A completely reasonable way to deal with the new wave of open carry morons.....

[hrdware]

BadgeBunny is right that cops don't have a whole lot of say in which calls they get to respond to. However, they do have a lot of choice in how they handle the situation once they are called, and it is part of their responsibility to address any concerns as aggressively as possible WITHIN THE LAW. Obviously it is part of their responsibilities to know the law and the legal limits on their own choice of action. Certainly it would not be good police work to address a legitimately concerned citizen's call about a man with a gun by just telling the citizen that open carry is legal and to buzz off... if a call goes out, the cop needs to show up, locate the subject of the call, and make consensual contact to adequately address the situation. None of this requires any sort of suspicion of wrongdoing. In addition, a cop would be completely within his rights, as would any member of the public, to tell the subject exactly what he thinks of his behavior, and even to lecture him about how not all legal behavior is smart behavior. The process of making consensual contact, and the conversations that ensue, frequently give rise to reasonable suspicion and/or probable cause that a crime is being committed... in which case it is proper to detain the suspect, either for further investigation or for prosecution. But if there is no RS or PC present, no contact beyond consensual contact would be warranted. In the vast majority of cases, this sort of contact should give the cop a pretty good idea of whether the subject is actually a danger or not. And if there is no reason to suspect a crime is being committed, the cop can tell the concerned citizen that he checked into the situation, that the man is lawfully carrying a firearm, that he doesn't believe him to be a danger, and that there is nothing more he can legally do about the situation.

The problem with the bold part is that if while the officer is telling me is opinion, he also tells me I am not free to go or I am being detained. This means he is using color of law to lecture me about his opinion concerning what I am doing. With any normal citizen, I can walk a way but if an officer is doing this under color of law, I can not.

 

[hrdware]

off-topic

There have been posts in which I have seen a few quips about how the open carry law was unnecessary and more notably a bad idea. I think what really rubbed me wrong, and is not fair to the other officers on here, where they said that they plan to check everyone for their ID regardless of whether they are suspicious or not, even though it was perceived that it would not be department policy. Unfortunately the thread that was in was deleted, or I'd be able to quote it word for word. It's quite possible I misinterpreted sarcasm, but unfortunately I saw it more than once so I don't know that's the case.

Please, don't get me wrong. I have the utmost respect for the boys in blue, both on this forum and off. I've even posted some contrary opinions based on what I've experienced in person. I've found that most of the police I've spoke with feel exactly how you stated.

It may simply be that I've only seen a couple of negative posts, and glossed over the positive ones.

/off-topic

Assistant Police Chief Sid Porter with Midwest City Police Department was misinterpreted/misquoted regarding this at a press conference. The press release came across as MWC checking everyone who was OC because OC automatically made the carrier a suspicious person.

There have been other threads I have seen where someone said something like, "...an officer I know said they were going to check everyone..."

It is my understanding that most of the larger departments are not going to worry about checking unless there is some other reason to do so. I think OMAG, the group that provides most of the training for the smaller police departments, is going to advise them to do the same, only check if other things would make the person stick out as suspicious.

 

[henschman]

The problem with the bold part is that if while the officer is telling me is opinion, he also tells me I am not free to go or I am being detained. This means he is using color of law to lecture me about his opinion concerning what I am doing. With any normal citizen, I can walk a way but if an officer is doing this under color of law, I can not.

I specifically said that the officer could do this as part of a consensual contact, which would mean that the citizen is free to leave or ignore the officer, as he could any other person. If the citizen is unsure about it, he can always ask if he is being detained or if he is free to leave when a cop is giving him a piece of his mind. In the video, the kid did just that. Of course the officer told him that he was being detained due to reasonable suspicion of a crime being committed, which as I have stated I believe was wrong.

 

[hrdware]

I specifically said that the officer could do this as part of a consensual contact, which would mean that the citizen is free to leave or ignore the officer, as he could any other person. If the citizen is unsure about it, he can always ask if he is being detained or if he is free to leave when a cop is giving him a piece of his mind. In the video, the kid did just that. Of course the officer told him that he was being detained due to reasonable suspicion of a crime being committed, which as I have stated I believe was wrong.

Missed that point in your original post. I agree with everything you have said here.

 

[dra1965]

I think the officer did a great job. the guy videoing needs to get the chip off his shoulder and quit being an armchair lawyer. He was looking for a fight. Grow up a little. Geez!

 

[carry guy]

I thought the officer was great. In a perfect world (at least from my point of view), citizens wouldn't freak out and call the police when they see someone open carrying a gun (even an MP5) in a state where open carry is legal.

The sad fact is a lot of people are totally conditioned by the mainstream media, which as we all know, has an anti-gun bias. Others are going to be vehemently anti-gun come hell or high water, despite any educational efforts about guns. Both types are likely to call the police in a situation such as this, as a knee jerk reaction, despite there being an open carry law. That's just the way it is.

 

[spd67]

So, excercising your right to open carry makes you an activist? I do appreciate that the police officer acted polite and professional.

No walking around with a video camera, with the only intent being to gain the attention of police, and then video taping it in hope that the police will do something wrong makes him an activist.

 

[bettingpython]

Well hell I'll have to sling the ole mp5k over the shoulder and head to the mall come 11/1/2012...

Dudes were a couple of nut sacks, I thought the officer did great.

 

[bettingpython]

Do you have a reliable cite for this?

I can cite it because I have called in on suspicious vehicles circling the neighborhood and then parking on a side street where it can observe the comings and goings of people in the past.

Once the guy turned out to be a PI working an insurance fraud case, another time the guy had warrants for failure to appear on burglary charges. Both times my calls were responded to. My neighborhood is neither ghetto or affluent.

 

[Crosstimbers Okie]

Hi,

What really annoys me about these guys is that they just don't get it. They give fodder to the anti 2a crowd with these types of stunts. See how their video is portrayed? Also, now anyone who open carries is labeled a crazy open carry "activist" instead of a normal person going about their day who happens to also open carry. Probably their very video will be used by anti 2a politicians to show that "the laws need to be changed".

I don't plan to open carry much, but if I'm dressed well and feel like I would represent open carry in a positive way by doing so, I may from time to time with a reasonable choice of firearm.

The officer handled the situation very professionally. Still, I'd like to see a day where an open carrier going about his or her business isn't seen as out of the ordinary.

Out of sheer curiosity, would someone carrying an ar15 pistol slung over their back fit the new open carry law? Is this something we might see?

Good luck,

Alan

I agree. There will be a backlash that will cost us big. Success breeds failure when the victor overreaches.