# Not to sure about this?



## Deebo

Hey, everybody on facebook is saying what a great job this officer did, I do recognize that he was respectfull and courteous. What I dont like is that he took the man firearm away for whatever reason.
Now, I dont walk around in open carry fashion, especially with my camera phone, just hoping to record a cops reaction, but, I have the right to. Is it "normal" for the cops to clear a citizens weapon?
I wonder.....


----------



## Beach Kowboy

I am all for open carry. It just seems to me there are a lot of douchebags lately that want to record and post it on Youtube just like this nimwit did. It's like they are egging officers on and daring them to say something. It just brings us regular guys into a poor light if you ask me... The cop seemed cool enough.


----------



## pheniox17

there are wankers in every crowd, and they wonder why anti gun dip shits get such a good argument


----------



## ekim

Screw the cop he was out of line. He had no reason to check his weapon. He was being polite but still went over board, IMO.


----------



## ApexPredator

I dunno I think open carry is by far the best advertizing for the right to bear arms. Just think most people dont bat an eye at the machine that causes more death every year than a whole slew of other things combined (cars) they outclass a gun in destructive power by a large magnitude yet no one questions most idiots right to drive even FELONS or people on DRUGS or MORONS. Its because they are commonplace and a person in inundated by them you see thousands of cars sometimes a day depending on where you live and you trust them to go hurtling by without a second thought. Even if you see one crash into a sidewalk killing people you would instantly know that was fluke and it wasnt the cars fault but the moron behind the wheel. So by open carrying you are forcing the public to accept and become more tolerant of guns I open carried in my home state and will do again if florida ever finishes getting its head outta its ass. Though if it is an isolated incident the impact could have a negative effect.


----------



## Deebo

Oh, I may have been rambling, and missed my own point. I love open carry, I am all for it. I have the right, and I do sometimes open carry. 
I am just wondering about the officer holding the citizens wrist, and removing his weapon.


Any of our fellow board members who are currently police or have been help me out here? I am not looking to bash police, I think he was very polite.


----------



## SARGE7402

Deebo said:


> Oh, I may have been rambling, and missed my own point. I love open carry, I am all for it. I have the right, and I do sometimes open carry.
> I am just wondering about the officer holding the citizens wrist, and removing his weapon.
> 
> Any of our fellow board members who are currently police or have been help me out here? I am not looking to bash police, I think he was very polite.


First I don't think it was open carry. If you listen closely to the officer he asks what he's carrying. Most cops even the dense one's are familiar with the shape of a handgun. Secondly,you don't know why the officer was dispatched there. A lot of times the calls are vague and due to radio reception we only get part of the call. like the night I was dispatched to deal with a murder. All I heard was a location - not where the shooting had occurred, person injured, gunshot, and a street name. Other responding units heard a lot more than I did.


----------



## Maine-Marine

SARGE7402 said:


> First I don't think it was open carry. If you listen closely to the officer he asks what he's carrying. Most cops even the dense one's are familiar with the shape of a handgun. Secondly,you don't know why the officer was dispatched there. A lot of times the calls are vague and due to radio reception we only get part of the call. like the night I was dispatched to deal with a murder. All I heard was a location - not where the shooting had occurred, person injured, gunshot, and a street name. Other responding units heard a lot more than I did.


see the comments on youtube....
It was open carry or the officer would have arrested him...this is California. (he did not have a permit) The officer was dispatched because there were calls of a person with a gun. It is against the law to open carry a LOADED weapon...seeing a weapon, the officer checked that it was not loaded...only way to do that safely...do it yourself.

I would suggest that if you only hear bits and pieces of a radio call..use a phone to clarify...it could cost you or somebody else thier life if you MISUNDERSTAND a call


----------



## Smitty901

He had no right to act as he did. OC is not probable cause for an arrest, there is no difference in an arrest and a stop it your are stop from leaving. Forever that person will have a police record showing he was detained by police on suspicion of a gun crime .
You can not change that or ever get rid of it.
LE needs to focus on real crime it is all around them but they still seems to want to play the PC game.


----------



## SARGE7402

There is a world f difference between a stop and an arrest. Officers make traffic stops every day but not all result in an arrest (ie a summons being issued). The same holds true for criminal matters. Many moons ago, I was stopped for allegedly carrying a weapon - yes I had a permit. The officer was very polite and I asked him what the weapon was that he was looking for. He said the call was for one sticking out from my belt. I removed my kubotan and handed it to him. as and after thought - as I'd showed him my CCW he asked if I was carrying and I said that i was and showed him. and if as MM states open carry with a loaded weapon is a crime the only way to determine that is as he says.

And MM that call was 10 years ago, radios have come a long way, but there are still dead spots for radios, and cell phones. And yes, the murderer went to jail but that's another story


----------



## inceptor

I do not and would not open carry although I am not against it. I prefer the element of surprise.

That being said, it does absolutely nothing for the cause when morons go out to purposely bait the LEO's so they can have a vid to post on you tube. All they really hope to accomplish is to tell the world "look how cool I am".


----------



## slewfoot

ekim said:


> Screw the cop he was out of line. He had no reason to check his weapon. He was being polite but still went over board, IMO.


One the cop never even came close to being out of line. Two never,never, never, take a weapon from someone whether handed to you or you take it no matter if he/she is a best friend or not always check and clear the gun for safety reasons. The dirt bag had no reason to be doing what he was doing in the first place. He was looking to promote a confrontation simple as that.
Btw way I am a big promoter of open carry.


----------



## Smitty901

If you are in a State where OC is legal. Unless your are engaged in active that would others wise make you suspect for violating the law. Any LEO that stops you or questions you simply because you are OCing he is wrong and abusing his authority.
The courts have ruled over and over simply exercising a right to OC is not probable cause. Without PC NO officer has a right to interferer with your movement . Any encounter with LE where you are not permitted to simplify walk away is an arrest.
You can not stop a Black man from walking where you don't think he fits in, why because it is the law. You can not stop an OC just because they are OCing ,why it is the law.
LEO have all kinds of crime in reach they know about but refuse to enforce. They need to work on that and not Someone Ocing with in the law.


----------



## hotpig27

The Cop was awesome and very perceptive. His intuition on the guy from the start to the finish was spot on. He did not spread eagle the guy at gun point like we see so often. He was smart tactically by controlling the gun until he verified that it was unloaded per law and he immediately returned it. He could have kept control and ran the SER #. That would have been more thorough. He secured the scene stopping assist units so that a wolf pack did not develop. He did not screw around with a pistol that he was not familiar with. He asked the gun owner how to clear it. He did not engage in that one upping contest you see other cops do when some one will not ID themselves. Sure the cop made a couple of half hearted attempts to get a name but we do pay them to be nosey.

I love that the cop called the guy out on lying about his agenda. Hint if you are doing something that you know will attract the Police you are one of those guys. If you are doing something and your first thought when you see a Police car is to start recording. You are one of those guys.

Good what looks like a short voluntary contact with a Pro Second Amendment cop.


----------



## Smitty901

The problem still remains if you are not breaking the law if there is no Legal PC a LEO has no right nor business to interfere with you movement or activity. If he does so he is in violation of the law. We no long live in a society that allows us to over look that as we once did .
No meeting with an Officer is by chance none is harmless. It can and will be used as a way to trap you for something you may not have even done. It will be used to farther their Political agenda. LEO do not enforce laws the enforce political agenda.
If the office was pro 2nd he would never have bother him.
He would never try that with a black man in a white area based on a BMW call. Agenda.


----------



## Deebo

I feel that only Smitty and I are on the same page. Yes, the officer was nice.
So, what your saying is, police should just be ok to stop EVERY LAW ABIDING gun toting individual and hinder them, just becouse they are bieng nice.
I have a problem with that.
Soemone stated he could have ran the serial numbers in the firearm. NO- that would be accustomed to pulling up random drivers and running vin numbers. No probabale cause.
I agree with Smitty, every time an officer makes contact with someone, they are out to "fill in a ticket" and make some revenue for the "bosses".


----------



## Deebo

And, I have yet to get my ass to bestbuy, to get my own lapel camera. I do have a tape recorder setting in my backseat right now, and my camera phone, but I GUARANTEE you, most police officers "act different"when they see the camera on them.


----------



## Deebo

Of course my gun is loaded. Is yours officer? I dont usually have "one in the chamber", just becouse of my children.
Do officers ask concieled carry permit holders to "relinquish the firearm" during "routine encounters"?


----------



## ApexPredator

The issue to me is so many people seem ok with this let me spin it a bit for you. Hey let me search your house to make sure your in compliance with the law. URG okay Mr officer. It sounds like unlawful search and seizure to me doesn't it to you and yes while you may have given permission you were still coerced into it unless you desire confrontation with "Enforcement Officers".


----------



## hotpig27

The Officer looked at the weapon for two reasons.
1 Officer safety, I realize some of you guys are unaware that some people actually shoot Police Officers.
2 My understanding is open carry is legal there so long as it is not loaded. Up to the point of verifying that the officer did not know if he was dealing with a infraction.

Also it is not illegal for a cop to talk to people on the street. Assuming #2 is correct PC is established but it does not matter since this looked like a voluntary contact between the baiter and cop.

So long as there is a hodgepodge of gun laws in America we will continue to see this stuff. I doubt any of us will see the day that all 50 states are on the same page.


----------



## ApexPredator

#1 LOL if I can work around known "reformed" taliban fighters with loaded weapons I doubt that cop was in even the slightest bit of danger any sign of provocation nope none no reason to demand to see his weapon. If that cop actually felt threatened he needs more training hes a danger to the community. What he was really doing was looking for an excuse to charge him. 

#2 Verifying that hes was not committing an "infraction" is exactly what I was talking about I thought it was Innocent until proven guilty not guilty until proven innocent hence my concern.

Not a surprising view considering any kind of relationship with "Enforcement Officers"


----------



## hotpig27

See #2 in that place if you want to carry open you have to follow that silly reckless law.

Looking for a reason to arrest? you have a comprehension problem because the cop did nothing in that direction. He did not even do the basics of that like checking to see if the guy had warrants or that the gun was stolen. He did the minimum that he had to do to investigate multiple complaints that were called in. A good pro second amendment cop.


----------



## ApexPredator

Hold on comprehension problem lol ok here it is again in case you had a hard time with it the first time. *"Innocent until proven guilty not guilty until proven innocent hence my concern."* Unless the legal system has changed that means that gun was empty until its proven NOT EMPTY so WHY check to make sure its empty no grounds for a check in that case this is nothing more than harassment of a law abiding citizen. As far as complying with a silly law does the open carry law state that you must submit to search on any grounds other than that I still think what he did was illegal. Since you ignored #1 Ill go with it wasn't for safety the only valid argument even though not pertinent in this situation.


----------



## hotpig27

The law allows for Police to check under certain circumstances for their safety. Call it looking both ways before crossing the street. In this case it appears that the cops gut feeling was this is not a bad guy hence a voluntary interaction between the cop and baiter. Both sides got what they wanted. The baiter had to make contact and defy the Police authority in order to be a you tube hero. The cop had to make contact because that is what he is paid to do.

Some of you refuse to believe a cop can be a regular person so you will always believe that he did something wrong. I on the other hand know what he could have done and by some standards should have done but he played it very well.

Some cops would have got into a pissing match with the guy for not respecting their authority. This cop made a couple of half hearted attempts to get a name for his report. He did not play the game that the baiter and a lot of viewers wanted to see. I was glad to see a video that did not have some power tripping fool in it. It was a rather short and sweet meeting.


----------



## Deebo

hotpig27 said:


> The law allows for Police to check under certain circumstances for their safety. Call it looking both ways before crossing the street. In this case it appears that the cops gut feeling was this is not a bad guy hence a voluntary interaction between the cop and baiter. Both sides got what they wanted. The baiter had to make contact and defy the Police authority in order to be a you tube hero. The cop had to make contact because that is what he is paid to do.
> 
> DEEBOS-Not trying to piss you off, but being a lawful gun carrying citizen of the US is not defying police authority, or being a youtube hero. Posting it for chestpounding, yes. But it does raise a lot of pther questions.
> 
> Some of you refuse to believe a cop can be a regular person so you will always believe that he did something wrong. I on the other hand know what he could have done and by some standards should have done but he played it very well.
> 
> DEEBOS-What he could have done? Why, becouse a man with a gun was walking?-And, the cheesy- smiling for the camera, Im officer so and so, Do you honestly, deep down think he would have acted the very same if he was in an alley behind main street?
> 
> Some cops would have got into a pissing match with the guy for not respecting their authority. This cop made a couple of half hearted attempts to get a name for his report. He did not play the game that the baiter and a lot of viewers wanted to see. I was glad to see a video that did not have some power tripping fool in it. It was a rather short and sweet meeting.


DEEBOS- yes, like I said, I commend the officer, I am just concerned that he "TOOK THE MANS FIREARM". Now, me, not having a concealed carry permit, I ask, what is protocal? In your jurisdiction?


----------



## Deebo

And, anal cavity searches for everyone!!! If you arent doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about.
Seems like a fitting comeback to almost every thread Im in!!!


----------



## ApexPredator

Thank you for the discussion. 
I generally agree the cop was "being good" but that's not the point. He is still acting as if the guy you tube hero or not is behaving criminally and he simply isn't it is the wrong mind set you are not a threat until verified you are not, you only become a threat when you demonstrate it. I really hope the guys that think they are doing the right thing wake up to this because they are alienating the people they protect. If this trend continues and something does happen you better burn that uniform because all the people that were meek before will now kill you or assist in killing you and there are some true predators out there that wont even bother to give you the time of day. I serve the country to help protect the people and the ideas of this Nation cops are supposed to be doing the same on the homefront.

Ive played this out in my mind so lets get your take on it. I have been deployed and may have some security issues If I am a law abiding citizen because I know I am and a cop approaches me with hostility and demands my firearm he aint gonna get it. If he begins escalating force at what point do you believe I am entitled to neutralize him first. Ive broken no laws so therefore the cop has no truly valid reason to seize my firearm unless he intends me harm I did not seek the confrontation so therefore personal security isn't a valid argument in his case. I don't find a cop following up on reports of someone doing something legal pursuit of justice so, As far as I am concerned he is a threat until proven otherwise.


----------



## Deebo

ApexPredator- First off, THANK YOU, for serving this great country. I am HONORED to even interact/ conversate with you. without you, and the great men and women who have paid the price, I wouldn't be able to sit here, and debate, in a FREE country. So, thank you, and, I will offer you a "cold beer and a handshake" ANYTIME. 
Yes, I am trying to understand how peole can say "the officer did great", when I see it as dis-arming a law abiding citizen.
I am not here to argue, I have the utmost respect for everyone, Hell, I am trying to become a "sherriff posse' member" here, where I live. I just see that "once we let it become normal", it will just get worse. What needs to be normal, is all law abiding gun owning citizens walking around with a firearm on their hip. That is what should be normal.


----------



## hotpig27

The comment on authority think of Cartman from South Park saying respect my authortie !!! Comes from the pissing match that we see on you tube between the cops and baiters when the cop asks for ID and the baiter refuses. It was not about lawfully armed citizens.

The cop was really sharp and did the cheesy thing knowing that it was not what the baiter and his viewers wanted. I have no reason to believe the cop would have treated the baiter any different even if it was not recorded or in a dark alley.

The cop checked the pistol for compliance to the law and immediately returned it. 

Protocol, law and officers discretion can very from State to State or jurisdiction to jurisdiction. My State has no provision for open carry so it would be a felony stop.


----------



## ApexPredator

I aint good at saying thank you for something I need to do anyways but thanks, though trust me the thanks is in seeing American children playing in a park safe and secure and knowing my son might have a chance at it too one day although I would feel better if every parent had a kimber in their pocket.


----------



## Deebo

Thank You, hotpig27. Glad to see that you can debate an issue, even if it hits "close to home" without getting upset.
being on the side of the law your on, I do see your points, But, I have also been "on the dark side", and see thing a little different.
I still have respect for police, even after having been singled out and "hunted" by a crooked currupt police force,(even thou I was a bad guy). Google-Operation Delta Blues.


----------



## Deebo

ApexPredator said:


> I aint good at saying thank you for something I need to do anyways but thanks, though trust me the thanks is in seeing American children playing in a park safe and secure and knowing my son might have a chance at it too one day although I would feel better if every parent had a kimber in their pocket.


Yes sir, when I see my little girl (16), marching in line with her JROTC group, and the I see the future, I smile, knowing taht all is not lost, that this still the GREATEST NATION, even thou we got our problems, we are still THE BEST.
And, yes, true hero's deflect thanks and accolades.


----------



## hotpig27

ApexPredator said:


> Ive played this out in my mind so lets get your take on it. I have been deployed and may have some security issues If I am a law abiding citizen because I know I am and a cop approaches me with hostility and demands my firearm he aint gonna get it. If he begins escalating force at what point do you believe I am entitled to neutralize him first. Ive broken no laws so therefore the cop has no truly valid reason to seize my fireman unless he intends me harm I did not seek the confrontation so therefore personal security isn't a valid argument in his case. I don't find a cop following up on reports of someone doing something legal pursuit of justice so, As far as I am concerned he is a threat until proven otherwise.


Just so you do not come off as bat shit crazy are you referring to a wide spread disarmament or a casual encounter such as the subject of this post.

In my State it is illegal to resist arrest even if you are innocent. We have courts and lawyers to handle that stuff.

In a case such as this you would never be entitled to neutralize the Police. If at any moment you think that is a good idea you need your guns taken away for your own safety and those around you. You are broken.

If you are talking about total national disarmament the fight will be on and it will not be the local cops doing it. I have no doubt that I would be one of the first ones targeted.


----------



## ApexPredator

Once again this compliance issue its not about complying its about freedom its about justice he has the RIGHT to bear arms. He is innocent UNTIL proven guilty, Are those statements false, unless they are I see no reason for the cop to inspect his gun heck I don't even see a reason for the cop to approach him. Whats the cause, Someone reported him for doing something LEGAL OMG why respond to that. Hell who ever is answering the calls shoulda told those people to read the constitution/bill of rights and quit wasting state resources. 

Quite simply this cop was outta line and harassing a citizen. Now I believe if this guy was a real "baiter" he would have gone with something like eh go fuk yourself pig see you in hell and walked away. Then the cop woulda had to respond by either obeying the law and LEAVING him alone or breaking the law and illegally detaining him searching his weapon or seizing it since the guy was cooperative I am going to go with he was more scared of the cop then the other way round. The problem is this guy was compliant at all further reinforcing that cops have some mystical right to take your rights away.


----------



## dsdmmat

Officer safety has been used as an excuse to deny 4th amendment rights in the past on too many occasions, so much so that the SCotUS has weighed in on the subject. Most of the time there is no excuse for relieving anyone of their legally carried weapon.


----------



## ApexPredator

hotpig27 said:


> Just so you do not come off as bat shit crazy are you referring to a wide spread disarmament or a casual encounter such as the subject of this post.
> 
> In my State it is illegal to resist arrest even if you are innocent. We have courts and lawyers to handle that stuff.
> 
> In a case such as this you would never be entitled to neutralize the Police. If at any moment you think that is a good idea you need your guns taken away for your own safety and those around you. You are broken.
> 
> If you are talking about total national disarmament the fight will be on and it will not be the local cops doing it. I have no doubt that I would be one of the first ones targeted.


So basically you said citizens have no right to defend themselves from the state I don't think I am the one broken here. Actually I don't think the situation matters at all that much its about a persons rights to defend themselves apparently in your state that's a right citizens sadly don't posses. Its a hypothetical btw but if it did happen I would have a very good argument and it would be one sided. I try to get along with cops so long as they leave me alone I don't break any laws and yes I have come very very close to engaging one on a case of mistaken identity he did the smart thing and backed down because he was wrong that was a smart cop.


----------



## hotpig27

You guys must live in some fantasy land were people can walk around freely with arms. The baiter and myself do not live in this utopia. We live in places that have restrictions even if we do not like them or recognize them.

The cop verified the guy was in compliance with the law in that place and went his own way. If the baiter did not stop to talk to the cop then he wasted his time and had nothing to post on the net. The baiter needed the cop. It just did not work out as expected. 

If you do not like the laws get your butts to the polls on every election. Donate to the NRA even if you do not like them. They are the biggest game in town. I have my personal membership and my Business Alliance membership. I also regularly give to the NRA-ILA. I also send money to the Illinois Gun Owners Rights (IGOR) I like IGOR better than the NRA but the NRA has the clout. If you do not like the NRA support your State or local gun rights organizations.


----------



## Deebo

Well, brother, I guess I live in fantasy land. In NM it becoming NORMAL to walk around freely with arms. I will talk to my cousin ( a local k-9 officer), and see what the local police department does in this instance.
The cop verifying he was in compliance with the law? How, all the cop found out was that "a man with a gun was STILL walking down the street". Im just guessing, but that was the same facts before he stopped and questioned the individual.
As for the NRA, I am a proud dues paying member, just renewed my second year this month. And, I am in the process of "hoping to speak at the next gun rights rally", here in Farmington NM.
My local sherriff is up for re-election, and I have finally met him. He seems like a man of his word, he even went so far as to have a letter in the newspaper stating that he would not go against any unconstitutional laws.


----------



## hotpig27

You missed the whole point. In order for the guy to be legal in that place the gun could not have bullets in it. The cop looked and low and behold no bullets. No crime no time.


----------



## ApexPredator

hotpig27 said:


> You missed the whole point. In order for the guy to be legal in that place the gun could not have bullets in it. The cop looked and low and behold no bullets. No crime no time.


Obviously otherwise that cop woulda done the real cheesy thing and arrested him pointlessly.

The problem was and will be until you address it somehow the assumption of guilt. Hopefully enough freedom remains that its true even where you live that you are innocent until proven guilty. That means there is no reason to verify someone is in compliance because you MUST assume they are innocent that means that they are in compliance without any kind of verification. This is akin to me searching everyone's bank records to verify no one has been laundering money, or searching everyones home to verify they are still in compliance with the law and do not posses any illegal substances or stopping everyone on the road to verify they arnt illegal aliens. If those examples are ok with you then ill just give up on this thread.

The point of the second amendment wasn't to give us protection from each other it was to give us protection from the state to make the state respect its people. Speaking of the 2nd amendment here it is

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

seems pretty clear your able to freely walk around with guns without having to verify crap and or having to hand over a firearm for even 1 second but I dont think we live in a free state anyways and thats one of the points here. 
Had the baiter walked away I am pretty sure he woulda got a free ride after being detained.


----------



## dsdmmat

hotpig27 said:


> You missed the whole point. In order for the guy to be legal in that place the gun could not have bullets in it. The cop looked and low and behold no bullets. No crime no time.


In order for you to be searched the police have to have Reasonable Suspicion of a crime being committed. The presence of a gun is not enough for reasonable suspicion.
Fourth Circuit Finds That Carrying a Firearm in an Open-Carry State Does Not Create Reasonable Suspicion and Provides Thorough Analysis of the "Free to Leave" Standard of Seizure - FEDagent.com| Free Weekly E-newsletter


----------

