This is a discussion on Is a request for your ID really an infringement of your rights? within the Open Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Hopyard Yes, sometimes if not always, you know what is bothering you and making you feel uneasy, but you do have to ...
Ya know... I've read everyone of these threads. Some have been points of excellent discussion, others...not so much.
Still, I look at them all and I see both sides of the story. I'm in a unique position, being an Officer in a small town, yet one that is very protective of my personal rights. I do realize that many see a guy in uniform and they automatically assume that they are about to be hassled or that they have done something wrong, because they never have any interaction with a cop. Fact of the matter is, if you live right and act right, unless you have a personal friend that is a cop, you just don't have to deal with them, so for many people it automatically starts out in the negative.
So as a gun owner, as a Concealed Handgun Instructor, I know the laws and how they apply because I constantly teach them. I get updates on any changes because I am an Instructor, not because I am a cop. When I can, I teach other cops about the law when I am requested to do so.
As a cop, I see things from the "other side" What some people feel as an infringement on their right, I see as being proactive. For instance, the guy that services ATM's. If I see someone servicing an ATM at one of the several local banks, I want to get to know him. I'll chat with him and may even give him my cell phone number. Yeah...I know that that makes some big city cops cringe at the thought...but this is small town America here where everyone knows everyone and their business. At first when I talk, I may seem a bit intrusive at first. Its not to take away your right to privacy and its not because I am being a jack booted thug. Its not because I was picked last on the football team or because I used to get beat up at recess...it is simply because I want to get to know you. I am trained as an observer, as all cops are. I notice little things and little details about things that are out of place. Being this way allows me to be more efficient at my job.
So, although it is not yet legal here in Arkansas, I've wondered how I would react to open carriers if it were legal.
What some people fail to realize is that when any new law comes out, there is a learning curve, for everyone involved and its not just the cops. It's the citizens, the lawyers, the Judges, every single person that is affected by that law must learn it and some learn it quickly, where as others do not. A cop will learn the laws that he deals with the most. He'll get to know them inside and out but on a new law, there is a learning curve.
Since you don't have all the details, you can only fall back on your training to help you with the current situation. Its the very reason that many cops respond in a negative manner to a "man with a gun call". When we hear that, usually the details are scarce, we don't know if you are just walking from point A to point B and happen to be wearing a gun or if you intend to make yourself famous and kill everyone you see. Its for that reason that some cops tend to be a bit heavy handed at first...because the law is new, we don't know how you'll respond, we aren't even sure how we will respond until we get there.
So,I think that, if you were the type to walk about wearing your gun and the law was new, you should expect to get some attention. Think about how I would see it. I'm being told that someone is walking around wearing a gun. I will approach cautiously because I don't know you...and yes I have a plan to kill you if that is what I need to do.
One of the reasons is, that you are in my city. If you are going to walk around wearing your gun, by me introducing myself to you and you telling me who you are, we are setting up base of knowledge, so that in the future if someone calls it in again, I see you walking, I've already talked you, I remember you as a good guy and I just drive by and wave at you, because doing any more than that is a waste of my time and yours. What you are doing is legal and thats all I care about.
What we need to understand is that I'm just one guy on one shift. Since we only have ONE officer per shift, I would expect any of the other officers to do the same thing as me...so you might get asked about what you are doing by the other 6 officers that we have because they don't know you. Yeah, at first it might seem like a hassle...but eventually, as everyone becomes comfortable with each other, things get easier.
Of course, in the big city's this wont apply, because there are too many people to really know who does what. So what you get into are cops that don't know the latest details of the law, some might be just out of the academy and they are convinced that everyone is trying to kill them, you will have cops that have the God syndrome and you will have others that are really OK with the concept and are just doing what they perceive as "just doing their job" . Like any other job you will get the whole spectrum from A to Z.
So if I ask for an ID...understand that most cops are trained to call in the location and the person of interest. Its not because they want to violate you, its because thats what they are taught to do. Its a safety issue. Many cops have been injured or killed by the "routine stop" and the name of the person involved was all that they had. I have wondered how many people had bad intent but when they knew they were ID'ed they knew that if they got stupid they could be tracked down so that in itself prevented harm.
Denying me ID...puts me on suspicion because its a fact of life that the bad-guys don't want me to know who they are. I cant tell you how many times they have refused because they know they have warrants on them or the give me the wrong name...usually of their brother or Dad or someone that they know well enough to answer a few basic questions. So if you want to tell me to take a hike, because you don't have to "produce papers"...then expect to spend just a bit more time than normal talking to me until I figure out that you really are an OK guy, that knows your rights and wants to assert them...and thats OK too, I don't have an issue with that...but really...dont we both have better things to do?
BTW: I have lived in really small remote and rural towns and they did not stop folks for the mere prescence of OC'ing whether they know them or not. I have seen this in NH when tourist show up or out of towners and my neighbor at the time, a LEO, said she never stopped one just because.
Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”
No probably not.Ok, let me see if I get this straight...if and when they have OC where you are you will feel itis your duty to stop and chat with the person for no other reason than they are doing what is legal
If I was dispatched to a MWAG call, I'd have to stop and check it out.
Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”
it is legal to open-cary a handgun in several states.
its also legal to walk down the street with a running chainsaw, an ax, or a samurai sword.
its also legal to walk down the street with a sliced open arm with blood dripping down your body.
that doesn't mean the police shouldn't be able ask you "what's up, buddy?".
That is correct.it is legal to open-cary a handgun in several states.
Running chainsaw? Not a normal act. I am checking you out. AX? Actually have seen that in my town. Samurai sword? I'll probably check that one too.its also legal to walk down the street with a running chainsaw, an ax, or a samurai sword.
I'll defintaly stop and ask what the issue is. I might take you to the ER. I might call it in. You can bet your britches that'll get some attention.its also legal to walk down the street with a sliced open arm with blood dripping down your body.
I might do it just to be friendly. It dosent mean that you are doing anything wrong.that doesn't mean the police shouldn't be able ask you "what's up, buddy?".
I talk to lots of people. It dosen't mean that I am "interviewing" them.
Well let's see. Steffen answered this one for me thank you for posting this.
.This happened on my route home from work. I missed it by about 1 hour and work with one of the people who were part of the 19 cars stopped. The police basically showed up with a SWAT team and surrounded the cars at the intersection... There would not have been any additional cars to be searched. The guy said it was really scary, but more or less just a case of wrong place, wrong time and the police were very polite and professional after they cleared his car. They had a specific description of the suspect, so they didn't even need to search the cars. Everything was over in about 15 minutes.
Edit: I want to clarify because the article has different information. The "search" of the vehicles of the people who did not match the description did not take place as reported, it was more like "is anybody else hiding in there." Also, they took about 2 hours to go through the suspect's vehicle, but the others were free to go much sooner
So the media got the story wrong, OMG surely not? So since the event did not happen the way they said this analogy does not apply.
F350 took care of this one.Yeah... 'course we couldn't trust 'em to fight the Pacific battles....
Actually it was a hold over from the Civil War; the US government did not want "brother fighting brother" which is one reason my dad, first generation German was not sent to fight in Europe.
There were many Japanese in the Pacific, they were trusted to be interpreters of Japanese POWs, communications intercepts and other highly sensitive intelligence work requiring native speaker knowlege of Japanese.Where does it say in that little nugget that machine guns and SBR's have to be registered, where does it say that you have to have a permit to concealed carry? It doesn't because those things did not exist back then. A firearm was a tool, a means of personal protection, a way to feed your family and a way to fight a war against England. In today's society registrations, permits and so on are the law of the land deal with it. These things will not change.Where, in that little nugget does it say, imply, infer, or otherwise obliquely determine; that those who do so will be subject to harassment by police? To being asked for ID..?
You have your opinion of what harassment by the police is and I have mine. An officer dispatched to a call has a duty to respond an investigate the call plain and simple. He does not have the luxury to pick and choose what call to go on. Yes if he can see that there is no problem go on about his day, then deal with the citizen who called in the complaint calling his boss stating he did not do his job.
You can double post, put in bold, change the color it makes no difference. Deal with it. The system is already in place for registration, permits and so on. Was the 2A circumvented? Personally I don't think so. You can still own a machine gun, SBR, carry a gun concealed it is simply regulated but feel free to preach on.
The level below probable cause is reasonable suspicion. A gut feeling, something does not look right, what a cop hears, sees smells, touches can all lead to further investigation which leads to probable cause. Yes you can articulate your gut feeling. LE experience goes a long way in determining if what an officer sees requires further investigation. On many occasions courts accept and rely on an officers experience to relate what led him/her to investigate an activity further. We talk about situational awareness on here all the time so what is different when a cop on the street sees something that draws his attention to someone? This phrase says it best "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck".
Excellent question. Everyone complains about the lack of jobs, the welfare state, supporting people with federal aid who are not even citizens of this country but oh god don't stop them and ask them if they have the proper documentation that is offensive. In many states it is required that an individual produce ID at the request of LE and it is a crime not to. As I stated before if you have to produce it by law then do it. If you are not required do what you want to do and deal with whatever happens but either way quit whining about it.So it is ok to demand I produce and ID but don't you dare ask an Undocumented citizen to do so.
RightsEroding it is also blatantly clear how many are considered wrong for having a different viewpoint than yours. You damn right I am an individual and I will maintain that individuality for as long as I am breathing and that is my right. I will support what I choose to or not choose to and your "Sky is falling" attitude may work on some to get them to follow your rhetoric but I choose not to fall in line "just because".
"A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013
Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Tolerance in the face of tyranny is no virtue. I don't have a problem presenting identification, until my own willingness to do so becomes...compelled by the force of law.
There are only TWO kinds of people in this world; those who describe the world as filled with two kinds of people...and those who don't.
Hmmm, its legal to be driving a car so it could be said its OK to check out the driver because the driver could be drunk, driving without a license. To go back to the basic of it all the 2nd amendment states ".....the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Take note: bear=open carry and that it shall not be infringed. Detaining a open carry person doing nothing suspicious and "running" their name is an infringement.
I find it strange that when one exercises their constitutional rights they are looked upon as being suspicious, criminal, guilty, etc.
May I see some ID, No. Hmm, this person must be hiding something or guilty of something.
May I search your vehicle(during traffic stop). No. Hmm, this person must be hiding something or guilty of something.
I invoke my 5th amendment right not to answer. Hmm, this person must be hiding something or guilty of something.
What good is a right if one has to constantly fight to have/use that right.
"One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."
--Thomas B. Reed, American Attorney
Second Amendment -- Established December 15, 1791 and slowly eroded ever since What happened to "..... shall not be infringed."
Some of these replies are really going off the deep end of reality. Can we stick to firearm open carry and skip past samuri swords and sliced arms?
Retired USAF E-8. Lighten up and enjoy life because:
Paranoia strikes deep, into your life it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... Buffalo Springfield - For What It's Worth