Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 157 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I guess that I just can't understand why people get angry when stopped by LEO's because of their weapon. I can understand that it could get irritating getting stopped for no reason, but if you just prove to the officer that you are legal to possess the weapon you're back on your way. Right? I understand people are concerned for their rights, but there has to be a better way to handle these types of situations. What I'm trying to say is why not give the LEO your ID or CCL/CWP? I came across a couple of videos on youtube that the reasons of the videos being made were moronic. In one of the videos some guy decided to strap an AR on his back and walk around town just to see what would happen, and in another video a man was OC'ing and decided it would be a good idea to approach an officer as he was making a traffic stop. Hopefully you guys/gals can explain to me the reasoning behind this type of behavior when confronted by LEO's. Thanks

Here is one of the videos I mentioned above:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,418 Posts
You're going to get flamed into next week any second now...


I'm waiting for one of these kinds of morons to get lit up by an LEO who isn't interested in talking like this one. Also, these guys are completely wrong about the not having to identify oneself, the SCOTUS ruled exactly the opposite a couple of years ago.

On another note, am I the only one who has noticed that 95% of the types who make videos like these on purpose tend to be self righteous white males in the 20s who think they know it all? They seemingly don't care that their actions are causing a totally unnecessary waste of LE resources, they only care about pushing their own personal agenda.

ME! ME! ME! IT'S ALL ABOUT ME!...and they said Gen X was bad...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,955 Posts
Some states such as my own OC requires nothing, no permit, no id, no nothing and OC is a guaranteed right by my states constitution with modern legislation to back it up against would be interfering officials that has some relatively sharp teeth.

So here and in states like mine concerning OC theres absolutely no reason for an officer to stop a person for OC unless they are doing something else illegal. Here and some other states there is no requirement to have an ID or permit at all to OC so theres no reason for an officer to stop a person and ask for something they have no legal requirement to have in the first place.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,171 Posts
When Carrot Top walked into the theater in Aurora with his M&P15 I guess he wasn't doing anything illegal either...until the drilled the first patron. I get tired of all the "how far can I push it" people that never think should I do this or is it retarded?

Overall I'm for open carry being legal, but for those of you who CCW, at what point are you gonna draw and kill the guy that's approaching you with a rifle? It seems with OC there's a mighty fine line between carrying and brandishing. What is the difference between the two?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
I'm with Ghost1958 here. OC is 100% legal here in NC, requires no permit nor registration, and NC is also not a stop and ID state. So if an officer stops you simply for carrying he is in the wrong. I don't care if you view it as, "just keeping everyone safe", it's still an illegal stop & question. The "keeping everyone safe" argument could be used for Chicago and NYC's laws and we clearly see that as quite the fallacy.

It does come down to rights and yes I think anyone who stands up for them is doing the right thing here. How can anyone say "we should stand up for our 2A rights" but then pretty much roll over on the 4A? The BoR are not a la carte, all of them apply and are important to exercise.

Trying to put the blame on law-abiding citizens going about their business while legally armed for the waste of LE resources because that LEO is ignorant of the law is completely ridiculous. If I hassled you needlessly just because I felt like it and blamed you for making me do it you'd call me a passive aggressive a-hole (and rightfully so). Wearing a badge doesn't change that.

My CCH instructor is a police sergeant for a nearby county and specifically mentioned that if any of his officers gave a OC/CCer trouble for merely carrying to report it to him right away so he could set that officer straight. That's the approach that should be had.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,287 Posts
Some states such as my own OC requires nothing, no permit, no id, no nothing and OC is a guaranteed right by my states constitution with modern legislation to back it up against would be interfering officials that has some relatively sharp teeth.

So here and in states like mine concerning OC theres absolutely no reason for an officer to stop a person for OC unless they are doing something that is illegal. Here and some other states there is no requirement to have an ID or permit at all to OC so theres no reason for an officer to stop a person and ask for something they have no legal requirement to have in the first place.
Fixed it for you. OH is the same way except OC in a car in OH is CC by definition.

OP, think about how you would feel if you were stopped and IDed every time you stepped out of your house - just because. If you are doing nothing illegal, why should you have to put up with the hassle?
 
  • Like
Reactions: darbo

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,389 Posts
...please cite the case and ruling that you mention in the first paragraph...
You're going to get flamed into next week any second now...


I'm waiting for one of these kinds of morons to get lit up by an LEO who isn't interested in talking like this one. Also, these guys are completely wrong about the not having to identify oneself, the SCOTUS ruled exactly the opposite a couple of years ago.

On another note, am I the only one who has noticed that 95% of the types who make videos like these on purpose tend to be self righteous white males in the 20s who think they know it all? They seemingly don't care that their actions are causing a totally unnecessary waste of LE resources, they only care about pushing their own personal agenda.

ME! ME! ME! IT'S ALL ABOUT ME!...and they said Gen X was bad...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,171 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
659 Posts
I guess that I just can't understand why people get angry when stopped by LEO's because of their weapon. I can understand that it could get irritating getting stopped for no reason...
I think you pretty much answered it yourself, "getting stopped for no reason". Would you like to get stopped every Sunday as you leave church just to be asked who you are and what you were doing? (4th amendment, another right)

Second Amendment as ratified by the states, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,993 Posts
they only care about pushing their own personal agenda.
..and what agenda would that be? To appear on you tube? Make lots of money?

I maintain that if we do not exercise our rights, the WILL be taken away.
I do not care what their motivation is...it is a RIGHT!

Columnists at major newspapers are allowed to spew hatred, anti government sentiment, personal bias. They too are protected under the 1st amendment which if you take note is also being attacked now by the Obama administration.

This LE officer's techniques are precisely how the jack booted thugs TALK their way past a search warrant, a violation of the 4th amendment.

One does not have to be a constitutional attorney to recognize our rights are being molested at every turn by nearly every method available, legal AND illegal.

We do not live in a "Your paperz pleez" state; though we are approaching that rapidly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: carracer

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
766 Posts
I guess the thing that irks me the most about the whole OC and even CC at times is when you come into contact with cops who really don't know what's going on with the laws themselves. And to be fair some of the time it really boils down to all of the confusion surrounding the interpretations of super broad/vague laws put on the books. Just like right now with the debacle in Arkansas... You already have sides posturing with almost completely different views concerning new laws coming in August. Just cut the crap and spell out what is right and what is not and tweak it from there and make sure the ones enforcing it know whats up.

Even in states like KY where it's perfectly legal to OC i guarantee you a large percentage of the police still don't properly understand this. agree with it or regularly knowingly or unknowingly overstep their boundaries when dealing with OCers and even CCers.

And to a previous poster... Carrot Top was wearing body armor and snuck in through the backdoor like the true coward he is. No way would he be casually OCing or even carrying anything in "public." Why? Because he's a coward that's socially inept and would be too afraid of any confrontation. He's also a criminal and OCing usually doesn't fit a criminals MO too well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
I understand you guys point but I guess my question is why do these people in the videos go out of their way to put themselves right in the LEO way. Fine if your minding your own and the LEO questions you then you can get upset but to go out of your way to prove a point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,389 Posts
...the facts of that case dispute what you post: from the wiki article: Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004), held that statutes requiring suspects to disclose their names during police investigations did not violate the Fourth Amendment if the statute first required reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal involvement. Under the rubric of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), the minimal intrusion on a suspect's privacy, and the legitimate need of law enforcement officers to quickly dispel suspicion that an individual is engaged in criminal activity, justified requiring a suspect to disclose his or her name.
Hiibel .v. Nevada 6th Judicial.

...stopping someone for doing something which is completely legal (open carrying of a firearm) is illegal in itself, if there is NO reason for the Terry stop...no suspicion of the individual's doing something criminal...and NO right to identify unless there's a right to stop him in the first place....
Hiibel clearly explains the fallacy in your opinion...and explains to the OP why cops have no business stopping an armed man where it is legal to be armed in the manner which he is armed...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
292 Posts
Did not watch the entirety of both videos. However, in both cases the carry was preformed to elicit a response. In one at least, the carrier approached the LEO, in that case there was (IMHO) RAS for a demand for ID. At least verbal ID which can be demanded (ie who are you what are you doing) that I have no problem with. The other I have no problem with either. Because in light of recent events the carry of a long arm is somewhat suspicious.
However, we are not a "papers please" nation. That is part of the issue with the immigrant laws being put forth by some states. Unless we are doing something which requires ID, we have no need(legally) to have it. Intelligently we may want it in case of emergency/ accident-medical personnel would like to know who you are if you are incapacitated and unable to respond.
The issue is not those who approach LEO as these do (one case at least) but those who are approached by LEO. Do you want to be stopped for ID when carrying a bible or maybe a copy of the book "1984"? How bout a copy of the Constitution?
These yahoos abrogated some of their rights by approaching LEO (IMHO). But your average OCer does not and this deserves to be left alone.


Posted from the outer reaches of the universe via my Star Fleet communicator! Live long & prosper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,389 Posts
...when law enforcement is violating our rights and the law in their dealings with law-abiding citizens, publicity is our friend...and video and witnesses help prove it...

...nothing motivates an agency to bring their officers into compliance with the law like the City Manager's reaction to the cost involved in a court case...and the writing of a judgement check, if necessary...

...simply this: when a law is on the books, we citizens are expected to know what it says, understand it, and obey it...ignorance is not a justification in most courts for breaking the law...should those entrusted by us with enforcing the law be held to any lower standard than that to which we are held???

...freedom's like a chunk of cheese in a pantry...better stop the mouse who only nibbles a tiny bit daily...or the whole cheese will be gone soon...
I understand you guys point but I guess my question is why do these people in the videos go out of their way to put themselves right in the LEO way. Fine if your minding your own and the LEO questions you then you can get upset but to go out of your way to prove a point.
 
1 - 20 of 157 Posts
Top