Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Open Carry On Its Way Out In California?

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    When did we make the transition from the Open Carry people to fanatics? Or are you saying the Open Carry people are fanatics? That is an interesting assertion.
    I never made that assertion, sir. Please re-read what I wrote. If I have to respond to a "man with a gun" call, and the man is calm and cooperative, and understands that I'm not busting his balls, and that I'm just doing my job, then our business is likely to be pleasant and brief.

    The second scenario that I mentioned, where I have to approach a citizen who's openly carrying, and before I even get the chance to be reasonable, calm, and pleasant, he's agitated by my very presence, has one of his buddies jamming a camera in my face, and getting up on his soap box and trying to make a scene, then what would you call such a person?

    Such a person, in my opinion, has revealed himself to be a fanatic.

    Please don't presume to tell me that I have tarred all openly carrying citizens with the same brush, because I very carefully explained, at length, the difference between the two. I honestly don't know how much more plainly I can explain it.

    Let's try something a little different, since open carry seems to be a sensitive issue to you: Let's take the 1st amendment:

    A group of citizens gathers in front of a bank, without impeding customer traffic into or out of the bank, picketing and protesting the bank's lending practices. Okay? These are citizens who are angry about this bank's business practices, and are protesting.

    At a different bank in town, the same thing is happening, but these citizens have linked arms and blocked any access into or out of the bank whatsoever. They have a bullhorn, and they are shouting and broadcasting all sorts of vile things.

    Which group would you say is the group of fanatics? Group 1? Or group 2?


    Both groups are exercising their 1st amendment right to assemble.

    Group 1 is exercising their rights in a manner that I doubt any officer would have one bit of problem with.

    Group 2 has crossed the line into fanaticism.

    Do you see the difference?

    Again, I reiterate: The ordinary citizen is not the problem. Fanatics, (i.e. extremists) no matter what right they're exercising or advocating for, are always a problem.
    Last edited by BCSD Frank; 06-06-2010, 04:33 AM.
    Sure, that badge will get you midgets, but those midgets will get that badge!

    The more I learn about people, the more I prefer the company of my dogs.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by opencarry View Post
      More of a visual deterrent, more comfortable, easier to carry a larger firearm if preferred, faster draw for most people
      Visual deterrent is a farce. How big a firearm you gonna carry? There is nothing that can't be concealed. Stealth and suprise of concealed is superior to any speed gained by OC IMHO. Comfort...maybe.

      So by all means let's clog up the legislature with bills and 911 lines with "man with a gun" calls so a few people can be marginably more comfortable.

      Now let's talk disadvantage. How many OCers train weapon retention? Probably almost none. Visual deterent? How about visual target. I know who I'm taking out first. I could go on but gotta go.
      Two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Chief Wiggum View Post
        Visual deterrent is a farce. How big a firearm you gonna carry? There is nothing that can't be concealed. Stealth and suprise of concealed is superior to any speed gained by OC IMHO. Comfort...maybe.

        So by all means let's clog up the legislature with bills and 911 lines with "man with a gun" calls so a few people can be marginably more comfortable.

        Now let's talk disadvantage. How many OCers train weapon retention? Probably almost none. Visual deterent? How about visual target. I know who I'm taking out first. I could go on but gotta go.

        I hear that a lot but have yet to see one case where this has happened. I am going to stand by my assertion that criminals prefer soft targets and seeing someone with a gun adds risk and deters in my opinion. And there is no legislature in my state right now due to it and as far as 911 calls they are fewer and with proper education of the public they could be quelled also. lets also talk financial for a second, I can open carry for free, a concealed pistol permit runs almost 300 bucks.. I have one, but I'm just saying ...some do not and cannot afford it. And another advantage in Michigan is Pistol free Zones DO NOT APPLY to CPL holders who are OPEN CARRYING

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by The King's Fool View Post
          I would think that, being a cop, you might be in a better position to answer this question. Why don't patrol officers carry concealed? There has to be a reason, there being no advantage to OC and all...


          Wow. Very well done post, sir. I only had one issue...

          When did we make the transition from the Open Carry people to fanatics? Or are you saying the Open Carry people are fanatics? That is an interesting assertion.

          Nice post. Are the Open Carry guys really that anti-cop? I wonder if a lot of them have had experiences like you mentioned above. Maybe the real problem is that the Open Carry guys tend to attract all the bad cops, and the good cops tend to attract all the nutjobs.

          Maybe the majority of cops, and the majority of gun people, are really nice guys who just don't get much chance to get to know each other.


          If it helps, the Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that the police didn't have a duty to protect a woman who had a protective order against her husband/boyfriend/whatever-he-was (a protective order from Colorado which had a mandatory arrest clause). That being the case, you probably aren't likely to be held personally liable. IANAL, though.

          That reminds me! A very heartfelt thanks to all LEOs who protect and serve, especially knowing that they have no legal duty to do so.

          I cannot say they are all anti-cop of course but to be honest I try to be careful what groups I associate myself with due to personal ties ect and the overall tone seems to head that way a lot. I am sure a lot of them have had negative experience but as a adult you have to be mature enough to separate the fact that negative police experiences and violations are done by a minority of the sworn officers not even close to a majority. I gather information from the site, it is informative I just prefer not to actually join due to overly biased conversation tone and my association preferences, I am not saying it is a bad place by any means, just not for me.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by opencarry View Post
            I hear that a lot but have yet to see one case where this has happened. I am going to stand by my assertion that criminals prefer soft targets and seeing someone with a gun adds risk and deters in my opinion. And there is no legislature in my state right now due to it and as far as 911 calls they are fewer and with proper education of the public they could be quelled also. lets also talk financial for a second, I can open carry for free, a concealed pistol permit runs almost 300 bucks.. I have one, but I'm just saying ...some do not and cannot afford it. And another advantage in Michigan is Pistol free Zones DO NOT APPLY to CPL holders who are OPEN CARRYING
            And you can't document a single time where a open carry citizen as served as a deterent either.

            OC just waisted the time of my legislature and my tax money here.

            Sounds like you should work on making concealed cheaper or free instead of open carry.

            You can talk educating the public all you want there is still no way to for a citizen to know what an individual's intent is. The insanity I've heard from the OC crowd is that if you see someone open carring then you know theyare a good, law-abiding person. This is garbage and everyone knows it. There will always be people wary of an armed persons intent, sometimes EVEN when that person is a uniformed officer. Why OCers think they will create a pro gun/OC utopia by simply walking around with guns is beyond me. In fact, it looks as though this has now back fired on them.

            Oh, and one more time since neither you, nor anyone else in the OC crowd answered, or ever does...how much weapons retention training do you do or have you done? How much do the OCers you know do?
            Two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by opencarry View Post
              In some states a permit is required and in some, such as mine it is not. Where required I do not see a problem with it being validated at all. Ok.. well I think the best way I can respond is to say that in a lot of cases ( at least in michigan) officers are given the proper information and dispatch often gathers it. In most cases where there is a confrontation with a LEO it is very common for people to FOIA the entire thing so we have heard the information given in a lot of cases. In some cases the specific information has been -- there is a man walking down the street with a gun in a holster and I was wondering if that was legal or not - The response to that particular call was a officer pulling up and having his gun drawn and aimed at the OCer before he even exited his car. And I will say for every negative encounter in Michigan that we have there are a hundred more that are not negative, but it is the negative ones I think that keep a lot of us from being "compliant" so to speak during a encounter. There have been some cities here where the same officer has stopped the same person 3-5 times for open carrying, having known from the previous encounters that the person was clean... but they continued to stop and detain them to try to deter them from open carrying. Seeing a lot of these encounters makes a lot of people nervous when dealing with the police. Some of the FOIA information has allowed people to listen in to officers standing at their patrol car behind a OCers car they have stopped discussing how to "trip them up", what questions to ask to try to "get them". These things all add up to us the same as the idiot OCer that is walking around with a AK47 adds up to you.

              I know not being a OCer it is hard to understand at times the demeanor that some OCers take but I will try to sum up some food for thought. If we travel back in time 2-3 years open carriers were harassed a lot more, detained and even arrested. It was over that period of time that more and more people started learning their rights AND exercising them, in some cases this meant lawsuits. Now coming back to present day the problems that OCers have are not a fraction of what they were back then, exercising our rights has really quelled a lot of behavior that was uncalled for in a lot of cases. When dealing with the police it is not a issue of the 2nd amendment that people fight against , it is a issue of the 4th. I can tell you personally why I started open carrying and it was about exercising my rights. I first learned about OC when I took my CPL class, they had officers in to handle the law section of the license to conceal carry and they were the ones to bring it up. During this being brought up people started asking questions about OC ( most did not know it was legal ), the officers made no bones about the fact that no one should do it because they WILL be harassed. I asked how someone can be harassed for engaging in legal behavior and they said that the street was their ground and they would arrest people for it.. I will be frank that that did not sit well with me one bit, I am a citizen of this country and having officers say we should not do something legal for fear of harassment from them was unacceptable to me. After the class I started researching OC a bit more and started learning of the unlawful detentions ect ( people were just starting to carry recorders then) and I decided that I would OC and exercise my rights to do so until this changed. After a while I did see that this was the minority of officers and I was OCing here and there to exercise my rights but I was not on the same soap box I was right after the class.

              Now a days I rarely OC, it is not the problem on the streets it was back then and most of the time I prefer to CC. The only time I OC is if what I wear just makes it more practical or if I am going to a pistol free zone, OC to me is just another option I have not a lifestyle. I will also add that during this and that time period I never attended a OC gathering, I never passed out literature and never joined OCDO the reason is most on OCDO seemed and still do to me to be heavily anti-leo. I know a lot of you on here think that I am and the truth is I am not, I am 100% pro-my rights and will vigiorously defend them with every legal avenue I have at my disposal if needed and I will seek out for anyone whom violates anothers rights to be held fully accountable. I also believe that 99% of LEO's do a fantastic job and during the last few years during interactions with them I never felt the need to file a lawsuit and there were only a couple of occasions where I even made a phone call to a superior to straighten out a issue and never filed a formal complaint. I know for a lot of people during the last few years this was a learning experience and it took some adjustment. I have financially supported a lot of projects in the surrounding communities and have donated regularly to local police associations and will continue to do so in the future, but I do know there are some that try to enforce their opinion instead of the law and I would also support actions against the minority that fall into that category with the same vigilance and means I have supported the ones that do so much for us.

              Now a question for you, if you get a call that someone is doing something legal why do you have to check it out? If the call says - someone is walking their dogs with a gun holstered on their hip -why respond? I am not trying to be a smartass here but I hear a lot of times people say we have to respond, what if I called and reported someone was playing baseball, or golf, would those calls be checked? How do you know what kind of person anyone on the street is, but we know you cannot check everyone. People are assaulted with bats and golf clubs to... and again, I know this question sounds smart but it is serious, I am not sure how to word it in a way it wouldn't smell like F**K you but please take it as a serious question.

              Stay safe
              Go back and read this whole disertation you just wrote then think to yourself this one thought...this could all be avoided by simply carring concealed.
              Two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by The King's Fool View Post
                I would think that, being a cop, you might be in a better position to answer this question. Why don't patrol officers carry concealed? There has to be a reason, there being no advantage to OC and all...
                If you really need me to answer this then I pity you.
                Two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by PhilipCal View Post
                  B.S. You don't want a police perspective, that's simply crap. You've already posted your totally uninformed, incorrect reply to Frank's post on police response. Here's the difference. Frank is a serving Police Officer, and a respected member of this forum. You, on the other hand, are a totally uninformed, as in ignorant troll. In my assessment of you as a troll,(which I stand by) no mention was made by me of sexual ejecta. In fact, it's very possible for one or more of us to tell you are a troll, and to do so in a perfectly civil manner. You might also review Sgt Slaughter's reply to you. He offers a very cogent explanation of California's current problems. Unfortunately, that is a problem which is not limited to California. Now, finally Mr. PavePusher, Sir, when you've aquired Frank's level of experience and skill in our profession, you can come back and lecture us on how YOU'D handle the call he referenced. In the meantime, your opinions to which you're entitled, have no real weight here. Let me put that another way. The Constitution gives you the right to an opinion, and the companion right of expressing it. What the Constitution does not require, is that You know what you're talking about, and be assured, you don't.
                  I'm not sure how to remediate my ignorance without asking questions. I'm also not sure how I've offended you, so I'll bow out of this discussion.

                  Have a good weekend, and please stay safe out there.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Probably a wise decision.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by BCSD Frank View Post
                      On the one hand, someone stated that cops simply shouldn't bother checking on someone who is openly carrying a weapon, but if we are dispatched to a call, we MUST respond.
                      Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't a lot of rural LE agencies drop such calls without specific info? I remember hearing about city dwellers moving to the country and calling 911 on hunters as "men with guns"....

                      This is a urban vs. rural thing, or so it seems.
                      "First of all, then we have to say the American public overwhelmingly voted for socialism when they elected President Obama." - Al Sharpton, March 21, 2010

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Frankly, by its very nature, a "visual deterrent" cannot accurately be quantified as the crime (or potential crime) never happened. One cannot dismiss open carry as a visual deterrent simply because statistics aren't available to disprove the theory.

                        Similarly, I don't recall ever hearing stories of people singled out and attacked simply because they were openly carrying a firearm. That's anti-OC propaganda that I've not seen any data to support.
                        NRA Life Member

                        The police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence. - Sir Robert Peel

                        Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. - H. L. Mencken

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by equinox137 View Post
                          Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't a lot of rural LE agencies drop such calls without specific info? I remember hearing about city dwellers moving to the country and calling 911 on hunters as "men with guns"....

                          This is a urban vs. rural thing, or so it seems.
                          I think you're right. It's not that the calls are dropped, but especially during hunting season(s), those kinds of calls simply don't come in. They generally come in as trespassing/poaching calls.
                          Sure, that badge will get you midgets, but those midgets will get that badge!

                          The more I learn about people, the more I prefer the company of my dogs.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            DISCLAIMER: Be kind. There may be a handful of grammatical issues. It's late and my response is long. Please excuse them!

                            Originally posted by Chief Wiggum View Post
                            Visual deterrent is a farce. How big a firearm you gonna carry? There is nothing that can't be concealed. Stealth and suprise of concealed is superior to any speed gained by OC IMHO. Comfort...maybe.

                            So by all means let's clog up the legislature with bills and 911 lines with "man with a gun" calls so a few people can be marginably more comfortable.

                            Visual deterent? How about visual target. I know who I'm taking out first.
                            I may regret jumping in this but after reading these posts I just felt the need to. Let me put in the disclaimer that I am a Police Officer and I have NEVER open carried before. I use to be totally against it. But, I have done quite a bit of research on this topic and although I don't do it (I do live in Maryland after all and I may be visiting family in Michigan in a few weeks and may actually try it out for the first time), I can't say I am really against it anymore. I AM however, against a lot of the Open Carry nuts over at Opencarry.org but that's a whole different topic.

                            The way my body is, I had a hard time concealing a Glock 22 when I first got into Police Work. Carrying a Glock 27 isn't too difficult for me because it is so small but I also don't like to wear oversized shirts that are two sizes too big just so I can conceal. Sometimes I'm forced to carry my Revolver which not only limits me to 5 rounds of ammunition but takes away accuracy from any type of shot that isn't point and shoot directly in front of me if I end up in some sort of confrontation where I must use deadly force off-duty. So yes, I wouldn't mind open carry so I can carry a bigger firearm that I'm comfortable with that carries a lot more ammunition than my 5 round revolver or even 10 round G27.

                            I believe it is a visual deterrent as well. From my research, as Opencarry has stated, I have yet to find anything that proves the argument that the guy/gal opencarrying will be taken out first. That's the same as anti-gun people stating that states turned into SHALL issue will turn into the wild west and there will be bloodshed all over the streets. IT NEVER HAPPENED. But, there have been stories where people have been caught and admitted that they were going to rob the store but saw an Open Carrier. Also, when I've done extensive research papers in High School and College, there have been Research done with Prisoners who have committed violent crimes and I don't remember specifics so if you don't want to believe me, you don't have to, but where the majority have stated that what they worry the most when committing these acts of violent crime is not the Police, but of the armed Citizen. So, if you don't want to believe that Open Carry is a visual deterrent, that is on you, but evidence is tipping the scale in that direction.

                            As far as the comment about clogging the 911 system and legislation, that is actually offensive. You have all these brave men and women overseas fighting for OUR freedom and you may have been doing that when you were younger as I do not know your history and/or military background, yet you are stating how ridiculous it is to fight for something that we have the right to do? Although I'm not relating these Open Carry people to Rosa Parks or MLK Jr, but did you think the same when MLK was doing his protests? How ridiculous it was for him to bring all these Police Resources so he could march and do these protests just so he could be comfortable and live freely. Again, maybe a little outstretched but you get the point. A right not exercised is a right lost. You must be at one of those Police Departments where you are SOOO busy that you only have time to do the real crime fighting and these people lawfully doing something is too much of an inconvenience.

                            Originally posted by Chief Wiggum View Post
                            Sounds like you should work on making concealed cheaper or free instead of open carry.

                            You can talk educating the public all you want there is still no way to for a citizen to know what an individual's intent is. The insanity I've heard from the OC crowd is that if you see someone open carring then you know theyare a good, law-abiding person. This is garbage and everyone knows it. There will always be people wary of an armed persons intent, sometimes EVEN when that person is a uniformed officer. Why OCers think they will create a pro gun/OC utopia by simply walking around with guns is beyond me. In fact, it looks as though this has now back fired on them.

                            Oh, and one more time since neither you, nor anyone else in the OC crowd answered, or ever does...how much weapons retention training do you do or have you done? How much do the OCers you know do?
                            The first sentence... I'm not even going to dignify with a rebuttal response because again as the paragraph above, is ridiculous. Your right. Forget your rights. Just because Chief Wiggum here is uncomfortable with you exercising your right, you should probably stop doing it and just try to for something else because it is more "convenient."

                            About the whole individual intent is and how dangerous it can be. Why are you worrying so much about this open carrying thing? Look how many people drive and kill people? You don't know anyone's intent when they get behind a Motor Vehicle, which happens to be a pretty dangerous weapon and kills more people. What about the people that carry pocketknives? You don't know their intent. They may try to cut someone's throat. You might want to outlaw those. How about kids at the park with a baseball bat. Yeah, they may be pretending to play baseball, but you don't know their intent. I've seen some pretty good beatings with a baseball bat being used. As sarcastic as I'm being, I do understand where you are coming from but in reality you don't know the intent of anyone. And almost every object can be used as a weapon.

                            You state you don't know the intent of the OCer is. You can't tell the intent of ANYONE that is doing anything but most of all, you don't know the intent of all these people CC either. And you know what, as a whole, gangbangers and these people that commit violent crimes with weapons, particularly guns, like to hide their intention and CC themselves (illegally). Thus far, people with the gun openly carried have nothing to hide. After all, now people are paying attention to them. If they wanted to truly do something, they would as statistics show, conceal their gun so no one knew they had it on them.

                            Again, I never carried Openly and I was adament against OC, especially when I started as a Police Officer. The more research I've done on the matter I support it. Does that mean if I respond to a guy openly carrying (If I weren't in such a horrid state such as Maryland) I will instantly trust them and put my guard down? Not a chance. But, I will not be out for them and after all is done, I will respect their decision to protect themselves and their families. Plus, they have the added responsibility, if something happens everyone sees they have a gun and they have to be on an even better behavior because now they have the added responsibility to make sure to NOT escalate confrontations, because of their firearm.

                            Is Open Carrying a huge deterrent and extremely effective? Right now, not so much. Not as much as it can be. I encourage everyone (that can legally do so) to get a CCW permit. But, even if 8 out of 10 people on the street are CCing, it is not a deterrent. If something happens, I like the odds of that something to be ended, but it is not a deterrent from it happening in the first place. I think if we get to the point where 8 out of 10 people are OC in public, the benefit would actually outweigh CC. Not only would it be a huge deterrent because the bad guy will SEE all of these people around them with a gun, but if they decide to do something stupid and violent, just as with the CC, it will be ended rather quickly. Of coursse, to get to the point, there has to be a lot more people OC that are doing it now. But, if all of these people that have CC permits right now all decide to OC, I am willing to bet that violent crime will drop dramatically, and I'm not a betting man. But, there are more people CC then I think most people realize, so it really would not be unusual to see people OC if that were to happen.

                            Finally, because I'm just mumbling and going on and on. It is a nice alternative. I'm hopefully going to be starting at a new PD very shortly. Depending on if I can use some of my vacation time before I leave or not to go up to Michigan, I may have to go up and visit family after I leave here and turn in my creds and before I start the other place and get my new creds. I am now going to be disarmed. At least in Michigan I will have the opportunity to defend myself because they have Open Carry out there. So, I understand, although not the smartest in the world, why these Cali people open carried unloaded with a magazine with them. At least they had it, which is better odds then not having one at all if something were to happen.

                            Okay, i think I'm done. I've rambled enough, and it's just about midnight so I don't even know if this stuff makes sense! To my fellow brothers and sisters out there, be safe.
                            Last edited by MiGuy; 06-06-2010, 11:53 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              About the only liability I can see, with open carrying, is that if some thug sees that you have a nice weapon (or a nice watch, or a fat wallet, etc. etc.), if he gets the drop on you, especially if you're open carrying unloaded, your very nice weapon (watch or wallet) is now someone else's property.
                              Sure, that badge will get you midgets, but those midgets will get that badge!

                              The more I learn about people, the more I prefer the company of my dogs.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by BCSD Frank View Post
                                About the only liability I can see, with open carrying, is that if some thug sees that you have a nice weapon (or a nice watch, or a fat wallet, etc. etc.), if he gets the drop on you, especially if you're open carrying unloaded, your very nice weapon (watch or wallet) is now someone else's property.
                                I don't see that as a liability, myself. No different than someone stealing (carjacking) your car or the knife in your pocket. In line with that logic, you shouldn't have guns in your house either, because a burglar may enter your house and steal your gun(s) there, too.
                                NRA Life Member

                                The police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence. - Sir Robert Peel

                                Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats. - H. L. Mencken

                                Comment

                                MR300x250 Tablet

                                Collapse

                                What's Going On

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 9101 users online. 450 members and 8651 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 19,482 at 12:44 PM on 09-29-2011.

                                Welcome Ad

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X