Being adamant about not providing info. when asked

[croute]

Good point bikenut. Sorry for the name calling, I think the names I've been called in here are getting to me! Guess I'm beginning to stoop to the levels of others. Can't remember who said it and I'm not willing to take the time to go back and find out, but I agree that battles should be chosen wisely. In the case of a cop stopping me for open carrying, I would just cooperate and get it over with. Fighting for rights in a courtroom is another story.

I'm also concerned with anyone giving "the powers that be" more ammunition to take away more of our rights. I may be wrong and have no stats to back it up, but I believe the majority of citizens don't understand people who carry guns. And, if we cause a situation where we look bad, it just gives them another reason not to side with us, then petition the government to do something about it. I think that's a losing situation for all of us.

 

[NavyLCDR]

And as I already mentioned... this library thing is far from over because this is one that needs to be taken all the way.

And using insulting name calling does not enhance the credibility or validity of your argument.

I'm not quoting the rest of your post for brevity. Same thing happened when Seattle tried to ban firearms in parks and recreations facilities. Their claim was they were not enacting an ordinance....they claimed their Parks and Recreation Department was enacting an administrative rule. There was no penalty for carrying a firearm in a park or recreation facility, but persons caught carrying guns would be asked to leave, and if they didn't, the police would be called to enforce trespassing. The lower court declared their gun ban illegal, null and void, and ordered all "no guns" signs to be removed within 30 days. Seattle appealed to the court of appeals who upheld the ruling. Seattle tried to appeal to the Washington State Supreme Court who refused to hear the appeal because Seattle lacked any substantial claim. They got the smack down because concerned citizens, who also happen to be avid open carry supporters, called the city's bluff.

 

[NavyLCDR]

In which case he may well say "OK, hold on while I run your info through the computer..."

..And walk back a half hour later ordering you out, cuffed and the search proceeds with backup onsite as well.

What if he knew something about you already and just had to get the warrant approved OTAR?

What if, then? See how that works, logically in the other extreme.

Then we do a FOIA request and file a lawsuit in court.

 

[Treo]

Am I the only one that noticed that the OP is conflating not informing with refusing to surrender your permit/driver's license on demand?

Two very different situations

 

[NavyLCDR]

In the case of a cop stopping me for open carrying, I would just cooperate and get it over with. Fighting for rights in a courtroom is another story.

If you waive your rights every time a police officer stops you and voluntarily agree to the encounter with them, how do you ever expect it to get into the courtroom?

 

[Rich_S]

Take the risk. I will not waive my rights for the sake of convenience.

Really? So then you carry a personal firearm every time you enter a military base, correct?

 

[Rich_S]

I'm not quoting the rest of your post for brevity. Same thing happened when Seattled tried to ban firearms in parks and recreations facilities. Their claim was they were not an ordinance....they claimed their Parks and Recreation Department was enacting an administrative rule. There was no penalty for carrying a firearm in a park or recreaton facility, but persons caught carrying guns would be asked to leave, and if they didn't, the police would be called to enforce trespassing. The lower court declared their gun ban illegal, null and void, and ordered all "no guns" signs to be removed within 30 days. Seattle appealed to the court of appeals who upheld the ruling. Seattle tried to appeal to the Washington State Supreme Court who refused to hear the appeal because Seattle lacked any substantial claim. They got the smack down because concerned citizens, who also happen to be avid open carry supporters, called the city's bluff.

So as an avid open carrier do you open carry on military bases? Are you protesting your inability to exercise your rights if you don't?

 

[Deanimator]

If you waive your rights every time a police officer stops you and voluntarily agree to the encounter with them, how do you ever expect it to get into the courtroom?

The fundamental problem you are coming up against in this discussion is trying to explain the concept of the illegitimate use of police authority to people who believe that ANY use of police authority is by definition legitimate, or at least not subject to lawful challenge.

It has certain affinities with the concept of robbery as a "tax", which it is easier to "pay", than to defend oneself against with force.

Bullies have no incentive to stop being bullies when they're able to get precisely what they want by being bullies.

 

[Rich_S]

If you waive your rights every time a police officer stops you and voluntarily agree to the encounter with them, how do you ever expect it to get into the courtroom?

Do you actually think that if you resist the officer will stop hassling people open carrying? This cop is back on the job:

Link Removed

SWAT Officer returns to work 3 months after shooting - Framingham, MA - The MetroWest Daily News

 

[Deanimator]

Really? So then you carry a personal firearm every time you enter a military base, correct?

That's rather a foolish nonsequitur.

You equate failure to CONSENT to UNLAWFUL acts by police with obedience to BLACK LETTER LAW.

You might as well equate refusal to wash a cop's car for him on demand to obeying the speed limit.

 

[Nightmare45]

In Texas when you are pulled over, they know you have a concealed carry permit.

 

[Deanimator]

Do you actually think that if you resist the officer will stop hassling people open carrying? This cop is back on the job:

Link Removed

SWAT Officer returns to work 3 months after shooting - Framingham, MA - The MetroWest Daily News

I GUARANTEE you that police misconduct won't be eliminated by fawning submission to it.

 

[Rich_S]

I GUARANTEE you that police misconduct won't be eliminated by fawning submission to it.

This cop killed someone. He's back on the job....no harm/no foul. What would you think would happen if someone complained about being stopped for open carry? If you guessed ABSOLUTELY NOTHING you, sir, would be correct.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Really? So then you carry a personal firearm every time you enter a military base, correct?

So as an avid open carrier do you open carry on military bases? Are you protesting your inability to exercise your rights if you don't?

Rich_S, here is your problem. You cannot comprehend the difference between volunteering to serve in the US Military and volunteeriing to obey the laws and regulations that exist due to that military service - and refusing to comply with a request of a police officer that they have no legal authority to pursue if I refuse. Two entirely different scenarios and situations. I volunteer to give up my right to bear arms under certain circumstances because I voluntarily choose to as a condition of service in the US Military defending this country that I love. I refuse to waive my 4th amendment rights, which I serve to protect, because someone is attempting to use a badge and uniform to coerce me into doing so.

I find it humorous that you cannot see the difference between the US Military saying, "Here we are. You can be a part of our organization if you choose to not carry a firearm while in uniform or while on base." and a police officer saying, "Identifiy yourself to me and show me your papers because I am asking you to because of this badge and uniform I am wearing and because you are choosing to engange in a legal behavior that you have a right to engage in."

 

[Rich_S]

Rich_S, here is your problem. You cannot comprehend the difference between volunteering to serve in the US Military and volunteeriing to obey the laws and regulations that exist due to that military service - and refusing to comply with a request of a police officer that they have no legal authority to pursue if I refuse. Two entirely different scenarios and situations.

Here is your problem:

You voluntarily allow just about every human right you have to be controlled by others and then you jump down someone's throat because they choose to show an ID or etc. to end a confrontation and not exercise their rights as YOU think they should. That pretty much makes everything you say a joke.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Here is your problem:

You voluntarily allow just about every human right you have to be controlled by others and then you jump down someone's throat because they choose to show an ID or etc. to end a confrontation and not exercise their rights as YOU think they should. That pretty much makes everything you say a joke.

I am not jumping down anyone's throat because of what they choose to do or not do. What I am doing is calling ******** on the reasons they give to others for what they should or should not do.

You shouldn't open carry because it will bring the attention of LEO down on you.
You should show your ID because the LEO is just trying to do his job.
You should show your ID to LEO in the interest of public safety.
You should show your ID to LEO because you will look like an ass to the public if you don't.
You should show your ID to LEO because if you don't you will be a bad representation of those who carry guns.
You should show your ID to LEO out of respect.
You should show your ID to LEO to be courteous.
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH......

 

[Deanimator]

This cop killed someone. He's back on the job....no harm/no foul. What would you think would happen if someone complained about being stopped for open carry? If you guessed ABSOLUTELY NOTHING you, sir, would be correct.

And Harless lost his job.

Clearly a political price must be exacted.

 

[Deanimator]

Here is your problem:

Here's your problem:

You seem positively gleeful at the opportunity to submit to ILLEGITIMATE authority.

The Germans won at Eban Emael, Dunkirk and Sevastopol.
The Japanese won at Nanking, Singapore and Corregidor.

The Allies should have surrendered, right?

 

[BC1]

If you talk long enough they may find something to charge you with. LEO had my wife for 45 minutes outside her car because she parked crooked. He thought she was DUI. He kept asking questions. Wanted permission to search. When we arrived at the scene he said he was suspicious because she was being evasive. She has the right to be evasive. She knew he was looking for something, anything. Smart girl. My best friend is an attorney. He's been pounding this into our heads for decades... keep your mouth shut! Don't volunteer anything not required by law.

 

[Bikenut]

Good point bikenut. Sorry for the name calling, I think the names I've been called in here are getting to me! Guess I'm beginning to stoop to the levels of others. Can't remember who said it and I'm not willing to take the time to go back and find out, but I agree that battles should be chosen wisely. In the case of a cop stopping me for open carrying, I would just cooperate and get it over with. Fighting for rights in a courtroom is another story.

I'm also concerned with anyone giving "the powers that be" more ammunition to take away more of our rights. I may be wrong and have no stats to back it up, but I believe the majority of citizens don't understand people who carry guns. And, if we cause a situation where we look bad, it just gives them another reason not to side with us, then petition the government to do something about it. I think that's a losing situation for all of us.

Let me first apologize to everyone for the length of my response. I surely hope folks will bear with me and read the whole thing... even if it puts them to sleep.. because it contains some very interesting points... and not all of it is a response to just croute's post..

I've said it before and I'll say it again...

I'll not fault anyone for the choices they make concerning what they do in their own lives.

I will take issue when those same folks attempt to make everyone else make the same choices because they don't like any other choices.

You do what you are comfortable with and leave everyone else alone to do what they are comfortable with and guess what? Everybody is happy. Except, of course, those who want to tell everyone else what to do.

Now, about worrying that the ordinary citizen will get all upset about guns if people actually exercise the right to bear arms. Ummm.. work with me here because I'm NOT being a jerk... exactly how will folks get used to seeing guns unless they actually see guns? And how will ordinary folks learn that carrying guns is legal and the cops can't can't intimidate them unless they see people carrying guns and people confronting cops and prevailing? And how will that happen if no one has the courage to confront the cops and prevail?

I'm not knocking your, or anyone's, personal choice to not get into confrontations if that is what you/they want. I don't think I've ever done that. What I am adamantly against is folks trying to require others to abide by those same choices.

Personal example...

My wife open carries sometimes, when she feels confident she won't get into a confrontation because she doesn't do confrontations very well, but she knows that if a confrontation happens I thrive on confrontations... and I'm always very polite, I have a large knowledge base of Michigan law, I'm well aware of just how far a cop (or a fellow citizen) can push the issue before they themselves violate the law, and I won't take any illegal crap from anyone... citizen or cop. Now that may sound like keyboard ninja stuff.. and neither you, nor anyone, knows me personally so what I say should be taken with a grain of salt... but I can say that several municipalities in my area have changed their illegal ordinances because I attended the meetings (open carrying to boot) and politely but firmly.. and determinedly... demanded they be changed. And I'm just one of many open carry "activists" who have done the same and much much more here in Michigan.

But if none of us had stepped forward and attended meetings open carrying, went to places where the cops don't like open carry, brought lawsuits against police that overstepped their authority....... but instead listened to folks who said that open carry would "scare" people, or because we were afraid that ordinary folks wouldn't understand... that voters would demand even stricter gun control... and that we would make the right to bear arms look bad....

Not one damn positive thing would have happened here in Michigan.

The thing is... we tried things the "Let's just hide our guns and maybe no one will notice. That way we don't "P" iss anyone off and we can just kinda slide by." tactic where people hid their guns and just wrote letters to Congress critters who's staff used them for toilet paper.. or the Congress critter him/herself used as jokes at some dinner party ... for quite a few decades. And... someone please tell me which was more effective at generating positive change... hiding guns and writing letters... or getting out there "in your face" using recordings on youtube (and in court) to show the cops were in the wrong.. plus bringing suit against police who abused their authority.

I'll not hold my breath waiting for an answer to that because I have seen firsthand that in Michigan it was the open carriers who dared stand up that caused things to change.. and gigantic leaps forward happened in just the last 3 to 4 years .. to the point where being hassled for open carry in Michigan has changed from a guaranteed event to something that doesn't happen very often. And the general population has become aware (thank you anti gun media for trying to cash in on the sensationalism of it all and inadvertently informing the whole State that open carry, without a permit, is legal!) that open carry is legal and no big deal.

As an aside... I need for folks to understand that I am not anti cop. Quite the contrary since a couple of officers came to my aid on their own time! when I was going through a difficult time with a very violent felon. So I am NOT anti cop... but I AM anti criminal even if the criminal is wearing the uniform of a .. cop.

Good cops don't do the crap that ends up in court or on youtube.. think about that for a while...

Thank you all for staying with me to the end of this post.