Hooksett, NH cop acts belligerent and uses profanity to Law-Abiding Citizen for OCing

This is a discussion on Hooksett, NH cop acts belligerent and uses profanity to Law-Abiding Citizen for OCing within the Open Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Don't sweat the small stuff. Walking around OC talking to a camera in an area that does not often see people OC can warrent a ...

Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 255

Thread: Hooksett, NH cop acts belligerent and uses profanity to Law-Abiding Citizen for OCing

  1. #91
    VIP Member Array Thanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    2,347
    Don't sweat the small stuff. Walking around OC talking to a camera in an area that does not often see people OC can warrent a hello from LEO IMO.

    In addition, the gun owner should have had an id. For example, can you transport a firearm open carry in a vehicle in NH. I'm not 100% sure if I care if he does or does not provide the ID to LEO (I guess it would depend on state law).

    In the end, I think the OC did fine (but I don't get what was proved other then you have rights) and the LEO did fine.

    If it were me, I would have had the id, stated I had my id, if supported by state law inform the LEO he did not have the right to ask for it, and ask why I was being detained, I would like to go.

    As for PD watching the OC, oh well. No law against that.

    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    To me this whole thing just seems like a waste of resources.

    Here is a different perspective, one that hasn't been posted yet.

    A guy is lawfully carrying a gun. Somebody calls it in because they are scared or not used to it, but they assume the worst.

    The Dispatcher calls on the radio and all I hear is that somebody has called " man with a gun, walking down the street x at the x block, check to your own satisfaction" a term that is used alot on the radio here...which means basically means "do what you feel you need to do, handle it like you think it ought to be handled."

    So maybe I am sitting in a car observing traffic on the side of the rode, maybe running Radar in a spot known for excessive speeding. Now I get a call to call check out a man with a gun walking down the street. I may even be out with a car or even eating, or trying to eat and now I have to get up, leave my food there and go.

    Now, I've got to stop what I am doing and go to this call. No big deal, that's what I get paid for right?

    So I find this guy, observe that all he is doing is walking from point A to point B and so far,nothing seems out of place, other than the fact that he is openly carrying a gun. Knowing that laws, I know that fact alone, being a legal activity, is no real cause for concern. He does not appear to be doing anything suspicious other than the fact that he is walking down the street trying not to run into something while he is video taping himself and talking to himself. Not behavior that we see everyday,but still no harm done.

    So, do I stop and question him? Do I roll by him and tell dispatch that he is OK?

    Do I know for sure what is up?

    No.. I do not.

    For all I know he could be walking to rob a store, walk into a school and start shooting, or he could be meeting his ex girlfriends boyfriend for a duel that starts at high noon. Of it could be that he is just walking to a restaurant because he is hungry, maybe he is walking to visit his Mom that lives down the block or maybe its such a pretty day that he just goes out for a walk and thinking about the recent crime he's read about in the Sunday edition of the paper he decides to strap his gun on before going.

    The fact is...I don't know until I stop and talk to him.

    So I do that. I stop, identify myself as Officer Friendly and ask him whats up.

    What he may not know is that I am listening to his speech, the manner in which he says it, his body language, how his eyes move,even his posture.I'll be watching his hands and I will note the gun, the ammo that he is carrying and even the holster.

    I ask a few basic questions like name, where he is from, where he is going. Depending on his response, I may just say OK, I got a call on you, just had to check,be careful and have a good day.

    Or it could be that you feel like asserting your right to carry but you refuse to give me your name because I am just another" jack booted thug" trying to harass you. Now, I ask for your I.D. and you refuse to give it to me, because you read the state statutes that say an officer cannot require you to give it to them.

    Knowing that you don't have to give it to me, I don't say much. I note that you are carrying a gun as a "responsible citizen", but you don't want to tell me who you are.I observe that you really aren't dangerous in any way, that you probably don't have any intent to do wrong, but that you are claiming to be a responsible citizen,yet you insist on refusing to help me do my job and help me to get on my way to do something more important. I also see you video taping the whole encounter and I know that whatever I say will more than likely be cast on every web site on the Internet and millions of people around the country will be talking about this very thing for weeks to come.

    And here I am, a very pro gun cop, that likes the idea of everyone being armed so that they can protect themselves, so much so that I teach people how do it correctly and safely quite often. And here you are supposedly trying to educate people by wearing your gun where they can see it, yet, you are acting not much different than the thugs that I take to jail when it comes to communication. You are asserting your right to be a jerk and for what cause? To educate me? To educate the people that have gathered to watch and listen to how you response to my questions?

    I don't see it as being a good diplomat for the cause. I just see it as being less than smart, because you aren't aware enough to know an ally when you see one,or maybe you wont answer a simple question because you want to be the next hot topic on the Internet channels, and you haven't yet figured out that if you want to be effective at what you do, that actions speak louder than words and that what you think is a "noble cause"and you refusing to communicate is only making my job harder.

    On the other hand...

    If I don't stop you and check you out and you do go stupid and kill somebody, the first thing that the public is going to say is "where were the cops when we needed them"?or "why couldnt the cops do something"?, just like they do when anything bad happens. When the investigation begins and its found out that I just drove by without questioning you, what are the relatives of the people you just killed going to think? The first thing that they will think is that I didn't properly do my job and they would be correct.

    So thankyou for contributing to just one of a million ways that a cop is danged if he does and danged if he dont.

    As for me...
    I just see it as a waste of time.The people watching you see you as another radical wearing a gun, and that image will be stuck in their brain until someone else gives them another image of a gun owner, either good or bad.

    And just exactly how this is "helping" to "educate" everyone and make things better for us all?
    Not that my opinion matters much, but I don't always get to agree with HotGuns, and I agree with every point he has made in the quoted post.
    NRA Member
    S&W 642 (no-lock) with .38 Spl +P 135 GR Gold GDHP
    Glock G31 & G33 with .357 Sig 125 GR. SXT Winchester Ranger

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #92
    VIP Member
    Array ppkheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    3,969
    After reading this entire thread, I'm going to attempt to "coin a phrase" that might represent what a lot of folks here are trying to get across. The phrase might save a lot of typing and explanation in similar cases in the future.

    Let's say someone OC's, and they do so perfectly in their legal right, essentially flaunting their OC status, intentionally drawing attention to themselves, hoping for a confrontation, especially with the police. Much of this is about a (subtle or not) "in-your-face-attitude". They get the attention they "wanted", and the police now have a negative experience with this OCer. The general public who has been watching see that MAN + GUN = the police presence needed for this man; which means to the public that they should notify the police if they see a man with a gun, because the police are interested in this. I'm calling this OC ugly dance, the "OC Shuffle"

    "OC Shuffle"- When someone OC's in a manner and/or demeanor that creates more problems, creates more enemies, and ultimately casts a negative light on all OC'ers as perceived by the public. If you have an OC experience that causes US to lose support when WE could have had an opportunity to gain support, you did the "OC Shuffle"........you caused the public to paint us all with that broad negative brush.

    FWIW, I'm supportive of OC................when it helps!
    Turn the election's in 2014 to a "2A Revolution". It will serve as a 1994 refresher not to "infringe" on our Second Amendment. We know who they are now.........SEND 'EM HOME. Our success in this will be proportional to how hard we work to make it happen.

  4. #93
    Member Array doobie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    New Hampster
    Posts
    233
    Quote Originally Posted by orangevol View Post
    Doobie...I just do not get it.

    Near the end of the last video you referred to a person in red pick-up that conversed with you about why the policeman stopped you and responded to him saying, "Well, I guess he wanted to harass me."

    I don't get it...The cop stated he was just doing his duty after someone reported seeing a MAN WITH A GUN. He stated over and over, "I'm just doing my job", I don't have a problem with you carrying, it's your right".

    Where exactly was the harassment???
    harassment: to disturb persistently; torment, as with troubles or cares; bother continually; pester; persecute.
    I've been detained 5 times in under 2 months.

    A man with a gun in itself is not illegal; it is my RIGHT. Another person's annoyance and alarm does not OVERIDE my RIGHT. If the officer has reason to believe I've done something wrong or am doing something wrong, or WILL do something wrong, then YES he had a responsibility to stop me. But he had NONE of them. Therefore he had no reason to stop me. It was NOT considered a terry stop, because if my first question was "Am I free to go?" I probably would have been free to go if I had him answer the question. If he told me a lawful reason why he was stopping me I would have provided him with any information he requested. He refused to answer what I was doing wrong with anything other than, "what are you doing in our <censoring> town with a <censoring> gun?"
    Criminals For Gun Control
    Brady's Campaign Pro-Gun Forum

    Member: NRA, PG-NH, GO-NH
    Life Member: JPFO, GOA
    Clubs: LF&GC

  5. #94
    Member Array Adamcop84's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Homosassa, FL
    Posts
    90
    Like many of you have said already this guy seems like he is just looking for confrontation. Yes he isn't in the wrong and it is his right to OC in the area he is in but he is making us all look bad by looking for trouble. This site isn't meant to show how LEO's are stupid and willl bust you no matter if you have the right or not. This isn't the way to exercise your right, kinda foolish in my opinion.

  6. #95
    Distinguished Member Array Bunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Carolina - LKN
    Posts
    1,384
    I get it, sort of. I just think maybe there are more friendly ways to prove a point and educate. I mean, if this is the response this is getting on an internet message board where essentially we are all pretty unknown to each other, imagine the response it may be getting in person.

    There's got to be a better way to make a statement, still maintain a good relationship with local PD (and if they know you to be a "good guy" when they get the call on you, I'm sure you'll be treated with a lot of respect. It goes BOTH WAYS.), and give POSITIVE PR to open carry in your area.

    When people see something that might scare them or make them nervous, what's the best way to ease their fears? Argue with a cop, or be a role model and help educate, possibly converting more sheep into sheepdogs?

    Just my 2 cents.
    Don't frisk me, I am the weapon.


    Sig Sauer P239 DAK (9mm)
    NRA Member & Pistol Instructor

    www.vanguardnc.com

  7. #96
    VIP Member
    Array atctimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NSA Headquarters
    Posts
    6,242
    It is not about being a "good" guy. It is about getting in front of a judge and setting a legal precedent. Then the whole police force will have to change their policy on how they deal (or don't deal) with OCers and the 2A.

    This town was "known" as an anti 2a town. So this guy is trolling for a law suit. He is making himself visible and available to be stopped and detained. He is also obeying the law at all times. The video is for evidence of this stop and any others (like creating a paper trail). Sooner or later the police will wise up and leave him alone, or they will arrest him and get smacked with a law suit. That is his goal. Not being a "good" guy.

    Allot of people in DC probably thought Heller was a troublemaker too.

    In this case I think the cop did an OK job. He should just clean up his language a bit.
    Two roads diverged in a wood, and Ió
    I took the one less traveled by,
    And that has made all the difference.

  8. #97
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,206
    Quote Originally Posted by atctimmy View Post
    Allot of people in DC probably thought Heller was a troublemaker too.
    Exactly so. Nothing's going to happen out of the goodness of hearts, because of some overall protective feeling about the People and their security. It's going to happen because the People stop being willing pawns to be toyed with, refusing the continued erosion of liberties ("My Rights! My Rights!" that SD goes on about, as if it's unworthy to retain).

    Rush it, and it might get quite painful. But, achieve it by helping the system itself crumble its own anachronistic feudal system of "by the boot heel" rules, and we all win. That is the goal. And it won't happen by osmosis.
    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, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  9. #98
    Distinguished Member Array Bunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Carolina - LKN
    Posts
    1,384
    Ok, now I'm lost again. Who's Heller?
    Don't frisk me, I am the weapon.


    Sig Sauer P239 DAK (9mm)
    NRA Member & Pistol Instructor

    www.vanguardnc.com

  10. #99
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Bunny View Post
    Ok, now I'm lost again. Who's Heller?
    Heller was the recent Supreme Cour case in which the Court opined that the Federal government cannot infringe on the right to keep and bear arms. Pretty simple stuff. It arose from the Washington DC gun ban, It had nothing to do with the states, however.

    That case was entirely different than the juvenile act we are discussing here. Washington DC is a Federal enclave. All laws are controlled by the Congress of the United States. The Congress was informed that the laws did not conform to the Constitution so the laws were changed legislatively.

    It has nothing to do with the childish stunt of seeking confrontation with authorities. Open carry is already legal! Persoanlly, I would like to see the stunt pulled in Chicago. I doubt that these types of open carriers would really risk something to make their point. This was nothing more than a childish prank, which may not work out so well next time.

  11. #100
    VIP Member Array wmhawth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    4,241
    Quote Originally Posted by doobie View Post
    I've been detained 5 times in under 2 months.
    A man with a gun in itself is not illegal; it is my RIGHT. Another person's annoyance and alarm does not OVERIDE my RIGHT. <censoring> town with a <censoring> gun?"
    I'm giving up on you Doobie. You just don't get it. Of course you do have a right to have a gun and it seems you do have a right to openly carry it. In your mind you believe you are exercising your right and that you are proving some kind of a point by refusing to produce ID. In reality your methods are counter productive. In addition to making us all look bad I think you are going to create problems for yourself in court should you ever have to justify actually using your weapon in self defense. I'd close by asking you: Do you actually carry your gun for the purpose of protecting yourself and your loved ones, or is getting negative attention your real agenda?

  12. #101
    Senior Member Array usmc3169's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    866
    I would also toss in the comment that with rights come responsibilities.
    "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

  13. #102
    kpw
    kpw is offline
    VIP Member Array kpw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,150
    Quote Originally Posted by usmc3169 View Post
    I would also toss in the comment that with rights come responsibilities.
    Responsibilty to use and protect them first, at will, whatever others may think or feel about them.
    While invoking those rights, motive and agenda really don't matter. LE has a tough job to do, no doubt. Our role as citizens isn't to make their jobs easier by sacrificing our rights, although you have the right to do just that if you wish. Just don't expect everyone else to do the same. I've seen similar videos relating to border patrol checkpoints with the same type of positive and negative comments. Their agenda and motive might be similar to doobie's, we may not like it but that doesn't make them wrong for not conforming to our idea of citizen behavior.
    "In a republic this rule ought to be observed: that the majority should not have the predominant power." -
    -- Marcus Tullius Cicero

  14. #103
    VIP Member Array wmhawth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    4,241
    Quote Originally Posted by kpw View Post
    Responsibilty to use and protect them first, at will, whatever others may think or feel about them.
    While invoking those rights, motive and agenda really don't matter. LE has a tough job to do, no doubt. Our role as citizens isn't to make their jobs easier by sacrificing our rights, although you have the right to do just that if you wish. Just don't expect everyone else to do the same. I've seen similar videos relating to border patrol checkpoints with the same type of positive and negative comments. Their agenda and motive might be similar to doobie's, we may not like it but that doesn't make them wrong for not conforming to our idea of citizen behavior.
    I think we have a responsibility to each other not to pollute the stream for others. Doobie may think he is helping our cause by his strange method of "exercising his rights", but in actuality he stokes the engines of the likes of the Brady Batch and others of their ilk. I wish he wouldn't use his rights to endanger my rights.

  15. #104
    Senior Member Array Holdcard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Phoenix, Az.
    Posts
    531
    After reading this thread let me pose a question. What exactly did the original poster do that was illegal?

    I'm not asking for your opinion on how it could have been handled or whether or not you thought he was/was not being cooperative. I'm asking about the law.

    Was he breaking the law by carrying his firearm?
    Was he breaking the law when he did not produce identification?
    Was he breaking the law when he did not answer probing questions?
    Was he breaking the law when he asked why he was being stopped?

    Whether or not you agree with his methods, I don't believe he broke any laws in this state/county/city otherwise he would probably have been ticketed or arrested.

    I'm really not attempting to take sides here, I'm just curious as to what law he broke, or what reasonable suspicion the officer had to stop him. I'm also curious why the officer was allowed to use profanity?

    In my mind this is not only about 2nd amendment issues. What information must I legally give when an officer has stopped me for - walking my dog, driving a red van, eating lunch, talking on my cell phone while walking to my car after eating, pushing a cart full of groceries, wearing a specific pair of shoes, having short hair, wearing a specific color shirt or pants?

    Yes I know the list is ridiculous but since legally carrying a firearm is no more illegal than anything on my list, so what gives and what's next?

    Just because someone wears a hooded sweatshirt on a cold day does not necessarily mean the person should be stopped and questioned. Or does it?

    Holdcard
    If You Want To POPULATE Heaven
    You Have To PLUNDER Hell!!

    4th Man Ministries

  16. #105
    Member Array crankinNM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NM
    Posts
    314
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdcard View Post
    After reading this thread let me pose a question. What exactly did the original poster do that was illegal?

    Was he breaking the law when he did not produce identification?

    Holdcard
    The world she is a changing.

    My wife was going to have a margarita at Taco Cabana and they would not serve her because she did not have her ID.......She is 53.

    It did not use to be like that.

Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... 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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Nullification: Twenty-five States With Firearms Freedom Acts
    By mrreynolds in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: April 8th, 2010, 11:58 AM
  2. July 3rd: Hooksett, NH: Open Carry Litter Clean Up
    By doobie in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: July 7th, 2009, 08:45 PM
  3. Acts 2:38
    By First Sgt in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: January 23rd, 2009, 05:51 PM
  4. Comparison between law abiding citizen and criminal
    By celticredneck in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: December 2nd, 2008, 07:31 AM
  5. Article: Criminal Protection Acts (Ohio)
    By fortysomething in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: December 28th, 2005, 06:28 PM

Search tags for this page

hooksett issues
,
wicked guns hooksett nh
,
wicked weapon nh
,
wicked weaponry
,
wicked weaponry hooksett
,

wicked weaponry hooksett nh

,
wicked weaponry in hooksett nh
,
wicked weaponry in nh
,

wicked weaponry nh

,
wicked weapons hooksett nh
,
wicked weapons nh
,
wickedweaponry
Click on a term to search for related topics.