Why does it have to be OC Vs. Police? - Page 8

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 Burns If you have a complaint about an officer it is taken VERY seriously to say the least. This is something they ...

Page 8 of 17 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 249
Like Tree392Likes

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

  1. #106
    VIP Member Array Smitty901's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,299
    Quote Originally Posted by Burns View Post
    If you have a complaint about an officer it is taken VERY seriously to say the least. This is something they don't want you to know so they usually play it off with the "go ahead it won't do anything" attitude to discourage you.
    Depends on who you are. Non protected class person files a complaint, maybe get looked at nothing will get done.
    Non protected class OC person files one LEO get an at a boy for follow COP orders.
    Your in Wisconsin what was it Chief of Police in Milwaukee said he would have his Officers do to any OC they see?


  2. #107
    Member Array Maine_Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Maine/Ukraine
    Posts
    27
    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?
    A question I've asked more than once on other forums. I'm with ya a hunnert percent. I OC and I have yet to encounter a LEO. I'm sure its just a matter of time, but when the time does come I hope to have a pleasant encounter. I don't own a recorder nor do I plan to buy one and I have no desire to be the next big shot youtube star.

    I'll even show ID if asked without pitching a fit and/or getting my knickers in a twist.

    Brad426. You on VJ by any chance?

  3. #108
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Maine_Expat View Post
    A question I've asked more than once on other forums. I'm with ya a hunnert percent. I OC and I have yet to encounter a LEO. I'm sure its just a matter of time, but when the time does come I hope to have a pleasant encounter. I don't own a recorder nor do I plan to buy one and I have no desire to be the next big shot youtube star.

    I'll even show ID if asked without pitching a fit and/or getting my knickers in a twist.

    Brad426. You on VJ by any chance?
    I believe that most open carriers will do just that. We cannot however allow those who choose not to comply while following the law to lose their right to not comply.

    Michael
    atctimmy likes this.

  4. #109
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,802
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911247 View Post
    Simple. because most police officers seem as if they are out to give OC'ers a hard time. Every time a cop sees an OCer........they stop them, question them, violate their 4th rights.......disarm them. While all the OC'er is doing is walking to buy a soda.......

    Therefore they have taken the defensive, armed themselves with not only guns, but recorders and cameras. As you know not all cops are good cops, some do harass OC'ers, some arrest them on false charges because they dont like the idea. Some make life hell for them. The OC'ers are just trying to protect themselves, much as you guys want to protect yourselves.

    I think everyone should just play nicely and lose the drama involved with OC and it would work out just fine.
    It's not going to work itself out, ever. Not so long as the public school curriculums all over the country (I've been a teacher for 23 years, I know what I'm speaking of, here) continue to march in lock-step and drill kids from kindergarten to college that all gun ownership is evil. Cops are mostly graduates of the public schools. Our military, too. That's what makes the potential for gun confiscations so frightening.

    Look at what happened after Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. Those cops and soldiers (national guard) who busted in doors and tackled a little old lady holding her late husband's old revolver by the thumb and forefinger (non firing grip) did their duty. They followed orders, not the US Constitution. Why? They weren't taught the importance of the Constitution in school. They even expressed doubts to the TV cameras following (gleefully) their every move, as if they were on patrol in Afghanistan. They expressed doubts but they still followed orders and were fully prepared to kill Americans for refusing to surrender their arms.

    Afterwards, many states passed laws outlawing this practice, but do you really think in an emergency like a WMD attack, the national government won't hesitate to do it all over again on a national scale? If they did do you think those same cops and soldiers would hesitate, since it's already been done in the past? Now a more important question: Think carefully before you answer. What will you do? I personally, don't know.
    Last edited by ExSoldier; July 27th, 2012 at 09:47 PM. Reason: Formatting
    atctimmy likes this.
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  5. #110
    Member Array Maine_Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Maine/Ukraine
    Posts
    27
    Agreed Michael. This was a personal choice I made before I ever slipped the holster onto my belt.

    I also agree with the OP that there are too many jerks out there just trying to "school that stupid cop" and getting another youtube clip up. If that's all you're after then sell your gun and go back to your Nintendo, you aren't helping us at all.

    Every LEO is a potential ally, why make them an adversary?

    Also realize folks that I'm an Oath Keeper and my main mission is to reach out to all active oath takers so I'm also geared toward keeping commo lines open.

  6. #111
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Maine_Expat View Post
    Agreed Michael. This was a personal choice I made before I ever slipped the holster onto my belt.

    I also agree with the OP that there are too many SFBs out there just trying to "school that stupid cop" and getting another youtube clip up. If that's all you're after then sell your gun and go back to your Nintendo, you aren't helping us at all.

    Every LEO is a potential ally, why make them an adversary?

    Also realize folks that I'm an Oath Keeper and my main mission is to reach out to all active oath takers so I'm also geared toward keeping commo lines open.
    In Bold: Excuse me? LEO's are there to dispassiontley enforce the law. They should not be neither my adversary nor my ally.
    atctimmy likes this.

  7. #112
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,802
    Maine_Expat, welcome to the forum!
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  8. #113
    Distinguished Member Array Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Oshkosh, Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,330
    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty901 View Post
    Depends on who you are. Non protected class person files a complaint, maybe get looked at nothing will get done.
    Non protected class OC person files one LEO get an at a boy for follow COP orders.
    Your in Wisconsin what was it Chief of Police in Milwaukee said he would have his Officers do to any OC they see?
    I don't pay attention to Milwaukee, I live in Oshkosh, and here complaints are taken very seriously, and that was referring to any complaint in general, not just OC problems. I know this from personal experience, not something I read or heard online.
    Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable- JFK

  9. #114
    Member Array Hamltnblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Springfield PA
    Posts
    33
    It seems to me that a call of man with a gun should be responded to but maybe it's the procedure that's required.
    Many times the call is made by a liberal trying to stir things up or doesn't believe in the right to carry. (Same people who wish for them if there's a problem)
    Also consider sometimes the person calling may be from out of state and don't know the laws.

    When the police arrive on the scene maybe they should just observe what is going on. If the person carrying is simply going about their business and not acting out in any way, then leave him/her alone.
    When the person who called sees the police they have the option to approach or not. When they see the police move on maybe they will understand there's no problem.

    I know it's not the same but it's in the same ballpark of racial profiling. If someone called 911 to report a suspicious person because of their skin color, the police would check it out but only stop the person if they were acting in a threatening or suspicious manner.

  10. #115
    VIP Member Array Brad426's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,895
    Quote Originally Posted by Hamltnblue View Post
    It seems to me that a call of man with a gun should be responded to but maybe it's the procedure that's required.
    Many times the call is made by a liberal trying to stir things up or doesn't believe in the right to carry. (Same people who wish for them if there's a problem)
    Also consider sometimes the person calling may be from out of state and don't know the laws.

    When the police arrive on the scene maybe they should just observe what is going on. If the person carrying is simply going about their business and not acting out in any way, then leave him/her alone.
    When the person who called sees the police they have the option to approach or not. When they see the police move on maybe they will understand there's no problem.

    I know it's not the same but it's in the same ballpark of racial profiling. If someone called 911 to report a suspicious person because of their skin color, the police would check it out but only stop the person if they were acting in a threatening or suspicious manner.
    Really, you think the police would respond if someone called and said "There is a black man on the sidewalk of Main Street" (yeah, I guess it depend on where, huh)? You don't think the dispatcher would ask what he was doing before they dispatched officers? I just strongly feel that officers shouldn't be dispatched to calls about legal activities, regardless of whether or not it makes some people nervous.
    I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.
    Clint Eastwood

    I love Tiberius/Maggie.

  11. #116
    Member Array Maine_Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Maine/Ukraine
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    In Bold: Excuse me? LEO's are there to dispassiontley enforce the law. They should not be neither my adversary nor my ally.
    To dispassionately enforce the law they must first know what is lawful and Constitutional.
    Read the last line in my post suntzu. I have another mission that is my first priority. As an Oath Keeper I DO want active LEOs and military as allies when the SHTF. I cannot achieve that if I slam the door (of communication opportunity) in their faces.

    Again, this is MY own personal choice and I'm not advocating that everyone should "do it this way". There is more than one way to skin this kitty here.
    kb2wji likes this.

  12. #117
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad426 View Post
    Really, you think the police would respond if someone called and said "There is a black man on the sidewalk of Main Street" (yeah, I guess it depend on where, huh)? You don't think the dispatcher would ask what he was doing before they dispatched officers? I just strongly feel that officers shouldn't be dispatched to calls about legal activities, regardless of whether or not it makes some people nervous.
    Agree in principle with when officers should be dispatched. Trouble in that in the world we live in the general populace wants the police to check up on everyone but them. I do most of my walking at night due to the extreme heat during the day. Even in this small rural town people will call the police on me. They want the police to tell them what I am doing out that late. When the patrol car, we only have the one, shows up he will either wave at me or stop to talk guns and politics with me for a bit. Then he will call the person who reported me and tell them everything is fine.

    The point is, is that the police will be called by people who demand to know what everyone else is doing. That will never stop. What can be controlled is how the police react when the answer the call. Will they roll by with a nice hello and a wave when they see no law is being broken? Or will they stop the person and demand that they prove they are not committing a crime? Will they detain him while they try to find something to arrest him for?

    Michael
    Last edited by mlr1m; July 28th, 2012 at 02:40 PM. Reason: I made an oopsie
    atctimmy likes this.

  13. #118
    VIP Member Array Brad426's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,895
    Quote Originally Posted by mlr1m View Post
    Agree in principle with when officers should be dispatched. Trouble in that in the world we live in the general populace wants the police to check up on everyone but them. I do most of my walking at night due to the extreme heat during the day. Even in this small rural town people will call the police on me. They want the police to tell them what I am doing out that late. When the patrol car, we only have the one, shows up he will either wave at me or stop to talk guns and politics with me for a bit. Then he will call the person who reported me and tell them everything is fine.

    The point is, is that the police will be called by people who demand to know what everyone else is doing. That will never stop. What can be controlled is how the police react when the answer the call. Will they roll by with a nice hello and a wave when they see no law is being broken? Or will they stop the person and demand that they prove they are not committing a crime? Will they detain him while they try to find something to arrest him for?

    Michael
    I'm with you. In your case your actions are suspicious to your neighbors (although one would think eventually they would catch on).

    I'm not for a second saying that the police shouldn't be dispatched to a MWAG call if the called said the person was acting aggressively or erratically or suspiciously. But if the dispatcher asks the caller what the MWAG is doing and the answer is "Walking down the street" or "It appears he is ordering a Grande Double Cap with skim milk" or what-have-you then the dispatcher should tell the caller that OC is legal and not dispatch officers to the scene to set up the potentially confrontational encounter.
    I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.
    Clint Eastwood

    I love Tiberius/Maggie.

  14. #119
    VIP Member
    Array atctimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NSA Headquarters
    Posts
    6,428
    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 don't understand why this thread made it past Mike's #11 post. Everything about why is answered in that post. Boom, question asked and answered.

    After Mike's post we have had 108 post that just go around in circles.

    To all those who are still curious as to "why", just go back and read post 11. If you still don't get it then you'll never understand.

    ETA: In fact, I think the mods should delete every post in this thread except the OP and Mike's #11 post. Then they should lock it and sticky it.
    It is surely true that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. Nor can you make them grateful for your efforts.

  15. #120
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by atctimmy View Post
    I don't understand why this thread made it past Mike's #11 post. Everything about why is answered in that post. Boom, question asked and answered.

    After Mike's post we have had 108 post that just go around in circles.

    To all those who are still curious as to "why", just go back and read post 11. If you still don't get it then you'll never understand.

    ETA: In fact, I think the mods should delete every post in this thread except the OP and Mike's #11 post. Then they should lock it and sticky it.
    And what would I do with the rest of my day?
    Seriously though. I find the responses to be very interesting. The ones I disagree with more so than those I am in agreement with. I like and learn from what others think.

    Michael

Page 8 of 17 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 ... 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.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors