Anti-Gun Groups Despicable Plan to Get You Killed If You Open-Carry in Public

[opsspec1991]

Anti-Gun Groups Despicable Plan to Get You Killed If You Open-Carry in Public

By Steve Straub

Facebook and Twitter followers of the anti-gun organizations Moms Demand Action and the Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence are encouraging one another to call the police whenever they see someone carrying a gun in public.

Read More:
Anti-Gun Groups Plan to Get You Killed If You Open-Carry | The Federalist Papers

 

[Peggy Reist]

They saw how well it worked at Walmart with the guy holding the toy gun. They're going to go with the proven tactic. There is no doubt among people here that they'll stop at nothing and nothing is too low to stoop to.

 

[Nightmare45]

False police report is illegal, go for it.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

Link Removed
And don't think, for a single second, that the antis aren't willing and able to do it!

 

[schadenfreude]

False police report is illegal, go for it.

This.

I have experienced similar treatment at the behest of a ''well-meaning Federal air marshal" who resides in a nearby neighborhood and whose house I do pass on occasion while walking with my children. While it was disconcerting to have the local constabulary converge on me 'en masse' as I walked with my children, once they became aware of the fact that open carry is a right constitutionally enumerated in my state's constitution, seeing their embarrassment was rewarding as I laughingly offered them a copy of the state constitution. Seems that even the local PD is woefully unaware of the very constitution that they've sworn to uphold and defend.

That whole incident illustrates the liberal mindset in action. Any gun, even when carried in innocuous circumstances, is a bad gun and they are all bad guns.

Of course, then we have those who ostensibly support the 2A yet balk reflexively at OC simply because they see it as some sort of a 'social offense' to openly carry a gun in public even though it is legal.

 

[billt]

You can file this one in the same folder with the disgruntled, soon to be ex wife who accuses her estranged husband of child molestation. Law enforcement doesn't take kindly to these type of antics. Especially when the motivation is purely political. Cops aren't stupid, and they will react with a vengeance when they find out they are being made into political pawns. Cops have better things to do. These anti gun groups are getting pretty desperate. Even Michael Bloomberg's millions aren't getting the results he had hoped for. You can only entertain a bold faced lie for so long before the people get fed up and stop paying attention.

.



The tipping point for these desperate idiots was after Newtown. They failed to even get increased background checks passed. Why? BECAUSE THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE DON'T WANT THEM. It really is that simple. Even for their dimwitted brains to decipher. Their lies have been proven, and people know it. Even people who have zero interest in guns. Remember Sarah Brady's nonsense that..... "75% of American people want stricter gun control!" All B.S. The dimmest bulb in the room knows with a 75% majority you could put hookers and heroin in public schools. Who's going to stop you, the remaining 25%. With all of the current problems we currently face in this world, these people are running on minute 14 of their 15 minutes of fame...... And they know it. Their silly, foolish desperation proves it.

 

[JAORE]

Think it worthwhile to inform your local LEO if open carry is legal in your area? Would they take it as an insult or could they spread the word to dispatchers and beat cops?

 

[HootenArmory]

Think it worthwhile to inform your local LEO if open carry is legal in your area? Would they take it as an insult or could they spread the word to dispatchers and beat cops?

They would take it as an insult. Either they are competent and know the law, or they are incompetent and they certianly won't appreciate the average joe calling in to point that out. If open carry becomes legal in your area, I'm sure it will be big enough news that LEOs will be informed.

If a call comes in, they have a duty as sworn police officers to respond, no matter how silly the complaint. If you are approached by a peace officer, be respectful, don't be a know-it-all. The peace officer has the right to disarm you for anything HE THINKS is a valid safety concern. Do what he says and if you are improperly cited, get a lawyer and fight it. Do not make a scene as that only goes to bolster the anti-gunner's argument that all gun carriers are "nuts".

 

[Arc Angel]

Anybody, besides me, notice something (What shall I say?) 'unusual' about this woman? :sarcastic:

Link Removed

 

[mspt_99]

Anybody, besides me, notice something (What shall I say?) 'unusual' about this woman? :sarcastic:

Link Removed

She has big guns. She must work out unlike most Americans?

 

[CharlesMorrison]

They would take it as an insult. Either they are competent and know the law, or they are incompetent and they certianly won't appreciate the average joe calling in to point that out. If open carry becomes legal in your area, I'm sure it will be big enough news that LEOs will be informed.

If a call comes in, they have a duty as sworn police officers to respond, no matter how silly the complaint. If you are approached by a peace officer, be respectful, don't be a know-it-all. The peace officer has the right to disarm you for anything HE THINKS is a valid safety concern. Do what he says and if you are improperly cited, get a lawyer and fight it. Do not make a scene as that only goes to bolster the anti-gunner's argument that all gun carriers are "nuts".

Link Removed

Dipstick...

 

[billt]

In Arizona any cop would have to be brain dead to think open carry was illegal. They've been doing it here since the 1800's.

 

[BluesStringer]

....

If a call comes in, they have a duty as sworn police officers to respond, no matter how silly the complaint.

Maybe in Texas, but not in Alabama. That isn't meant to imply that some cops wouldn't contact an OC'er no matter how silly a complaint is, but neither the 911 and/or non-emergency operators nor the street cop is under any obligation to contact an OC'er sans any report or observation of an actual crime or requisite suspicious activity being committed.

If you are approached by a peace officer, be respectful, don't be a know-it-all.

I give what I get. If the cop respects my rights (which is already a stretch in the scenario you're describing), then I'll be respectful in return. If the cop says something and it's obvious he doesn't know what he's talking about, then I'll correct him, especially if what he doesn't know is what the law says or doesn't say about OC. I can quote chapter and verse of the code concerning carrying weapons, and the first cite I'd offer him/her is §13A-11-7 - (a) A person commits the crime of disorderly conduct if, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he or she does any of the following:

[(1) thru (6) and (b) snipped for brevity's sake]

(c) It shall be a rebuttable presumption that the mere carrying of a visible pistol, holstered or secured, in a public place, in and of itself, is not a violation of this section.

I feel it is the duty of any law-abiding citizen (LAC) to inform anyone, cop or otherwise, when they're getting ready to either break the law or violate my rights. Certainly doesn't mean I'll resist them if they go ahead after being informed, but common courtesy dictates that they be made aware before they earn the distinction within their agency of costing the people (taxpayers) in their jurisdiction however many thousands of dollars it's going to cost them for harassing a LAC in violation of (c) above, because I can just about guarantee, it will cost them.

The peace officer has the right to disarm you for anything HE THINKS is a valid safety concern.

Cops have authorities, not rights, when it comes to doing their jobs. While it may be true that he has the legal authority to disarm a citizen for any outhouse excuse he can conjure up to justify his actions, he can also cost his agency/city/county and sometimes state government thousands of dollars if he disarms someone improperly according to the law.

Do what he says and if you are improperly cited, get a lawyer and fight it. Do not make a scene as that only goes to bolster the anti-gunner's argument that all gun carriers are "nuts".

Umm....thanks for the advice, but no thanks. Not advocating "making a scene," but I'll be damned if I will cower to their "authority" to break the law without at least verbal protest if they're violating my rights. The lawyer is already "got" and he knows me well enough to know the likely reason that my phone number will come up on his caller ID if and when it does. He'll probably get to the PD or Sheriff's Office before the arresting officers have completed the inventory of my stuff, and if the only thing that "justified" the contact between me and the cops was that I was OC'ing, I'll not only sleep in my own bed that night, but I'll leave with my weapon and my spare mags too.

I'm sure you mean well, and that you believe you're giving good advice to people who may not know the laws where they live, but I believe that the majority of members on this site are not newbies to either gun laws in general, or concealed/open carry laws specifically. There is no reason on Earth why someone who has broken no laws should quietly and without protest submit to a cops' illegal harassment, so I cannot agree that your advice is good, as well-intentioned as it may be.

Blues

 

[HootenArmory]

It sounds like you have decided to make a stand on prinicipal and that's fine. Freedom needs people willing to do that. I offered my opinion based on my training and experience. My approach has always resulted in mutually agreeable interactions with law enforcement. We have our discussion, I get my gun back and we both part ways. Maybe I am slightly inconvenienced, but with no other reprecussions. It sounds like your approach has resulted in multiple instances of handcufs and a requirement to keep a lawyer that knows you personally on retainer. I have never seen an instance where an individual decides to argue the finer points of the law with a peace officer on the street go in thier favor, even when they are 100% in the right. Your results may vary.

I don't have the time or money to deal with that kind of non-sense. I'm glad you do.

By the way, the title of the origional article was "Anti-Gun Groups Dispicable Plan to Get You Killed if You Open Carry". Your chances of getting killed go down drastically if you appreciate the stress level of the officer and respect his authority. He does not know that you are one of the good guys until you have a discussion. If he thinks there is a risk, he won't have that discussion while you're armed.

Again, I'm not saying your wrong, just offering my opinion.

 

[NavyLCDR]

I have never seen an instance where an individual decides to argue the finer points of the law with a peace officer on the street go in thier favor, even when they are 100% in the right. Your results may vary.

Link Removed

John and his wife have new motorcycles, compliments of the city, due specifically to the fact that he argued the finer points of the law with a police (not peace, we have very few peace officers left in this country) officer on the street (well, in the park, is that close enough?)

The biggest problem with the "just submit" advice when unlawfully detained by a police officer is that "just submitting" causes the burden of proof to shift to you in a court of law that you were actually detained and the encounter was not voluntary (there can be no violation of rights if the subject voluntarily waives their rights). Ask up front if you are free to leave. If the officer says "No", then ask, "So you are detaining me?" Now the fact that you are being detained, without your consent, is established and the burden of proof shifts to the officer that they had a legal reason to detain you.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

It sounds like you have decided to make a stand on prinicipal and that's fine. Freedom needs people willing to do that.

Glad to know that your OK with others fighting for your Rights!

I don't have the time or money to deal with that kind of non-sense.

I know, I know...
Standing up for what is right is just too dang hard! Let others do that! You go rest your head now...

Your chances of getting killed go down drastically if you appreciate the stress level of the officer and respect his authority.
just offering my opinion.

...and we all know how valuable THAT opinion is worth....!

I don't give a rats arse about some toolbag cop and his (or her) need for Respect.

My father taught me that respect is earned, never given freely.
You want my respect, as a cop or anyone else, friggin EARN IT like everyone else has to...

 

[guitarcam87]

Not to jump in uninvited or anything on this topic but....I agree with both of your arguments regarding how to react to a LEO encounter. The videos that circulate of people trying to make LEO look like idiots are doing more harm than good. Fueling anti gun fires. At the same time it is the responsibility of a citizen to know and exercise his rights.

Here are my thoughts...

If an officer asks to see my permit and asks why I feel the need to OC I intend to respectfully oblige. Not because "respect is earned" but because I'm a respectful person. If I'm a good guy then why give off the disrespectful arrogance of the bad guys?

LEO'S are doing their job just like I do mine every day. If I don't want the hassle I'll CC. I know that when I strap on my weapon in plain sight that there is a possibility that I will have to defend my reason for doing so.

Point is...there is no reason to make a scene when it is simply not necessary. I have nothing to hide in regards to my intent to carry. If anything, I want the cops on my side if the day ever comes that I have to discharge my weapon in defense. Might not bode well in court when an officer who has encountered me in the past reports that I was a d*ck during a routine check...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using USA Carry mobile app

 

[Bikenut]

I apologize for the length of my post.....

My comments are offered in the spirit of giving food for thought....

Not to jump in uninvited or anything on this topic but....I agree with both of your arguments regarding how to react to a LEO encounter. The videos that circulate of people trying to make LEO look like idiots are doing more harm than good. Fueling anti gun fires. At the same time it is the responsibility of a citizen to know and exercise his rights.

It is the citizen exercising his rights when he refuses to allow a cop to violate those rights. Just because the guy is wearing a cop's uniform doesn't give him the authority to violate people's rights. And.. if no citizens step up (often by just complying out of the desire to not suffer the inconvenience/expense of fighting to support rights) and resist those violations then those violations will not only continue but get worse simply because .... no one stood up.

As far as videos fueling anti gun fires those videos often show the cops violating the law while the OCers', who might be less than polite to the police who are being less than polite to the OCers, violated absolutely no laws. And I'd like to point out that it was folks in Michigan who stood up OCing filing law suits against the police (that were won) because of confrontations. All this caused huge media coverage resulting in educating the general population that open carry was not only legal but no permit was needed. In fact OC caused the Michigan State Police to issue

http://michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._86_2_336854_7.pdf

explaining the legality of open carry to police depts. all over the State. Now THAT is a major positive caused by what some would call behavior that "fuels anti gun fires".

And there is more.... a case involving a library in Lansing Mich. went to the Mich. Supreme Court that upheld a previous Appeals Court decision that only the State legislature can make gun laws. And that happened because a young man legally exercised his right to bear arms by openly carried a shotgun into a library. Without that "fuels anti gun fires" behavior Michigan would not have that very important decision.

Link to timeline for that decision: CADL v MOC - Chronological History | Michigan Open Carry, Inc.

Here are my thoughts...

If an officer asks to see my permit and asks why I feel the need to OC I intend to respectfully oblige. Not because "respect is earned" but because I'm a respectful person. If I'm a good guy then why give off the disrespectful arrogance of the bad guys?

In some States it is law to produce a carry permit when asked by the police. But here is a question.... if you are a good guy then why is the cop treating you like a bad guy by wanting you to prove you are a good guy just because you are legally exercising the right to bear arms openly? Now carefully consider the following question...... If you have nothing to hide then why is the cop looking for something hidden expecting you to prove you aren't hiding something?

LEO'S are doing their job just like I do mine every day. If I don't want the hassle I'll CC. I know that when I strap on my weapon in plain sight that there is a possibility that I will have to defend my reason for doing so.

Please consider this... many men and women died on battlefields since the 1700's so you would have the freedom to take the easy way out and CC in order to avoid standing up for what they died for in exchange for the convenience of not having to deal with some "hassle". I'm not saying you are wrong for wanting to avoid that hassle... I'm pointing out that others stood up and took the ultimate "hassle" in hopes you will think about that.

Point is...there is no reason to make a scene when it is simply not necessary. I have nothing to hide in regards to my intent to carry. If anything, I want the cops on my side if the day ever comes that I have to discharge my weapon in defense. Might not bode well in court when an officer who has encountered me in the past reports that I was a d*ck during a routine check...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using USA Carry mobile app

Some folks consider standing up for rights absolutely necessary and more than reason enough to "make a scene"... and those videos seen on utube wouldn't be there if the cops had not hassled the OCer(s) in the first place so let's put the onus for the encounter going bad where it belongs... on the cops who went looking for something, anything, to jack the OCer(s) up on. Doesn't matter if you, I, or the cops, think the method of carry, or the gun that is being carried, is not acceptable... what matters is whether or not it is legal. And if it is then there is no reason for the cops to do anything other than to observe that there are no laws being broken and leave people alone instead of wanting to see their papers or trying to intimidate them.

And think about this... the cops show up AFTER you have either won or lost the battle with the bad guy. And it won't make any difference how nice you have been to them in the past or how many doughnuts you paid for.. they will stick to procedure anyway.

I used to be like you my friend... I used to look to the cops for protection. I've paid for many a cop's meal (and will in the future since I'm not anti cop and have respect for good cops while despising cops who think they are above common folk) but I am realistic in what the relationship between cop and ordinary people is... and it isn't that cops are knights in shining armor riding to the rescue of victims (most will if they can but that ISN'T their function) but a cop's job is to be suspicious of everyone hoping to find something hidden so they can arrest someone. Investigating crimes and arresting people is their function but that happens AFTER the crime has occurred ... which means a cop's function isn't to protect anyone.

In fact, the Federal Supreme Court has ruled that the police DO NOT have a duty to protect anyone:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=0

My point is that just because someone thinks the actions of others are over the top, in your face, or could "fuel anti gun fires", doesn't mean it isn't necessary to cause a scene with over the top and in your face actions that actually end up quenching those anti gun fires simply because hiding from the fight for fear of losing not only doesn't win the fight .... but also doesn't do anything at all to put out those anti gun fires that are constantly burning anyway.

Rights... use 'em or lose 'em.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Asking me why I am wearing a gun in a holster on my belt is no different than asking my why I am wearing a watch on my wrist - 1. The answer should be obvious. 2. It's none of the officer's business.

 

[BluesStringer]

It sounds like your approach has resulted in multiple instances of handcufs and a requirement to keep a lawyer that knows you personally on retainer.

Yeah, but you're not saying I'm wrong, right?

Whatever, I've never been contacted, cuffed or had an occasion to call my attorney over a cop being stupid enough to harass me for no good reason. I simply stay prepared for it because the instances of stupid cops doing that to LACs can be seen in multiple iterations every single day if one cares to scour the news and/or papers and/or websites and/or YouTube coverage of it.

I keep an attorney on retainer because I carry a gun. I carry a gun because I think there's a possibility that I may have to use it one day to save either mine or my wife's lives. Using it will almost assuredly give me cause to call that attorney, whether just for advice over the phone, or to come to a cop-shop to extricate me from their attempts to get me to admit to some wrong-doing that I will never willingly or knowingly engage in. I also keep insurance on my vehicles and my home(s), and my agent knows my name and personal situation well enough to respond to my need to call her, just as my attorney does. I interviewed them both in an attempt to preclude any misunderstandings about why I was retaining their services. That's how they know me. Is there something odd or objectionable about employing as much foresight as one can muster when it comes to potential legal troubles that can arise from being a driver, property owner or carrying a gun?

I have never seen an instance where an individual decides to argue the finer points of the law with a peace officer on the street go in thier favor, even when they are 100% in the right. Your results may vary.

There's nothing "finer point" about citing and/or quoting the actual code section that a cop is in the act of violating, if/when one does so with me. Like I said earlier, I believe it's just common courtesy to warn an adversary that they're getting ready to make a costly mistake. Beyond that warning though, combined with the accurate and verbatim citation of the law, I'm not going to argue with them at all. In fact, I'm going to be as quiet as a church mouse and not say a freakin' word, something you might try before jumping in to make an ass out of yourself towards someone who didn't say a single contentious word to you.

I don't have the time or money to deal with that kind of non-sense. I'm glad you do.

The fact that you think exercising and/or standing up for my rights and/or having an attorney on retainer for that express purpose is "nonsense" says a lot more about you than it does about me.

By the way, the title of the origional article was "Anti-Gun Groups Dispicable Plan to Get You Killed if You Open Carry". Your chances of getting killed go down drastically if you appreciate the stress level of the officer and respect his authority.

Unless and until I do something against the law, he/she has no *legitimate* authority over me, and therefore, any that he/she attempts to exert is wholly unworthy of my respect.

He does not know that you are one of the good guys until you have a discussion.

And if he/she contacts me on the basis of my OC weapon, sans any report or observation of me having actually done something wrong, then he/she has proven that he/she isn't one of the "good" cops, and again, is wholly unworthy of my respect.

If he thinks there is a risk, he won't have that discussion while you're armed.

Maybe not, but all I said is that if that's the road he chooses to go down, it's going to cost him/his agency/the taxpayers. I'm 60 years old. I have no interest in being beaten up or shot. I won't resist, but I won't comply without verbal protest/warnings that he/she is acting outside of his/her authority. And the whole thing will be at least audio-recorded, if not video too, so no lying assertion that our "conversation" or interaction was voluntary on my part will stand scrutiny in court when I go to get my few thousand dollars for the indignity of being harassed by my servants.

Again, I'm not saying your wrong, just offering my opinion.

Blues