Inviting A “Stop and Frisk” By Openly Carrying

[JD]

I see the difference as well as the similarities. These similarities are that both are examples of legal carry. No laws broken in either case. If they can arrest him they can arrest me.

Michael

He wasn't placed under arrest.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[bmglock23]

Do I think its practical to carry a long gun, SBR or pistol variant of a long gun for EDC? Not really, but if we can legally own a type of gun and arnt out INTENTIONALLY scaring people, then why should it matter what gun it is we carry?

Because others don't know your intentions. How far would you expect to get on a city street "legally" carrying the weapon pictured here? You'd be seen as an armed maniac, regardless of what you may be, especially in light of recent events. Remember, half the people you share the country with have completely different attitudes on guns than you have, and we should choose our battles carefully.

AR15_A3_Tactical_Carbine_pic1.jpg

P.S. I'm actually in the market for an affordable AR-15 like this, but I won't be walking around town with it!

[bmglock23]

Duplicate post .... my apologies.

[SCXDm9]

Keep in mind how quick this conversation elevates between gun lovers..... preaching to the choir so to speak. Move this conversation to none gun owners or to people on the fence so to speak and one should be able to see how people we are discussing do not help our cause.

I will say again, if most of us saw a group of thug dressed black men doing the same, in your neighborhood or the park your childern are in... the conversation might be different

[mlr1m]

He wasn't placed under arrest.

LOL okay not arrested, you are correct. I should have said if they can detain him two and one half hours in an attempt to see if they could find something to charge him with that they could do the same to me.

My opinion on all of these threads when this subject comes is is consistent. If you do not know if I am breaking a law why am I being stopped? Arrest me now or let me be on my way. As I said, if we allow them to do it to someone who we do not approve of what will prevent them from doing it to us?

Michael

[bmglock23]

As I said, if we allow them to do it to someone who we do not approve of what will prevent them from doing it to us?

Michael

By not doing things we don't approve of.

[mlr1m]

Originally Posted by mlr1m
As I said, if we allow them to do it to someone who we do not approve of what will prevent them from doing it to us?

Michael

By not doing things we don't approve of.

Sometimes its hard to determine whether or not a person is serious when we only using text. I truly hope your comment was in jest.

Michael

[Lotus222]

It's like the opposite of Bait Car. It's "Bait Gun" and its for the cops. Really stupid, but kinda hilarious. I doubt he'll win anything. I can think of much worse things that tax dollars are spent on, though.

[gottabkiddin]

I'm going to look at this from a different perspective.If his actions are not illegal, then why was he detained?Are there varying degrees of "legal"? I think not. Was he endangering anyone? Clearly not.He was just a guy walking around with a pistol being openly carried... nothing more, nothing less.Going back and reading some of the responses and original orignial posts, it's become painfully aware to me why we gunowners are in the the quandary that we are in. Most of us have been led into believing that if someone behaves in a way that we dont approve of, then it must be wrong.Most of us have been brainwashed into accepting silly regulations of a right, a second amendment right,a right that is specifically outlined in the Constitution, as being perfectly acceptable. We are used to being fed crumbs and accepting it as the norm, from our all knowing,enlightend masters that take care of us and "protect" us, because we are too simple, to uneducated and in many cases, too stupid to understand the big picture.Some facts...A Draco pistol, is in fact a short AK. The barrel is 11.5 inches long, well short of the legal minimum for it to be classed as a rifle.It doesnt have a stock,the barrel is below the minumim 16" required length for a rifle, and by Federal standards it is a legal handgun. As such, it meets the criteria for a handgun in most states.It may be that the man in question is in fact trolling for some attention. It may be that he is trying to make a point, one that goes all the way to the top, so that certain things may be clarifed by law. What ever his motive is, does it really matter? If he was walking in the park, where open carry is legal, with a gun that is legal to do so, then why all of the excitement?Lets look at what should have happened in an ideal world.Mr. Embody is out for a stroll, and some soccer mom freaks out because this ugly dude is walking around with an even uglier gun. She calls the cops.Cops get the dreaded "man with a gun" call. Its dreaded because you never know what's going on until you get there and sometimes it gets ugly. When an officer gets that call, they realize that they may be minutes away from having to kill someone.Cop gets there,searches around and either finds the man with a gun or someone points him out. He approaches that individual in a maximum state of readiness. He secures the gun and then interviews the owner. Within minutes, it should become apparent that Mr. Embody is acting in a legal manner, that the gun is legal, and that no breach of the law exists. He is given back his gun, and sent on his way.It should have been a non issue. The reason that is became an issue is because of ignorance displayed at every level. It was displayed by whoever made the call. They just saw a man with a gun. All he was doing was walking. The dispatcher got the call and dispatched it to the police, in this case the park ranger. They just put out the info that they get.The ranger got there and secured the gun.He either didnt know it was legal,he was confused about it or he didnt care.He arrested him, and utlimatley let him fight it through the courts.In a court of law, personal feelings, like the many displayed here, arent supposed to color the facts,only the facts should matter.Wheter we beleive it to be stupid foolish,dangerous,whether we mistakenly beleive it to be something that it is not, whatever feeling we may have, it should not matter if the issue was legal to begin with. If the man was simply walking in the park with an openly displayed handgun and it was a legal activity, then there should be repercussions,no fines, no legal hassles,nothing at all. Now,we get every people of every internet gunboard on the world wide web, talking about this issue for months on end. They talk and speculate and discuss about this thing, this very thing that was common place is most of this country, not so long ago, in a day when most people had enough common sense to know that it wasn't the gun that was the dangerous thing, it was the man that knew how to use it and in that day if someone called law to report that someone was wearing a gun and it was legal act, they would have been the ones that were chastised and ridiculed for being foolish.It's weird how it all pans out. Here we are, most of us on this board pride ourselves in being pretty well versed when it comes to self defense and the law, ragging on some guy that was doing something legal....but we dont like it because of the gun that he is wearing and using much of the same arguments that the anti's use to limit our rights and freedoms.And we wonder why things are the way they are.Interesting.

Excellent post sir, and for the most part I whole heartily agree. The only point I wish to make in regards to this guy and his method is a simple one... Grabbing the bull by the horns is not the best way to get his attention. If one is so dumb as to do so, then he surly deserves what he ends up with. Just like, you don't use a sledgehammer to drive in a nail, you can, but it's kinda stupid. It's so clear this clown was baiting and it's hard to fathom obvious intelligent folks even debating his intentions. It's no longer a question of, (does he have the right to carry the firearm) it's a question of why carry that weapon while decked out in camouflage walking around in a public park... I kinda equate this to something close to some kind of sick martyrization or something. I mean seriously, does anyone really think we need some guy going around doing this kinda stuff to bring attention to our right to bear arms? For the record, it's the guys and gals that believe that this is totally acceptable behavior that worries me.




just a straight up opinion from me on it...
If I saw some dude walking around like this guy was, looking like some kinda wannabe commando in the middle of a national park, I'd be doing two things. 1, I be looking for any friends he might be communicating with. 2, alerting the Authorities to some very odd dude that just looks outa place that they might want to check out. My 2nd amendment rights would be so far down the ladder it's not even funny. With all the Timothy James "Tim" McVeighs and James Holmes clowns running around, can we really be so relaxed with our preparedness? That's something each of us must ask ourselves first and foremost IMO, the whole (it's his right to carry that) thing comes after as far as I'm concerned...

[JD]

LOL okay not arrested, you are correct. I should have said if they can detain him two and one half hours in an attempt to see if they could find something to charge him with that they could do the same to me.

My opinion on all of these threads when this subject comes is is consistent. If you do not know if I am breaking a law why am I being stopped? Arrest me now or let me be on my way. As I said, if we allow them to do it to someone who we do not approve of what will prevent them from doing it to us?

Michael

Have you read the court document listed in the article?

Ward found Embody in a parking lot and ordered him to the ground at gun point.
Without arresting Embody, Ward removed the gun, patted him for other weapons and
detained him. When the Nashville police officers arrived, Ward explained his concern
that Embody’s weapon was illegal, and the officers conducted a weapons check to
determine the gun’s status. Meanwhile, Embody requested the presence of a police
supervisor, even after the Nashville officers advised him it would delay his release.
Once the officers confirmed that the firearm fit the definition of a handgun under state
law, Ward returned the gun to Embody and released him. The incident lasted about two and-
a-half hours.

The reason it took that long was that the officers were honoring his requests. ..I'd love to see the actual time lime from when the request for a supervisor was made and the events leading up to his arrival, sometimes officers are busy doing policely business when not responding to bogus MWAG calls....but I wouldn't be surprised if it was "Yeah, I'll be right there, as soon as I get done with lunch"

Yes, the thing he was carrying is a pistol, but due to the nature of that pistol and the painted orange tip it raised reasonable suspicion as to the nature of that firearm He was not arrested, he was not charged with anything, he wanted a supervisor on scene and had to wait for one. They checked out the gun, he was released WITH HIS GUN and he tried to sue them for their actions.

I'm sorry, but that's just stupid in my opinion. The firearm was a half inch from being illegal, the difference between a pistol and an NFA item can be pretty slim...I don't really fault a park ranger for not being well informed on NFA items etc.

[mlr1m]

Excellent post sir, and for the most part I whole heartily agree. The only point I wish to make in regards to this guy and his method is a simple one... Grabbing the bull by the horns is not the best way to get his attention. If one is so dumb as to do so, then he surly deserves what he ends up with. Just like, you don't use a sledgehammer to drive in a nail, you can, but it's kinda stupid. It's so clear this clown was baiting and it's hard to fathom obvious intelligent folks even debating his intentions. It's no longer a question of, (does he have the right to carry the firearm) it's a question of why carry that weapon while decked out in camouflage walking around in a public park... I kinda equate this to something close to some kind of sick martyrization or something. I mean seriously, does anyone really think we need some guy going around doing this kinda stuff to bring attention to our right to bear arms? For the record, it's the guys and gals that believe that this is totally acceptable behavior that worries me.




just a straight up opinion from me on it...
If I saw some dude walking around like this guy was, looking like some kinda wannabe commando in the middle of a national park, I'd be doing two things. 1, I be looking for any friends he might be communicating with. 2, alerting the Authorities to some very odd dude that just looks outa place that they might want to check out. My 2nd amendment rights would be so far down the ladder it's not even funny. With all the Timothy James "Tim" McVeighs and James Holmes clowns running around, can we really be so relaxed with our preparedness? That's something each of us must ask ourselves first and foremost IMO, the whole (it's his right to carry that) thing comes after as far as I'm concerned...

This argument holds up well when discussing folks grabbing a bull by its horns or poking a sleeping bear with a stick. Where the argument fails is when those being poked are supposed to fall under the same laws as the one doing the poking. Unlike the bull or the bear a police officer is supposed to only enforce actual laws. He should not enforce his feelings for teaching someone a lesson.
We either want a Government that obeys the laws the same as its citizens are supposed to do or do we want a Government that is above the laws it is sworn to uphold.

Michael

[gottabkiddin]

This argument holds up well when discussing folks grabbing a bull by its horns or poking a sleeping bear with a stick. Where the argument fails is when those being poked are supposed to fall under the same laws as the one doing the poking. Unlike the bull or the bear a police officer is supposed to only enforce actual laws. He should not enforce his feelings for teaching someone a lesson.We either want a Government that obeys the laws the same as its citizens are supposed to do or do we want a Government that is above the laws it is sworn to uphold.Michael

True enough, but again. With all the idiots perpetrating all the hate crimes and mass killings, I call it sorta like a preemptive strike for the good guys. Like it or not, it's what's been forced upon us by the losers of our society. JMO..

[mkh]

So you believe that laws should be there to stop crime from happening eh?

How is that working out so far?

I don't even understand your point so I don't know how to answer you. I do know that as gun owners we have an obligation to not be stupid.

[JD]

Unlike the bull or the bear a police officer is supposed to only enforce actual laws. He should not enforce his feelings for teaching someone a lesson.
We either want a Government that obeys the laws the same as its citizens are supposed to do or do we want a Government that is above the laws it is sworn to uphold.

Michael

And where in this case did anyone run afoul of that?

I'm not really seeing where anyone's rights were violated. A guy went out of his way to seek attention (not his first or last time, and his permit has since been revoked and last I heard he lost his appeal on that one too.) was checked out, and was free to go with his gun...

What exactly was the point of injustice or where laws were violated/disobeyed and not upheld?

[tns0038]

It’s irresponsible idiots like this who give gun owners a bad name, and virtuous for the auti-gun lobby groups.