“We’re not against people carrying firearms concealed, but having them out, having them exposed, you’re opening a recipe for disaster. Some people want to be police officers, like George Zimmerman did. We don’t need George Zimmermans walking around with firearms exposed.” – Miami Fraternal Order of Police president Javier Ortiz in The war between police and the NRA: Open carry laws make cops’ jobs virtually impossible [via salon.com]
Home Quote of the Day Blue Force Gear Quote of the Day: Open Carry is a...
“We’re not against people being Amish in their homes, but wearing those weird old-fashioned clothes out, having them exposed, you’re opening up a recipe for disaster…”
This story is nine months old…
George Zimmerman is George Zimmerman. The rest of the gun owners are not George Zimmerman, so you don’t have to worry about multiple George Zimmermans. Unless he’s been cloned.
Open carry of a pistol lets an officer know that you have a firearm in a non threatening way. It’s not like your waving it around with your finger on the trigger.
What does open carry have to do with Zimmerman? Nothing.
This thug with a badge only invokes the specter of Zimmerman because Zimmerman’s an already unlikable, easily lampoonable caricature of gun owners. That’s called a straw man argument and nobody employing it may be trusted.
Drawing him into this unrelated aspect of gun ownership allows Herr Ortiz here to conflate open carry with some questionable, though not illegal, actions in an entirely different context. Comrade Ortiz may as well have decried open carry by law enforcement officere and declared that “we don’t need Lee Paiges walking around with firearms exposed.”
You’re countering Ortiz on the basis of Zimmerman just being one guy and hardly representative of all gun owners (though he’s probably much closer to being representative than many gun owners are comfortable admitting.) That’s Ortiz’s trick, though, because this has nothing to do with one man or that particular man’s actions. The entire premise of the Zimmerman analogy is faulty. You should should reject that premise out of hand, not accept and proceed to argue from it.
I don’t think he was trying to trick anyone. I think he’s just an idiot. You’re giving this guy way too much credit.
Zero interest in Zimmerman. Zimmerman shot a POS that needed shooting. Move on.
“Fraternal Order” = statist union thugs/self protection racket.
Actually, there is news today on Zimmerman being in another confrontation:
“George Zimmerman told police he was punched in the face Sunday night at a restaurant in Sanford, Florida, while explaining to fellow diners that he shot Trayvon Martin in self-defense, according to a police report released by the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office.”
While I obviously don’t believe he should have to or anything, why GZ hasn’t changed his name and left Florida is completely beyond me. WTF is he doing living in the same community? After the 3rd or 4th incident of him being attacked and shot at and whatever else, you’d think he’d f’ing pack up and leave. He’s now legitimately in a situation where he very well may be attacked (again) and have to truly defend his life against a grave, immediate threat (again) and shoot somebody (again). How’s that going to play out for him? Damn. CHANGE YOUR NAME AND LEAVE FL, dude!
Email this asshole. I did. He actually replied in a bewildered fashion.
To further add to that, I don’t think that Zimmerman was open carrying was he? I thought open carry in Florida was restricted to Hunting/Fishing transit – No?
You’re partially correct. It’s while hunting, fishing, and camping including traveling to and from those activities. We had a push for OC with concealed license this year in Florida which passed the house but died in a senate subcommittee.
Aside from his argument being a total fallacy, introducing Zimmerman is the very definition of a Straw Man.
George Zimmerman was a concerned, if not too bright, citizen attempting to help the police protect his community. He was NOT trying to be a cop, he was on the phone to the cops.
Most important, George Zimmerman was NOT OPEN CARRYING. As I commented a few days ago, if Zimmerman was in fact open carrying and Martin had seen his pistol, do you think we would know the names of either one of these men today?
Treyvon attacked without adequate provocation for the sole reason that he saw Zimmerman as a soft target. Literally, he thought he was entering a “Gun Free Zone”. He was wrong.
And just what did George Zimmerman do, again, besides be acquitted? He was on his way to Target, saw a suspicious figure lurking around buildings, so he called the police. When the dispatcher said “we don’t need you to follow him”. Zimmerman began his journey back to his truck, only to be suckerpunched and beaten by a teenaged thug who would have beaten him into brain damage if not for a Kel Tec PF9.
I suppose we shouldn’t watch out for our neighbors in a neighborhood which was experiencing a wave of crime committed by young black males, right? Just because EVERY SINGLE CRIME committed in that neighborhood was committed by people who looked and dressed just like Trayvon Martin. But hey, just because that’s the case doesn’t mean GZ had any right to be suspicious, because that would be racist. And gosh darn it, his racism merited that young African American male the right to dole out a beating until his hands got tired. That White Hispanic was exerting his privilege over him and that sort of microaggression could not be tolerated. And violence is excusable because black people experience instutionalized racism.
George Zimmerman should be a lesson to anyone who CCWs. If the media gets hold of your story of a DGU on a slow news day, and the dynamics of the names of the involved are racial polar opposites, you can be screwed. You’d better hope your name isn’t Adolf if you have to shoot a Traquandavious or a Dante. And if someone happens to hook their relatives up with a PR firm who floods the media with the most cherubic photos of them before they got inked up and grill-bedecked, it doesn’t matter if you’re a cop who was punched and had his gun grabbed, you’re screwed.
Do you know what I learned from the George Zimmerman case? Carrying a revolver bought through a private cash sale seems like a very good idea. If you’re in the right you can have your life ruined. Zimmerman’s entire family is in hiding. He pops up from time to time but apparently they have no fixed addresses. Maybe if nobody saw you do it then nothing happened. Get home, throwing the gun in a river on the way home.
“We’re not against people carrying pocket Constitutions concealed, but having them out, having them exposed, you’re opening a recipe for disaster.”
THAT has gotten people arrested in Denver. Passing out the U.S.Constitution in front of federal court.
It was information pertaining to jury nullification, not (only?) the Constitution.
Why wouldn’t you want more members in neighborhood watches? What did Zimmerman do that was bad? I mean, if he was guilty of something don’t you think our President, AG, and the entire Judicial system would have found the means to pin him for SOMETHING? Because you know they tried, and tried, and tried…
But hey, if it makes the police sleep better at night knowing there all alone in the fight against crime, so be it. Just seems to me that at this point in our country when trust in police is declining I’d figure the cops would appreciate the assist.
It’s it the government goons who say “See something, say something.”? It’s that EXACTLY what Zimmerman did? And then the “something” practiced the ground and pound he learned on YouTube.
Statists gotta state.
“if he was guilty of something don’t you think our President, AG, and the entire Judicial system would have found the means to pin him for SOMETHING? Because you know they tried, and tried, and tried…”
But maybe they’re just incompetent at it. For instance, Hillary…
“But it’s increasingly challenging when people have AR-15s slung over their shoulder and they’re in a crowd. We don’t know who the good guy is versus the bad guy when everyone starts shooting.”
And when has this EVER happened? To my knowledge never. Open carry here in VA is a complete and total non issue for both the citizens and police. Many times I have encountered LEOs while open carrying and actually been thanked by them. Never a bad experience, ever.
It just happened in Dallas. Remember?
Uh, no it didn’t. Everybody didn’t start shooting, and the cops were easily able to identify that the open carriers weren’t responsible.
On top of that, the open carriers recognized the situation and immediately took step to alleviate any concerns law enforcement might have had.
That one hand of DPD didn’t speak to the other isn’t the OC’s fault. If they had, they could have narrowed down the threats more quickly and avoided creating a PR mistake in the middle of a situation that could have brought pure, unadulterated sympathy.
No, they didn’t know who the good guys were, hence they wrongly reported him as a person of interest. Should they have known? I don’t know maybe. Multiple shots ringing out, reports of multiple gunmen, snipers. Completely confusing situation and here’s one guy walking around with a rifle who clearly is not a cop. Now this guy feels compelled to give up his weapon not knowing if or when he’ll ever get it back. Look, you guys can open carry til the cows come home, I honestly don’t give a s$%t but to expect everyone else around you to simply go about their business, especially when there is a shooting going on, is the epitome of naivete.
The police seemed to have no problem distinguishing who was open carrying and who was actually shooting at them, did they?
So Dallas was the worst case, open carriers at the location of a mass shooting, and what happened? Absolutely nothing, except for a “person of interest” coming forward for a 20-min interview. None of the gun-grabbers’ hysterical memes came true – the OC’ers didn’t get shot by mistake, and they didn’t go all vigilante on the shooter.
Uh…..Adam? The police not only reported him as a person of interest, but they speculated that there might be as many as three active shooters. That’s two fictional people beyond the actual number.
Now, some might argue that such a situation is already so fluid and confusing that the police could be chasing phantom shooters, so we really don’t need any open carriers adding to the fog. However, that argument belies the reality of the Dallas case in that the open carriers all scattered and took cover, and thus didnt draw any fire or attention from the police. The person of interest promptly turned himself in and was cleared.
The police were confused, momemtarily, by the shooter’s use of combat tactics such as shoot and move, but they figured that out quickly enough, just as they figured out that the open carriers were not threats.
The tired old refrain of “the police won’t know who the bad guys are” just isn’t supported by the evidence. Really, when you consider that police rounds hit their intended targets only about a third of the time (and the percentage falls into the teens when that target is firing back) coupled with the police rate of hitting innocent bystanders, I’d say it doesn’t really matter whether anyone’s open carrying. The police probably won’t hit them at all, or else they were going to hit them, anyway, as a bystander, regardless of anyone open carrying.
Police thought there were three shooters, because they couldn’t wrap their heads around the concept that a motivated killer might shoot them from one position and then move to another position.
Speaking of that didnt a cop just shoot an unarmed black therapist then claim he meant to shoot the white autistic guy?
“We’re not against God-given rights, but exercising them, freely, you’re opening a recipe for disaster.”
“we’re not against people speaking freely, but doing it in public is a recipe for disaster.”
Hmm. Still sounds messed up how ever you put it.
The PC handwringers already have us wayyyy down that road. Speech is allowed as long as it agrees with their feelz – otherwise it is ‘hateful’ or ‘racist’ or ‘misogynist’ and prohibited.
Fedzilla has already seen it as a useful tool, with obscenely un-Constitutional nonsense like ‘hate laws’.
The end of our grand experiment is inevitable at this point. The only question now is who, how, and when it will be sent over the cliff.
No doubt you are familiar with his personal motto: When in danger, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout!
Perhaps the “disaster” would be that a significant portion of the population, openly armed, would be such a deterrent to crime that we didn’t need so many cops.
That would be a “disaster” for a police union.
No, a disaster for the police unions would be for everyone to stop speeding.
Thanks, I needed that laugh.
So its preferable to Mr Ortiz that the police not know who’s armed until the shooting starts, vs. knowing in advance which individuals are packing heat… Idk about that one. I’ll bet if you surveyed active duty officers, 100% would say they would like to see which hood rats are packing heat before chasing them down a dark alley. The FOP’s arguments are straw men that don’t pass the smell test.
Is Miami’s rising criminality and corresponding decent into 3rd world hell hole being slowed because your boys in blue are doing a bang up job?
You should be pleading for more GZ’s. Dead criminals are fertilizer for a civil society.
Is this person even a police officer? In my experience, people who are “presidents” of these kind of organizations tend to be burocrats that are hired for their managerial skills, not necessarily for their experience related to the the organization.
Well, the sad fact is the example George Zimmerman gives society is the average citizen is fully capable of recognizing criminal / suspicious behavior, confronting a suspect, and then lawfully protecting ourselves in self defense if and when confronted and/or attacked.
The thug Trayvon Martin would likely still be walking around committing crimes today if the police handled it because the trends are:
1) The police would’ve arrived too late to spot the criminal behavior or would’ve waited 3 hours to decide on a course of action.
2) The justice system and POTUS apparently love to keep criminals on the streets.
If the article OP is concerned police can’t follow standard ROE, that’s a police training problem, not an OC problem.
Uh… if George Zimmerman had been openly carrying a firearm Treyvon Martin would still be alive. Even really dumb criminals know enough not to assault people with firearms.
Probably be in prison by now though.
Apparently you have to be a cocksucking pile of shit to be the president of a police union or other cop organization. Ever see a quote from one that didn’t prove the quoted idiot was a walking POS?
To paraphrase what this useless waste of flesh said, Open Carry is bad, because George Zimmerman is bad, and George Zimmerman always carries concealed.
Because police wondering whether or not someone has a gun somehow makes their job easier than KNOWING when someone had a gun?
Doesn’t every LEO assume everyone is armed? It follows rule 1, always assume the gun is loaded…
The guy talks about open carry like it’s a new concept, never been tried before.
These urban cops need to get out of their bubbles once in a while. Maybe attend a national conference and talk to some of their comrades from states where open carry has been permitted for decades.
Ask them how it works and benefit from their experience, instead of sheltering in place and wetting your panties.
He thinks too highly of himself. Why would I want to be like them. Under paid, dress in a goofy uniform, have to deal with idiots all day and night AND always late to the party when you need them. I see carrying my firearm as not wanting to be at all like them. Sheesh.
“Police in multiple states have voiced criticism of open carry laws, which many say make their jobs more difficult, stressful and dangerous. Instead of listening to these police criticisms, those who continue to demand unfettered gun rights — nearly the whole of the GOP and its base — imperil the same police lives they claim to want to protect. “You can’t be the party of law and order and not listen to your police chiefs,” Art Acevedo, police chief of Austin, Texas, admonished his state’s Republican lawmakers recently.”
The complexity and totality of fail within this text is mind boggling. Since when is the free exercise of one’s rights subject to police approval? I’m sure one can find a number of police in multiple states who would also argue that the 4th and 5th Amendments make their job more difficult, stressful, and dangerous. But instead of listening to these police criticisms, those who continue to demand unfettered civil rights – nearly the whole of the GOP and it’s base – imperil no one. “You can’t be the party of law and order and not heed the law of the land and the Constitution”. Hey Art, do you even remember that oath of office you took? Maybe you should read it again.
“Forty-five states permit open carry of guns. Among them are Texas and Louisiana, where recent cop shooting deaths have called into question how the practice — particularly during mass killings, a regular occurrence in this country — gets in the way of policing.”
Forty-five states? That sounds like a super majority to me. Maybe it means something that some people don’t seem to get.
Recent cop shooting deaths don’t call into question anything. Leftist morons call things into question. And as I recall, the open carrying of firearms by citizens has never gotten in the way of policing, even at these two events. So why the outrage?
George Zimmerman, registered hispanic democrat, got run under the political bus for trying to do the right thing. I doubt the media or society will ever give back normalcy to him.
On another note, I’ve noticed a lot of 30.07 signs in Austin, possibly left in RF’s wake… still open carrying?
Miami: the police responsible for Trayvon Martin not being arrested for possession of marijuana/paraphernalia, and for possession of burglary tools and stolen goods, thereby enabling him to be walking the streets of Sanford freely, when he decided to assault an armed, law-abiding citizen.
How about you spend more time/effort doing your job of actually arresting criminals, and spend less time worrying about the actions of law-abiding people, mmkay?
Maybe they’re on to something. The overwhelming majority of people who open carry are police / federal agents and the police and federal agents do tend to shoot a lot of innocent people….
When your stupid neighbors who needed a job (and you were stupid to elect them as your “government”) hate you, think you’re stupid, and tell everyone that they (your government) cannot trust you, then this is the stupid sh_t that falls out of their mouths.
“Some people want to be police officers…”
Translation: “My badge grants me special rights to firearms. You are not a supercitizen like I am; you have not been anointed by the state to wield the privilege of carrying a weapon, and acting like it’s your God-given right completely invalidates my position as the boss of a police union, so stop it.”
Statists gunna statist. It’s also a simple logical fallacy, well actually a compound logical fallacy but nonetheless, fallacious statists gunna statist fallaciously.
This was my favorite… “If those individuals would just think through the implications of being spotted carrying a weapon three minutes after an armed robbery, particularly given our acute sensitivity to rampage violence these days, to see somebody with a firearm is to focus attention on that somebody,”
Let me get this straight: for the sake of argument, I’m casually strolling down a street open carrying my full size Glock in an OWB holster. An armed robbery occurs nearby. When the police arrive on or near the scene looking for the perpetrator, of whom they would probably have not only a description guiding their search but also the overall body language and actions of individual people to guide them, and I’m suddenly at greater risk because I’m open carrying? Are we to believe all cops are that stupid, or just believe such when it helps further a narrative?
Not that I’d want to be near an armed robbery to test my theory, but I’m guessing the LAST thing a cop might notice about me in a rapid-fire assessment of the threat level I pose would be the gun on my hip. I’d even bet $10 that for certain officers or deputies that I would be considered less of a suspect in that moment as it would probably be a first for them to encounter a criminal open carrying, especially after they just committed a violent crime and are attempting to evade and escape.
Any of you LEO’s here think I’m way off with this theory of mine?
Fraternal Order of Police, (F.O.O.P), President Javier Ortiz.
What an embarrassment to the police.
He should be called the President of (F.O.O.P.), the Fraternal Order Of Pantywetters.
I haven’t looked into when this guy began his stint as head of that labor union. But the overall FOOP for Florida supported the recent efforts of the Florida House and Senate to return our OC rights. Sadly, it was the Florida Sheriffs Association that was against it (despite some pretty outspoken supporters of the effort).
“We’re not against women in public concealing their faces, ankles and, wrists, but having them out, having them exposed, you’re opening a recipe for disaster.”
Huh…who knew that people really were so similar, on the inside? Scratch a crypto-fascist and you basically get an Islamofascist. Same song, different verse.
His objection to open carry isn’t any imaginary risk of open carriers being mistakenly shot by police. After all, police mistakenly or criminally shoot bystandersand suspects with shocking regularity. Where’s his call for disarming the police? Or at least for mandating they carry concealed? Pure silence.
No, what this thug’s real objection is, is that the citizenry is armed at all. He’s focused on open carry, because that’s the controversy of the day and something that is still within influence, whereas private gun ownership itself is set in stone.
He wants only the chosen few, those selected to serve as armed agents of the state, to be able to have guns at all, let alone openly carry them. He’s contemptuous of his countrymen and obviously shelters statist ambitions. This man is everything that is wrong with police today. He should be drummed out of the service immediately. He’s disdainful, disingenuous, and dangerous.
So the moral to this story-the po-leece aren’t your friend. Anyone see ole’ GZ in the news again? Something about being punched in a bar…Trayvon was just makin’ some Drank.
“We’re not against people carrying firearms concealed…”
Yes you are.
“, but having them out, having them exposed, you’re opening a recipe for disaster.”
Citation needed. If that is your recipe then you need another cook book because I am not having any of that crap you are feeding me.
“Some people want to be police officers,…”
Then why don’t they join the force? Obviously the standards are not that high.
“We don’t need George Zimmermans walking around with firearms exposed.”
Zimmerman was concealing as you approve. How many “disasters” did Zimmerman get into before Martin was trying to kill him? If it was me, I would have pulled my gun right after Martin threw the first punch. And no, I don’t want to be a cop. I tend to avoid trouble now that I carry rather than go looking for it. When I open carry, trouble avoids me.
Zimmerman is a jerk, I’ll grant you that. But, while the prosecution was busy proving that he was not guilty of murder (that’s usually the defense’s job), they also inadvertently proved that he wasn’t a “wannabe cop”.
State witness, Ms. Dorival, NWP coordinator, offered to “provide Zimmerman with a civilianized patrol car and a uniform of sorts, and provide additional training that would allow him to effectively conduct patrols of his neighborhood.”
He turned it down.
Get your facts right.
Excellent point, they also left out the fact that had GZ not been carrying his weapon he might be in a coma or in the morgue.
George Zimmerman concealed his firearm, which sinks this guy’s whole point. Zimmerman employed his preferred mode of carry, and disaster still struck.
I think it’s silly to try to argue that one mode of citizen carry is better, or worse, for police officers. If we all carry concealed, then every person on the street is a potential threat because you don’t know who is armed. If we all carry in the open, then some people might feel threatened, including police. Going a step further, if we ban guns, then criminals will still have them and conceal them, so we’re right back to not knowing who is a threat. Bottom line, guns are a complication for a police officer’s job, period. Regulations don’t help, they just alter the dynamic of the problem. The police need to learn how to deal with them, and accept that they are a risk of the job. Lastly, statistics show that honest armed citizens are very rarely a threat or a complication for police officers.
Doesn’t this guy realize that making the job of police easier would warrant paying them less?
What’s ironic is even though the police are easily identifiable, the door swings both ways. We don’t know if every cop we meet is good or bad either.
Civilians don’t know when they might be mistakenly no-knocked or SWATed, which is embarrassingly prevalent.
For the amount of open carry we currently have, we seen to be pretty free of disasters enabled by or even vaguely related to “open carry.”
While we’re at it, how do you craft a law prohibiting “open carry” that allows all the legitimate uses for a gun, which have not been banned. Sure, you can defend yourself, as long as you don’t take the gun out of your pocket to do it. We have no problem with hunting, just don’t be carrying a gun out where we can see it when you hunt, practice, on your way to and from, or when take the gun somewhere for maintenance.
We haven’t prohibited gun ownership. You buy a gun any time. Indeed, you can do anything you like with your gun, provided you never carry it (openly or concealed), or hold it in your hand (brandishing). Have fun.
I live in Tennessee and tend to agree. I can open carry, but chose to conceal. I would rather not show my sidearm. I believe that it only invites trouble. I am not the police.
Wait a minute. You mean you are going to have to think before you draw your weapon and shoot people?
George Zimmerman carried concealed. His license was for concealed carry – not open carry.
I think I understand here. Mr. Ortiz is not a thinking man. He doesn’t want to think about things and certainly doesn’t want to think about open carriers. Perhaps he wants to go throughout the day using nothing but muscle memory?
I’m going to keep it short: Fvck the Infernal Order of Polizei.
It’s not my job to make a cop’s job easier. It’s the cops’ job to make the crooks’ job more difficult. And the boys in blue aren’t doing it.
Even though Zimmerman carried concealed, this LEO is spot on.
Open carriers often rely on the open carry intimidation factor to bully others and act like authority figures just like Zimmerman. Acting like an authority figure when you are not is a clear way to start trouble.
Is it a lot of hard work to remain so willfully ignorant of facts – both regarding George Zimmerman specifically, and open carriers generally?
Thank you for that reply. You saved me the trouble. Not sure I agree 100%. To many people, ignorance takes little effort at all.
I kind of wonder if Zimmerman had been Open Carrying if Trayvon would have assaulted him.
Zimmerman was a legit Neighborhood Watch volunteer, despite the media saying he was self appointed which means volunteer.
Open carry allows us to carry full size pistols (that have larger capacity and are easier to shoot accurately) in more comfort and provides easier access. Thats why police officers carry openly.
Intimidation factor is a bonus. Do you feel bullied by big athletic guys when they are just minding their own business? I mean, you will think twice before attacking someone much stronger than you, who can hurt you easily with his bare hands, right?
You can call it bullying, but if seeing my openly carried firearm prevents you from attacking me then I will gladly be a “bully”.
Disclaimer: This is all theoretical. Illinois does not have OC yet.
“Disclaimer: This is all theoretical. Illinois does not have OC yet.”
No, it is not “theoretical”.
Treat people with respect and don’t act like a Billy bad ass when you approach them and that gun they are carrying will never leave the holster.
I have a better idea! Let’s ban Police Unions Nationwide! Also, due to serious public trust factors with Law Enforcement. We the people should institute “Full independent civilian review boards ” on a National level. For all rank and file LEO’s. And hold them accountable for their actions when deal with the public at large . And to make sure they are honoring their oaths to uphold the US Constitution – Bill of Rights. To hold them responsible for infringements, and violations there of…Possibly, Disarm and Disband all public police officers. Replace with “Privatized local/town security officers, or a town ship security force…” Under strict control…Lightly armed–batons, nightsticks, defense sprays. No guns. Work in groups. No public harassment—reactionary force. In a free society. SWAT TEAMS for armed response with a special warrant from a judge. Time to restructure our Law Enforcement on local/city/state levels. Only US citizens have the “civil right ” to the 2nd amendment. No government agents.