What do you guys think about this video?

This is a discussion on What do you guys think about this video? within the Open Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I watched the video and my opinion is, I was watching one idiot taping two stupid cops....

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 118
Like Tree102Likes

Thread: What do you guys think about this video?

  1. #46
    Member Array jrclen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Central Wisconsin
    Posts
    342
    I watched the video and my opinion is, I was watching one idiot taping two stupid cops.
    68blackbird and Ghost1958 like this.
    Shall not be infringed means - shall not be infringed.
    Member - NRA
    John

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #47
    VIP Member
    Array PEF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,688
    One should NEVER have a nostril shot in the opening moments of a video. Very gross.
    brocktice likes this.

  4. #48
    Ex Member Array pscipio03's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    406
    I still fail to see where he obstructed, interfered or stopped the LEO from being able to continue what he was doing. The guy filming approached the officer, that's all. He obviously did not act erratic or show any signs of aggression, or the cop would have stopped what he was doing and dealt with the situation at hand.
    The officer then tells him to move away, which he did. He didn't hesitate, argue or continue forward. He walked away and stood on the curb from what I believe to be a safe distance away.
    If you disagree, please let me know when in the video he interfered. There's a counter on the video, so you should be able to give me the exact moment when the guy interfered with the LEO from being able to finish what he was doing.
    Later in the video the LEO in questions knows what he did was wrong. His buddy that showed up is incorrect multiple times as well, and tap dances like Greggory Hines because he knows he's being a fool in what he's saying.
    Some might say this is an ignorant soap box to stand on. And I'll say this is EXACTLY what we need to stand up for. If you're doing something legal, and someone else doesn't like it, that doesn't mean you get to pass judgement and change the law on site. And, that cop should have known better. He didn't like being filmed? Tough. Doesn't think this guy should be OC'ing? Suck it up, buttercup. If he felt his safety was in jeopardy, he's the coolest cat I've ever seen reacting to it.
    jrclen and d2jlking like this.

  5. #49
    VIP Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    2,053
    Federal court says citizens can film officers. NM protects the right to OC. The vidder complied with first officer's legal instructions - or the officer should not have turned his back and completed the stop. OTOH, the creepy vidder was halting and baiting in his interaction. His exercising his legal right of uncivil obedience serves no purpose of public good. Where's the tar and feathers?
    The cops were also fishing. We have to protect our rights because if we don't, no one will. But I think we're asking too much if we expect cops to use kid gloves and to do their jobs and get home safely without cutting some slack.
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

  6. #50
    Senior Member Array JJVP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    512
    Quote Originally Posted by pscipio03 View Post
    I'm sorry, did I miss something, or did I just read a bunch of you agreeing to the fact that LEO did something that goes against the his state's law? Idiot? Don't need this? Wait, are you all in agreement that he should be stopped for doing something COMPLETELY WITHIN HIS RIGHTS?????This cop is ignorant and has absolutely no right to ask for his ID. I'm hoping he was reprimanded for this.I can not believe you people are agreeing to this. You are being sheep and as bad as the people out there right now calling for strict gun laws.I really thought people on this forum would know better.
    Completely agree with you. The guy did NOTHING illegal. He was not required to show id. The cops were inventing laws as they went. They need to retrain those cops on the law. If they had really thought that they were right, don't you think that they would have arrested him? They didn't, because he was on the right. This is not nazi Germany, at least not yet, where "show me you papers" was a way of life. I guess those of you who are bashing the video guy don't mind letting a cop search you car or your house, just because he feels like it, right? After all, you have nothing to hide.
    jrclen and Ghost1958 like this.

  7. #51
    Senior Member Array JJVP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    512
    Quote Originally Posted by kb2wji View Post
    I dont know about NM, but in my state, this guy WAS breaking the law. And im not talking about the open carry law. He has zero business involving himself in a traffic stop. To do so is stupid and dangerous. To do so with a gun is more stupid, and more dangerous. I stand by statement. When this guy refuses to get away from a traffic stop, he's taking a ride downtown.
    Did you watch the video? How exactly he got involved in the traffic stop, by video tapping it? The cop asked him to move away, and he did, so why do you said he refused to go away?
    d2jlking likes this.

  8. #52
    Distinguished Member Array ArkhmAsylm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    St. Paul, Minnesota
    Posts
    1,373
    -
    I believe that this is Pete Eyre of the CopBlock.org group. Yes, they do go out looking for police to monitor them and, yes, challenge them as well. I wouldn't do it, but they feel that it's their job. I need to work for a living...
    "Historical examination of the right to bear arms, from English antecedents to the drafting of the Second Amendment, bears proof that the right to bear arms has consistently been, and should still be, construed as an individual right." -- U.S. District Judge Sam Cummings, Re: U.S. vs Emerson (1999)

  9. #53
    Member Array rabbit2011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    183
    That guy just gives a bad reputation for those who open carry. Here in Wisconsin you can also open carry without a permit, but there are limitations. You can't be within 1000' of a school (not including your own property). With a CC license though in Wisconsin, I can CC and OC with in 1000' of a school (as long as you are not on the property(still with some limitations)). Will I OC just to OC within 1000' of 3 schools(which is where I live)? No. I will CC to limit negative public attention while walking my dog.
    If you wish for peace, prepare for war.

  10. #54
    Senior Member Array rugergunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    686
    Quote Originally Posted by 02R1 View Post
    Police Confront Man for Open Carrying Firearm Legally - YouTube

    I'm all for open carry and such...BUT seriously, this dude was being a hard headed punk. What's so hard about just showing the cop and ID? If i was a cop doing a traffic stop and a dude walks up to me with a gun on the side, I would be on the alert side too..

    I sure hope this dude in the video isn't a member of this site or other gun sites. He shouldn't own a firearm.
    Yup. That dude was a serious clown.
    kb2wji likes this.
    I would rather die on my feet, than to live on my knees.

  11. #55
    Senior Member Array royal barnes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Wendell, N.C.
    Posts
    569
    I am a retired LEO and have watched this video several times over the last year or so and here's my opinion. The man with the camera was looking for a confrontation and even stated that he would keep the camera rolling for whatever might come next but he did move away as instructed when the officer told him to. As an officer I would have been uneasy trying to deal with someone on a traffic stop with a person standing behind me with a visible firearm but when the man moved that should have been the end of it. The cop chose to confront the man after the traffic stop was over. He was carrying legally and was not required to show ID unless the officer suspected he had committed a crime. I saw no evidence of any criminal activity. As much as I always hate to admit an officer is in the wrong it happens and this appears to be one of those times. Was the guy with the camera a jerk. Yeah, but he didn't violate any laws.
    jrclen, Crowman and Ghost1958 like this.

  12. #56
    Member Array popo22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    136
    I think the video-taper is a complete "Knuckle-head" but I don't see that he did anything illegal. Some might think that his actions were "hindering" the Officers ability to complete his investigation and therefore committing an arrestable offense (personally I think that is pretty weak). If I was really that concerned about his presence then the proper action would be to call for a "back-up" and wait until the "back-up Officer" arrives to complete my work. This might delay the "traffic stop drivers" time at the stop but at least all would be safe. In Texas the actions of the video-taper would not constitute "Interference With a Public Servant", especially when he walked across the street when requested.

    In order to legally demand someones ID the person must be at least "suspected" of a crime or illegal activity. In Texas one cannot OC but apparently it is ok in NM so that would not be a legal issue. I wouldn't appreciate the video-tapers actions either but since it was not illegal I would not detain him. Since the Officers did not physically detain the video-taper there was no major issue with them trying to identify the video-taper on a consentual basis, although they had no leg to stand on legally concerning a legal detention. IMHO
    A Wise Man Changes His Mind, but a Fool Never Does

  13. #57
    Distinguished Member Array RightsEroding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,295
    Absolutely amazing how polarized we are on this video.

    1) The guy is a jerk. (We have consensus)
    2) He broke no law
    3) He was within his right to carry

    After reading each and every post, I came away feeling most of the negative comments were based on the idea that many responders here simply didn't like the snotty little attitude of this guy.

    Being an idiot or acting the fool does not automatically disqualify one from being in the right.

    Who is supposed to hold LE to a standard? Their superiors? Please!

    Who should expose ill educated LE? How do we know if they are properly educated in the law.

    Look; I know they have a tuff job; but if they can't control their power kick, they should not be cops.

    I suppose there are better ways to educate concerning OC such as a march etc...

    The few LE officers I know have told me they prefer to see law abiding citizens carry as it is rare to see a felon doing so.
    jrclen likes this.
    "When those who are governed do too little, those who govern can, and will, do too much." Ronald Reagan

    Do what you can; then do what you must

  14. #58
    Member Array jrclen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Central Wisconsin
    Posts
    342
    If the LEO's had acted professionally, and handled the situation in accordance with the actual law, this video would contain nothing at all of interest to anyone. And we would never have heard about it. Rather than chasing and harassing the idiot with the camera, the first officer should have simply gone about his duties. Some here say the guy with the camera hurts gun owners. I say the cop in the video hurts hard working police officers.
    Crowman, JJVP, Ghost1958 and 1 others like this.
    Shall not be infringed means - shall not be infringed.
    Member - NRA
    John

  15. #59
    Ex Member Array pscipio03's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    406
    Does make me wonder how many of these videos he had to shoot before he finally got a cop to do something stupid. We saw this video-- bet he's got about 20 more on his phone that had LEO basically ignoring him.
    Pistology and jrclen like this.

  16. #60
    Lead Moderator
    Array rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    15,938
    I suggest everyone attack the argument , rather than labeling or attacking forum members. We can have differing opinions and still maintain a polite response. Any more personal attacks will be met with time outs that may be permanent.
    "In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." Thomas Jefferson


    Nemo Me Impune Lacesset

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 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

concealed carry traffic stop jim wilson

,

guy in ohio stopped by cops for carrying a firearm refuses to show id knows the law

,

open carry

,

you must see this testimony then share share share

,

you must see this testimony!!! then share, share, share

,

you must see this testimony!!! then share, share, share!!! back to album previous ? next

Click on a term to search for related topics.