LEO and open carry

[ExSniper]

Please list sources for all statistical info posted. There is no valid database of LEO shootings available that would make any quoted number accurate.
Civilians in Oklahoma are not allowed to draw their firearm unless in immediate, urgent danger. Cops may have to use their guns under much more diverse situations. Please do not compare apples and oranges.
I have been teaching SDA classes for over a decade and staunchly support your right to carry. Whether we like it or not common sense requires some limitations on our rights because so many are willing to trample on others rights to exercise theirs. I hope open carry passes but I worry that it will result in more arrests of weapons carriers who insist on pushing the envelope.
BadgeBunny, thank you for understanding what I said.

 

[NikatKimber]

Please list sources for all statistical info posted. There is no valid database of LEO shootings available that would make any quoted number accurate.
Civilians in Oklahoma are not allowed to draw their firearm unless in immediate, urgent danger. Cops may have to use their guns under much more diverse situations. Please do not compare apples and oranges.
I have been teaching SDA classes for over a decade and staunchly support your right to carry. Whether we like it or not common sense requires some limitations on our rights because so many are willing to trample on others rights to exercise theirs. I hope open carry passes but I worry that it will result in more arrests of weapons carriers who insist on pushing the envelope.
BadgeBunny, thank you for understanding what I said.

I agree with most of what you said. I don't know exactly how you meant the bolded part, but I would agree that there should be limitations on the way we use our rights. But not the right itself.

IE, having a gun = not a crime
reckless with a gun = crime

I don't think there should be legalese saying we have to have retention. But it would be completely allowable (without infringing rights) to say something to the effect of: "It is up to the bearer to reasonably secure the carried weapon. Failure on the bearers part resulting in unauthorized possession of their firearm is not protected under this section."

This would put the burden of proof on the prosecution to prove that the carrier was *NOT* securing their firearm, rather than on the carrier to prove that they *WERE* using retention.

This would also make it possible to distance the responsible firearms community from the nutcase that carries in an el cheapo nylon rig and lets their gun fall out while sitting in McD's. And allows that person to be prosecuted, as they should.

 

[Souperphly]

Will I open carry? Probably not. But I might use an OWB holster with my shirt covering it.

Oh yeah, I am NOT a LEO, but I respect them very highly for the job they do.

I see this as the greatest benefit of OC, I like my serpa OWB holster but it dosen't conceal well enough for me to be comfortable carrying with it. With OC I won't need to be as religious in my concealment.

 

[pak-40]

Please list sources for all statistical info posted. There is no valid database of LEO shootings available that would make any quoted number accurate.
Civilians in Oklahoma are not allowed to draw their firearm unless in immediate, urgent danger. Cops may have to use their guns under much more diverse situations. Please do not compare apples and oranges.
I have been teaching SDA classes for over a decade and staunchly support your right to carry. Whether we like it or not common sense requires some limitations on our rights because so many are willing to trample on others rights to exercise theirs. I hope open carry passes but I worry that it will result in more arrests of weapons carriers who insist on pushing the envelope.
BadgeBunny, thank you for understanding what I said.

VERY interesting read. It dispells many of the myths and hypotheticals being portrayed here by those AGAINST our rights to open carry.

http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/ShallIssue.htm#toc

 

[kd5rjz]

Well, I am a Leo (born in August), but not a LEO, but I'll give my opinion anyways.

I support OC, though I doubt I will OC very often. No point in going into reasons as this thread is regarding the support of OC and not the philosophies behind it.


I think this legislation is a piece of crap , just as I think the concealed carry legislation was a piece of crap. CC & OC should require no license, no fees, no classes, etc. Selling us our rights is BS.


Statistics, opinions, and laws shouldn't affect CC or OC, we're given the right to "bear arms" in the Bill of Rights and so obviously that should be the only law we need regarding OC, period.

 

[pak-40]

I think this legislation is a piece of crap , just as I think the concealed carry legislation was a piece of crap. CC & OC should require no license, no fees, no classes, etc. Selling us our rights is BS.


Statistics, opinions, and laws shouldn't affect CC or OC, we're given the right to "bear arms" in the Bill of Rights and so obviously that should be the only law we need regarding OC, period.

+1 Though I do think the OC law is a good first step in the right direction.

 

[oklacowboy]

This is correct.

 

[ExSniper]

I think this legislation is a piece of crap , just as I think the concealed carry legislation was a piece of crap. CC & OC should require no license, no fees, no classes, etc. Selling us our rights is BS.
Statistics, opinions, and laws shouldn't affect CC or OC, we're given the right to "bear arms" in the Bill of Rights and so obviously that should be the only law we need regarding OC, period.

We were not given the right, rights existed and do exist prior to and even in the absence of government. We have enumerated and codified certain rights and in the interest of avoiding anarchy we place and accept limits on these rights.

I have arrested SDA permit holders for violating the laws of the State of Oklahoma. Article 2, Section 26 of the Oklahoma Constitution, as poor a document as it is, mandates that the legislature may restrict the carrying of weapons. They can do so without violating the 2nd Amendment because we are "a well-regulated militia." The founding fathers wrote at length about weapons and the well-regulated wording meant to them properly trained, equipped, and prepared to defend and maintain a free state. The current open carry bills are filled with stupid and superfluous minutia and are a poor and feeble first step.

As I said, I hope some form of open carry passes but I fear the "in your face" attitude of many who support it will cause serious and negative repercusssions. Not wild shoot-outs in the street but very damaging attention to gun owners in general.

If you choose to legally open carry, I wish you the best and implore you to get more training. Anyone who says they have had plenty of training or enough training simply does not understand that you cannot ever have enough training. Be caeful, be safe, make wise decisions before you choose to carry openly.

Kopel makes some very valid points but his data is way too small a sample to be statistically valid and his comparison of police shootings to civilian involved shootings is simply two extremely different types of events. Most of what he wrote was related directly to six states that passed CONCEALED carry and what the initial impact of citizens carrying concealed. It is a really old study based on several very much older studies, many of which he admits used a flawed methodology.

 

[BadgeBunny]

**snip**
BadgeBunny, thank you for understanding what I said.

No problem.

I find it interesting that some folks have always been able to have a rational conversation about subjects such as this, but most seem to get some kind of adrenaline dump and then the jumping up and down and name-calling starts. I've never found that to be a really productive way to handle things ... but ... like I've said before ... others mileage may vary ...

Besides, this is the internet ... I've lost track of the "Oh, oh, oh ... we gotta DO something about this" posts of righteous indignation here that get about "this" far off the ground. It's just easier to sit in the easy chair and attack you for having a view different from theirs (and with some practical experience to bring to the discussion no less) than it is to get up and do something about it.

In the end, if open carry passes, it will still be regulated in some way, shape or form and it will, IMHO, make LEOs job harder and more dangerous. In the end we won't know until (or if) it passes ... But again I still think open carry is a bad idea ... I'm entitled to that opinion and I'm not changing it until someone can give me a VALID reason (and it is their job to convince me it's a valid reason, it's not my job to just take their word for it because they said). That doesn't make me anti-America or anti-2nd Amendment -- It just makes me a girl with a different opinion that those who disagree with me ...

 

[MLR]

:SNIP:

In the end, if open carry passes, it will still be regulated in some way, shape or form and it will, IMHO, make LEOs job harder and more dangerous. In the end we won't know until (or if) it passes ... But again I still think open carry is a bad idea ... I'm entitled to that opinion and I'm not changing it until someone can give me a VALID reason (and it is their job to convince me it's a valid reason, it's not my job to just take their word for it because they said). That doesn't make me anti-America or anti-2nd Amendment -- It just makes me a girl with a different opinion that those who disagree with me ...

As a person who grew up in a LEO family member. Who still has many close friends in that occupation I agree with much of what you have said.
What we have to understand is that government was not formed to protect itself at the expense of the people. It is not the job of the people to make life easy for the government or those in it. The government was set up to protect and to make life easier for the citizens.

Many of our laws nowadays are set up to make prosecution of certain crimes easier. A far cry from the original intent where it was difficult to convict a person. When rights are taken away simply because keeping them it makes things more difficult for the government I believe we have gone to far.

Michael