open-carry-interaction-w-police

[whiterussian1974]

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/0 ... rspective/
"The progress and outcome of these armed encounters usually depends on two key factors: geography and the officers’ attitude. In some states (e.g. Arizona) the police are comfortable with the practice. In other states (e.g. Rhode Island and Connecticut) open carry is so rare the police assume it’s illegal – or at least indicates an illegal activity. That’s the general picture. More specifically, though, bad things can happen . . ."

[66427vette]

Never understood open carry. Why show the cards you are holding? Seems like a good way to get shot first then robbed.

[poikilotrm]

Never understood open carry. Why show the cards you are holding? Seems like a good way to get shot first then robbed.

Name a case where this has ever occurred.

[whiterussian1974]

Never understood open carry. Why show the cards you are holding? Seems like a good way to get shot first then robbed.

Name a case where this has ever occurred.

I can't sight specific names, but have seen cases where drug dealers/stash houses were raided.
For law-abiding citizens, I'm not aware of a single case outside of LA, Miami, NYC, NJ.
Those were mostly cases of Police/Security/Gov't Agents being targeted for murder. Those states have criminals that go Gonzo.
I agree that concealed carry is usually better b/c it has a force multiplication effect.
Non carriers are treated w equal respect/defference b/c noone knows who's armed. So it creates a Polite Society.
But under some circumstances, open carry is appropriate.
I always request that the suspect interlace his fingers above his head, rather than disarming him. I actually feel MORE comfortable knowing exactly where the greatest threat is. Just need to keep his hands away from it.
When my Spidy Sense tingles during an encounter, I ask the person to cross their arms across their chest. If they refuse I perform a Terry Search.

BTW, I chose "Only in non-sensitive locations. (not w/i 500' of schools/1000' of airports)"
Feel free to post your vote if you choose. Then we can also read your rationale.
(If you choose Other, just write it at beginning of your post.)

[doubloon]

Never understood open carry. Why show the cards you are holding? Seems like a good way to get shot first then robbed.

I would prefer concealed carry even if open were legal but I believe carry whether open or concealed should be legal and let it be the choice of the carrier.

Treat every gun as if it is loaded and treat everyone you meet as if they are carrying a loaded gun.

[whiterussian1974]

I would prefer concealed carry even if open were legal but I believe carry whether open or concealed should be legal and let it be the choice of the carrier.

Treat every gun as if it is loaded and treat everyone you meet as if they are carrying a loaded gun.

Should CCW permits have an Open Carry Endorsement? Should they need another 2hrs of training in firearm retention techniques?

Or should Open and Concealed carry be decriminalized. Just subject to Civil Action if an Incident occurs?

I tend toward this, but am keeping an Open Mind and would prefer that the Live Experiment proceed in steps. Not complete and sudden unrestiction. And begin in Rural States. Then progress to other Red States. Give a Exec Order Exemption for Blue States. Their voters claim to be unable to control their own actions; and vote for Total Gov't Incroachment.

This is an open ?, not just for Doubloon. Anyone can reply.

I went w 2 hrs b/c iirc in the Academy we had 3 days of Hand-to-Hand Training. This included 2hrs of retention drills.

[johndoe3]

from OpenCarry website http://www.opencarry.org/



On the map above, there are States that technically have open carry, but in practice you cannot (like NJ, MD, MA, CT, RI, HI)

It seems this issue is most relevant for Texas and the 5 other states (& DC) where open carry is prohibited. I personally prefer to carry concealed in towns and in a car. I leave it to each State to decide whether they want constitutional carry, mostly open carry, or open carry only by CCW licensees. There doesn't have to be a one-size fits all on open carry for all States.

In Colorado it is legal to:
open carry (except in Denver, Arvada and Breckenridge)
open or concealed carry of handguns in cars (inside a car treated the same as your home, & for Castle doctrine)
carry in churches
carry in bars
hunt with a suppressor (always has been legal)

OK, in Colorado we have the little issue of the 2 anti-gun laws passed in 2013 (15 round magazines and NICS for private sales of guns); but we are working on it to fix that situation.

Texas, best wishes as you all work out what kind of open carry you want in your State (consensus); it appears that you guys are going to get some kind of open carry soon.

[doubloon]

Should CCW permits ...

There should be no permit. Honest and law abiding citizens should not have to register like sex offenders to exercise the right to carry.

What makes handguns special? I can carry a long gun anywhere I want without a permit or registration and by all accounts it is a much more dangerous and deadly weapon than any average handgun.

I don't understand the decriminalization question unless you mean open and concealed carry without a permit in states where such a permit is required. Already in at least some states open and/or concealed carry requires no permit and is "decriminalized"?

[TROOPER]

Never understood open carry. Why show the cards you are holding? Seems like a good way to get shot first then robbed.

This.

Whether or not the government does have, or should have the ability to restrict this is one issue.

Whether or not this is a sound tactical decision -- and I assume folks carry specifically for tactical reasons -- is a different issue altogether.

[whiterussian1974]

Should CCW permits ...

There should be no permit. Honest and law abiding citizens should not have to register like sex offenders to exercise the right to carry.

I totally agree.

I don't understand the decriminalization question unless you mean open and concealed carry without a permit in states where such a permit is required. Already in at least some states open and/or concealed carry requires no permit and is "decriminalized"?

I meant that in TX open carry is only permitted on Private Land, except under State Licensure. Security/LEO,etc.
Now that I see that map, I don't know why "we" aren't allowed Public Open Carry.
I voted, "Only in non-sensitive locations. (not w/i 500' of schools/1000' of airports)"
So I feel that TX should convert to this option... and join the Brotherhood of Fellow States that embrace Conditional Constitutional Open Carry.
Shop and Bar owners and some of their employees are allowed to open carry. I did when I ran a Greyhound Bus terminal.
Yet I wasn't allowed to carry when Off Duty as a Correctional Officer in Huntsville until I changed out of my uniform. In street clothes it was lawful. In Uniform, not.
In rural areas, especially remote towns COs have been shot at by Gangbangers, exCons, and Family Members of same. For a while, there were even Off Site Changing building for COs to dress when out of The Gate, but before leaving State Land.

I agree. A non-criminal is over 10,000 times more likely to be injured or killed by a motor vehicle, than a firearm.
There's a Bear Arms Right, but no Drive Cars Right. Why have we reversed these?

[doubloon]

... Why have we reversed these?

Not the only thing reversed.

In America you can join the army before before you can vote.
In America you learn to drive before you learn to drink responsibly.
In America you're required to have a muffler on your car but you have to pay special fees for an anal probe to put one on a firearm.

[Hush]

Never understood open carry. Why show the cards you are holding? Seems like a good way to get shot first then robbed.

True

[whiterussian1974]

... Why have we reversed these?

Not the only thing reversed.

In America you can join the army before before you can vote.
In America you learn to drive before you learn to drink responsibly.
In America you're required to have a muffler on your car but you have to pay special fees for an anal probe to put one on a firearm.

Yeah. Using 1934 NFA logic lifepreservers, seatbelts, birthcontrol and abortions should have a 15-18month wait after being photoed and fingerprinted.

Maybe Congress, Supr Court and DoJ need a new perspective. If the outside world frightens them, they can always return to the warm, protective environment they are used to.

[continuity]

It's all in the totality of the situations contact.

A farmer doing fence line maintenance, is a totally different situational contact than a bar fight evolution...

[poikilotrm]

It's all in the totality of the situations contact.

A farmer doing fence line maintenance, is a totally different situational contact than a bar fight evolution...

No, it is all in the totality of the cop's mindset. Don't take that as bashing, it isn't.

[johndoe3]

I voted, "Only in non-sensitive locations. (not w/i 500' of schools/1000' of airports)"

whiterussian,
What you propose is bad law IMHO. Consider that in small towns creating a buffer around schools as you propose, would ostensibly disarm half the town. It would criminalize someone driving by the school on the street. Yes, the safety of children in schools is important; however, we've learned that large buffer zones around schools does not protect the children, but directly makes citizens living nearby into criminals. I will add also, that States are decriminalizing guns in school parking lots. After all, why should people be disarmed solely because they drive up to pick up their kids?

Likewise, the airport proposal is also bad law. Airports already have gun free zones beyond the TSA checkpoints. In many States the rest of the airport terminals are subject to the same laws as elsewhere in the State. How would an air traveler carry their guns into a terminal to ship during their flight if your proposed zone were in effect? Even if they carry the gun in a locked box, they have to open it and show the contents in the terminal (with ammo in the shipping box), so they can have access to a gun within the airport terminal. Also, your proposal effectively disarms people going to and from the airport. Why?

I'm suggesting that your proposals above are government tyranny if enacted into law.

[doubloon]

...
I'm suggesting that your proposals above are government tyranny if enacted into law.

Agreed.

...
No, it is all in the totality of the cop's mindset. Don't take that as bashing, it isn't.

But nothing to do with the mindset of the person confronted by the cop I guess? It takes two to tango.

Singling out cops negatively and ignoring the culpability of any other party involved in the situation certainly comes across as bias even if you deny it after you say it.

[poikilotrm]

But nothing to do with the mindset of the person confronted by the cop I guess? It takes two to tango.

Singling out cops negatively and ignoring the culpability of any other party involved in the situation certainly comes across as bias even if you deny it after you say it.

No. People going about their daily lives, not bothering anyone, but with a weapon on their hip are not in need of being confronted in the first place. Cops will actively seek to interact with open carriers in order to intimidate and harrass them. This isn't bias, this is observable fact and openly stated policy in many cop shops. The only people regularly seeking to provoke violence and disrupt peaceful society are the cops when it comes to open carriers. Carrying does not somehow make the carrier "culpable", as you suggest.

It may take two to tango, but in the event you are open carrying, it only takes action on the part of the cop to destroy a life or lives.

Mindset only applies to acts comitted. A person sitting drinking a cup of coffee in a cafe with a Sig on his hip has his mind on his coffee, most likely. A cop seeking to confront that peacable and law abiding citizen isn't doing so for any other reason than to harass. Your attempt to blame the victim is, as always, repugnant.

Let's follow your mindset though. Given that nearly 100% of violent crimes are committed by people wearing pants, would wearing pants in public, a perfectly legal activity, just like OC, be RS or PC for a stop?

Oh, and in pretty much every state, acting in a manner that is presumptively legal, like say, oh, I don't know, ummm, OC, means that there is zero RS or PC for a stop.

Edited to add: One other thing, CCW/OC people are the single most law abiding demographic in the US. Why do cops then seek to harass them so eagerly?

[TROOPER]

How... "Leondard Embody" of you.

[poikilotrm]

How... "Leondard Embody" of you.

I don't know who that is, but if you find what I say incorrect or improperly thought out, try using logic and reason to refute what I say. I know that has historically been difficult for you, but try.

[whiterussian1974]

I voted, "Only in non-sensitive locations. (not w/i 500' of schools/1000' of airports)"

whiterussian,
What you propose is bad law IMHO. Consider that in small towns creating a buffer around schools as you propose, would ostensibly disarm half the town. It would criminalize someone driving by the school on the street. After all, why should people be disarmed solely because they drive up to pick up their kids?

Likewise, the airport proposal is also bad law. Airports already have gun free zones beyond the TSA checkpoints. Also, your proposal effectively disarms people going to and from the airport. Why?

The law would only require concealing w/i School/Airport Zones. NOT disarmament.

I agree that kids and travelers should also be safe, and that Gun Free Zones are crime magnets.
My proposals would only require that people take the extra step to lift their shirt or open their bag before defending themselves.

Logically, if Military and Police use open carry in sensitive locations; then everyone armed should result in even higher safety.

Yet, our society has chosen that uniforms mean that people have extra training and conferred authority. Thus, a 19yr old with an auto rifle is somehow more "trustworthy" than a Retired Army SpecWar Vet. Just by adding the uniform.

Some Societies recognize maturity and experience. Sadly, ours doesn't seem to. I don't really understand why we don't just use a lapel pin or armband to display our authority to have special access and privilage. Oh wait, we do. Just like in 1930s-40s Germany, 1920-current Russia, Cuba, China, USA. Ever notice the Congressional Lapel Pin that is a "go nearly anywhere pass?"

In Ancient Rome serving a Tour of Duty in Military of Gov't Service allowed Citizenship. This allowed voting, carrying a personal defense weapon, Freedom of Speech, etc. It seems to me that just as DLs don't require a new written and practical test for renewals, simple online countinued education and periodic practical test should be good enough.

Iread an article in a gun mag yesterday that states Gun Trainers are just another group of Gov't dependants that lobby for continued and increasing public training to justify forcing people to pay for courses.
Thoughts?

PS: http://nashvillecitypaper.com/content/c ... k-47-parks Leondard Embody

[whiterussian1974]

No. People going about their daily lives, not bothering anyone, but with a weapon on their hip are not in need of being confronted in the first place.

Let's follow your mindset though. Given that nearly 100% of violent crimes are committed by people wearing pants, would wearing pants in public, a perfectly legal activity, just like OC, be RS or PC for a stop?

Edited to add: One other thing, CCW/OC people are the single most law abiding demographic in the US. Why do cops then seek to harass them so eagerly?

The problem is generally the ignorance of those making the calls. Emergency Operators should be trained to request what crime the armed citizen is comitting when called. Then inform the caller that the Constitution allows an armed Citizenry. But call screeners aren't usually police or lawyers, so even THEY don't know if a law has been violated. That's why they just send a Patrol to the Scene.

Often, callers claim that the person is "waving a gun around" or my favorite banishing a firearm.
Yes, that's right. Banishing.
And once a possible crime is reported we're REQUIRED to investigate. Equal Protection Clause means that we can't discount a report until it's investigated. How we go about the investigation however, is a judgment call. Not everyone or every situation results in the same judgment.

You;d be amazed how many things the Courts have ruled permissible as PC. Simply having a Country Western Radio Station bumper sticker is PC for Stop in sections of TX.
A single occupent or 2 male occupants in a car w out of county plates is PC.
Most terrorism is committed by people w heads. Don't be surprised if having a head is ruled a "proximal, imminent threat."

Gov't Agents can already write themselves On-the-Fly Warrants that aren't subject to Judical Scrutiny because of Patriot Act. They can even write in their own Gag Order to prevent discussion or disclosure of receiving the NSL upon pain of Indefinite Detention.
Wake UP people. 1984 was decades ago. Welcome to the Age of Precrime.

[doubloon]

How... "Leondard Embody" of you.

I don't know who that is, but if you find what I say incorrect or improperly thought out, try using logic and reason to refute what I say. I know that has historically been difficult for you, but try.

Lenny is to carry what Gecko45 is to tactical.

... Given that nearly 100% of violent crimes are committed by people wearing pants, ...

Sorry, this is not accurate, have to throw out the whole post now.

[66427vette]

Most of the guys who open carry around here are the mall minja types the like to draw attention to themselves or guys looking for trouble to put on YouTube .

[tsands974]

Never understood open carry. Why show the cards you are holding? Seems like a good way to get shot first then robbed.

Name a case where this has ever occurred.

There doesn't have to be a documented case to prove the logic behind this. If there is an armed bad guy coming into say a convenience store for whatever evil purpose, guess who is going to be the first to get targeted? The guy who's gun is clearly showing. Common sense

I prefer to keep my handgun concealed, to keep non-informed citizens from freaking out, and to keep myself from being target #1 in the event of an armed encounter as mentioned above.