Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Philadelphia PD won't Look the Other Way on Open-Carry Gun Owners

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

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

  • #46
    So...the state of PA lets the city of Philly nullify a state law?
    Lt. Col. Grace - "Lt. Murphey, why are you all dressed up to mack on the ladies?"
    Me - "Sir, you just answered your own question."

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by vincelli View Post
      Yeah, cause I always open-carry while walking to the auto-parts store, in a major city where open-carry is pretty much unheard of, with a tape recorder specifically carried "in case the cops approach me", in the MIDDLE OF FREAKIN WINTER WITH NO JACKET!

      You're a moron.

      -V
      Anger issues? Thought so.

      Nice red herring to my response. Try again.
      John Q. Citizen

      They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by JQC View Post
        Anger issues? Thought so.

        Nice red herring to my response. Try again.
        Don't need to. Everyone already knows what you are.

        Have a wonderful day!

        -V

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by JQC View Post
          The problem with that logic is that this officer wasn't, "up to date" on OC laws.

          Which means that permit or not, as far as the cop is concerned he's certain he's dealing with a felon. Otherwise he wouldn't have stated with such certainty that OC is illegal in PA. Think about it. If you saw someone do something that you are 100% certain is a felony, how much discretion would you exercise in your dealing with them?

          In the end, the guy is stuck there for at least 40 minutes if not longer until all that got sorted out anyways. Again, I'm not justifying his actions, but he was damned either way. The only problem he now faces is the charges for not complying.
          You missed:

          Ummm...it's both of their fault that the stop lasted for 45 minutes - but mainly the moron WALKING AROUND LOOKING FOR A CONFRONTATION AND NOT COMPLYING WITH THE OFFICER...it does not take that long to verify that a person has a valid permit as long as you comply and follow the officers commands...probably 5-10 minutes tops...
          If you're going to cut and paste to quote me, at least READ what I typed and get it right...I pretty much agreed with you...

          Originally posted by JQC View Post
          Okay, so it is a retaliatory move on the DA's part. Not saying that it's right or wrong, but let's call a spade a spade. They're mad that this got out, and want to make a statement - plain and simple.

          Now as for him, how is he looking for a confrontation with the cops? If he really wanted to make a statement, he would have OC'd in broad daylight, in front of city hall, a court house, a post office, a police or fire station, with his buddy operating a video camera on him the entire time... anything other than walking into a freakin auto parts store!

          THAT would be clear cut proof of someone making a statement and trying to antagonize the police.
          Again, you're missing the point. He was walking around, in the middle of winter, without a jacket on, openly carrying a weapon, with a recording device on him, which he admits to carrying around "just in case an officer has a bad day"...you don't think he was looking for a confrontation?!?! How you do know he wasn't stopped by a dozen other officers who DIDN'T detain him more forcefully because he followed their commands and he didn't get the reaction he wanted, so he decided to step up his game and be completely non-compliant this time around?! No one knows that for sure except for him, and he sure won't tell anyone...what other reason could he have for posting the video on the internet other than to stir up s**t?!?

          The DA let him off the first time, possibly because they believed his word over the officer. Once they saw the video and exactly what happened, why wouldn't they charge him?!?! So they can invite more idiots to do the same?!?!

          You seriously have your priorities mixed up. This was NOT a 100% law-abiding citizen who was roughed up for no apparent reason after completely complying with a police officer. This was a guy out to collect a pay check. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that. If I were an OC advocate I'd be ashamed to have him on my side. As I am an avid advocate of gun ownership, I am ashamed that people are actually aligning this idiot up with other gun ownership advocates.
          Originally posted by RSGSRT
          We've reached a point where natural selection doesn't have a chance in hell of keeping up with the procreation of imbeciles.
          Why is it acceptable for you to be an idiot, but not acceptable for me to point it out?

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Charlie Brown View Post
            No concealed carry in Philadelphia.

            With a permit, you can carry concealed in Pennsylvania or openly in a Class 1 city (Philadelphia).
            Nope, you can absolutely carry concealed in Philly, just need a permit, which isn't difficult, since it is a shall issue state.
            Being a good street cop is like coming to work in a wet suit and peeing in your pants. It's a nice warm feeling, but you're the only one who knows anything has happened.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Charlie Brown View Post
              In PA, you can't carry concealed. The only way to bear arms legally is to carry them openly.
              Not so. This guy had a CCW permit, according to reports.

              Originally posted by Charlie Brown View Post
              We have to actually believe that their actions are illegal.
              Also incorrect. Reasonable suspicion does not require a belief that the person has done, is doing or is about to do something illegal. Reasonable suspicion is a lesser standard than probable cause.
              Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. -- Aldous Huxley
              Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity. -- Albert Einstein

              Comment


              • #52
                He was walking around, in the middle of winter, without a jacket on, openly carrying a weapon, with a recording device on him, which he admits to carrying around "just in case an officer has a bad day"...you don't think he was looking for a confrontation?!?!
                First off, please don't take the "middle of winter" line to mean jack - and frankly you should know better. I lived in Michigan for over 20 years and experienced some of the most brutal mid-west winters out there. There were plenty of times when in the, "middle of winter" when it would be nice enough outside to go around without a jacket on. Hell there were some years when it got so bad one week, that when it went up to 40 the next week we'd be out wearing shorts! How's that saying go? If you don't like the weather in Michigan, just wait 10 minutes and it'll change.

                Tell me it was 10 below with a wind chill, and I'll grant you a point.

                Second, like I said... if he wanted a confrontation, it would have made more sense to go someplace with a lot more people, and a much higher chance of getting caught. That means more eyes, more chance to make noise, more witnesses in a lawsuit, more responding officers which = more chances for officers to make a mistake. THAT is a set up. A guy going through an airport checkpoint knowing the TSA will grope you - and saying on a recording, "if you touch my junk I'll have you arrested" ... that is a setup.

                How you do know he wasn't stopped by a dozen other officers who DIDN'T detain him more forcefully because he followed their commands and he didn't get the reaction he wanted, so he decided to step up his game and be completely non-compliant this time around?! No one knows that for sure except for him, and he sure won't tell anyone...what other reason could he have for posting the video on the internet other than to stir up s**t?!?
                You're right. I don't know that - but neither do you, nor anyone else. However wouldn't there be some kind of record for such of contact? If so, wouldn't it make sense for the DA to publicly release that detail to discredit any type of lawsuit he could bring forward?

                Meaning... how often do you have a MWAG situation that never gets documented somewhere??

                The DA let him off the first time, possibly because they believed his word over the officer. Once they saw the video and exactly what happened, why wouldn't they charge him?!?! So they can invite more idiots to do the same?!?!
                That's a fair point. I grant you that.

                This was a guy out to collect a pay check. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that. If I were an OC advocate I'd be ashamed to have him on my side. As I am an avid advocate of gun ownership, I am ashamed that people are actually aligning this idiot up with other gun ownership advocates.
                I know you're pro-gun from your other posts - and we agree on that too; however I don't see this as a setup whatsoever.

                Let me use a different example.

                When I shop at Best Buy, I don't like showing my receipt on the way out. I might if it takes 2 seconds, but if there's a long line with people with tons of stuff ahead of me, I'm walking straight out the door without saying a word. I've never had much of a problem doing this. The worst thing that happened was a guy shouted at me, "Hey thanks a lot man!" as I left.

                That's completely legal right? Also unpopular right? Now suppose I start getting harassed more often by exit employees.

                Isn't it fair for me to want to document my experience with a camera in case this continues? Or, is my taking a legal, but unpopular action a way of trying to get a payout? I don't want a payout. I just want to leave without getting harassed so I can get on with my day.

                Is it a setup if I turn on a recording device before I walk out?
                Last edited by JQC; 05-24-2011, 01:40 AM.
                John Q. Citizen

                They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

                Comment


                • #53
                  JQC,

                  Please move your account to the OpenCarry forums.

                  We don't need this crap here.

                  This has been one of the worst winters for both NY and PA. Your BS that it was probably warm and sunny in February of this year just doesn't hold any weight.

                  In addition, your "defense" that he could not have been looking for a confrontation simply because you can devise confrontations which are MORE unnerving than what he did is just ridiculous.

                  By that logic, a person who threatened a bank teller in order to rob the bank couldn't possibly be guilty if he didn't actually have the weapon he threatened to have.

                  We deal with the REAL world; a world that at times can be very deadly, and for nothing more than some self-centered person saying "He dissed me, so I had to kill him."

                  You deal with a fantasy world where cops should never have any fear that they may be in danger; afterall, if someone was truly a threat to a cop they wouldn't ambush him/her, they would just walk into the station and start shooting.

                  When you've walked a day in our shoes, then you can talk about this subject. Until then, stick to what you know.

                  -V

                  P.S. We aren't out to "get" decent citizens. We aren't out to ruin their day. We aren't out to try to "steal" their rights away from them. In fact, quite the opposite. If you don't get that, then you don't get us. This cop is gonna get disciplined because he did his job, insured the public was safe, but happened to be setup by some loser with an agenda. This dirtbag tailored his actions to cause just this. Think of this cop's family when he spends time without pay because some dueschbag just had to make a statement about OpenCarry.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    I'll offer one last response before bowing out of this thread.

                    By that logic, a person who threatened a bank teller in order to rob the bank couldn't possibly be guilty if he didn't actually have the weapon he threatened to have.
                    I'm sorry but that's plain false. Threatening a bank teller is illegal. In this case, open carry is not. Apples to oranges my friend.

                    I fully get that you guys work in a dangerous, but extremely important and necessary profession - and I know that a super-majority of you guys and gals are good people who don't sit in a briefing room thinking about way to screw the public over that day. I get that.

                    That doesn't change the fact that you have both the authority and means to deprive us of our liberties when necessary - something you need to have. Still, that's a high price tag that for anyone to hold over my head, so naturally the public will put everything such a person does under a really big microscope... and if you aren't up to date on what our privileges and rights are, the public will respond in kind. It goes without saying that in our culture, freedom of movement is something people are extremely sensitive about - so anytime it's challenged, expect a lot of questions for two reasons.

                    First is obvious - they don't want their rights violated.
                    Second but less obvious - I wouldn't want a criminal to get a conviction tossed because someone wasn't up to date on the laws. Doing so puts that criminal out on the street, which in turn puts my safety in jeopardy. That's unacceptable.

                    This officer isn't going to get reprimanded because the kid chose to OC. He'll get disciplined for not knowing PA handgun laws as they relate to OC. This is a fact that no one disputes. Had he known this, well then you could have cause to tell me to join that other site. I wouldn't have such an objection w.r.t. the cops actions.

                    Ultimately the whole issue on whether OC constitutes RAS for a Terry stop will get sorted out in the courts, not here and most of us trust that you guys will follow the courts directives if and when that should happen. There will always be some who won't trust you, or are paranoid about misconduct. As Andrew Napolitano says, "The camera is the new gun"... and they'll never go away, so there's no value in stressing over it.

                    Thanks!
                    John Q. Citizen

                    They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by vincelli View Post
                      JQC,

                      Please move your account to the OpenCarry forums.

                      We don't need this crap here.


                      P.S. We aren't out to "get" decent citizens. We aren't out to ruin their day. We aren't out to try to "steal" their rights away from them. In fact, quite the opposite. If you don't get that, then you don't get us. This cop is gonna get disciplined because he did his job, insured the public was safe, but happened to be setup by some loser with an agenda. This dirtbag tailored his actions to cause just this. Think of this cop's family when he spends time without pay because some dueschbag just had to make a statement about OpenCarry.
                      Even IF what you allege is true (and I don't buy it) then the officer is getting a lesson in getting OWNED, maybe next time he/she will do better.

                      Imagine that, every time you act like a jerk, and get caught at it, somebody must have set you up...easy fix, don't act like a jerk. If the officer spends time without pay, it is because he did not act in a professional fashion....if the person you claim purposefully owned him did not, then somebody else will if he is so easily owned.

                      Bill
                      Just pay your dues, and be quiet :-)

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by JQC
                        Second, like I said... if he wanted a confrontation, it would have made more sense to go someplace with a lot more people, and a much higher chance of getting caught. That means more eyes, more chance to make noise, more witnesses in a lawsuit, more responding officers which = more chances for officers to make a mistake. THAT is a set up. A guy going through an airport checkpoint knowing the TSA will grope you - and saying on a recording, "if you touch my junk I'll have you arrested" ... that is a setup.
                        You missed the part of the original story where he admits to carrying around a recording device "just in case" - you don't think he's looking for a paycheck?! Come on now...he probably has a lawyer on speed dial...

                        From the story:

                        he has had an audio recorder on him each time in case a cop is having a bad day or doesn't understand the law, he said.
                        And as far as this goes:

                        Originally posted by JQC
                        When I shop at Best Buy, I don't like showing my receipt on the way out. I might if it takes 2 seconds, but if there's a long line with people with tons of stuff ahead of me, I'm walking straight out the door without saying a word. I've never had much of a problem doing this. The worst thing that happened was a guy shouted at me, "Hey thanks a lot man!" as I left.

                        That's completely legal right? Also unpopular right? Now suppose I start getting harassed more often by exit employees.

                        Isn't it fair for me to want to document my experience with a camera in case this continues? Or, is my taking a legal, but unpopular action a way of trying to get a payout? I don't want a payout. I just want to leave without getting harassed so I can get on with my day.

                        Is it a setup if I turn on a recording device before I walk out?
                        Best Buy is a private owned company housed in a privately owned building on private property - if they have rules against video recording then they have every right to ask you to leave, or if you refuse, have the police TELL you to leave, or have you arrested for trespassing. It's a free country - as is such, you do not have to shop there and are perfectly free to shop somewhere else if you don't like their policies. I understand completely what you're saying, but that's their policies to attempt to stop theft, which is more important to them than maybe losing a few customers who get upset about the long line at the door and don't want to come back, so they have every right to, just like you can tell anyone who enters your home to take off their shoes. It's private property. If you don't like Best Buy's policies and procedures, go shop at Walmart. Now YOU'RE comparing apples to oranges.

                        And also:

                        Originally posted by JQC
                        A guy going through an airport checkpoint knowing the TSA will grope you - and saying on a recording, "if you touch my junk I'll have you arrested" ... that is a setup.
                        That's not a set up - that's just an idiot being loud...flying isn't a constitutionally protected right and the TSA has established protocols for the safety of everyone on the plane (as well as the ground)...if you don't like their safety measures, you can drive, take a bus, or take a train...

                        Now, for your statements:

                        Originally posted by JQC
                        First is obvious - they don't want their rights violated.
                        Second but less obvious - I wouldn't want a criminal to get a conviction tossed because someone wasn't up to date on the laws. Doing so puts that criminal out on the street, which in turn puts my safety in jeopardy. That's unacceptable.
                        I applaud your intentions - I really do. However, you have to pick your battles better. Defending a moron who clearly was in the wrong makes you look bad. This wasn't a completely 100% law abiding citizen who did nothing wrong and was stopped illegally. Even with the OC laws in PA they had a right to stop him and make sure he had a permit to carry OC. You can't argue that fact. All he had to do was follow the officers instructions exactly how he said them and he would have been on his way within minutes. This whole thing is in the media, along with other incidents that make the paper, because instead of doing what the people are supposed to do, they decide to do things that make the officer fear for their safety - and like I said above - the #1 priority of every police officer on the face of the planet is to GO HOME SAFE AND ALIVE AT THE END OF THEIR SHIFT - PERIOD. Did the officer use foul language and maybe violated a policy or 2? Yes. He'll be dealt with. Could the whole thing have been avoided if the guy would have just did what the officer said? You bet. And then he wouldn't be facing charges himself.
                        Originally posted by RSGSRT
                        We've reached a point where natural selection doesn't have a chance in hell of keeping up with the procreation of imbeciles.
                        Why is it acceptable for you to be an idiot, but not acceptable for me to point it out?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by crass cop View Post
                          +2!
                          looking for a confrontation, hence the recorder!
                          "I told the cop I would get my permit".....seriously? Im gonna let you lower your arms to "gun on hip" level so you can go through your pockets?? dont think so.

                          +1 to V, also
                          Just a little food for thought, a recorder being present is not always because someone is "looking for confrontation". I have posted before that I rarely OC, in fact I cant remember the last time I did. But, I have AV in my car and audio on my person. Having the ability to record something is useful and not always because someone is looking for trouble. I didn't have trouble with the police when I did OC and I have zero reason to expect trouble with them now, yet I still like to have the ability to produce a witness if needed that is not of the "he said she said" type, and that does not mean it has to be a witness to a police / citizen encounter..it can be a witness to anything it is needed for.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by crass cop View Post
                            if it was a "right", then you wouldnt need a permit to OC
                            I dont need a permit in my state to OC, I agree with VA Dutch 100%, I dont usually do it but I like to have the option.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by opencarry View Post
                              Just a little food for thought, a recorder being present is not always because someone is "looking for confrontation". I have posted before that I rarely OC, in fact I cant remember the last time I did. But, I have AV in my car and audio on my person. Having the ability to record something is useful and not always because someone is looking for trouble. I didn't have trouble with the police when I did OC and I have zero reason to expect trouble with them now, yet I still like to have the ability to produce a witness if needed that is not of the "he said she said" type, and that does not mean it has to be a witness to a police / citizen encounter..it can be a witness to anything it is needed for.
                              Ok, we've already established that you carry a cell phone, along with about 99% of the population...
                              STOP CALLING IT A RECORDING DEVICE!!! People think you're paranoid when you say that!

                              Just call it "a cell phone that has the ability to record"...
                              Originally posted by RSGSRT
                              We've reached a point where natural selection doesn't have a chance in hell of keeping up with the procreation of imbeciles.
                              Why is it acceptable for you to be an idiot, but not acceptable for me to point it out?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Yes, we certainly want police officers to spend their time learning about the sensibilities of people who openly carry firearms and bait the police, rather than on suppressing crime, arresting criminals, or training that mighthelp them in doing their core job.
                                Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. -- Aldous Huxley
                                Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity. -- Albert Einstein

                                Comment

                                MR300x250 Tablet

                                Collapse

                                What's Going On

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 4692 users online. 268 members and 4424 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 26,947 at 08:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

                                Welcome Ad

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X