I don’t think it’s a big deal if a cop asks someone open carrying a firearm for their ID—if the po-po believes that the gun schlepper is up to no good. Nor do I think it a big deal if the person with the openly carried firearm tells the inquisitive constable that citizens openly carrying a firearm don’t have to show their ID to cops—unless they’re being Terry-stopped. But I am opposed to cops and open carriers who insist on being dicks. In this case, it’s the former. A U.S. passport’s not sufficient ID for officer McGruff? GTFO. Why don’t you step out here with me? Why don’t you FOAD? Stand over here so everybody doesn’t have to stand here and look at us? Why does that give me a serious case of the willies? Seriously, this is exactly this kind of officious condescending attitude by a cop that makes me wish that everyone open carried so that the police understood that they’re not nearly as special as they think they are. Just sayin’.

135 Responses to MO Cop to Open Carry Advocates: Show Us Your Papers!

    • I don’t like his explanation of causing alarm. He is almost as bad as the original cops, even if he is nice about violating people’s rights.

      • Yeah, he was mistaken about that, for sure. However, his attitude tells me that he’s trying really hard to walk the right side of the line, while serving all the local residents. I get the feeling that if someone pointed out that problem with that reasoning, he’d likely take it to heart. I don’t know him, I could be wrong, but that’s the feeling I got.

        • 3 Texas Open Carry protesters got arrested by state troopers the other day in the capital, 2 for carrying black powder revolvers specifically exempted by Texas law as not being firearms. DA refused to arraign one, others were released on PR bail after the Texas land commissioner offered to bail them out. Here’s where one of the troopers reads the actual law and starts to mumble and walk off. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8UXEFhyBz4&feature=youtu.be&t=8m40s

      • I too am really sick of how other people *feel* being used as rationale by law enforcement for detainment. Since when was making someone feel uncomfortable illegal? Is sticks and stones not relevant any more?

        “They saw your gun. It made them uncomfortable.”
        “Perhaps they should question why they have irrational fear of an inanimate object.”

        Jesus, it makes me uncomfortable when I see some 25 year old single mom who’s put boy shorts on her 7 year old with “Juicy” written on the ass. Unfortunately, that’s not considered child abuse so far as I know. Maybe I should start calling the fuzz every time something makes me weep for the future of our society.

    • These people did NOT “cause” alarm. How does acting in a lawful manner “cause” alarm? It was the idiot caller and the responding government mercenaries that caused the alarm here.

      • Yep.

        I notice that nobody walks that back in either video.

        “Wow. I’m sorry, officer, that you got called when there’s nothing going on. It’s a shame someone with their hair on fire wasted your time.”

  1. Society has come to where politicians and the police think they are above the rest of us in the unwashed masses. Not a single one of you has any more rights and shouldn’t have any more privileges than I do and that includes exempting yourself from the laws you write and getting to be better equipped in defending yourselves.

    These were meant to be thankless jobs so the right kind of people would take them.

    • The people the cop was harassing were very, very compliant. They could have just handed them a card saying they invoke their 4th and 5th amendment rights, refused to provide ID, and keep going back and forth between asking the cop if they are free to go and if not, demanding that the cop articulate probable cause for a crime being committed. Of course, that might get you hauled in in some places, so I can fully understand why they played it like they did. Also made that cop look like even more of an jerk.

  2. RF, I can understand your outrage over an officious, arrogant and overreaching cop. What I can’t understand is your surprise.

    Officer D1ckless in the video is the standard, the prototype, the model officer. What a hero!

    Cops are great — just as long as you have nothing to do with them whatsoever.

  3. I’m sorry but once you start comparing people to Nazis or Hitler you have lost my support.

    And I know this probably won’t be a popular opinion but I really don’t blame the cops for have the AR. I guarantee what happened was some soccer mom saw the guns, got spooked, and called 911 saying “THEY HAVE GUNS!!! SAVE MY CHILDREN!”

    This cop honestly seems confused by the whole situation and is just trying to figure it out.

    • Read a history book. This behavior is typical of EVERY repressive gov’t since day one. On a related note, it is well documented that LE attracts those very same character traits that make up the “Nazi’s”. Name calling is appropriate when their behavior, and actions, violate our rights.

        • Demanding to see sources for any statement is pretty weak. Anyone here with access to google can find a reputable source to support any point of view.

        • What am I supposed to search? “Are Cops Nazis”? Yeah then I’ll probably end up with a bunch of results for Infowars.com

    • The cop seems confused by the situation? He’s just trying to figure it out? Umm, the situation is…NOTHING! No law being broken! Nothing to see here, move along! Yet he feels a need to ask anyone and everyone who even MIGHT be associated with the women (who, again, were NOT breaking a law) for ID, detaining them, etc. It’s a total bunch of bullsh*t.

      It pisses me off, also, when the officer is asked by a few people “Am I breaking a law?” he just says “I’m asking to see your ID” over and over. Eff off.

      And then the chief saying “Well, when you open carry and someone sees it and freaks out you’ve just created a public disturbance…” is ridiculous.

      • The cop in the first video looks to me like he’s been doing this job for a long time. It is especially disappointing, then, that he is no better at it than this. His correct response on being called to the Walmart should have been 1. Was the call from Walmart management? 2. Did some official of that Walmart store ask that these people leave the store/premises? (One could understand a little trepidation at approaching an unknown armed person directly and asking them to leave.) 3. Inform the people open-carrying that the management would like them to leave and escort them from the premises.

        If the call did not come from Walmart management then the officer should have contacted them at the same time and asked what they wanted to have done.

        One has to suspect, however, that this group was looking for something to video since they were not in their home state. I support open carry and wish these sorts of situations did not occur, but at this stage of the process you really have to expect some push-back from an uninformed populace and over-zealous police.

      • The situation is that the cops were called because “OMG gunz!” So these cops went to Wally World expecting a gun fight and they were disappointed to only find a bunch of fugly girls OCing.

        And you might not like it but if you are OCing and someone calls the cops to complain because like I said “OMG gunz!” well then you are in fact creating a public disturbance.

        • The way many people dress at Wally World creates more of a disturbance than someone OCing. No laws were being broken, and the officer was overreaching. They do not have the authority to ask for ID unless there is reasonable suspicion of a crime being committed. Just having a firearm isn’t cause. The police are being compared to the SS because in fact, this is how the SS began. Incrementally violating the law until it’s the norm. If there is no push back, they will continue to plow over the sovereignty of the populace. I could write up a Kraft worthy article on my and many citizen’s beef with modern policing, but I’m just too lazy, and this isn’t the forum for most of it’s content.

    • “This cop honestly seems confused by the whole situation and is just trying to figure it out.”

      It’s how LONG it takes him to figure it out. If he can’t tell within a minute or two that these aren’t gangbangers, that they have the right paperwork and that they aren’t “bonnie and bonnie” out to rob walmart, it should have been over.

      I’d like to see him go into hang-banger-land with AR-toting pal and his “command posture” on like that and check some ID like that.

      I really would!

    • Germans stuck their heads in the sand in the early and late 30s as well and ended up with the 3rd Reich on a rampage for world domination.

  4. Unless I am in control of a motor vehicle, there is no law in my state that says I have to carry an ID of any type.

  5. Might be your state, but if you have a CHP in NC, you have to have government ID so a cop can make sure you are okay.

    By the way, these guys carrying AR’s around are really using the Democrats tactics on them.

    Take an issue, keep publicizing it and pushing it and after awhile it’s no big deal. Like welfare, criminals arrested with guns and let loose by judges, Obamacare, blah, blah, blah.

    I not a fan of cops but they do spend most of their working days dealing with society’s finest. After awhile of being thrown up on, pissed on, spat at, slugged and generally abused, watching the revolving door of arrest, bail, release, then arrest, bail, etc they are set up for the mindset that everyone they run into is a jerk trying to be Rambo. And for the most part they are right.

      • While you can understand that they develop an attitude after a time, it does not permit them to shove that attitude down our throats. They are trained and are being paid to protect us and enforce the law, not presume everyone is a perp until proven innocent.

        Next point, if they have been doing this long enough to develop that attitude, just how many bad guys, or girls, have they in their career seen walking around a neighborhood Walmart or shopping mall open-carrying a holstered pistol? I would guess that unless it was someone already on a mission and with the pistol in their hand, pretty much doesn’t happen. Bad Guys conceal their intent and their weapons, they do not walk around advertising.

        • Exactly. Why would a criminal advertise their intent? Only a lawful person would carry in a holster for everyone to see, it makes no sense to do so otherwise.

    • Sorry, must disagree. I interact daily with LEO in the ER. The majority are see are looking for an excuse to abuse the public. Brutal, uncaring, power hungry. List goes on.

      • While I’m glad to not live in any city or town, I’m doubly glad to not live in yours.

        Seattle? Chicago? Oakland…?

        Sorry, man.

      • They do seem to develop an “Us against them” attitude and that is unfortunate and inexcusable. With the current mindset of many, especially urban, police departments it is no wonder that so many of those types of personalities migrate to police work.

        Is there a solution? I don’t know. How are you going to find enough people who are NOT aggressive and overbearing to face these kinds of situations day after day? I surely would not want to do it. Perhaps the only thing we can do is keep making video tapes and keep the pressure on to make them not only uphold the law, but obey it.

        • Here’s a suggestion for the Chiefs (and those in a position of authority) among us:
          One complaint = desk duty for the duration of the IAD inquiry
          Two complaints = desk duty for duration + one week + written warning
          Three complaints = unemployment
          And screw the union…

  6. It’s a wonderful thing that you can break no law yet be stopped and questioned by police. Makes me feel all safe and sound. Hopefully the NYC stop and frisk frenzy sweeps the nation!

    And on that note, why just have DHS checkpoints 75 miles away from our borders? I think if we had them every, oh, let’s say, 50 miles on the highways we could really cut down on illegal immigration AND catch lots of criminals by searching every vehicle in the process. Plus, a bonus would be that since you have to stop so often, the backups would slow everyone down and there would be NO highway deaths due to speeding! Unemployment would be at a new low from all the extra officers needed, and…man, the benefits are popping into my head so fast I can’t continue!

  7. On subject, I suspect the officer has more of a problem with kids questioning authority than with open carry. More grouch syndrome than badge-heavy.

    Some dweeb called the cops, but Wally World hadn’t asked the kids to leave. The kids were surprised and put out, and the cop was doubly put out. It was more graceful than it might have been.

    Which isn’t to say that it doesn’t suck.

    • So… sounds like the police should’ve spent their time educating the person(s) that called them in instead of harassing people legally carrying firearms.

      If no law is being broken, there is no reason that police officer should’ve even approached those OCers. A simple observation of the OCers at a distance would’ve determined they weren’t doing anything illegal.

      I think it should be required that people that call the police on people OCing are the problem here, not the OCers.

      People that call about a person “carrying a gun” should learn the difference between having a gun in a holster in a permitted location vs. waving it around and being irresponsible (or actually being suspicious — at which point, why the hell would a criminal be OCing?). BIG difference.

      • There is something to what you say, and the general public is in large part to blame for the fact that cops check out open carriers. However, realistically, if you were a 911 dispatcher and someone called and told you they saw people with guns, what would you do? If the situation turns out bad (the people with guns were there to cause mayhem), then you would get sued into oblivion if you had decided not to send the cops out. They might ask the caller if the armed person was acting strangely in any other way. However, once a call is placed, the cops pretty much have no choice but to check it out. And once there, the cops have to fill out a report, so they can’t really say they didn’t even ask the gun carrier for a name, so I don’t blame them for asking. That said, the cops don’t have to detain people, nor do they have to be jerks. In this case, people just getting a sandwich, it wouldn’t take much to figure out that this particular crowd didn’t look like trouble. At that point the cop shouldn’t have detained them even long enough to run their IDs. Not being a cop, I don’t know what pressures they are under. If it were up to me, I’d say “look, we got a call, so I have so see what you are up to. Just getting some food? OK, no problem. I’m going to stay over there until I see you go back to your car, just to make sure things stay calm here.”

      • Cops are supposed to respond the same way they did in the days before there were hundreds of thousands of (extra) them looking for something to do – what’s he/she doing that is directly threatening you? Nothing? He/She’s just packing? Well don’t ever call us again unless they actually DO something illegal, or we’ll be up your donkey 6 ways from Sunday for wasting our time.

  8. For the record, I’m one of those who believe open-carry should be legal, but would not personally do it (why show my hand?).

    I’m not sure how to best educate these officers and the public in these legal open-carry states – but it needs to be done.

    The problem with a pre-announced massive open-carry demonstration is that it would be confined to some pre-permitted, roped-off, public demonstration area – complete with speeches and Don’t Tread On Me flags, etc. MSM would natch just cover the NDs and obvious loons along with a montage of the bumper stickers, t-shirts, and hats present.

    Alternatively, the masses could open-carry on some unannounced day politely going about their normal business. There would not be enough LEOs to hassle all these law-abiding citizens, so it could be an opportunity to educate everyone. Of course, the likely down side to this is again the MSM – who would have a field day with the legality of the 2nd amendment run amok and all those people everywhere with evil guns.

    I’m out of ideas – I just hate seeing law-abiding citizens harassed, and the answer is not to change the laws.

    • For many years, I’d an axe in the rear window of my truck — in an area in which most trucks have rifles in their rear windows.

      I cannot tell you how often I was questioned, even harassed. Because of a sodding axe.

      Bang O.K, but not chop? Weird.

      Yeah, maybe this is TTAK stuff, but still… Police are triggered by the atypical; the nail that protrudes gets smacked.

      Until we number at or over 51%, I fear, we’ll be the red-headed black sheep. 😉

      • Red-headed black sheep? Now that, I’d like to see.

        It doesn’t necessarily have to be 51%+. Research on decision-making in large groups indicates that a committed minority of 30% is enough to sway the opinion of the general public.

        The gay marriage debate is a good example of the 30% at work. Homosexuality occurs at a steady rate (about 10% of the population worldwide, iirc), so people who are actually trying to marry a gay partner are a small minority…but we’ve reached the tipping point where that critical mass of 30% are actively pushing on their behalf, and change is marching onward.

        This gives me hope.

        About 40% of the US population owns guns, and gun owners are increasingly becoming aware and motivated to protect their rights. We don’t just have rights, we ARE right. And non-gun-owners are beginning to realize it, too. There are more than enough of us to push public opinion — and our feckless legislators — to where they ought to be. If we just keep going.

        • Very well reasoned indeed. There is one key difference between gay rights and gun rights, though (at least, a practical difference): Gay rights fit with the overall goals of the progressive movement, gun rights conflict with the overall goals of the progressive movement. Thus, the former is coasting downhill as far as publicity goes, whereas the latter is slogging uphill.

          Need more libertarian reporters, or at least more reporters that don’t let their personal political views color their coverage. Freedom of choice for both guns and sex among responsible adults would make the USA a happier place.

  9. I just don’t buy that these “Peace Officers” had no clue as to what was going on. Of course they’re familiar with open carry citizens that is unless he’s been “patrolling” under a rock for the last couple of years.
    His clueless attitude seems to work pretty well though as he gets every one of those law abiding citizens to show their bellies and cough up ID. Did you see how that empowered him, he was almost giddy.
    Too bad they lost their nerve. Unless they committed a crime he had no right to detain them and ask for papers…. Someone should have tried to walk away just to see if they’d stop them… I bet they would have been free to leave… At least that’s the way the law dictates it should…

  10. Yeah, people have to remember to keep their mouths shut in those situations — do NOT volunteer any information. Do not say your name or provide identification unless your state requires that you provide your name or identification or both. You can be polite, courteous, assertive, and QUIET all at the same time.

    We need a simple guide from an attorney on how to respond to these encounters.

    My playbook is as follows if an officer approaches me and starts asking questions or giving orders:
    “Are you detaining me or am I free to go?” If they do not give a simple, clear answer, I will state that I do not consent to the officer’s interaction and I will tell them that I am going to walk away if they are not detaining me.

    If the officer states that they are detaining me, I respond that I do not consent to any searches. I would finally ask them for their reasonable, articulable suspicion of what crime they think that I committed or am about to commit. If they ask any other questions, my only response would be that I am exercising my Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.

    That is the extent of my verbal communication with an officer.

    • My usual interaction with an officer is when Deputy Krause stops by to say hi.

      About twice a month one of Larry’s cows gets out and someone calls it in as a road hazard, and usually he’ll drop in since he’s in the area. Or deputy Ehlers.

      The conversation usually consists of shooting the sh¡t over a container of lemonade, coffee or cocoa (depending on the outside temperature) ending with “Be safe out there,” “See you at the range” or “Say ‘Hi’ to Maggie for me.”

      If it’s in the city, it’s usually dealing with a cop who was dispatched by mistake when an alarm system was supposedly on test.

      There was that time whn some POS burgled my vehicle — that only happened once, but the cops were alright.

      I’ll take my reality any day o’ the week and thrice on Sunday.

      • I feel you Russ. My typical police interaction is our local chief stopping by when he see me out to ask what if any problems there are in the park, or the locals I run into in our LGS who are usually on duty, bored and hanging out.

        Once in a while I deal with one in a traffic stop where once they realize I’m sober and really do have a drivers license (and CCW and Pistol(s)) goes more like they’re embarrassed for mistaking me for a bad guy than anything like I see in YouTube videos.

        It has to be a city cop thing that they go all badge crazy. Around here their departments and peers wont but up with jack-wagons like that. Lose the support of the people, lose your job; that’s just how it works in villages this small.

  11. I’m having trouble getting the two linked videos to play for some reason, but under Missouri law cities and towns can prohibit open carry within the city limits, even if it is technically legal state-wide. AFAIK, that provision is still on the books even though the MO legislature has made great strides otherwise in expanding gun rights. No idea if Marshfield – a rural town about fifteen minutes’ drive east of Springfield on I-44 – has such a local ordinance or not.

    • It didn’t sound like that was the case. The cops acknowledged their right to carry, and only specifically noted that in that area businesses were allowed to prohibit firearms and ask people to leave. It didn’t sound like there was a blanket city prohibition.

  12. It would have been funny if some other random person was carrying and walked into the store. The cops head would have exploded trying to “figure out what was going on”!

    • That was one of those moments where if you had the time you could un-conceal and saunter over for a look-see. If enough people did it would eventually reveal the absurdity of the cops behavior and demonstrate how little support their is for such behavior (the cops I mean, not the carrier).

  13. And take those queer punk Rambo gloves off there Barney.

    What’s with the squad of the wimp “backup” hanging back watching Barney get all macho with 4 little girls. Did someone put out the free donuts batsignal and every cop in the county camerunning for “backu”?

  14. You know why so many police have this attitude? Because they are constantly told that they are the greatest heroes in American history.

    • You make a good point, to some extent. Most cops don’t have that kind of problem, but there’s always a few in any department, urban or rural, that let it go to their heads.

      I blame Slick Willie and his media ops back in the 90’s for this sort of thing. He would round up officers wherever he went, usually under some form of duress, have them dress up in their prettiest and stand behind him while he spewed his crime bill BS, etc. And so fast forward a couple decades and we have hero syndrome. It does a lot more harm than good, that is for sure.

      Tom

  15. When a cop can’t tell the difference between the people they’re sworn to protect and the people they’re sworn to protect them from, maybe it’s time for said cop to think about getting a different job that’s more commensurate with his abilities.

    Conveniently, this cop is already in Walmart. Perhaps he should have filled out an application.

    • Right on Ralph! Dress, demeanor, activity and location. . .nothing these folks were doing even remotely tickled my BG radar, which makes one wonder what officer Wonder was queuing on that made him want to detain everyone.

    • Hey now, that’s not nice. I happen to work at a Walmart, on the other side of Springfield as a matter of fact. We get all kinds just like any other place but you’d be pretty surprised how smart some of us are.

      PS: I’ve seen lots of people OC, and carded several of them. Seen several CCW permits, including but not limited to MO, OK, AR, KS, TN, WY, TX….the list goes on. It doesn’t bother me, although I’m naturally curious as to what sidearm (in my experience, 1911’s are the most common OC sidearms).

      Tom

    • Don’t think he would make a good door greeter. Perhaps something in customer service . . . no wait . . . sweeping the floors.

  16. The U.S. passport is one of the best and most reliable ID’s anyone could depend on. In my state anyone can get a worthless drivers license even if you’re an illegal alien (I should have said “undocumented”). I’m not picking on the illegals because my entire family including myself are immigrants who became U.S. citizens following the legal process. The illegals in my state can also register to vote when renewing or applying for a drivers license, and then they can illegally vote in our statewide elections.

    • It’s probably more secure than a driver’s license, but it can’t be easily searched by the dispatcher the way a license can. This does not by any means make it less legitimate, just less convenient.

      • It’s a WHOLE LOT more secure than a DL; you need to submit your birth certificate (and Naturalization papers or other proof of citizenship if necessary) and two color mug shots (AND have them compared by the Accepting Official) before you can get one. You need to check them with the Dept. of State; nothing local exists. All it entitles you to do is walk around unimpeded inside the US and its colonies.

  17. Not going to make excuses for anyone else’s behavior, so I’ll just summarize my last three calls involving open carry people. None of these ended up with cases being written, so I don’t think there’s any issue with writing about them.

    A few weeks ago- while talking to an uncooeprative robbery victim at a 7-11, a mildly thuggish looking person walked by with a pistol tucked into his pants. Not in the front, but at the 3:00 position and outside his T-shirt. Never said a word, just stopped at the street corner about 30ft away and kept looking at us every minute or two. Never reached for his pistol or did anything else that could be considered threatening. We left without talking to him- no reason to stop him.

    A few months ago- off duty guy from another agency spots an open carry guy at Jack in the Box, and calls in a man with a gun. Gives updates for location as open carry guy leaves, gets in a car and starts driving away. Half a dozen cops start looking for this guy, including me, until about five minutes later I get on the air and say “just to confirm, there’s no crime reported?” Dead silence for about thirty seconds, then the supervisor gets on and tells everyone to stop looking and clear the call.

    Last year- open carry guy involved in a collision. Saw he had a Kimber on his hip, and had a very nice and polite conversation with him about his choice in pistols, since I carry one too. My partner thanked him for exercising his rights and for being polite about it.

    Haven’t run into one of the Youtube crowd yet, but if I do… it probably won’t be dramatic enough to make it onto Youtube.

    • I am genuinely a little surprised you didn’t make contact with case #1, since by your own description he was A) armed (and not with a holster but mexican/thug carry style), B) acting suspicious (loitering/casing/watching you), and C) looking like trouble (at least by your own description).

      I am certainly not a cop but I think I would have at least talked briefly with him just to see his reaction (“Hi.. were investigating a robbery. Did you see anything about x minutes ago?”)

      • There were a few minutes of discussion about whether or not to contact the guy, but the previously mentioned victim didn’t react at all when he came by. We were pretty sure someone else was responsible based on some other surrounding circumstances, but no victim = no case. At any rate, the conclusion was that we had no reason to think he was breaking the law, and that he might turn out to be one of the Youtube crowd, or trying to bait us into a lawsuit.

        Now obviously, we can’t be sure of any of that since we didn’t talk to him, but unless he had turned out to be a convicted felon who would volunteer his ID when asked after picking the worst street corner possible to stand at, nothing good could have come of it. The consensus was that we should move on to other calls instead of trying to play his game.

      • I’m not a cop, but I as a not-a-cop interpreted the “looking at us every minute or two” not as casing, but as “I’m a thuggish looking guy and I know that cop’s probably seen my gun, I wonder if he’s gonna hassle me, because I’d really rather not deal with that shit right now.”

      • I’m occasionally a little rough looking after a day in the woods or on my cousins farm (though only ‘thuggish’ in a very backwoods sense). But I’m exactly the kind of guy who might hesitate at a distance when passing by a cop with a stop if it doesn’t look like it’s going so well (cop outnumbered, belligerent actions, etc). I never, ever want to get involved but this can be lonely country, and while it’s even hard to approach without looking like part of the problem, if a fight breaks out with a lone cop, I’m guessing he’ll take all the help he can get.

  18. I live in Columbia, Missouri, home of the University of Missouri, and very democratic. About every third time I’m in Walmart I see someone open carrying. No fuss, no panic, no fainting and no police. Usually you really have to be really looking to even notice the open carry. I would think if there isn’t a problem in Columbia, the Springfield area which is very bible belt and very republican should have people coming up and buying the kids their drinks because of the OC.

    But, the police are pretty cool in Columbia. Not usually trying to prove they are better than anyone.

  19. You know, I don’t blame the po-po for getting excited after someone – probably a soccer mom demanding action from outside the area – called in an “OhMyGodAGUNAGUNwe’realllgonnadie…” and finding a bunch of possible teens OCing. I’d want to sort out what was going on too. And the kid from Maine with a passport was a genuine WTF moment. But it should have ended much sooner than it did. There was no need for the Chief to show up unless it was either a slow day or it was on his way home.

    Then there’s the comment regarding a gang, which is a legit but overblown concern – DHS and FBI are keeping everyone on edge with their recurring fantasies.

  20. “I don’t think it’s a big deal if a cop asks someone open carrying a firearm for their ID—if the po-po believes that the gun schlepper is up to no good.”

    This is why you are anti-gun and anti-rights. Free people don’t have to show their “papers” to the government because the government wants it. There must be some criminal activity taking place to demand ID.

    • No, if there’s criminal activity, an arrest is made. Suspicious behavior (while armed or otherwise) deserves a terry stop. Simply being armed is not just cause to ask for ID IMO, but packing while doing something else suspicious (e.g. loitering, driving unusually) certainly deserves futher scrutiny.

      • What is with it and you Nazis? You are absolutely wrong. In order for a Terry stop to be made there must exist reasonable articulable suspicion that criminal activity has taken place, will take place or is taking place. An arrest may not be made absent probable cause a crime has occurred.

    • Just because the police ask for your ID doesn’t mean you have to provide it, depending on what the situation is. On a social contact, I can ask for any number of things- when the request turns into a demand, or when an arrest or other negative consequence is threatened, that’s when there may be a problem. A legal problem for me, that is, not a problem for the person who just doesn’t want to give any info.

      Repeated and angry requests for ID may have the result of making someone look like a jerk, though.

  21. The passport has no street address, so the cop probably wanted to know that info. He was not entitled to the info, but since the women were complacent in giving up their rights, why not?

  22. There was no need for the Chief to show up unless it was either a slow day or it was on his way home.

    Or he’s keeping an eye on his guys. You know, like when the guy on your crew who’s slow to de- escalate is on a “bunch of teens run amok with guns” call @Wally-world. Officer Your Papers Please seems a little – um – more forceful than he is bright, with the law and local policy a bit – um – nuanced. Given the call I imagine, by showing up Chief Lecture could stifle anything from a firefight in the aisles or a rousting that gets everybody fired brewing.

    It’s actually nice to see Chief Let’s Not Be Stupid being proactive. They don’t get to do that much, and frankly do it wrong most of the time they attempt it.

    I do wonder though, how can we get the police to be a bit more bugged, or even shamed, when they are sicced on a non-event? There really ought to be some kind of positive feedback for dispensing with non-events quickly. Maybe a monthly “Dispensing With BS” award? They get more work if there are more calls, including stupid ones. Maybe deduct every call that turned out to be nothing from the count of calls served. Their screening on the front end does seem to suck rocks. “Four tiny girls OC-ing at the Walley-burger takeout. They appear to be getting Strawberry shakes.” (OK, that’s a crime.)

  23. This isn’t my ideal scenario of a cop responding to an open carry call; but it’s ok. I’m not a fan of his attitude and I only roll my eyes at Mr. AR-15 skulking around in the background. Still, what would you have them do? They got a call that several civilians are walking around with guns. If that turns into a spree shooting and they had never responded, their careers, reputations and people’s lives, maybe even their own, are toast (survivor’s guilt can be extremely depressing, you see.) So responding to the call is a no-brainer. How they conduct themselves is what’s at issue.

    I don’t like his oh so stern and gruff demeanor, but I know going in that that’s what cops are all about. Some are just dicks looking to snatch any opportunity that they can for leverage. A gun and a badge provides that. More legitimately, a commanding presence and voice of authority can keep control of a situation and ensure a swift and safe resolution; whereas a namby-pampy approach might invite dangerous challenge and escalation. So I can see that side of it, too.

    Assuming the end of this video is the end of the interaction and he basically goes on to tell them to beat it, without arrests, tickets or confiscations, then I’d say all’s well that ends well. It’s a little inconvenient, but this is what it takes to move the minds of people long term toward greater recognition and embrace of firearms freedom. Demonstrate that open carry is a great big nothing (even hot chicks do it!) and eventually these encounters will cease. The proof? When’s the last time you saw a cop stop an interracial couple for holding hands in public? I know, I know, here come the flamers shouting “Quisling! Collaborator! Shove your head in the sand and ignore it, but it won’t go away!” Got it.

    First, take a deep breath. Second, switch to decaf. Third, get off the Internet and go visit a country where “police state” is a reality and not a hackneyed shibboleth. Then you’ll know what real life storm troopers are and what crossing them entails. Five minutes enduring gawkers and glorified meter maids at Walmart, trust me, my friends, isn’t it.

    • “Assuming the end of this video is the end of the interaction and he basically goes on to tell them to beat it…”

      I’m pretty sure it is. Also, when Mr. Gruff asked them where else were they going, his tone made it an asshole intrusion of privacy. When Chief Let’s Not Be Stupid asked, it sounded like he wanted to know so that if they planned on stopping somewhere else, and then the police got calls from that location, they’d know it was a non-issue, and could possibly even tell the caller that.

    • Jonathan, what I would liked to have seen done is get the person who made the call with the people who were OC. Than ask the caller what was the problem, what law was being broken. When they discovered no laws were being broken, explain to the caller the law, including false reports to the police. Tell the caller your letting them off this time, but don’t do it again. Tell the kids your glad to see they are good citizens and hope they have a good time.

  24. This comment is pure conjecture:

    Might there be a connection between a large number of combat veterans coming off 12 years of war, entering into the police force, and having trouble differentiating between ROE and the constitution?

    In Afghanistan, stopping anyone and everyone was possible and legal, and honestly, essential. That kind of “us vs them” mentality, as discussed above, is not a good mentality to bring to domestic police work.

    I feel like low-training MOS’s, such as infantry, have few options getting out, and find their way to policework because it is familiar.

    I think this could explain a rise in militarization too. I can tell you I will opt for the best weapon system available to me. If I am a police officer and I can get something better, my instinct is going to be to do so.

    I just think there needs to be a nation wide re-evaluation of what a police officer is, and we need to do better about transitioning combat veterans into law enforcement jobs. In no way are combat veterans the cause of militarization, but I think it plays a major role.

    I only say this because while I hate most police officers’ behavior, what I see is often the first thing I would instinctually do based on my training and experience. So I am torn.

    • “I just think there needs to be a nation wide re-evaluation of what a police officer is, and we need to do better about transitioning combat veterans into law enforcement jobs. In no way are combat veterans the cause of militarization, but I think it plays a major role.”

      I agree, but I can’t see how this could be accomplished. It seems to me that recent combat vets, who may view everyone they encounter (a better term might be “accost”) as the enemy. They may be wholly unsuitable for the job because of this.

    • To be fair to recent US combat vets, I’ve heard a lot of talk from the other perspective, that the overseas ROE is actually much stricter on troops than the unethical and unprofessional behavior police in the US, especially SWAT, get away with.

      Anyone with experience with both want to chime in?

      • ROE honestly depends on how strictly your particular commander wants to follow it. Some units legitimately were not allowed to return fire if they were engaged if they could not positively ID the shooter. Some units, necessarily, would unleash holy hell at muzzle flashes and dust clouds.

        The actual ROE is not as big a difference as 4th Amendment type issues. As in, warrants, probable cause, responable suspicion, etc. Simply non existent.

    • I’ve been on nearly five years now, and that’s after four years active duty Army, as infantry. Yes, there are a lot of dumb infantry guys out there. There are also a lot of smart ones. Some of the most calm and level headed guys in my department are former infantry, both from Army and Marines. The guy with the most “I’m in charge” kind of attitude is former retail security, but that’s not enough for me to make an overall judgement about it.

      If there’s any relation between military type “engage the enemy” attitude and police aggressiveness, I think it comes from the training and doctrine guys trying to come up with the latest greatest thing to sell. Make it black, add some rails, and someone will pay you to come in and train the guys. Call it Mil-Spec and everyone will want in.

      • I will definitely agree that Infantry is better suited to do the job than former MP’s. I also agree that militarization is marketed to the police because of their current ability to own a class of weapons/gear above that which the normal civilian can own.

        Army Infantry actually boasts the hughes GT score (ASVAB) of the entire US Army. The “dumb grunt” stereotype certainly applies in many cases, but those tend to disappear from the army on their first available ETS. Infantry leaders are generally really smart, and smart men are drawn to the Infantry for whatever reason. So my analysis is not really directed at intelligence, but rather, experiences.

        If you ask any of the former soldiers or marines in your department whether they would rather serve a warrant with an M4 or an M9, I can almost guarantee they will opt for the latter. I know I would instinctually. I also know my trigger finger is going to be a touch twitchier if I am talking to an armed individual. Doesn’t mean I am going to shoot him, just means my current training and instincts would direct me that way.

        From where I sit, it is hard to see all these towns with 15k people, with Bearcats and SWAT Teams wearing Multicam, and not think they are just trying to relive their glory days. I mean, give me an MATV, an M4, a Gustaf and a Mark 19 and I will police anywhere and everywhere.

        But I do think you are right. The number of civilian “operator courses” and cool guy gear on the market is definitely fueling a more militarized police, even if just in appearance.

  25. Q: Why do you have a video camera?
    A: Why do you have a dash cam? The same reason.
    It’s kinda like the LEO’s retort, should you refuse to let them do a search of your car.
    If you’re not doing anything illegal, then searching your car shouldn’t be a problem.
    If you’re not doing anything illegal, then filming your behavior shouldn’t be a problem.
    There are probably more police dash cam videos of officers abusing innocent people
    than there are YouTube videos of officers abusing innocent people. A peace officer?
    Has anyone ever taken a poll of LEO’s feelings about the citizens right to bear arms?
    Would we be shocked to discover that many LEO’s don’t agree with our 2nd A right?

    During my CCW course, the instructor told us that our CCW permit does not confer
    upon us the powers of the police. If this is true, then why do states have laws that
    allow people to open carry,…like the police? If there’s one thing that separates the
    police from civilians, and a majority of security guards and Mall cops, it’s the gun
    on their hip for all to see. This is not a small or trivial distinction, or…designation.
    Cop + gun on hip = safety. However, civilian + gun on hip = danger, call the cops!
    In 30 years of carrying concealed, I’ve never been stopped by any police officer.
    Even when I used the entirely obvious, zippered hip pack carry, not even once.
    Why? I think it was because they recognized that even though I was carrying in
    an obvious fashion, I was not trying to portray for public consideration, that me
    and my gun also = safety. Like it or not, for good or for bad, this is how society
    determines at a glance who are the good guys, and who are not. This is why
    I think open carry alarms and confuses many in the public, and the police.

    • That is right you are NOT an uniformed law enforcement officer or trained professional security (with required liability insurance and way more training than you have). Deal with it. If I saw your crazy ass with a gun hanging off your hip at Wak-Mart, I’d call the Cops. Deal with it. Knowing it bothers people, assuming you have brains CONCEAL… YOU ARE NOT, REPEAT NOT THE POLICE. You are not a “sheepdog”; you protect squat. Stay out of it, mind your own business. The weapon is ONLY for YOUR protection if YOU have belief YOU are about to be killed…. OTHERWISE LEAVE IT ALONE… Let me repeat you are not a super hero or COP because you have a gun. Your visible gun with you wearing flip flops, cut-offs and “I’m with Stupid” or “Rock with my Glock” T-shirt is NOT making anyone feel safe. It is people like you, immature, lacking reasoning and common sense to realize YOU ARE NOT COPS… COPS do have more rights than PQ Public, with or without guns. Deal with it. They actually put their life on the line, go into known danger. You don’t. You need to listen to your conceal carry class instructor…. George Zimmerman on solo amateur patrol/watch for strangers with conceal carry, IDIOTIC….. The liability is too great. Why? What if he had pepper spray? What if he had a partner with him so he did not need to use his gun. I agree with the verdict, but that is not the point. People think he baited Martin to use his gun. I don’t think that happened but it does not matter now. Your 8 hour CCW class and shooting a non moving target my 8 year old nephew can shoot 100% does not make you LEO…. If you want to be a Cop then become one. If the police force doesn’t want you, that should tell you something, Guns doesn’t make you a LEO. It takes no brains to buy a gun, take a CCW class and pass it. STOP BAITING COPS WITH YOUR OPEN CARRY “MY RIGHTS” BULL. It is anti-society, anti-authority and makes gun owners look like D-bags. It serves no purpose, is not productive and makes no one safer. I guarantee you a bad guy will see you, shoot you in the back first. Be an fool, give away your tactical advantage, but that is why I am going to call the Cops on you, you make it less safe. Showing off your gun means you have a small…….

      • “COPS do have more rights than PQ Public, with or without guns.”

        Listen, you goddamn little shit. Show me one place, one citation, one official document where it says that. One. Your opinions are your own, but you don’t get your own facts. Peddle that bullshit elsewhere.

        • First don’t use God’s name in vain. Second you are a coward, you would NEVER say that to my face, I grantee it you little punk. Again this is why general public is against guns, especially open carry, immature foul mouth punks like you. Clearly you have nothing intelligent to say. Bye troll.

        • Actually, anyone who knows me would tell you that’s pretty near precisely what I’d say in person. I don’t say much when I’m out in public, but when I get around to saying it, it sounds a whole lot like that.

        • Greg, your god is a figment of your imagination. Also, you come off as a not very nice person…not exactly representing that god you worship very well. And threatening people over the internet? What are you 12?

        • No not everything I wrote is wrong…. I agree if he Zimmerman had his gun open, Martin MIGHT not have attacked him, as I believe he did. With that said, he also could have overpowered Zimmerman and TOOK HIS GUN…. a likely scenario… Even Cops get their own gun taken from them and used on them…. I repeat the STUPIDITY of going on solo amateur patrol at night as a private individual.

  26. I HATE OPEN GUN 2nd AMDT “MY RIGHT” FOLKS THAT BAIT COPS & FILM IT. LET ME BE CLEAR I DISLIKE OPEN CARRY, AND I HATE PEOPLE WHO BAIT COPS FOR “THEIR RIGHTS”. SHUT UP WITH YOUR RIGHTS AND GROW UP. Don’t get me wrong I have a carry permit, use it daily… CONCEALED. These ladies at least behaved. COP was fine… BUT WHAT A WASTE OF TIME… I would have called Cops on these woman. CLEARLY the Guy put them up to it. “Am I being suspected of something”….. Look ALL people who bait Cops, to “prove” your OPEN carry rights are selfish immature jack****. It is widely discouraged by Gun experts in the know. YES people are OK with PROFESSIONAL LEO with guns…. Yes that is SMART. If you hate Cops or Government, you are a wacko anti-authority nut. No we don’t just trust Gov or LEO’s blindly, but these folks, the woman & one guy by intentionally and NEEDLESSLY making a public gun display, to bait the cops, to video tape it, to post on web for attention, are just unbelievably pathetic. Don’t F with Cops… Don’t do it. While you are at it be considerate of the public; DON’T alarm them with your weapon…. CONCEAL FOR GOSH SAKES. It is SMART and a tactical advantage. The only time I open carry is when hiking…..

    • When it’s legal (and I think it should be legal everywhere), my rights >> your “dislike.”

      Some people open carry and film it to bait the cops, and some simply open carry because it’s their right, and they film for their own protection. I’m quite certain that in at least some of the videos I’ve seen, the cop’s behavior has been modified by the knowledge that he was on film. Sometimes it’s modified for the worse, but often I think it’s modified for the better.

      I repeat, my rights >> your dislike. Feel free to feel however you want, but keep your opinions to yourself, because I don’t care about yours any more than you care about mine.

      And lay off the coffee.

    • Lay off the caps lock as well. The law is the law, and the only people who broke the law in this video was the police. Shame on you Greg.

      • No I am not going to keep my opinion to myself…. Again open carry advocates by and large are idiots…. The baiting of cops and videotaping it for the web is a hobby and a dumb one. It is dumb, dumb, dumb and people who do it in general are very immature and selfish. You have stated nothing that disputes that. I love how you want me to not use my 1st Amendment rights….. You hypocrites cannot admit this baiting of the public and cops DOES NOTHING TO PROTECT OUR RIGHTS….. NOTHING!!!!!

        ALSO I WILL USE THE CAP LOCKS. LET’S BE CLEAR, THE 2ND AMENDMENT IS NOT THE MOST IMPORTANT AMENDMENT….. OWNING A GUN DOES NOT MAKE YOU A COP OR PATRIOT. THE 3RD AMENDMENT IS NOT IMPORTANT, QUARTERING SOLDERS DURING TIME OF WAR, IS ANACHRONISTIC. THIS IS NOT 1776, WHERE CIVILIAN MILITIAS WERE FIGHTING THE RED COATS WITH FLINT LOCKS. I DOUBT PEOPLE WHO OWNED GUNS IN THE DAY, WALKED AROUND WITH THEM ALL THE TIME. AGAIN I BELIEVE 100% IN THE RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE AND THAT PRIVATE GUN OWNERSHIP IS PROTECTED…. BUT OPEN CARRY AT WAL-MART DUMB, EVEN IF YOU CAN DO IT.…. AMEN. SO BE RESPONSIBLE AND STOP MAKING YOUR GUN AN EXPRESSION OF YOUR FEAR, PARANOIA, EGO AND INSECURITY……. PRIVATE OWNERSHIP OF YOUR GUN OR GUNS SHOULD BE PRIVATE, NOT ON PUBLIC DISPLAY.

        • “SO BE RESPONSIBLE AND STOP MAKING YOUR GUN AN EXPRESSION OF YOUR FEAR, PARANOIA, EGO AND INSECURITY”

          You’re being a tool, and I’m about done with you, except to say, open carry is not about my fear, my paranoia, my ego, or my insecurity. When I open carry, the few chances I have to do it (and I don’t always do it even when I have the opportunity), it’s about my comfort. Sometimes it’s just more comfortable.

          Here’s a trick: I carry concealed everywhere I go that is not specifically prohibited by law. I was recently on vacation in Virginia. In Virginia it’s illegal to consume alcohol while carrying concealed. Florida does not have that rule. But it is not illegal in Virginia to consume alcohol while open carrying. So, if I carry openly (since I can’t carry concealed) because I’m going to a brewpub and I’d like to have a glass of their excellent stout with my steak, is that “dumb” by your definition? Am I exhibiting fear, paranoia, ego, or insecurity? Or am I just adjusting to the requirements of the situation?

          The girls in the video may be just as accustomed to carrying openly in Oklahoma where they live as I am accustomed to carrying concealed in Florida. They go on a trip to Missouri, where open carry is also allowed, and they’re suddenly supposed to stop because you think it’s dumb? If you think so, well… Ron White has something to say, for me, to you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkXsrz_Qrl8&t=4s

        • I, for one, will give thanks every day that you do not get to decide what is important for the rest of us law abiding citizens. As long as cops use the full resources of the government to engage in unconstitutional activities with little to no repercussions for their actions, we will use whatever legal means necessary to fight back.

          I guess, at the end of the day, you really don’t have anything to say about it.

        • You’re WRONG on the Third Amendment, and, as it turns out, you really ARE wrong on just about everything you say…

    • jmo, if you have a “carry” permit, perhaps the state who issued it to you should rescind it!

      That being said, Greg “with a carry permit”, you obviously have never been in a constitutional carry state, have you?

  27. Here in Wisconsin our courts have told the police to back off. A citizen open carrying in public(which does not require any type of permit) does not have to show any id if asked if they are not committing or suspected of committing a crime. I imagine most would comply but some have not and that’s what led to the courts taking on this issue and making a decision. Missouri courts need to do the same.

    Robert’s opening sentence says a lot about himself, he may want to rethink it. “I don’t think it’s a big deal if a cop asks someone open carrying a firearm for their ID—if the po-po believes that the gun schlepper is up to no good.” Please define “no good”. Will it be a wide general definition to where anyone can be asked for their id, much like in this case?

    This was a disgusting response and display by police, typical. Even though there is no law that says these carry folks needed to show id, once they did comply and were polite about it they should of been left alone. Instead he went further with unnecessary questions, more id demands from those not even carrying firearms, and the detention of these people by holding their ids hostage. We need open carry everywhere and we need the courts of each state to define the laws, especially to the police because in 99% of the cases like this it’s the police that don’t know the laws and commit the crimes.

  28. I’d didn’t find the cop very aggressive. It seemed to me he was extremely unsure, though, as to what he’s supposed to do when asked to remove open-carry folks from a store. I don’t know the state or its laws.

    The person who struck me as a complete @ss was the lurking guy that found it appropriate to throw in his criticism of the OC girls when the LEO asked him to move along. He knew neither the law nor manners.

  29. The problem with this entire situation is it seems the local populace is obviously unaware of Open Carry laws in their state, or they wouldn’t have been alarmed and called the police. What should’ve happened is the person that called it in should’ve been made aware of Open Carry law.

    In this case, since the police rudely interacted with the OCers, they should’ve apologized and went on their way. Honestly, they have no business asking for IDs — what were they trying to accomplish? To see if it said “I’m really a criminal or a felon” on their ID? It’s ridiculous and unnecessary. The OCers were not doing anything suspicious, unruly, or anything warranting an official stop — there was zero cause for suspicion or criminal activity.

    This is lack of judgment and education of the Open Carry law on the Police’s part. They could’ve just observed them and surmised a legal activity within a few seconds and left it at that.

    Perhaps the NRA should start an educational campaign to make people aware of what states allow Open Carry and to provide examples of what lawful open carry looks like.

    Obviously, a criminal wouldn’t be stupid enough to open carry as that draws attention. Not to say there aren’t any stupid criminals. BUT the point is, people are obviously sensitive about guns and don’t know enough about OC to tell the difference. Education is key.

  30. Clarification on the I.D. laws in the state of Oklahoma. You don’t have to show your ID to a cop unless operating a motor vehicle. BUT, if you’re carrying, a copy can ask you for your ID and carry permit even if you are not under suspicion.

  31. I, for one, am sick to death of law-abiding citizens being treated as suspects. These girls were not doing ANYTHING wrong or illegal. The more videos like this that I watch convince me that county law enforcement is more accepting of our constitutional right to carry than city LE.

    That first cop was simply a DICK.

  32. In a nutshell….

    Most, if not all of this, could have been avoided if the dispatcher or officer answering stupid soccer mom’s call would have explained that it’s not illegal to openly carry a sidearm in public in Marshfield, and further ask if there was a specific crime in progress that merited a police response. After the sound of crickets for a few moments, bid adieu and wish her a good day *click*

    Tom

  33. I live in Oklahoma and I have open carried every day since the law went into effect on November 1st, 2012 and I haven’t had a single problem with anyone asking me to leave their business, nobody has freaked out and called the police, etc. I guess I’m just lucky.

  34. I see why so many people hate cops. If there is probable cause to make the stop and / or detention, then there is a specific crime(s) being investigated. If people ask me if I am detaining them, I’ll let them know specifically what crime(s) I am investigating, as well as the specific Vehicle Code, Penal Code, section(s).

    If there is no immediate safety issue, I’ll invite them to look up the relevant code. Sometimes I’ll show the code to them.

    If the cop stopping you can’t tell you what they are investigating – that’s a big issue. Granted, that isn’t always possible in a murder investigation, but it was definitely possible here.

    No crime – no legal stop. This officer should be talked to – at the very least – regarding his attitude.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *