I’m all in favor of open carry. Like Ralph, I don’t think that “being a good little gun rights advocate” and keeping your firearms hidden from view makes it any more likely that the enemies of firearms freedom are going to stay their collective, metaphorical hand. Open carry creates “gun normalization” that protects our rights. Besides, if something is legal to do then it’s legal for you to do it. Ipso facto. And yet the Neenah Wisconsin officer felt free to . . .
threaten to shoot the open carrier in the head if he made a furtive move. Twice. This despite the fact that the officer clearly knew the “suspect” was exercising his Constitutional right to keep and bear arms without any intent on shooting anyone. “Oh we’re playing that game are we?” The threat of violence was entirely unnecessary. It was a verbal assault. Not illegal, but hardly designed to de-escalate the situation. Which wasn’t what I’d call tense.
At 6:52, the officer gets into it:
I’m a pro-Second Amendment Patriot American and I love my Second Amendment rights. But do you realize what you’re doing could very well cost us, me, my Second Amendment rights because this is so egregious to the general public that it’s gonna cause them to make decisions legally that, you know are going to restrain us. Do you realize that? Do you care about that?
Who the hell is this police officer to debate open carry with a legally armed American? Imagine if the officer walked up to someone on a street corner preaching the gospel/demonstrating for or against abortion, drew his gun and started warning them that their demo was dangerous to the officer’s First Amendment right to free speech and the U.S. Constitution? GTFO.
Note: there are plenty of people who agree with the officer’s argument against open carry but he’s holding an American citizen at gunpoint. He’s acting a civil servant. Or, if you prefer, a representative of the government. He’s not supposed to “take sides” or debate the law. He’s supposed to serve and protect. Period.
The second officer (Gonzales) steps up to argue against open carry. And then the first officer starts up again. “The road to hell is paved with good intentions,” he lectures. Ain’t that the truth. The last comment is even more ironic: “what an awesome opportunity to learn.”
LCP is great when you need to carry discreetly
I’m confused. Am I a terrorist or a “responsible citizen”? Am I supposed to be afraid of myself or pat myself on the back cause I know when to put my booger hook on the bang switch?
Uhhh good question. Judgin by the news I’d say all us vets are responsible terrorists that should be afraid of who is patting us on the back.
“I’ll shoot you right in the head” and your little dog too…
“It was a verbal assault. Not illegal,”
In many places making a credible verbal threat is considered assault and is illegal. Battery is the crime of actually carrying out the threat. This thug should be charged with assault and terroristic threatening.
508.080bTerroristic threatening in the third degree.
(1) Except as provided in KRS 508.075 or 508.078, a person is guilty of terroristic
threatening in the third degree when:
(a) He threatens to commit any crime likely to result in death or serious
physical injury to another person or likely to result in substantial property
damage to another person;
To me it was more like a warning — “If you, armed as you are, make any sudden moves, I will respond in thus and such a way.” I, unlike many of the other posters to TTAG about the incident, thought the officer was being eminently reasonable, considering that once a citizen had made a complaint about someone walking around in public with a long weapon, the police were duty-bound to respond to check the situation out. The bottom line is that once the officer had satisfied himself that he probably wasn’t dealing with a James Holmes or an Adam Lanza, he ended the contact. In the meantime, he took steps to ensure his own safety. So let me ask those of you who are upset about the behavior of the police in this incident: Suppose someone showed up on the sidewalk in front of your house with a rifle slung across his back, in a jurisdiction in which open carry is perfectly legal. How would you respond? Would you be likely to say to yourself, “Oh, it’s just some guy exercising his Constitutional 2d Amendment rights” and go on about your business as if he weren’t armed at all? Or would you want to know a little bit more about the guy?
If said person was in front of my house, I would talk to him about his long gun, what is it, how it likes it, how it shoots. I would think any normal person would.
My dad and I have walked up to strangers houses (farm houses) to ask to hunt quail many times.
Suppose someone showed up on the sidewalk in front of your house with a rifle slung across his back, in a jurisdiction in which open carry is perfectly legal. How would you respond? Would you be likely to say to yourself, “Oh, it’s just some guy exercising his Constitutional 2d Amendment rights” and go on about your business as if he weren’t armed at all? Or would you want to know a little bit more about the guy?
——————————-
Why would I care? Seriously, how on Earth am I affected by this?
If the long gun were interesting, I may want to inquire about it, but outside of that, I couldn’t care less if he or she had a firearm anymore than I would care the color of his or her socks.
My level of concern wouldn’t even raise to the level of thinking of a reason why s/he would be carrying, anymore than I’d need a reason why s/he chose to walk there that day.
Why would you care? Do you really think someone is going to walk around with a slung rifle to go and commit some crime?
Wouldn’t the person trying to hide a rifle underneath clothing be far more dangerous?
The only reason I may want to know more about the person is to possibly develop a friendship with a like minded soul, much like I do when I run into people at the LGS or purchasing ammo.
I’d have zero concern at all about the rifle itself.
The officer called him stupid for following the law and by doing so, he’s potentially going to ruin it for others because fear mongrels that see him following the law will freak out and demand more laws. How asinine is that? That’s like buying a Ferrari, being legally able to drive it but an officer pulls you over and suggests that you park it in a garage, hidden from sight because the public might have fears that you will use it to travel well over the speed limit intoxicated.
The officer is an anti bully well rehearsed in pro 2A doctrine. His only concern for gun rights are for his and his “only ones” constituents.
Very helpful. While I have been doing precision shooting for 40 years I think at a level of generality there are people who will be happy to buy a product like this because the overall architecture is designed for the 300 Blk, and the scope is reasonably priced. The rest of it is just stuff most people won’t figure out either way.
Where is Wisconsin is this? How ridiculous is it for the tool to debate gun control with the citizen. Seems the motto “to protect and serve” is forgotten in todays world. Very sad. Cop says he is free to be stupid and They seem to forget they dont make laws just enforce them.
Neenah…between Oshkosh and Appleton.
This happened in Wisconsin, where the previous governor said that concealed carry licensing was unnecessary because it was an open carry state. He even patted his hip — “wear it here.”
And a cop with an exaggerated sense of self importance lecturing a citizen on the Constitution! It would be funny if it wasn’t so tragic.
Do cops wonder why we don’t trust them? Are they really that stupid?
No and yes.
Tom
Stupid? He said, “egregious”, Ralph.
Anybody notice how he asked about 1000ft of a gun free zone to try to arrest him….
SIG. No question.
This makes me absolutely sick, for many reasons. “Im going to shoot you right in the head”. Assuming that unlike the majority of cops this guy could actually hit what he was aiming for, that seems like an unneeded inflammatory statement to me. Continuing to hold them at with a gun at low ready out seems like overkill as well. The lecture about the Constitution is what really made me angry. The guy really seemed like a sack of douche juice.
My first thought was, “Oh shit, is that guy being threatened with immediate injury or death?”
One could argue a solid DGU case if a cop drew down on you and made threats while you were doing nothing more than carrying openly.
To the sh*tbags arguing this dumbass was in the right drawing on and threatening a citizen; choose your sides carefully…
Funny Matt, I was just thinking the same thing.
+ another 1000.
If it’s a gun I don’t have to carry, then I choose the Sig. Like the M9 and the CZ75 it’s an accurate, reliable and rugged firearm that’s extremely easy to shoot well. The HK loses points for being slightly snappier and having unfamiliar controls. It’s gets a little back for being lighter.
We have fought, and subsequently won, many legal battles in the past few years here in Wisconsin with over zealous and ignorant police officers who insist on making up their own rules on the spot. It really pains me to see that these police officers are never really punished in a way that would set precedence for possible future violators.
It sounds like a bunch of hoods got lit up.Too bad.Apparently one Shaniqua Brown had about a hundred people over.It sounds more like aflash mob than a party.
Cliffs: Dude open carries, just to open carry. Cop makes unnecessary threat. Yadda, yadda, yadda…
This has played out hundreds of times before. What’s the point of even discussing it?
HK
because I own 2 P30’s, 2 P2000SK’s, and plan on getting a pair of HK45’s when the next group buy comes out.
HK does not suck, and they do not hate you. Anyone who’s ever contacted them for service and support will be more than impressed.
You won’t need to though because HK’s just don’t break.
So who you do you call when the cops are being out of control? The police for the police?
Call 911 and ask for a supervisor. Whether you’re right or wrong, you will have better luck if you can be calm and polite. Especially if you’re more calm and polite than the officer that’s causing the problem. If the supervisor doesn’t solve the problem, and you believe you are legally and morally right, then the next step is to file a lawsuit. I have no experience with that side of the issue, though.
I’ve had a supervisor called on me a few times. Usually because I told someone I couldn’t arrest their ex-something until they committed a crime, and that being a jerk wasn’t illegal in WA.
If being a jerk was illegal Seattle cops would be busy 24/7.
Dear Nick
This is my counter-proposal: Bite me!
The gun control lobby believes that just be creating a bunch of organization made of the same people will create momentum for gun control. They should take a hard look at last week’s elections in Virginia. McAuliffe probably lost more votes because he was on Bloomberg’s payroll than he gained by misrepresenting Cuccinelli on social issues. Case in point was the race for the seat in the House of Delegates in Fairfax County held by Barbara Comstock. If anything, Comstock is actually more conservative than Cuccinelli and has been a target of Bloomberg’s for several election cycles. She comfortably held the seat in a district that Cuccinelli lost by 18 points. Virginians of all political factions like their guns and with a very low crime rate they are not about to be convinced that restricting firearms is going to make them safer. That is pretty much the position of most Americans outside of the urban elite, Hollywood and academia. Outside of the Northeast and California gun control is a loser.
This cop needs to review his shooting 101 class. You always aim for center mass, not the head or arm or knee or anywhere else. This fool would be lucky if he could hit center mass, never mind a difficult target such as the head. He’d most likely miss the head shot and take out another cop or an innocent bystander. I wouldn’t ever open carry, but I’m not against others doing so where it’s legal. If you do decide to open carry you stand a good chance of being stopped and questioned, or even shot if you make a wrong move. These two wanted to be stopped just to prove their point, but things could have ended very badly for this pair.
Here is the part that sucks, though. The cop is right when he says that provoking the general populace by open carrying a long gun could lead to loss of those rights. A number of states have outlawed open carry and those laws have so far withstood legal challenge. The argument in favor of open carry is that through time, open carriers can normalize the sight of a gun and so change people’s perceptions of guns. While probably true, that willl take a fair bit of time. It may be more likely that open carrying will frighten the masses enough that the anti-gun crowd will be able to push through anti-gun legislation before the normalization has a chance to succeed.
Damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
Yep, he is right; it happened here in California. Ronnie Reagan outlawed open loaded carry when the Black Panthers marc on the Capitol. Open carry of unloaded guns remained legal until a bunch of open carry advocates began having coffee klatches on the Board Walk in San Diego and at Starbucks in the SF Bay Area. The soccer moms were afeered, and called the coppers. The publicity lead the southern California democrats to first propose and pass an open carry of handguns ban, and a year later, a ban on long guns in all urban areas. (Obviously, open carry–even loaded–remains legal in most unincorporated areas, and state and federal forests, and on private property.) When they finally manage to ban hunting (limiting herd management to state and federal game officers), why, there won’t be any reason for anyone to carry anything but shotguns for ducks, geese and doves!
Yes, but…you’re talking about California. The logic does not necessarily apply in the more sane portions of the nation.
And if none of us Open Carry, even where open carry is absolutely and perfectly legal, just because we are afraid that exercising this right will cause the hoplophobes and civilian disarmament crowd to lobby for laws to take away our open carry right then we have ALREADY LOST THAT RIGHT and they needn’t bother to write the laws. All they have to do to get our compliance with any statist policy they want is to field enough jack-boot cops to harass us and we will just slink away and write nasty comments on blogs about people who were man enough to stand up to the bastards.
“The cop is right when he says that provoking the general populace by open carrying a long gun could lead to loss of those rights.”
Not the loss of rights; infringement. That’s not a petty distinction. Where rights are infringed, there’s tyranny (however great or small).
“enough that the anti-gun crowd will be able to push through anti-gun legislation before the normalization has a chance to succeed.”
If infringement happens in enough places at the same time then people who wish to exercise their right to keep and bear arms most logically will consider civil disobedience. They’ll refuse to go to the back of the bus.
Ohio always has been an open carry state and we still have to use open carry to get illegal signs/local ordinances removed and illegitimate MWAG stops/arrests trained out of the officers. In many places, the local powers that be simply don’t change their ways UNLESS we OC to get them moving. My oldest child was pulled over after work tonight. The state highway patrol officer (a very pleasant interaction) thanked him for notifying (it’s currently Ohio law if licensed, armed, and stopped) because, as the officer put it, “I have to repeatedly tell licensees that they must notify even if they are NOT carrying.” That is not correct and it has been this way since the beginning (AFAIK). The only way we get some to change is by repeatedly and politely correcting them and informing their superiors. Not much changes, at least here, without individuals getting out there and making it change. Some Ohio gun owners have a problem with us doing that but somebody has to.
I’ve noticed a trend that a majority of these open carrier/ police vids involve young open carriers (the famous Florida one of the old dude in the van withstanding). I wonder if the cops change their tone and keep the lectures to themselves when faced with a old dude OC’ing?
§1983 anyone?
Neenah is a nice little backwoods town. Been through it at least a hundred times. The officer appears a little badge-heavy, but the locals are good people.
I think that kid is an idiot!!! If I were the cop I would have reacted in the same manner. Granted “shooting him in the head” was not the best way to put it. The kid should not be carrying a long gun while waking around town. Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should.
Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you shouldn’t.
“Shouldn’t”? Am I reading your statement wrong? It IS late….
I’ve only gleaned through the post and have to try a faster system to watch the video. As it is, I have just a few quick comments.
“Or, if you prefer, a representative of the government.”
I prefer the term agent of government. Not only do they represent the vested authority and constitutional restrictions placed upon government in the immediate; they wield implied future power of government to bring about consequences beyond the present incident.
“It was a verbal assault. Not illegal,”
I’m not yet so sure about that ‘not illegal’ part. If the officer knew that OC was legal and didn’t have RAS or probable cause, then how can it be ‘legal’ to point a firearm at the person and verbally assault him? If the officer doesn’t like my skin color walking down that particular street, isn’t it ‘illegal’ if he points his sidearm at me and verbally assaults me; officer or not?
For us “average citizens”, what the other officer was doing would be called “brandishing” [displaying a firearm in a rude or threatening manner] and is illegal. Isn’t that what that army sergeant was being tried for in Texas?”
A company up here called Dlask used to sell a STEEL-framed version of the P228, all CNC machined, with a Canadian-legal 106mm barrel…
http://www.armchairpatriot.com/Home%20Defense/Construction%20and%20Blueprints/SIG_P228_Hi-Res_Blueprint.pdf
“what an awesome opportunity to learn.”
More like, what a awesome opportunity to keep the oath you swore.
Cop seemed reasonable to me. How’s he supposed to know if this guy is Joe Q. Law-Abiding Citizen or a wannabe Adam Lanza?
Keep the gun at home, the shooting range, or the hunting trip and you won’t have this problem.
FOAD
Sadly, the Republican party is corrupt and idiotic enough that it’s almost a certainty that they WILL nominate Jabb the Hutt. He’s a RINO, so Democrats will love him and if he’s elected (I’d day he’s got a 55-60% chance of winning), we will get new Federal gun control legislation, because the Republican Senators and Congressmen will be creaming their pants to rubberstamp anything he wants.
Because all your efforts have done such a wonderful job of making Jersey hellholes like Camden safe.
I heard the interview. Christie was making a big effort to keep talking without saying anything. He waffled as much as he could on the last legislation, trying to pacify as many Jersey voters as possible. He won’t be worried about that now.
I believe it to be willful ignorance on the part of the most rabid antis. I believe it to be simply ignorance or rationalization on the part of those gun owners (and some ‘gun rights’ groups) who still feel that we must somehow engage in “reasonable discussions’ and have ‘common sense compromise’. Even if all of the crime statistics indicated that private gun ownership increased crime significantly, we would still need the Second Amendment to prevent tyranny and we would certainly need to exercise the individual natural right to self defense. Indeed, the higher the crime, the more one would tend to need to defend ones self. It is better to be free in a nation with high crime than to be in servitude in a nation with low crime… at least in my opinion. Typically, the more free one is, the more risk that can come along with it (a subset of the responsibilities of freedom). Freedom, risk, and responsibility are inseparable. Compromise on the RKBA and we, as individuals and a nation, present and future, will suffer. There is no escaping that reality.
————-
Our Constitution restrains government in an attempt to prevent tyrannical behavior by government. I think many people see the Constitution’s utility as ‘kicking in’ once a government becomes a tyranny (mostly or completely). You know, a ‘line in the sand’. The Constitution’s real value lies in its preventative property; as an effective deterrent to tyranny. The Second Amendment implies both a deterrent and a solution to tyrannical government. It has great utility not only before full on tyranny but afterwards as well. Each and every day of our nation’s existence, the Constitution has been the document standing guard; persistently re-asserting the authority of the People over their government. My view has always been that the Constitution is there to head off all of the ‘little tyrannies’ in addition to the ‘grand tyranny’, into which our government WILL devolve to if we, the People, fail to keep it in check. That power check is impossible, after AND before full tyranny, without an individual, un-infringed right to keep and bear arms. The deterrent value isn’t there and the ability of the People to restore our Republic is absent without it. The 2A makes very little sense if the right of the people to keep and bear arms can be infringed.
The P30, ut only if it were in Light LEM. I don’t have any experience with the V3, but love the V1. As a matter a fact I traded the PPQ .40 for it. The PPQ was so light , it made the recoil too snappy. I don’t think the P30 is near as snappy, but it weighs more too.
I have to say that the only Sig I have owned was a 2022 .40 and I had to polish the fee ramp 4 times before it would cyclye reliable. I sold it to buy the PPQ. PPQ is a great piece but would like to get one in 9mm M1.
Everyone that regurgitates,”HK sucks and they hate me”has never dealt with their customer service. They repeat the same worn out old post of one man, talk about lemmings.
document, write em up, complain to their chain of command, If they arent set back a bit, take it very publicly to the City Council.
After that much hassle they will choose their battlegrounds carefully.
How about this: Remove your lap band and learn to control your caloric intake, then we can discuss controlling my guns.
here is hoping for a heart attack after a Krispy Kreme binge . . . .
Stay classy, TTAG.
How about writing the GOP and telling them not to run Krispy Kreme err Christie at all? Here’s the link.
http://www.gop.com/contact-us/
Well I wouldn’t trust the huffing and puffing post to tell me that water is wet. However, if Christy get the presidential nod the democrats will win another presidency. The last thing thing the republicans need is another rino. However as I am a Constitutionalist I trust neither party to do the correct thing.
I am usually fairly careful with my words. If I am trying to keep a situation from spiraling out of control, the last thing I am going to say is that I am going to shoot someone in the head. I guess having a conversation as a gentleman is too hard for some people to have. This also looked like a massive waste of everyones time.
I’d rather douse my underwear in lighter fluid and set them on fire — while I’m wearing them — than vote for the elephant in the room. But if it’s Christie against Hillary, I’ll vote for Christie. Because with that cvnt in the White House, we won’t last ten minutes.
Thank u ralph. Fight for a limited government, pro-2A candidate in the primary, but if Christie is the nominee, there will be no option, at least for me, but to vote christie. A republican or a democrat will be president. Period. To believe otherwise is foolish.
Correction: New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (RINO)
Who the hell did he piss off?
Wow. A cop using the word “egregious”. Which dimension did this happen in, again?
They are the Law Breakers as they Constitutionally CANNOT even start this institute as it is a Breach of OATH ,same as breach of contract!
Time for lawsuit,andI suspect suspension before firing !
While the cop is free, when not acting in his capacity as a police officer, to express his opinion to an open carrier, I don’t see how one can defend him acting that way as an officer. It is called police intimidation.
While he is not the worst offender as far as verbal assault, am I right that one officer had his gun drawn. That is irresponsible. If the man was holding the rifle in front of him, hand on the pistol grip, then I would understand. Slung behind his back? The cop could approach with hand on the gun, but not drawn. No reason to have it drawn.
Now that many cops? Well I had 4 cop cars once pulled over for a broken brake light. That seems to be the modus operandi, but I think that is a sign of police reacting to every situation like a felony stop.
Now if the cop and pulled up beside them and said “hey we have gotten some calls. I know open carry is legal, but I have to check it out. Also you are in a school zone and therefore need a permit [federal law].” “I know you are within your rights, but do understand that people will call in and we will have to stop you and check it out. I am sorry for that, but that is the way it is.” I would understand. He cannot ignore calls, what if it was not a peaceable carry? But not the time and place for lecturing.
Christie is a Liberal in disguise
Why doesn’t he give his ID or address? Is it because he knows they’re probably trying to peg him for some technicality and take his weapons? Looks like Good Cop Bad Cop.
It has become all too clear that there should be laws against people making OC gun rights asshole’s of themselves in public. If you think open carrying an AR or AK, or any other long gun in an urban area should be no big whoop for anybody who sees you, you’re an asshole. What fucking century do you think you live in?
News flash for the assholes. People haven’t open carried long guns through populated urban environs for over a hundred years. Not since the days of the late 1800’s. But that’s not what makes you an asshole. What makes you a complete asshole is that I can guaran-goddamn-tee that you long gun OC people would be screaming with sphincter twisting howls if you saw your local police and deputy sheriffs suddenly openly carrying AR’s, HK MP5’s-9’s, or similar tactical platforms as their EDC firearms. Don’t even bother attempting to deny it. You’ve insulted my intelligence enough as it is. Your normalization by force sounds just like something a government would do. No carrot, and all stick. Guess what? That pisses people off. Especially if they’re still cautious about accepting the carrot. The fact that so many of you OCer’s carry a handy video camera to document your assholishness shows that even you know that what you are doing is so out of the norm that the inevitable confrontation with police is practically a given. As if our LEO’s don’t have enough to do without your stupid publicity stunts that only divert valuable, and sometimes strained, manpower resources just to deal with you. What you are doing is the opposite of help. ~ Isn’t it just astounding how prevalent, and non-partisan, the insidious entitlement mentality has become in this country?
Just one of the ‘assholes’ checking in…
“People haven’t open carried long guns through populated urban environs for over a hundred years.”
Bullshit! Many of us did in Columbus Ohio, Cincinnati Ohio, and other cities multiple times this year. I’ve seen it before throughout my life.
“But that’s not what makes you an asshole. What makes you a complete asshole is that I can guaran-goddamn-tee that you long gun OC people would be screaming with sphincter twisting howls if you saw your local police and deputy sheriffs suddenly openly carrying AR’s, HK MP5′s-9′s, or similar tactical platforms as their EDC firearms. Don’t even bother attempting to deny it.”
More bullshit! Speaking for myself and most of my compatriots; what pisses us off is when agents of government can do it unmolested but We the People cannot. If the People, who hold the legitimate power, could do so without problem then I’d argue, protest, and comment in favor of officers being able to do so on the job.
“No carrot, and all stick.”
I know where they went and when you pull them out of there, we don’t want them back!
“As if our LEO’s don’t have enough to do without your stupid publicity stunts that only divert valuable, and sometimes strained, manpower resources just to deal with you.”
Yeah, them poor old bosses need all the help they can get. ROTFLMAO The bad ones need to stop wasting valuable time infringing upon, harassing, and threatening citizens going about their private, lawful daily business armed then they’d have time to perform their jobs.
Sorry, you will not be receiving my vote.
Constitutionally clueless cops are detrimental to the Constitution and the American Republic, as are their sycophantic coterie of tyrannical statist dildo fuckers.
Why the fuck does anyone give a fuck what Bobby Bacala deludes?
America, despite all her problems, will NEVER (s)elect a morbidly obese RINO POS, whom the neoCon Trotskyites love.
Never.
IF by some chance the establishment get their way and place him, that, along with the tyrannical trajectory oBUSHma & GWB has put the nation on, will clearly signal the official death of the American Constitutional Republic.
Unless we get Rand Paul to become the POTUS, this ship is toast.
Sorry folks, don’t care what or how many different ways they want to twist it: dig Cruz, but he is a Canadian. No ifs ends or buts.
neither.
get two Glocks for NY reload, instead.
He was being over jumpy on his approach, and he is a complete idiot for giving his political views on any subject while on the job.
citizen エコドライブ
Liberty is a very hard concept for liberals to understand.
“Who the hell is this police officer to debate open carry with a legally armed American?”
Another legally armed American? Putting on a badge doesn’t take away your citizenship, nor does it strip you of your first amendment rights. Why NOT debate the cop?
Oh, wait, TTAG hates every cop always all the time.
Cops are to TTAG as gun owners are to liberals. -eye roll-
I’d say his right to lecture someone about their own OPINIONS ends when being forcibly detained at gunpoint. At that point the citizen would be justified in simply repeating “Am I being detained? Am I Free to Go?”
Why should the citizen be required to listen to the cop exercise his first amendment rights? This stop took 15 minutes… most departments claim to be short-staffed, why aren’t they using their time better?
I’m not necessarily supporting those who open-carry a long gun, but whether or not you or I support that course of action has nothing to do with it’s legality, or the justification for harassing them at gunpoint.
The guns I would want closest to me on this run would be the ones being packed by the pretty lady in pink. 89 posts and nobody said it?
Well… Bloomberg is a republican. Over there near the waters edge, republicans and democrats are basically the same.
They are all the same everywhere when it comes to your civil rights.
I think, “You don’t pull your gun and I won’t pull mine” would suffice…
What nonsense. The issue in Abramski case is not background checks. It was whether you could buy a gun for a non prohibited person and then use an FFL to transfer it to that person, i.e,, whether the question 11a pertains to a legal purchaser transfers to another legal purchaser.
Your welcome Robert.
And from my Dad (RIP): WW2 Battle of Leyte
And my Grandad (RIP): WWI
Not being a veteran makes me appreciate them all the more. Thank You one and all!! I wish my dad was still here to thank today.
Kel-Tec P3AT. I’ve carried it for years.
The NAZI’s are comming!
The NAZI’s are comming!
The NAZI’s are comming!
Guess there’s no civics test to become a selectman.
“Open carry creates “gun normalization” that protects our rights.”
That’s funny, because I see more places banning open carry as time goes on… doesn’t sound like there’s a normalizing going on.
That said, it’s entirely unprofessional to debate someone’s political actions when you detain them as a uniformed police officer. It’s also just a bad idea. Save it for TTAG…
Happy Armistice Day! A celebration of PEACE and an end to the ill-named “War to End All Wars.”
Without soldiers, there could be no war.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C2qOAgMCl4
The Abramski case is a weird one. Abramski bought a gun for his uncle with his uncle’s money. It was not a gift by Abramski to the uncle.
Because the handgun sale crossed state lines, FFLs were required, and Abramski and his uncle complied with that. Neither Abramski nor the uncle were disqualified buyers; in fact, both cleared required background checks at their respective FFLs.
The reason for all these shenanigans was that Abramski was able to get a LEO discount for the handgun, so by having Abramski buy the pistol, the uncle would save a couple of hundred bucks.
The way that the cops got wind of the whole mishegoss was that Abramski later came under suspicion for bank robbery. During a search pursuant to a warrant, the police discovered the receipt for the handgun with a notation in Abramski’s handwriting that the gun for was his uncle.
It’s pretty clear that a purchase by a qualified person for another who is unqualified is a straw purchase. But that’s not the case here.
The question in Abramski is: can the purchase of a handgun by a qualified person pursuant to a background check for another person who is fully qualified and who also clears a background check be considered a “straw purchase?”
Expressed another way, did the second background check “cleanse” the original transfer, which clearly involved lying in response to question 11a?
A prior commenter inquired as to the length of time that purchaser #1 would be required to hold the gun before transferring to purchaser #2. The answer is that time is irrelevant. The violation occurred when the original purchase was made or the violation never occurred at all.
If a Mexican cartel member named “Pancho,” who has a clean record, buys a rifle in Texas with the intent of arming the cartel, Pancho broke the law even if the rifle falls from his hands into the Rio Grande during the trip back to Sinaloa.
I think the University Police should have also undergone a background check before the firearms were transferred to their possession. Ya know, since EVERY firearm transfer needs to have this, according to them…
A good portion of their comments posted in there ask “What would the teabaggers do if there were Muslims holding the guns there?!”
I just… wow. And we’re the intolerant ones?
I have another compromise. Pass all the laws you want and we’ll keep all of our guns anyway.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=l0SXlkrmzyw
If GE thinks this method is good enough for Gas Turbine parts, then I have no qualms about using it for a handgun.
Most particularly, I’m looking forward to using this process to enhance the strength and reliability of current firearms, and opening up new possibilities for gun designs. It needs it’s kinks to be worked out, and it’s a young technology.. but this is indeed the next industrial revolution 😀
In Her Majesty’s colony of New South Wales, having the police inspect your firearms is a condition of ownership. In nearly 20 years, I’ve had TWO. On in 2000 and another in 2010 after I moved house. In both cases I was given plenty of time (over 8 weeks) to make sure everything was done properly.
In the more recent inspection, all they did was make sure the safe was secured to the structure and the serial numbers matched their list.
The only objection I have is the officers turned up in a marked police car and probably radioed their position.
But having firearms properly secured is every gun owner’s responsibility.
It seems to me that the only acceptable voice at MDA is that of Shannon Watts–and when her followers realize that they are being used and abused, that discussion and dissension are not tolerated, those few followers she has drawn to her cause will dwindle to none. More and more, she is reminding me of Bloomie.
Nick, you should send these pictures to Barnes for promo material. Performed perfectly, and the deer looks great. If I ever get around to hunting, I will probably make the same decision about bullet choice. Seems a small price to pay for a good bit of safety.
It’s OK that they don’t want to hear of any compromize, because I don’t want to either. I used to think such a thing was possible, but have been fully disabused of the notion in the last 11 months or so.
Does George Bush have an alibi?
Does Shannon Watts?
/SARCASM WARNING/
Couldn’t have happened CRIMINALS always obey the law they(you know who they are)
would never have firearms, they are illegal. I’m sure that these misguided yutes didn’t illegally obtain and use firearms without filling out the proper forms in triplicate and bribe I meant pay off I meant well you know what I mean.
I can go buy a surplus jeep right now for three grand, tops, and do more with it than that mule.
I’ve OC’d here in NM; mostly in Albuquerque, for over 3 years; cops would look me over but no one has tried to approach let alone harras me. I’m in my fifties; over my life time; my interactions with cops have been positive.
It would be fun to be the listening and watching as the ‘fly on the wall’ of a Master Piece Arms executive management new-product meeting for about fifteen minutes.
The Undetectable Firearms Act is set to expire Dec 9th. ATF produces some tests and states ” an assassin only needs one shot” then voila, Undetectable Firearms Act 2.0
…okay…
Do they intend on making a clear version? I would like to keep the nice color of a blued gun with the DURAbility of Duracoat.
In the long run, open carry is better for our rights, not worse. Once folks are used to seeing them, and finding out that there is no open invitation in it for wild and bloody violence, but rather peace and safety, is our winning ticket. All others have the losing ticket.
I support anything that does not infringe on a persons right to carry a gun. My fear is some people will carry it to extremes. They will load themselves up like Rambo. That will instill fear in all around them. If a person who is sitting on the fence on the second amendment, it might just push them over the wall and they will vote against it. Just because you can does not always mean you should. Discretion is the better part of valor!!!!
Odd people do odd things in any culture. It’s human nature and there’s really nothing we can do about it except discourage it but still support their right to appear in public that way.
Andy, they’re already sore afraid. Open carry will allow them to see that their fears were needless and badly-conceived.
Exactly. It’s never going to become a societal norm (again?) until people actually OC everyday, everywhere. Once it is reestablished in everyday life, many of these gun control arguments will easily be recognized for the ridiculous rubbish that they are.