Florida YouTuber and Fisherman Mike Taylor Recorded Entire Miami Beach Incident

Mike Taylor, an Florida fisherman and YouTuber, was one of the parties involved in the Miami Beach open carry incident last week when Miami Beach police officers arrived on the scene with guns drawn. His footage is a much clearer record of what happened that day than previous video (see earlier posts here, here and here).

The incident started when a Miami Beach park ranger approached the group and informed them that they were committing illegal acts. Mr. Taylor handed the ranger a pamphlet containing Florida Statute 790.25(3)(h) and informed him that they were acting within the law and committing no crime.

The ranger then contacted MBPD.

Here is Taylor’s video of the incident (NSFW due to language):

What’s alarming is that while waiting for the police, at no point did Mr. Taylor or the other fishermen threaten anyone. You can then see the MBPD officers arriving on scene with their guns drawn, claiming that the fishermen were a threat.

The group provided evidence that they informed the Miami Beach police department by phone and my mail in advance of the incident, as well as the Miami city attorney.

As more evidence continues to come out of the incident, it appears that the City of Miami Beach clearly violated these Floridians’ First, Second, and Fourth Amendment rights. As a South Florida native and law enforcement officer, I’m sadden by the actions of MBPD. I grew up with the belief that an American’s civil rights are fundamental and must be protected and respected at all costs. In this case, due to ignorance of established Florida law, they clearly weren’t.



  1. avatar Alex Waits says:

    Top men.

    1. avatar Nigel the expat says:

      “Top Men” 😉

  2. avatar Wood says:

    If ignorance of the law is “no excuse” for all us poor deplorable peons, why is it ok for the enforcers to be utterly ignorant of the law?!? The only explanation here is that they intentionally harassed lawful citizens as an intimidation tactic with the full blessing of MBPD leadership.

    1. avatar P Hall says:

      I totally agree. We know that Chief Oates was informed of the Florida statute two weeks before the incident. (Which he later denied).

      I think their reaction was planned from the start.

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        California sheriffs and chiefs wanted their enforcers to point guns and intimidate people who open carried; in an effort to get citizens to stop bearing arms until they could get a law passed banning the bearing of arms. They used intense confrontations, disinformation, false detainment and arrest to “persuade” citizens from exercising their human/civil rights.

        The same strategy is happening in other states. Florida being one of them.

        It doesn’t help when gun owners also talk shit about open carry and the people that do it.

      2. avatar frank speak says:

        this one is headed for the courts……..

    2. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      “They collectively, intentionally committed a hate crime and maliciously deprived them of their civil and constitutional rights”. FIFY

      All of the officers and their bosses MUST be individually sued into bankruptcy AND criminally charged at the federal level.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Hear hear.

        Perhaps more importantly, even if the Florida Legislature had declared open carry “illegal”, those sorry-excuses-for-cops did not have legal justification to use deadly force on men who most certainly did NOT pose a credible, imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to anyone.

        Look at it this way: suppose the police thought those men were in possession of stolen jewelry worth more than $100,000 (surely a felony). Would the police be automatically justified to use deadly force while effecting the arrest of those men even though the men did NOT indicate any threatening actions? The obvious answer is “no”. Neither would police be justified in using deadly force to arrest men, who did not display any threatening actions, for improperly carrying a firearm.

    3. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “If ignorance of the law is “no excuse” for all us poor deplorable peons, why is it ok for the enforcers to be utterly ignorant of the law?!?”

      Because….the Supremes say so:

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        The logic sounds quite flawed. Cops are citizens and civilians too.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “The logic sounds quite flawed. Cops are citizens and civilians too.”

          Fortunately, reasoning or logic are irrelevant. All the matters is the decision.

        2. avatar CZJay says:

          Fortunately, reasoning or logic are irrelevant. All the matters is the decision.

          Cops are Americans too. Americans are supposed to be informed about their laws. By default cops would know the law because that is a requirement as an American resident. So they would know the law whether they were working as a law enforcer of said law or working at a Walmart.

          Saying cops can break the law makes them willfully ignore it. Just like when cops are given the power to shoot dogs. This level of acceptance of irresponsibleness allows for low quality people being police, which actively deteriorates America.

          It’s always someone else’s fault or responsibility. Personal accountability be damned. The American government will hold its citizens to a higher standard than they hold Americans’ “representatives” to. Previous generations would refer to that as tyranny.

      2. avatar Wood says:

        And with Justice Kennedy’s retirement, perhaps we stand a chance of fixing that bit of BS among other wrongs to be righted.

  3. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

    If the city were smart, they’ll settle quick.

    If the city isn’t smart (and thet’s where my money is, based on the past few months), I hope they get a few hundred grand out of them.

    A new house with a stocked gun room would be sweet revenge…

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      A lot more tickets will be given out if the city has to pay out.

      The system works perfectly. Cops keep their jobs and the tax payers have to pay more.

    2. avatar Bob H says:

      Think of all the open carry demonstrations they can stage with all the Broward County money these guys are about to get XD

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        That will only last until the “loophole” is taken care of by the government. Everything that isn’t wanted is considered a “loophole.”

        Liberty is nothing but a loophole.

        1. avatar Hannibal says:

          This is going to happen. The exemption was made for fishermen in rural areas with wildlife, not a city. I would bet money that this stunt will end with the exception being removed entirely.

        2. avatar Tony Papilli says:

          Thank you for another voice of reason and common sense on this posting. You are spot on.

    3. avatar California Richard says:

      Why should MBPD care how much it costs? Its not their money. If the voters/tax payers are outraged (outraged I tell you!!!), then they should demand changes!!!… Although there’s a high probability that the changes they will demand is a closing of this “loophole” (since when is freedom a loophole?) in the state legislature. And they’ll do it, and the Republican governor will sign it.

  4. avatar Moltar says:

    concealed means concealed amirite? okay now that I’ve gotten the sarcasm outta the way. I can see why they’d show up with guns drawn, multiple armed folks had done told a park ranger to bugger off and had ignored said park ranger’s request to unass his AO, but I can also see that in all honesty they’d have been much better served just rollin up on their Huffy’s without their gats in hand. These guys weren’t bothering anything, they weren’t violent, and they had the proper paperwork for their demonstration. If I had to bet on why this went down the way it did I’d pin it on the Park Ranger “embellishing” his report and hyping up the incident during his surely panty soiling 911 call.

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      You have a good point there.

      Were the OC’ers S*W*A*Tted?
      By a “law enforcement professional”, no less?

      1. avatar California Richard says:

        The information passed from the Park Ranger, to his dispatcher, to the MB 911 call-taker, to the MBPD dispatcher, to the MBPD officers….. “There are guys here with guns and they aren’t leaving even though I asked them nicely. Can you see if MBPD can come down here and talk to these guys?” can quickly turn in to: “Park Ranger requesting emergency assistance from MBPD! Has a large crowd of men armed with firearms resisting arrest!” …. happens all the time.

    2. avatar B-Rad says:

      And it was pretty obvious with their chestified camera rigs that they were angling for exactly this to happen…and then the cops did the old “hold my beer, and watch this” thing.

      1. avatar Maybe Gator says:

        Yes. All planned. I’m sure these guys didn’t have any dental appointments set up for late that day.

      2. avatar P Hall says:

        They were only angling for this to happen because it was predictable that the MBPD would violate their rights in this situation.

        It is perfectly appropriate to “freshen the franchise by exercising it”. And it is appropriate to film someone who habitually violates your rights.

      3. avatar Bloving says:

        Didn’t see much “fishing” being done either – as long as you’re waiting for the police to show up you’d might as well wet a line and try your luck.

        1. avatar Arc says:

          This. I hope they at least brought rods, line, tackle boxes, etc. with them. Preferably some used stuff that wasn’t bought on the same day. The more convincing, the better.

      4. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “And it was pretty obvious with their chestified camera rigs that they were angling for exactly this to happen…”

        Everyone has a natural, civil and human right to provoke law enforcement by obeying the law. Cops have no natural, civil, human right to arrest a person for following the law. Only if following the law exposes an underlying criminal act do cops have authority to arrest someone for an otherwise legal act. Except….

        It is possible that a legal act can cause another person to feel threatened, and then the legal act becomes “menacing”, which overrides the legal act. So, in my little burg, if a concealed carrier has an episode of “printing”, and someone believes the “print” means the person is armed, and thus, no knowing the concealed carrier, the observer fears the armed person may be a criminal, or someone poised to conduct a mass shooting, then “menacing” can be applied.

        “If the law says that, said Mr. Bumble, then the law is a ass–a idiot.”

        1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

          Which is the ONLY reason open carry passed in Minneapolis, because folks would/could inadvertently expose or print while carrying concealed. So now we have open carry, because our legislature cares about protecting its citizens who carry guns.

        2. avatar BierceAmbrose says:

          “Everyone has a natural, civil and human right to provoke law enforcement by obeying the law.”

          I wish I had said that. On my better days, I might have.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Feel free to make it your own.

    3. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I’m with you. You report “Hey, there’s a bunch of fishermen down here with guns!”, and get back “Yeah? So what?”. So you try again with “But, but, they’re carrying OPENLY!”, and get back “Uh-huh, that’s fine, don’t worry about it!” Finally, bring out the big guns (hehehe) with “They’re SCARING people, mainly me!” I’m saying the park ranger was a moron, just a guess.

      1. avatar Wood says:

        Park ranger probably went all Cartman –

        “You will respect mah authoritah!”

  5. avatar CZJay says:

    The lack of professionalism is disgusting.

    Pointing a gun at people that aren’t doing anything wrong just because they are scared. It’s one thing to draw your gun to be a step ahead of a threat, it’s another thing to sneak up on people with guns pointing at their body or head. That force escalation is uncalled for, unprofessional and dangerous to society.

    Cops won’t like it if you ever point a gun at them yet they want you to be happy to have their gun pointed at you. If you get offended by them pointing their gun at you unlawfully, they treat you as the crazy out of control violent threat to public safety. Gun owners know not to point a gun at a person or thing you’re not willing/wanting/intending to shoot.

    The “low ready” is taught to everyone for a good reason. Outside the military, cops should know better than anyone else.

    1. avatar 16V says:

      “The lack of professionalism is disgusting.”

      Disgusting? Sure, but with what’s recruited and standard training, this is what we get. Between the “gain dominant control of every situation immediately” metric which is trained to this very day, to the constant propaganda that policing is, despite all numbers, somehow “dangerous”, does anyone really expect different?

      As Deckard noted, either you’re cop, or you’re little people.

  6. A “Fisherman’s Boat Party” with NO Alcohol! Huhhh, How rare is that at a Boat Party…

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      The “law enforcement” were willing to give out some shots…

      1. Sections 790.07-790.115, 790.145-790.19 and 790.22-790.24. Pertains to Alcohol…

        1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the 'Good and Hard' Horns" PR says:

          He wasn’t referring to ETOH, son…

        2. At least three times Alcohol was mentioned! Twice by the Victim and once by the MB Police…

    2. avatar B-Rad says:

      It was also a boat party minus boat too.

  7. avatar Salty Bear says:

    Yet another blatantly clear example of why cops are not our friends. Without them, politicians would only be wannabe-tyrants with pens and phones, and we would be free.

    *Cue outraged comments from statist snowflakes citing good things cops have done (as if only gang members with shiny badges could do them), and assertions that I’d call the cops in x situation (where the cops would threaten me with violence if I didn’t).

  8. avatar neiowa says:

    A LOT of donuts went into creating those bodies. Or the vest adds 100lbs.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      The camera adds 10 pounds.

      I guess the fish eye lens of a GoPro adds the rest.

      1. avatar JasonM says:

        How many cameras were they wearing?

      2. avatar Sich says:

        Probably not even that, if the Pair of Sunglasses he’s wearing has a Pin-Hole Camera on the Bridge of the Nose. I own a pair with Prescription Lenses for when I got out on the Range. Their “Featherweight”, 10-ounces max, and use an Micro-SD Card to Record the Video and Sound…

      3. avatar B-Rad says:

        Well, they had 100% coverage via chesticams, then 100% coverage by cop chesticams, so I think that means 200%.

  9. avatar Ralph says:

    Fat fux with uniforms are not our friends. They are nobody’s friends, except other fat fux with uniforms.

    There may come a time when a cop needs one of us to help him. He won’t get any help, at least not from me, and if he wonders why, he should remember this farce and despair.

    Congratulations, boys. Now almost everyone hates you. Keep up the good work and make it unanimous.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      It’s not hard to convince the Left that the police are a bad idea. It’s much harder to convince the Right that police are not a good idea. It’s weird how the Left are against police yet are for gun control and the right is against gun control yet are for the police state.

      Get rid of police departments and keep sheriff departments. The people are not in control of the police chief and they don’t get to decide who becomes one whereas they can elect their sheriff. Then get rid of all the laws infringing on the 2nd Amendment and enforce The Bill of Rights in all 50 states. Also, return the right to protect life, liberty and property with necessary force. Until then, America is going to continue it’s decline.

      1. avatar California Richard says:

        If you elect a mayor who appoints the Chief of Police and hires/fires officers, how is that different than a Sheriff who hires/fires deputies? The hired help does the dirty work and both chief LEO’s jobs are at the whim of the voters. Both are almost 100% career law enforcement at the end of their careers who spent half their career in enforcement and the other half politicking….. the only difference I see is that your police chief is beholden to you and your town and your sheriff is beholden to other towns and people in your county.

        1. avatar Ing says:

          The police chief is hired by the mayor and answers only to politicians, whereas the sheriff has to face voters directly for re-election. That’s the difference.

          Sometimes they’re both useless political scumsuckers, like in Broward County, FL, but much of the time the sheriff’s office actually is more connected to the people it’s meant to serve.

        2. avatar Wood says:

          There’s a huge difference between what type of person gets elected mayor of a city vs elected sheriff of a county. One is mostly leftist (urban) the other includes rural areas. You can do that math.

        3. avatar California Richard says:

          Sorry I still don’t see it. Maybe because I live out here in upside-down-world. There are quite a few counties out here that are liberal dominated and municipalities that are conservative (like the city/county I live in) which seems to be the reverse paradigm of your circumstances. Good or bad, conservative or liberal, Sheriff or Chief,…. I just see politicops who want a job and go about different ways of getting it.

      2. avatar Bob says:

        The author is a Florida cop and the other articles he has written shows that elected Floroda Sheriffs are anti gun too.

      3. avatar drunkEODguy says:

        I’ll agree with you Jay. There shouldn’t be any police departments headed by appointed officials. While having sheriffs opens the position up to all the nastiness of politics, it at least makes them know they NEED TO GET REELECTED. As such, they tend to reign in any deputies that are going to give them that dreaded negative headline the morning after dicking up good and hard. If these guys knew they could get no shit fired because they work “at will” of the sheriff who has to have popular vote, I guarantee going to guns or getting hands on would be carefully considered and used at the last resort it’s meant to be.

    2. avatar pwrserge says:

      Until you have accountability, [read: public and brutal executions of corrupt cops and their bosses], this kind of BS is going to continue. Why do you think the FBI thought they could get away with overthrowing a democratically elected president?

      The deep state is out of control. The only solution is to convict the ringleaders and trigger pullers, then send them to the wall as an object lesson to the rest.

      1. avatar California Richard says:

        If the mob had their way: in Baltimore those 6x cops who “murdered” that guy in the van would be brutally executed, the cop that “murdered” that kid re:”hands up don’t shoot” would be tortured to death, and George Zimmerman would be beheaded for “murdering” that kid who only had a pack of Skittles…… the system we have right now doesn’t “brutally execute” people but the mob acting through mass media, the internet, and social media will ruin a man’s life, family, and career….. don’t think for a second that’s lost on cops. It’s part of the “Ferguson Effect”.

        The deep state works both ways….. our deep staters just arent as ruthless and criminal as theirs. Ours are about preserving the Constitution which is playing defense.

  10. avatar Alexander says:

    Yet again, the police is showing its fascist genealogy and then expecting sympathy from the citizens.

  11. avatar Crabbyoldguy says:

    Seems like typical complications due to lack of training, unclear jurisdictions, poor communication, and having too many law enforcement organizations. Has everyone at MBPD undergone retraining yet due to this incident? If not, terminate leadership. If it hasn’t happened in 30 days, revoke their authority and replace the whole department.

    I saw nothing in the actions of the civilians to warrant the use of force. The officers were fortunate they didn’t receive a kinetic response due to the unlawful handling of their weapons. Obviously, the officers won’t face criminal prosecution. But, I expect to hear about administrative and possibly civil repercussions. If not, I’d like to see the AG removed for poor use of discretion.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      The fact that the officers won’t face criminal prosecutions IS THE PROBLEM. Quite frankly, the lot of them need to be stood up against a wall and shot.

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “I saw nothing in the actions of the civilians to warrant the use of force.”

      A simple report of “man with a gun” is sufficient justification for full armed, high ready, safety off, response. Amazing it wasn’t a SWAT response.

      1. avatar CZJay says:


  12. avatar Anon says:

    1. The MPD needs a physical training program.

    2. THIS is why some people don’t like police.

  13. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

    I could have really screwed some wife beating, drunk driving, rich spiked pension ex-cops while I was around them in Mexico and Ft. Lauderdale. I’ll never stop berating myself for not doing it. They bragged about their crimes in drinking circles and I did nothing:-(

    1. avatar former water walker says:

      Yeah unbelievable the cops bragging of their misdeeds. Only my experience was working out at the gym(and one creepy racist ex-cop selling insurance). Any respect I had vanished along with my own treatment by dirty cops. THESE po po need to spanked-hard.

  14. avatar Billy says:

    They should have ran, those fatsos would have never caught them.

    1. avatar Sich says:

      And how far would they have gotten too! Especially “Bragging” about the Ordeal on YouTube…

  15. avatar DJ says:

    Bust a lawsuit off in there a$$.

  16. avatar pwrserge says:

    I want those three cops arrested, convicted, and strung up. This kind of BS should carry an automatic death penalty for everyone in the chain of command who authorized it.

  17. avatar John Q Public says:

    “The Face Of Authoritarianism….I’d except this in states like Massachusetts, NY., NJ., or MD. Not Florida….”
    Quote from the Movie the Patriot:

    Benjamin Martin: Why Should I Trade One Tyrant Three Thousand Miles Away For Three Thousand Tyrants One Mile Away?
    Benjamin Martin: Would you tell me please, Mr. Howard, why should I trade one tyrant three thousand miles away for three thousand tyrants one mile away?

  18. avatar rt66paul says:

    Oh, no! One of the open carriers was a minority! We can’t allow that to happen in Fla.
    Shotguuuuun! Shoot him fore he runs now! Do the twist now!

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      Cowards bully the weak and run from danger. In this case, they knew there was no threat, so they went all mall-cop on that American ass.

  19. avatar Tony Papilli says:

    Yes! If the law states that open carry is a viable right while engaging in these outdoor activities, then the police should have engaged these guys with a certain amount of kid glove treatment. When the officer stated that they were scaring people, he was advising these legal carry guys that they should use some common sense. I agree with the officer and his comment. If the open carry law was written in the spirit of understanding that these activities are to be taking place in a wildlife environment, one would have to question why one would need to open carry in a very public and crowded environment. It’s very possible that this event will garner these guys a big payday, but also force the state legislature to go back and rewrite the law for folks lacking discernment and not knowing the difference between potentially dangerous wild animals and plain old town folks. I am a firm believer in the second amendment but cannot support stupidity on either side.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Given the sort of scum and villainy infesting most major cities, I’ll take my chances with the wild animals.

      1. avatar Tony Papilli says:

        I don’t disagree with you, but perhaps concealed carry would be better for these instances, either a permit or no permit. In Kalifornia, we cannot get permits unless you are a democratic politician. Ha!

    2. avatar CZJay says:

      Yeah, those stupid Americans think they have liberty. Clearly the law was written to infringe on the 2nd Amendment of non government workers. Those silly adults think they can carry guns without permission slips; they must have some level of retardation.

      1. avatar Tony Papilli says:

        You have certainly earned an A+ for sarcasm. Well done!

      2. avatar FedUp says:

        You silly peon. Rights are for governments.

    3. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Here we go again. TX has open carry (licensed) now, with no problems such as described in the suppositions here, OC does not cause problems. When passed, should include a 5-minute training requirement for cops and 911 operators, consisting of “When you get a call saying “man with a gun”, reply “That’s legal!” and HANG UP! Are there any questions?

  20. avatar Some guy says:

    A few weeks ago an open carry fishing event was held in Palm Beach County. Over 60 participants and no issues.

  21. avatar John says:

    Fuck guns, nobody should have them. MBPD did great. Put those mofos in jail….

  22. avatar vvactor says:

    as an officer, with clear evidence that the Police Officers in this case committed the felony of Aggravated Assault on the civillian, you could arrest and charge them based on the video evidence, and add a distubing the peace charge as well. but i doubt you will use your police and arrest powers to right this wrong. smh

    1. avatar Mark Kelly's Diapered Drooling Ventriloquist's Dummy says:

      Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t Florida law allow one to act in “Self Defense” and employ the use of a firearm to protect themselves from “bodily harm” when that person (victim) is subjected to an “Aggravated Assault” whether the perpetrators are “armed” or not? Think George Zimmerman.

      1. avatar MiSq'd says:

        And what of the Threat by the (Victim), by Stupidly Saying “I bet my gun is bigger than yours”.

        1. avatar Mark Kelly's Diapered Drooling Ventriloquist's Dummy says:

          Silly gun-grabber an “offer” of a “wager” is NOT a “threat”.

        2. avatar MiSq'd says:

          As I recall the “Victim” claimed that HE called the MB Police to the Scene! I wonder if HIS Buddies knew before hand or were they Duped to being there by the Victim, just so HE could create an Police Incident and Post it on YouTube. Not satisfied in endangering Himself Alone, so he get’s HIS Buddies involved to to make the Incident more Spectacular.

  23. avatar SurfGW says:

    Stop with this baiting! People like this just got elected Miami Dade’s first Non-Hispanic Democrat (it is usually Cuban Republicans) by an overwhelming margin because of fear of guns. Focus on less confrontational and less sensational methods!

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      Exercising your rights as carefully as possible is ‘baiting’?

      I’m sorry my rights offend you.

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “Focus on less confrontational and less sensational methods!”

      I agree. Good advice. Applies to the first amendment, too. Keep quiet; do not frighten the horses. Speaking out only upsets the public, and results in more Dimowits being elected.

  24. avatar Mark Kelly's Diapered Drooling Ventriloquist's Dummy says:

    I’m Pro-Law Enforcement and what’s alarming is not only do the Miami Beach police in the video appear to be “Cubanos” but they expertly demonstrate the tactics of “Totalitarianism” as exhibited by their ancestors in Fidel Castro’s Cuba.

    The Tree of Liberty is begging to be refreshed …..

    1. avatar MiSq'd says:

      Refresh it then!

      1. avatar Mark Kelly's Diapered Drooling Ventriloquist's Dummy says:

        It must be done “legally”. I desire it be “refreshed” after speedy public trials where once pronounced “guilty” the convicted are quickly escorted to the town center so the offender’s sentence can be immediately imposed for all to see and act as a warning to others who seek to mimic the criminal’s unlawful and unconstitutional behavior.

        1. avatar MiSq'd says:

          And IF that Refreshment you seek gets you killed, what then! And what about you’re surviving family. Don’t go looking for trouble, eventually it will seek you out.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Hey, Mis, spoken like a born serf. Enjoy your chains.

    2. avatar SurfGW says:

      Bringing a weapon to a pier is likely to cause panic once the public sees it. Further, after all these shootings, cops have to be suspicious and aggressive against anyone with a weapon in public!
      The cops were well intentioned and these clowns were baiting!

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Bull. What they were doing was legal. Why would it cause panic? The cops should have known that. The cops should not have responded to the scene, at all. Thus, no fear, no overreaction, no lawsuit, no recriminations, nothing. Where is the problem with that?

  25. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    The notice of intent to file, requiring retention of evidence, needs to happen immediately, covering everyone n thing. The charges need to be t-ed up and ready to go, plus a media communications plan. Dripping out the facts a bit at a time, letting the anti’s and apologists spin their spin on grainy partial footage, before the better video is exactly right. And, sadly, I gotta believe it’s an accident.

    This is why civil rights advocacy need response plans on the shelf: legal action, data collection, PR, victim support. So, when it happens, they’re good to go.

    This is what we pay them for.

    You have a natural, civil, constitutionally-protected right to protect yourself when otherwise minding your own business, and it is not the government’s job to manufacture risk and bother because you happen to do that.That’s called harassment. This gaggle of uniformed boneheads is demonstrating *why* that bit of “common sense gun control” had to be codified into law. Yes, Virginia, some people are too dump, hyped up, full of themselves, or all three, to figure out that pointing guns as peaceful citizens, peacefully doing something not illegal is a bad plan.

    1. avatar MiSq'd says:

      Yeah, and the idea of “Bringing and argument to bear” by driving ~200 miles out of your way. That could get you potentially killed just so you can get your 15 minutes of fame is even a Dumber Idea.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Absolutely true. And most girly-men will stand back and pretend nothing is happening, look the other way, and soil their panties as you are doing. Some will stand up, like our founding fathers, like MLK, and risk it all for FREEDOM! If you are incapable of courage yourself, how about you STFU when someone else takes that risk?

        1. avatar MiSq'd says:

          I’ve taken plenty of risks in my Lifetime, Sir. I just don’t Advertise It on YouTube…

    2. avatar SurfGW says:

      Would it make you happier if these cop-baiters were SWATTED? If these cops were not brave enough to deal with these clowns on their own, you would have had a SWAT team show up. Be happy to have cops that have common sense and who released the baiters afterwards without charges!

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Did the “baiters” release the cops after their criminal assaults, or were they even asked? When you “bait” a fish and it bites, it ends up dead. These assholes bit, just as stupid as a shark, why should they survive? They broke about a dozen laws, why do we care if they released those who broke no laws, *they* should be in jail.

        And I would at least *hope* a SWAT team would have been trained well enough that they would not have responded to a report of “men obeying the law”, do you have reason to expect that is not true?

  26. avatar David Wiechecki says:

    Is there a weight limit you have to exceed to qualify to be an officer in that department? An occasional donut is ok. But a dozen a day gets what we see in the video. Bad cop, no donut!

  27. avatar Gun Owning American says:

    Bunch of idiotic jack booted thugs.

    1. Who called the “Jack Booted MB Police Thugs In”?/! Mike Taylor! He even emits it in the Video…

  28. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Because of the Mulford Act in California, as a former black resident, open carry is very special to me.
    I don’t say this lightly. White gun owners are going to have to be prepared to spend a great deal of money and perhaps arrest and jail time, in defending their civil rights. I really hope you are up to it.

  29. avatar George Rockwell says:

    Cops don’t give a shit about the Constitution or the law in general. They are all about “going home at the end of their shift” and they dont give a fuck about your civil rights. The sooner the bootlickers learn this, the better.

  30. avatar Pax says:

    Sorry, but the open carry guy in the video is coming on like a stiff prick. He wasn’t trying to exercise his rights, he was looking for a fight. Well, he got one. He’s a bad rep for the gun community IMO.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:


        Sorry, but the open carry guy in the video is coming on like a stiff prick. He wasn’t trying to exercise his rights, he was looking for a fight. Well, he got one. He’s a bad rep for the gun community IMO.

        ” Sich in response to Agreed…”

        Yes, publicly exercising constitutionally protected rights can result in upsetting “the people.” Can’t have that; self-suppression of our rights is the best course of action. Exercise your rights in the privacy of your home. Avoid forcing the public to endure your proclamation of your natural, civil and human rights. Offending others is impolite..

        To quote myself: “Everyone has a natural, human and civil right to offend others with lawful behavior”. (or something like that)

        1. avatar Sich says:

          Idiot Boy called the Police! He even admit’s it on the Video. Police are Reacting to a Gun’s In Plan Sight Call to the Fishing Pier! Which could imply just about anything, from Hostages Taken to some Fool Waving a Gun. Motor Mouth (Idiot Boy) is doing 90% of all the talking. Friends at Pier Clam Up as soon as Police arrive. But Motor Mouth keeps talking as though his mouth was on High Octane Fuel pumped with Nitro…

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          So far, no one has pointed out an illegality. Provoking police by being lawful, evening announcing to the your intent to be lawful is just legally exercising protected rights. Same as if I notify police that I will be protesting the governor by holding a sign on the steps of the capitol building. If cops want to make a big deal of that, it is their idiocy on display (which is always a good thing to provoke). Refusing to exercise your rights because some will be offended is not only silly, but a great way to admit you forfeit your rights to whatever you could be legally doing.

          In the case at hand, the same thing would have unfolded if the SC had ruled in January that there are no restrictions on gun ownership, period.

        3. avatar Sich says:

          All this Florida Open Carry Law DID was to make thing’s worse for the Police! Trying to determine whether if a Call Comes In about a Person with a Gun is Benign, Plausible Threat or All Out Threat! What happens when someone gets Killed and a Call was Made to the Police and Nobody shows up to investigate it. Who’s Fault does it become? The Caller, the Dispatchers, the Police, the Victim, WHO!!!

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “All this Florida Open Carry Law DID was to make thing’s worse for the Police! ”


          If being law abiding, even pre-notifying police of the intent to be law abiding poses problems for police, then deal with where the problem lies. It is not the responsibility of individuals to comport so as to not confuse ignorant police and other government officials.

          If you fear your police department is stupid, out of control, dangerous, prone to violence, then by all means stay indoors. If you present your CCW to police, and they ask you to hand over your firearm, they can then holler “Gun!” and shoot you down like a rabid dog…all in good faith belief you intended to shoot them, evidenced by your reaching for your gun. Police go home, you go in a body bag.

          BTW, what you fear is a real risk if a CCW gun carrier is engaging an attacker, and police arrive. Better to not make things harder on police. Give up your gun(s) now.

        5. avatar Sich says:

          I don’t think that Miami Beach Police would have sent Twelve Police Officers in investigate a situation without known what the Actual Situation Was. If it were a Simple Open Carry of a New State Law, MB Police might have sent Two Officers, NOT Twelve of them…

        6. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “I don’t think that Miami Beach Police would have sent Twelve Police Officers…”

          Of course they would; just to prove a point, as in “just because they can”. Intimidation is the currency of law enforcement (at all levels). Indeed, if the cops had not been previously notified of the intent to carry, they probably would have only sent a squad car to the scene. The chief of police likely decided “This smart ass is not going to make my fiefdom look bad”.

          In my township, the DA announced she would charge every shooting incident, even home invasions because private citizens are not law enforcement, and are incompetent in the use of judgement and guns. Her stated goal is a “gun free” (except criminals because they can’t be controlled) territory. It is why I do not carry at all. Heck, the law makes it illegal to conceal a gun without a license, and the packing box for my little plinker constitutes concealment. I must legally go into my garage (connected to the house), put the box, gun and ammo in the trunk, and drive to the range. (the box is locked so I can put ammo in the trunk with it). Then it gets funny. Once at the range, I must put the plinker in my hand (minus the box), the ammo in a bag or pocket, then open carry the plinker between car and the range. Reverse process after the shooting session. As it is, the cops don’t hassle anyone at the range, so everyone keeps guns in boxes, sheaths and containers between car and range.

        7. avatar Sich says:

          Motor Mouth counted them Off as they Arrived! More “Sensualism” to have Twelve show up for YouTube than just Two…

        8. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “More “Sensualism” to have Twelve show up for YouTube than just Two…”

          The only “wrong” motivation was the police attack on law abiding citizens (yes, when law abiding people are surrounded by heavily armed police, that is an attack).

        9. avatar Sich says:

          Define “Heavily Armed” other then Out Weighing those that were being guarded. I saw onlt three Officers with Service Pistols in Plain Sight, all others were Holstered like “Motor Mouth” was…

        10. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Define “Heavily Armed”…”

          Yes, let’s do put the microscope on the nits.

          “Heavily armed” as in a virtual squad of cops, each with handguns, batons and shotguns within reasonable access.

          If you are waiting for some universal, resounding, bombastic Supreme Court ruling that anyone may possess and carry any firearm they can afford, you are waiting for government permission to enjoy and exploit the rights you were guaranteed with the original constitution.

          If you are comfortable with police responding to legal activities as if a terrorist bomb had exploded, then fine. Go meekly about your business, afraid to display your sovereignty as an American citizen under a written constitution. It is your free choice as to how to unfold your life. It is not your free choice to ridicule those who proudly enjoy their freedoms and liberties.

        11. avatar Sich says:

          What “Shotgun’s”?/! I don’t recall seeing ANY Shotguns in the Video! I do recall “Motor Mouth” bragging to the MB Police that Their Firearms were probably Bigger and Lager Caliber then those used by the MB Police. Which DIDN’T Improve the Situation ANY or the Mood of the MB Police…

        12. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “What “Shotgun’s”?/! I don’t recall seeing ANY Shotguns in the Video!”

          Oh please. Now you are being obtuse. Do you actually think the cops arrived in squad cars that didn’t have long guns aboard?

          Time to give it a rest.

        13. avatar Sich says:

          Excuse me for my Obtuseness, but having the Shotguns in the Police Cars nowhere near easy reach of those MB Police Officers on the Fishing Pier is a bit of a Stretch of a perfectly good adjective to describe the seen…

        14. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Point is not the armament, but the attempt to intimidate a citizen to abandon a constitutionally protected right. Even if they had only been “armed” with flex ties, they were wrong, intentionally. Police bullying should be the issue here.

        15. avatar Sich says:

          The only one Intimidating was “Motor Mouth”…

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email