Open carry test

[Jappa52]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Trolling for trouble? He had parked his car and was walking into the bar...

no, no trouble here.  just some liquored up tardlet with a loaded weapon and an itch to prove his rights

Not taking a swing at you chairboy... here in Texas nothing mixes better than ammo and alcohol I don't think we can carry arms into businesses that sell liquor though

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by SirLoin
Any Canadians here that know of your rights when you are walking down the sidewalk?

You never have to talk to a cop in Canada to give them your name, address, or what have you...never.  

A cop can detain you for a short time if they have some objective facts that give them reasonable grounds to expect that you have committed an actual crime.

[x0847Marine]

Originally posted by SteveBailey
I hope I run into you in this situation some day(without the tard friend of course).   Your department will pay my way through the rest of my life.

Does what you say, when you say?  Please, please try that on me, then arrest me.  Good luck on whatever new career you choose afterward.

Heard that, oh, a thousand times.. everyone was going to have me fired.  Heres a small lesson in legal mojo: 148PC below is nice and ambiguous, and very easy to justify. It was up to me, not you, to decide what "delay", "obstruct" or "resist" was.

Most cases are not filed, which was never a big deal to me, for one reason; the police can also easily un arrest you per 849(b)(2)PC . I can throw cuffs on you for my safety under a charge of 148PC, after booking decide to and let you go home per 849(b)(2)PC pending any charges filed by the DA... meaning  a letter with a court date.

The DA will read my report, see that I released you 849(b)(2)PC, and not file any charges recognizing that my actions were intended as a temporary measure... the end. If you filed a complaint, which was common, my POA lawyer was one of the dudes who represented the LAPD officers Vs Rodney King, and would do a fine job representing my interests at no cost to me.

Its a way to get around arresting someone and still put them in jail for a few hours. It adheres to the "spirit of the law" which was intended to allow cops to detain people who didn't follow instructions for safety reasons, but not make a case out of it.

Welcome to the world of dirty tricks, 100% legal I might add.. and one that I used to deal with certain people who wanted to see who could win the urinate for distance contest.

FYI.. another dirty trick is to 849(b)(2)PC an injured suspect right before they get into an ambulance, that makes them, not the city, liable for the $700 ride and $12 aspirin.

148.  (a) (1) Every person who willfully resists, delays, or
obstructs any public officer, peace officer, or an emergency medical
technician, as defined in Division 2.5 (commencing with Section 1797)
of the Health and Safety Code, in the discharge or attempt to
discharge any duty of his or her office or employment...

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html

[SteveBailey]

Originally posted by x0847Marine
and one that I used to deal with certain people who wanted to see who could win the urinate for distance contest.

FYI.. another dirty trick is to 849(b)(2)PC an injured suspect right before they get into an ambulance, that makes them, not the city, liable for the $700 ride and $12 aspirin.

148.  (a) (1) Every person who willfully resists, delays, or
obstructs any public officer, peace officer, or an emergency medical
technician, as defined in Division 2.5 (commencing with Section 1797)
of the Health and Safety Code, in the discharge or attempt to
discharge any duty of his or her office or employment...

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html

Two things here.
 A person who gets in a pi$$ing match w/ a cop for the sake of it is asking for trouble, agreed.  As I've stated, I'm not one of those people, I am as friendly and polite to the officers as they are to me. Only once in my life have I run into a rude cop and she got back just what she gave me. Otherwise, I've yet to run into a cop that wasn't professional and courteous. If I've been lucky, I'll take it.

California laws will never apply to me.  I'd drown if  California was the last piece of dry land on the planet.

Remember, we are talking about a cop who stopped a person who was committing no crime or disturbance, and the cop was not responding to any kind of call. Were you to start issuing me orders under these circumstances, we'd have a problem.

As you've admitted, 148PC, like many DC laws are ambiguous.  It would never apply to me though because I certainly wouldn't interfere w/ your ability to discharge your duty beyond what we have already discussed.  

[lazs2]

xmarine.. are you sure that the laws are the same now as they were twenty years ago when you were forced to leave?

lazs

[john9001]

cities have been sued and had to pay hundreds of thousands and cops have lost their jobs because they followed the "law" instead of common sense.

cops are hired by the people to protect the people, they are not given arrest powers to boost their own ego.

[x0847Marine]

Originally posted by lazs2
xmarine.. are you sure that the laws are the same now as they were twenty years ago when you were forced to leave?

lazs

Uh, nobody forced me to leave, I retired from injuries. But 148, aka 'COC' for contempt of cop, is the same old staple and "catch all" that allows the police to throw cuffs on people for officer safety reasons, 849(b)(1) then allows the police to let them go without making a case out of it. Which is why I personally wouldn't hesitate to hook someone up, esp if that person refused to put down something that could be thrown / used as a weapon.

It made things safer for me, my partners and whoever else, which is the whole point. Making BS misd 148 arrests was a waste of time and generally frowned upon, ELA is the land of the righteous felony with guns, gangs and dope on every corner, but some sidewalk lawyers just didn't want to listen to simple instructions and wore cuffs if I felt my safety was in question.

Like dude in the video, I say put down the phone for my safety, he declines, I put cuffs on him... if everything checks out ok dokey, I might choose to book & release, or just let him go. Perhaps you have heard of an "attitude arrest"? being booked / released is an amazing attitude adjustment tool, and some people actually learn from it... next time a cop says put something down for officer safety, they comply.

He'd be welcome to file all the complaints / lawsuits he wanted... but the reality is he's cuffed for his safety as well... he's protected from any officer interpreting his actions as hostile... a nice safe situation where nobody gets hurt, well except for maybe a bruised ego. I'd rather bruise 10 egos a day than get an avoidable shooting or force incident. The police have no idea who this guy is, he could be joe cool citizen, or senior dirt bag.. either way he's almost no danger while cuffed... and because the responsibility & decision was all mine, thats how I did things with no apologies, a 100% success rate and zero (0) successful complaints against.

This isn't a game, people can and do get shot over stupid stuff / poor officer safety, I was one of those better safe than sorry guys who took no crap and bruised plenty of egos when it came to me going EOW on time.

[AWMac]

Just based on the facts above by the Whining Crying Libs and those in New Hampster...

Here in Oklahoma we have "Open Carry". The Law never questions that.  Hell some are Farmers working crops, Shootin Coyotes... Some are working the fields tending Cattle, guess ya'll call them Cowboys.. Garth lives here so I guess that's good.

Many watch the Red and prevent Texans and Mexicans from swimmin across. Our version of HomeLand Security. We started clearing out the HomeLand Depot....Nuthin swims across the Red.

Never has an incident like above happened here in Oklahoma.
We live like decent folk by decent means. Neighbors helpin each other.

Oklahoma is OK!!!



Mac

[MORAY37]

Intersting vid, thank you for posting.  

I'm a little on the fence in this one... how could you not be required to present I.D. to a uniformed, credentialed officer at any time?  And to not have to present certification of right to carry?  Second Ammendment rights aside...that is stupid.  Guy walks down the street with a holstered weapon, on the way into a  bar, and you're going to argue that the cops have no right to even stop him?  

Also, the clown in the video, waving his hands in the second responding officer's face... how he avoided cell time is beyond me.  They were well within the rights of on scene safety to order him to leave or to restrain him.  Running around like the little conspiracy theorist.."my friend is being accosted...he can't go here ha can't... blah blah blah."  The cops were obviously in very low response mode... as someone else pointed out, they even had their backs to him.  Accosted is physically restraining him...which they never did.  (it was funny that one cop started laughing when he was yelling about his friend being accosted)

All in all it was interesting, but obviously planned and staged for the response they got.  Nothing happened to the individual, and he treated it well, as did the officers.  I would hope our police are smart enough to take a second look at someone walking down the street with a deadly weapon.  I guess all a criminal has to do in NH is holster it until he gets to where he's planning to commit the crime.

[Chairboy]

Moray, while I agree that the 'friend' was an idiot, there are a couple of misconceptions in your post that should be addressed.

1. There is no requirement to have a permit for carrying a pistol in the open in that state.  So the requirement that you show one makes no sense.

2. The officer asked for his name, and he gave it.  There is no requirement that you carry ID or present it, that's just the way the country works.  The obvious counterpoint to that would be countries like the Soviet Union and Historical Germany where you were required to present your papers on demand.

3. How could it be staged?  He parked his car and was walking to the bar when the officer stopped him.  You appear to be assuming facts not in evidence.

[MORAY37]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Moray, while I agree that the 'friend' was an idiot, there are a couple of misconceptions in your post that should be addressed.

1. There is no requirement to have a permit for carrying a pistol in the open in that state.  So the requirement that you show one makes no sense.

2. The officer asked for his name, and he gave it.  There is no requirement that you carry ID or present it, that's just the way the country works.  The obvious counterpoint to that would be countries like the Soviet Union and Historical Germany where you were required to present your papers on demand.

3. How could it be staged?  He parked his car and was walking to the bar when the officer stopped him.  You appear to be assuming facts not in evidence.

1.  I was unaware of that...I figured that having to require a concealed permit would somehow also apply to carrying a holstered loaded firearm in public.  As stated in a previous law post, that does not apply to walking down the street displaying.  I am unclear on the distinction here.

2.  As for this... and it is a bit on the shade of gray.  You are correct, unless you have been witnessed to a crime, you only have to give name and destination, as well as origination.  The officer is within his right, though,  to ask for and receive ID if he believes the possibility of intent to commit a crime.  (Walking into a bar with a gun... yeah that could be construed to be intent)

3.  Not staged?  LOL.  He's wearing a political T-shirt, he wants his message out.  There is a camera on hand, that just so happens to be there at the exact time it starts.  His buddy acts like a circus clown to get attention.  Cmon.  I get his message, and I don't disagree with it.  But it is completely staged and it was so to get the exact reponse it got.

[Chairboy]

Originally posted by MORAY37
The officer is within his right, though,  to ask for and receive ID if he believes the possibility of intent to commit a crime.  (Walking into a bar with a gun... yeah that could be construed to be intent)

How?  This makes no sense at all.  He has a constitutional right to carry a gun, and as long as he's not going into a school or federal building, the current laws say he's ok.  

Do you assume that a gun is inherently a tool of evil?  If so, I've gotta disagree here.

Originally posted by MORAY37
3.  Not staged?  LOL.  He's wearing a political T-shirt, he wants his message out.  There is a camera on hand, that just so happens to be there at the exact time it starts.  His buddy acts like a circus clown to get attention.  Cmon.  I get his message, and I don't disagree with it.  But it is completely staged and it was so to get the exact reponse it got.

A note, he was wearing that shirt because he was going to meet with his free-stater friends at the bar.  It's a liberty movement, and they were having a get-together.  How would he arrange for A: an officer to be there, and B: for the officer to stop him for something that's not illegal, and C: the rest of the silliness like the other officer trying to hold these guys responsible for the Car Wash sign on the light pole?

C'mon, you're flailing here.

[wrag]

Originally posted by x0847Marine
Wow that was some poor officer safety... the state troop had his gun hand in pocket, then he uses his gun hand to write / use radio, no arms distance, no gun side protection, all while letting an armed individual stand there holding a phone that could have easily been used as a weapon.

Meanwhile the portly dude has both hands in his pockets and is allowing the annoying guy to flail his arms and walk around with out one "watch your back" to his partner. He's in an obvious crossfire with no attempt to control the situation, zero command presence... at one point several cops had their backs to the armed dude... not very sharp.

Personally, either the armed dude sits, puts hands where I can see them and does everything I say when I say, or he goes to jail for delaying / obstructing (Ca PC148). The instant he didn't put the cell phone down, he goes to jail... the police don't have to argue with people into compliance re: officer safety.

Same with Mr annoying, he stays far enough away so as not to interfere, or he goes to jail too... situation over.

(Ca PC148) and laws like it often get ABUSED IMHO by some in Kalifornian Law Enforcement.

And this is a GREAT EXAMPLE of why I departed the State in which I was born.

With TOO many Kalifornia law enforcement personal IMHO takin the above attitude.

YES be safe out there BUT don't walk all over my rights while you do it.

In most parts of Kalifornia open carry is still legal, or was when I left, BUT in several areas be warned and don't even try it!

You'll get FAR different treatment then in the video!

IMHO The P.eople R.epublic of C.alifornia and the P.eople R.epublic of C.hina are starting to have more in common then just initials.

YOU WILL OBEY, OR YOU WILL GO TO JAIL, OR POSSIBLE BE SHOT TO DEATH,  EVEN if the actions by Law Enforcement against you are unconstitutional.

Yes you can go to court over it LATER.  Or your family could if you don't survive.

There is a proverb that comes to my mind so often when I see many peoples response to open carry of firearms..................

goes something like this.........

Only the guilty flee when NONE pursue.........

Easy XMarine, this is not a personal attack Sir. I also see where it is you probably work and I understand your attitude and how you came by it.

Sadly way too much of Kalifornia is becoming like the L.A. region of the State.

You go into some very dangerous situations I'm sure.

Oh and BTW I was watching the portly officer that was standing behind the man on the phone.  Sure looked to me like he KEPT his right hand at the ready?  At least until he and the other Officers came to the conclusion that there actually was NO threat.

IT was GOOD to see Civilians and Law Enforcement being mutually respectful of each other.  I do wonder how that might have gone down without the cameras and phone though................

Also I'm fairly sure that the State in which this occurred either has no law like (Ca PC148) or employs it in a much different manner.

I know here in Nevada open carry is still respected through out MOST of the state.

And IIRC in the Arizona Town of Yuma if you carry openly it BETTER be LOADED or it will be confiscated!!!!!  That is or was the LAW there in 1970-74.

[wrag]

Originally posted by Shuffler
Many folks here do not even read directions to play a game.... you think they would school themselves in law to be able to tell the difference between lawful and illegal. NO! Many would think, hey this aint right, and then follow your directions.

Complying with the Officer is a good idea... unless your a trouble maker.

(something probably overheard Auschwitz)
All of you must be deloused get in the showers now, you will comply..... unless your a trouble maker.  We have ways of.....................

[Chairboy]

As much as I hate nazi/holocaust comparisons, that's a really good point.  Blind obedience of improper authority offers temporary succor at best, but almost certainly leads to long term suffering.

Citizens who value their rights exercise them, even at the occasional cost of being labeled a 'troublemaker'.