the more they see the police being cordial to them and not treating them like criminals, the more at ease the sheep will become and the fewer MWAG calls will be made.
    Instead of "Challenging Each Other" why dont we work together? I have to admitt, I have come across an OC person or two who wants to argue instead of having a simple conversation. Dont you think that the random citizen who decided to call 911 would be more comfertable with open carry if they observed a pleasant conversation, instead of an OCer telling the Officer to leave them alone, they are legal? I believe that if somebody out of uniform asked the same questions, they would inform them! We both want to make it home to our families at the end of the day!

    A simple internet search will show you how many LEOs are killed each year... We HAVE to be careful... but we are on the same team! If you, as an OCer, were sent to talk to a random guy who had a gun (based on a citizen complaint), wouldnt you be careful? Why wouldnt you be reassuring to the LEO that is in that position?

    I admit... I started this thread based on a couple of YouTube Videos I saw. It was almost as if they were out to get us... and then I continued reading threads on this website and saw one labled something like "Its OK to shoot the Police if they enter your house unlawfully".

    Do people really think that we are out to get random people for no reason?! Lets help each other out here! We have the same goals and we are on the same team!

  10. #24
    Ex Member Array PIMking's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by glocknug View Post
    First off, I want to say that I do not usually open carry, although I am usually armed. I have absolutely NO problem with Open Carry in general, but I am very curious about this. I am also a Police Officer.

    Why are there so many OCers that seem like they are just out to give the Police a hard time? I can tell you that nobody I work with is out there trying to "harass" people legally carrying a firearm. In fact, most are all for it. I can also tell you that we HATE being dispatched to calls regarding things that are not illegal, such as a guy openly carrying a holstered firearm, but we still HAVE to go!

    Instead of making YouTube Videos and giving the Police a hard time, why can't we work together? The majority of the time I have positive conversations with people who OC, but there are always some who just want to give you a hard time for no reason. I also try to call the complaintants back and I explain to them that nothing illegal or dangerous is occuring.

    Don't you think this hurts the rest of us in the long run, in the public eye? I think this is definatly the case when you have people OCing an AK-47, for no reason, just so they get approached by a Police Officer (Almost ALWAYS resonding to citizen complaints!), just to get a YouTube video up.

    It doesn't have to be OC Vs. Police...Why cant we just work together?
    Well the videos are more of an insurance policy for the public so it doesn't (which it will) turn into a he said vs the police said and we know if it goes to court the judge will believe the deputy over the person.

    Now as for baiting? I think it's stupid but around here half the police either 1) don't know it's legal, even with out a permit or 2) they don't like it and try to instill their "own" laws.

    We have a local open carry meetings once a month but still some get harassed. The videos help keep the police officers in line because it has happened before and will happen again because of their personal feelings or lack of knowledge of the laws. Alabama is an open carry state with out a permit, the permit is only needed if you're in a vehicle or obviously concealing the weapon. Some will try the "the Permit doesn't allow you to open carry" law, DUH! because you don't need a permit to open carry here. Or the "someone called a MWAG and you're scaring people so you need to either cover your weapon or put it in the car or you will be taken to the clink under public disturbance or trespassing.

    This is why I carry a audio recorder with me at all times, I don't want it to turn into a he said vs he said and the police video happens to not be working that day... It's nothing against police but it's sad that we get messed with by the police for doing something that is perfectly legal. Actually, it's our right unlike driving. Some police have thing about that badge and makes them think they're above the law, those small few make all of those who serve the thin blue line look real bad.

    For instance, this judge takes the law into his own hands. He doesn't like OC and makes things up on his own and convicts a man on a non existent crime.







    Again it's nothing against you at all, it all just a protection vs renegade cops who think they can make up their own laws. I carry a weapon for self defense from bad people, I carry an audio recorder to protect myself from bad cops.

  11. #25
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,720
    Quote Originally Posted by glocknug View Post
    I agree. Instead of giving the LEO a hard time for responding to a citizen complaint, how can we work together to solve this issue?
    Being dispatched is important, since it might well have substance. Yes, agreed, they need to be responded to. But IMO it's also incredibly important for all the investigative senses and perceptions a person has to be used when dispatched to such calls, particularly ones which have a fairly decent likelihood of being one of those 'bare fear' type calls. At minimum, be a bit circumspect about the justifiability. The mere fact a call has been made doesn't mean it's worthy of assumptions; it's only worthy of investigation.

    I can list a million "what for" calls that I have been dispatched to... I hate going to them... but I am required to!
    Required to go, yes. Particularly urgently if there's high likelihood of dire need or threat. But the flipside should also be true: particularly with circumspection and intelligence about the high likelihood of a 'bare fear' call without substance beyond that fear/concern ... which, quite simply, isn't by itself sufficient for a threat to be presumed to exist.

    If a random citizen was curious about your firearm and asked you about it, wouldnt you politely inform them about it?
    Possibly, though for me it would depend on the circumstances. At a picnic or outing where firearms were being discussed, and another commented on his/her firearms choices and preferences? Likely. But if someone just came up and began asking why I had a firearm, who was I, and such, almost certainly not. Frankly, going about my normal, everyday, lawful business of living my life shouldn't be a concern to anyone else, irrespective of whether it's the guy next to me, the wide-eyed person across the way, or the officer being dispatched by that wide-eyed person. In that sense, I make little distinction between people. It comes down to the circumstances and justifiability of the comments/questions.

    Here's the thing that every citizen needs to appreciate. It hasn't been but a few years with this everyone's-armed situation, across the country. It's a game-changing thing. Good thing, too. But it's been a rocky road, in many cases. Not everyone has gotten comfortable with it at the same pace, from the general citizen population to those elected/hired. There have been a few wackos who slip through the CHL background-check sieve; there have been a few in law enforcement and politics who abused their roles; there have been some misinterpretations, mistakes and overstepping in some quarters. But by and large we're progressing toward a more-polite, armed society. IMO, that's nothing but a good thing. It's helping to ensure we all deal with each other rationally, that dealing with each other from a position of fear or violence ain't gonna cut it anymore. In the long run, I feel we all win on that score.

    And that's the point, with the 'bare fear' MWAG type calls. They need not be handled blindly, based on a presumption of guilt, or based on a presumption that fear implies threat. It's like an informant being but one source of intelligence. It's not too smart to take an informant's word blindly, and much smarter to corroborate it with other evidence prior to giving it its allotted weight as justifiable, credible intel. Same thing should be true with such street encounters with armed citizens. A call is just that; it's not evidence of anything beyond a fearful caller, not without substantiating behavior or speech to support such a call. And think, what is such a call after all, generally speaking? It's not a claim of wrong-doing; it's a claim of fear/concern. Think about the distinction, because it's all-important.
    Last edited by Rock and Glock; July 20th, 2012 at 10:27 AM.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  12. #26
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,720
    Quote Originally Posted by glocknug View Post
    I admit... I started this thread based on a couple of YouTube Videos I saw. It was almost as if they were out to get us... and then I continued reading threads on this website and saw one labled something like "Its OK to shoot the Police if they enter your house unlawfully".
    Some of the angles are shameful. Agreed. No justification for them.
    Rock and Glock likes this.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  13. #27
    Member Array JustinApple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    71
    I was pulled over by a State Trooper not to long ago, before he even approached. I had all the windows down, interior lights on, my DL, CCL, and Insurance in hand, with both hands outside the window in clear sight.

    It was dusk so I wanted the officer to be completely at ease. When he walked up he was very polite and informed me my tail light was out.. Took my credentials, asked if I was armed, "I said yes sir" one on my person AIWB, the other in a mounted holster in the truck.. After he returned.. He said thank you for this great display of courtesy to "OUR" safety!

    Would you not see it the same way while OCing?

    What if it was a BG pretending to be a legal law abiding citizen OCing that had plans of his own and was using it to his advantage?

    Honestly I'd want the officer to feel safe, just as I would. I'm all for OC, I live in Texas with hi hopes that it passes this next years legislation. If I was asked for my license I'd be honored to show proof of who's side I'm on and make some good friends in the process.

    This is just a simple case of COMMON SENSE and the difference in how some of us are raised, see authority, and in most cases just get an EGO, which in my eyes is not conductive to good manners especially while carrying.

    It's a responsibility that requires us to be trained mentally, physically, and in the Laws that govern it.. I for one will forgo the Ego, Attitude, and idea that the officer is doing anything more than his job!

    God Bless

  14. #28
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,853
    Quote Originally Posted by glocknug View Post
    As far as the ID thing goes... I admit, I ask for ID on EVERY call I go to, whether its this or somthing else. It is not disrespectful. If you dont want to show it, ok... this shouldnt be a huge issue. We are just trying to figure out who we are talking to. I have been stopped by the Police in neighboring jurisdictions while out with a pistol. They ask for my ID and I provide it. I explain to them why I had my gun, and they understand! Keep in mind...
    Why do you need to know who you are talking to? I can tell you name is Paul. I understand showing up for a MWAG call...no issues with it. But yo see me walking down the street, weapon holstered, no signs of me being drunk or high or acting unusual...why do you ask for ID if it is not required? In case someone does not know the law and feels they have to comply? That sir is the point. Say how do you do (which has happened to me on two MWAG calls...LEO's never got out of the vehicel. and be on your way. I would refuse anything more becasue I am not doing anything wrong and by asking for ID and checking it is taking up my time.
    TN_Mike and abillb like this.

  15. #29
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,853
    Quote Originally Posted by JustinApple View Post
    I was pulled over by a State Trooper not to long ago, before he even approached. I had all the windows down, interior lights on, my DL, CCL, and Insurance in hand, with both hands outside the window in clear sight.

    It was dusk so I wanted the officer to be completely at ease. When he walked up he was very polite and informed me my tail light was out.. Took my credentials, asked if I was armed, "I said yes sir" one on my person AIWB, the other in a mounted holster in the truck.. After he returned.. He said thank you for this great display of courtesy to "OUR" safety!

    Would you not see it the same way while OCing?

    What if it was a BG pretending to be a legal law abiding citizen OCing that had plans of his own and was using it to his advantage?

    Honestly I'd want the officer to feel safe, just as I would. I'm all for OC, I live in Texas with hi hopes that it passes this next years legislation. If I was asked for my license I'd be honored to show proof of who's side I'm on and make some good friends in the process.

    This is just a simple case of COMMON SENSE and the difference in how some of us are raised, see authority, and in most cases just get an EGO, which in my eyes is not conductive to good manners especially while carrying.

    It's a responsibility that requires us to be trained mentally, physically, and in the Laws that govern it.. I for one will forgo the Ego, Attitude, and idea that the officer is doing anything more than his job!

    God Bless
    No offense to LEO's but it is not my job to put them at ease. I can be polite and courteous as I expect the officer to be without having to fork over documents that are not required. And in my previous post I think I made it perfectly clear that by the LEO asking for ID for no other reason than to see who I am is a waste of my time.

    As far as how we are raised. I was raised to be polite. I was not raised to allow folks to aks things of me that are not required and quite frankly none of their business untll the point the officer feels I am a BG for some reason. Also, by virtue of handing over your papers on demand whether you need them or not is becoming commonplace and folks just think you have to. Just like your SSN. It is asked for all the time and I refuse to give it to somebody unless needed or they will refuse a service. My water company had SSN on the application....I did not put it down and the lady said it was required. I stayed there for almost an hour waiting for her to prove I needed to put it down. Finally after phone calls she said it was not required.

    Your last sentence sounds good except you suppose that we know the laws. And in some states the law says that we do not have to show ID. So we do understand the law and complying with it.
    abillb likes this.

  16. #30
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,875
    [QUOTE=glocknug;2324952I handle all of these calls as a "consensual encounter". If you didnt really want to talk to me, you don't have to.
    [/quote]
    Serious question: if it can be ascertained by observation that they are not a threat and are simply OC'ing, even with a less common gun such as a rifle, why should this require an encounter at all?
    As far as the ID thing goes... I admit, I ask for ID on EVERY call I go to, whether its this or somthing else. It is not disrespectful. If you dont want to show it, ok... this shouldnt be a huge issue.
    Keep in mind that most won't see it this way. Especially the part in bold. Yes, they should know their rights regarding an encounter, but your very presence by definition is a threat, even if it is an implied "obey or else I will use force".

    Another thing to consider is that maybe the one who needs to have an official LEO encounter is the one making the MWAG call? By letting them make a call and then responding by requiring an encounter you are encouraging this behavior. At a minimum, the no feedback, no consequence is a neutral, but more than likely will leave them thinking (or rather feeling) that they were right and that something was wrong and it needed to be dealt with. This is the part that needs to be addressed.

    As a side note, I have a coworker who a few months ago was enountered and in his opinion harrassed because he was walking around the block using a long walking stick. He says that it was harassment because it went beyond a simple question of who are you, what are you doing, to repeatedly asking these questions and a fixation on the stick. They too asked for ID, which he didn't carry (in his own neighborhood) and finally left. This was a rural neighborhood too, the kind with houses on 1-3 acre lots and neighbors along a main road, not a populated subdivision.
    sgb and TN_Mike like this.

Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

carrying open in mi youtube

,
meaning of oc, police
,
oc meaning by police
,
oc meaning in police
,

oc meaning police

,

open carry police harassment

,
shelby county alabama open carry law
,

taking test for open carry permit in oklahoma after nov. 1

,

what does oc mean police

,
what does oc police mean
,

what is mean of oc of police

,
what is meaning of oc in police.?
Click on a term to search for related topics.