Cops Attempt to Detain a guy with a gun, Supervisor comes in ..Can i have my gun back Sir ? .. Yup !

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by WhatAreThey

Giving credit to a cop for NOT lying. That's great.

So you don't give credit for someone doing the right thing?

I don't give credit to people for NOT going to jail, or NOT lying, or NOT committing murder, or NOT beating their wives. You aren't SUPPOSED to do any of that and you certainly aren't going out of your way by not doing it. You don't go tell everyone you see on the street, "Hey good job! You didn't rape anybody today!" do you?

God forbid someone actually treat a cop like a person. They are, you know. Sometimes they are bad persons, but they are persons.

God forbid a cop assume someone is innocent until proven guilty.

If the cop was using physical force illegally, that would be a different story. If the cop was attempting to rape someone, that would be a different story. But in any case, are you able to take down a cop who is armed, trained, experienced, and has backup? The incident is going before a judge at some point anyway, and I would think it wiser to give the cop your name and, if you feel you have a case, go to a lawyer once you are finished.

A wise man picks his fights. A fool looks for fights.

"The incident is going before a judge at some point anyway" How do you figure that? What's with all of the cold cases, unsolved crimes, unsolved homicides etc...? Did all these people just not protect themselves because they had your attitude that good prevails and that every crime ends up before a judge "at some point anyway"?

Did you know that the Indiana governor just recently signed a bill into law giving private citizens the right to use deadly force against police officers by putting them in the same legal standing as private citizens when performing crimes?
Yes, and I support that. But do you equate asking for ID without suspicion on a par with breaking into a house and raping someone?

Yes, they are both illegal in this case. They equate perfectly well in that regard. One action is not less-than or more-than illegal than the other. Sure, one crime may have a harsher punishment than the other, but they are certainly both illegal.

Calling the cops to investigate an innocent person who is exercising his rights to open-carry is along the same lanes of someone calling the cops on an innocent black man just because they are scared of black people. It's wrong on many levels
Agreed!

But you appear to think the guy should have shot the cop for asking for his ID! What exactly did you want the cop to do? Ignore the call? Quit his job? Cry and beg for forgiveness? Arrest himself? What?

The very fact that once his supervisor arrived and took the responsibility of the decision he was happy to comply says he was not doing this to harass... he was doing his job!

The Nazi's were just doing their jobs too. A Hit man who kills someone is just doing his job. An organized crime henchmen is just doing his job. Pay someone to rob a bank - just doing his job! They are all illegal, but because they are JOBS, you somehow find the illegal actions valid?

His job is to investigate legal activity? What kind of job is that?

He has no more of a right to ask for that man's ID in that situation than I do to demand your ID when I see you on the street. Legal precedence protects the man from being investigated for any type of suspicious based solely on him carrying openly - something the "cop" was ignorant of. The cop was doing something, but it wasn't his job (upholding the law), as the law disagrees with everything the cop was doing especially since the cop admitted that he stopped the man solely because he was carrying a weapon openly. Translation: I stopped to detain you and question you for your legal activity because I can make up stuff, and lie because the RedNeck agrees with me.

The cop wasn't doing his job to uphold the law. He was doing quite the opposite: Dismissing the law.

The guy with the camera, the guy you are praising, was making that job harder on purpose. We have a word for people like that around here, which I will not repeat in polite company.

Again, what job? A "pedestrian check"? A "paper's please" check? Everything he was doing was illegal. He was illegally detaining the man. Illegally requested his ID. Illegally seized his personal property. The cop didn't know what he was doing. He wasn't performing his job correctly unless his job is to illegally harass people.

The Cop was the one making his own job harder, by NOT KNOWING HOW TO DO IT PROPERLY. He was obliviously getting On-the-job training from a citizen who knows the law better than the enforcer knows the law.

Originally posted by Germanicus
Only in America.

What a scary place. Thank god I live in a country where it is illegal to carry a weapon.

Only in America! What a wonderful place! Thank god I live in a country where it is legal to carry a weapon!

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Originally posted by WhatAreThey
Are you judging the validity of individual rights which are guaranteed by our constitution just because not a lot of people exercise them? As an American, that is a piss-poor attitude to have.

Why do you all keep thinking I'm not for the guys rights? For one thing I have never seen a single open carry in Portland, I have not seen anyone open carry outside of a purpose like hunting/fishing or going to a range since forever...

A guy walking down the street with an open gun will draw attention, I'm sure that was his purpose. The rest of us that do carry we do it concealed so as not to draw attention and to keep the carry for the main purpose of protection. It would be hard to convince me he had the same goal, so then what was his goal?

I guess one could say he was hunting, hunting for a legal fight and it turned out that the cops handled it well even though the gun guy was over bearing and extremely uncooperative which leads me to believe it was all planned to be filmed. I'm for the guys rights all the way I just disagree with his true motives.

So then you propose that attention-drawing trumps personal rights and case law, and you also propose that exercising your rights on purpose puts you in a position to be illegally detained?

Or is it just that you believe that individual rights which scare other people nullify those rights?

I wonder if cops who stop, detain or otherwise harass people committing no crime are acting on ignorance or hubris.

It has to be one of the two. Either the cop honestly doesnt know any better or the cop figures he knows better so he takes it upon himself to interrupt your day.

I suppose in the end it really doesnt matter which motivates the act because both motivations are or at least should be cause for immediate retraining.

To the folks who suggest the carrier may have a chip on his shoulder or may be out fishing for a lawsuit or may even just be a "bitter clinger" out to prove a point. So what? None of those things would be issues if the cops saved their actions for real crimes rather than working to move the "pre-crime" line further and further back by making criminals out of us all.

Be a belligerent claimant. It's the only way to assert your rights. It may turn other people off. Might make you look like an asshole. But think of the alternative. You want to be an asshole with rights or do you want to be a doormat always asking permission?

All states should allow open carry. It is up to the citizens of the individual states to decide if they want it, though. It is also the responsibility of the individual citizens who use that right to know the specific gun laws in the state or county/parish. For example, many places have laws that restrict firearms within so many feet of schools and government buildings. That might make open carry difficult in a city or suburban area. It is much easier in more spread out and rural areas.
In Louisiana, open carry is the law but doing so will get you hassled in any of the metro areas (New Orleans/Baton Rouge), but those are the places where they should allow it more. As it stands there are plenty of illegally concealed weapons used for criminal activity in those areas. They need more law abiding people carrying weapons.

That said, this guy was out trying to cause a problem to make a point. The cop wasn't acting irrationally at all.

This is not Newyork where the cops would smack the guy down in the ground in seconds it probably happened in Texas or Lousiana lol

The cop car says Portland, so it appears to be Oregon and the accents are def not TX/LA. And in TX or LA, the exchange would have been more like:
"Fred, if you're drunk again, you better put the gun away, go home, and sleep it off. What time are we goin' fishin tomorrow?"

Originally posted by Ryanssuperman
I think its ridiculous to allow a man to walk down the street with a firearm and not be able to request ID or a permit (assuming a permit is required).

I'm all of civilian rights, however, in Canada, the police are allowed to request identification regardless of if they suspect you of a crime. I think this is a safe practice ... and doesn't infringe on our rights.

The guy recording could have been a multitude of things ... criminal, escaped convict, not allowed to carry firearms ect. To be able to get away without identifying this individual is crazy.

And you support Ron Paul? you do realize Ron Paul would be on the gun carrier's side right?

I swear people have been beat down by our government so much they feel we have to ask permission to simply walk down the street with a side arm.
In Arizona they would need a separate police force just to stop people walking with sidearms, Everyone does it!

Originally posted by Germanicus
Only in America.

What a scary place. Thank god I live in a country where it is illegal to carry a weapon.

Yes, that way only the CRIMINALS can carry them.

Good idea.

/sarcasm.

The guy in this video was exercising his right to carry a gun...And he did so with foreknowledge
that he would probably be harassed.

The operative word here is EXERCISE....

Think of "rights" as muscles....if you don't exercise your muscles, you will lose them.

Whether you agree, or disagree, that it is a good idea for US citizens to walk around bearing
firearms in states that allow open-carry----it is legal, and you can move to a state with stricter laws
where you will feel safer if you don't like.

People who act the way the man in the video did are often seen as belligerent and self-serving,
but in reality, whether they are belligerent and self-serving or not, they are, by example, maintaining
a vigil against inroads to the constitution.

This is America, where millions of men and women have sacrificed their lives to uphold our
constitution and our freedoms...and whether you like it or not.....this was a patriotic act

The sooner regular people realize that these open-carry and CCW folks are the SHEEPDOGS, we protect the flock by having TEETH. As responsible gun owners we understand that evil exists, and we fear no evil at the same time.

Understand?

Originally posted by Ryanssuperman
I think its ridiculous to allow a man to walk down the street with a firearm and not be able to request ID or a permit (assuming a permit is required).

I'm all of civilian rights, however, in Canada, the police are allowed to request identification regardless of if they suspect you of a crime. I think this is a safe practice ... and doesn't infringe on our rights.

The guy recording could have been a multitude of things ... criminal, escaped convict, not allowed to carry firearms ect. To be able to get away without identifying this individual is crazy.

That really doesn't match the Ron Paul banner in your siggy?

Why should the cops be allowed to randomly stop people and make sure they are legal? By that line of thinking, why not stop everyone and ask if they are a citizen or have a greencard? Why not stop every adult with a kid and make sure they have permission to be with that kid and it isn't a kidnapping? Why not stop every person coming and going into town and make sure they have business in the town?

It is the slippery slope argument I know, but the point is, if the guy wasn't breaking any law, then the cop was out of line for even approaching him in the first place.

I really can't make my mind up about these videos.. one the one hand it's great to see someone reminding police what the law is, but on the other hand, the "defendant" in these videos always comes across as a really pretenious a* with a bad attitude deliberately looking for confrontation

In the OPs video, the cop had an easy way out... "There were reports of a man walking around with a gun", "Do you suspect me of committing a felony?", "Yes, I suspect you are carry an illegal firearm and need you to verify this is not the case. To do that I need to see your firearm license. If you don't/refuse to provide proof that your firearm is legally owned then you'll be arrested on possession of an illegal weapon.".

Also what happens when a genuine criminal pulls the same stunt? Cop has no proof of identity and no info to identify the felon so they walk scott free.....

Originally posted by fourthmeal
The sooner regular people realize that these open-carry and CCW folks are the SHEEPDOGS, we protect the flock by having TEETH. As responsible gun owners we understand that evil exists, and we fear no evil at the same time.

Understand?

I see you point and understand the concept, but, how often does one of these people actually prevent a crime against someone else.

I am pro gun ownership, just in case that statement sounds otherwise.

Originally posted by roadgravel
how often does one of these people actually prevent a crime against someone else.

I guarantee that more crimes are prevented everyday by citizens with weapons, than by the nations many "Law enforcement officers"...whose main intention is to keep society intact, not protect individuals.

reply to post by Ben81


Well

We don't arrest people for looking suspicious or scaring us in American unless they have the right skin color.

or wrong......

reply to post by Shark_Feeder

He was innocent. He was not arrested, not taken into custody, not bothered in any way other than light questioning.

A police officer can not convict anyone of a crime. They do not have the power to do so. They can charge you with a crime, arrest you for a crime, detain you for questioning, investigate a crime... but they cannot convict you of a crime. That requires a jury of your peers or a judge. During the course of doing their job, a policeman may proceed as though you are guilty, but they cannot make you guilty.

When you step before a judge, you are surrounded with this assumed cloak of innocence. The charges brought by the plaintiff, the DA in a criminal case, if proven remove that cloak of innocence until you prove the charges are wrong. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff initially, and on you when the plaintiff proves the charge.

Being questioned does not equal being guilty; being detained does not equal being guilty; being arrested does not equal being guilty. Being convicted is equal to being guilty.

May I suggest a good law book?

TheRedneck

reply to post by Ark005


I carry a pistol on me everyday, it is either on my belt where anyone who would take a look and use their brain would be able to determine what it is, or i have one in my pocket. Both are covered but both could be "made" if someone paid a little bit of attention. I also have a video and voice recorder on me in the form of my phone which I would think now and days the majority of people who are carrying do. (I responded to you just to point out if you have a pistol you probably have a "camcorder" on you also)

Anyway, I feel that the cop is in the wrong here. He is the one that initiated force, he stopped this man, took his weapon, and held him without proper reason according to the law. Then tried to get him to turn over his idea which is outside his power when not done in accordance with the law. This is evident by the fact that the supervisor came up and allowed the man to go because he apparently knows the laws.

It is highly concerning to me the number of comments on the original linked site that think this man should have to submit to a search because someone driving along was uneasy with a law abiding citizens appearance and accessories. I guess every goth kid with a chain wallet that I think looks suspicious and worries me that he may beat an old lady to death with that wallet chain should be stopped and forced to turn over ID to make sure he isn't crazy and willing to choke or beat an old lady with that chain. Or god forbid you have your tire iron out on the side of the road changing a tire, is he going to throw that into traffic?

If your concerned about the guy with the gun, then get your own and learn how to use it. Just be safe and responsible.

reply to post by WhatAreThey

I don't give credit to people for NOT going to jail, or NOT lying, or NOT committing murder, or NOT beating their wives.

As I expected. At least you are honest about holding people to unreasonable standards and demanding perfection. I give you credit for that too.

God forbid a cop assume someone is innocent until proven guilty.

By that reasoning, if someone robs a bank at gunpoint while an officer is inside watching, guns down 30 innocent people while the cop watches, the cop can do nothing because he hasn't been proven guilty.

It is not possible for a cop to establish guilt or innocence. Ergo, everyone must be treated as though they are acting lawfully, even if a cop is watching them commit a crime.

Nice world you live in.

What's with all of the cold cases, unsolved crimes, unsolved homicides etc...?

Wow... I think I just slipped into an alternate reality!

If you are arrested by a police officer, the case will go before a judge.

If you are illegally detained by a police officer, the case can go before a judge if you wish.

Talk about getting sidetracked!

Yes, they are both illegal in this case.

OK... I don't know if I can still continue this discussion with you. You really believe there is no difference between asking for ID and breaking/entering/rape?

The Nazi's were just doing their jobs too. A Hit man who kills someone is just doing his job. An organized crime henchmen is just doing his job. Pay someone to rob a bank - just doing his job!

And now you equate a cop to a Nazi war criminal, a mob henchman, and a bank robber.

What universe are you in?

The Cop was the one making his own job harder, by NOT KNOWING HOW TO DO IT PROPERLY. He was obliviously getting On-the-job training from a citizen who knows the law better than the enforcer knows the law.

Ah, I think I get it! You believe:

• Cops are undeserving of any praise no matter what they do.
  
• Cops should not be allowed to arrest people, stop people, or even talk to people.
  
• Cops are evil villains who rob banks and kill people on orders.
  
• Cops should also be attorneys and psychics.

Should they also leap tall buildings in a single bound and stop speeding bullets with their teeth?

Sheesh...

TheRedneck

reply to post by Ryanssuperman


I live in Canada and no it is not ok for a cop to ask for your ID. They are allowed to ask, you are under no obligation to present it.

Do you know not know anything about your rights? Do you know anything about how your ID is a legal fiction of yourself?

Google "Freeman on the land" and "Rob Menard". Learn something!

Are we seriously, in this day and age, still pretending like the police give a # about you and me? Anyone who posts a comment about "respect the police" BS has never been attacked by a cop for no reason but don't worry you will soon. Everyone changes their tune once that happens, too bad you all act so naive before that on some "Cops are here to help" BS. Seriously!? WTF?!

Has nobody seen this video?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by WhatAreThey
So then you propose that attention-drawing trumps personal rights and case law, and you also propose that exercising your rights on purpose puts you in a position to be illegally detained?

Or is it just that you believe that individual rights which scare other people nullify those rights?

Shat happens...enough said...lol read my post about its all grey in practice...