Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-22-2012, 15:20   #61
xmanhockey7
Senior Member
 
xmanhockey7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Kalamazoo, Michigan
Posts: 1,605
I'm not saying it's the OCer who educates the cop. It's the fact the OCer gets stopped then contacts the department about their being stopped that leads to the officers being educated by instructors or attorneys. And you're right most in the general public do not know the laws well at all. I had one guy at a shooting range tell me I committed a felony by transporting my pistol in a case unloaded in the trunk of my vehicle. However there are also many in law enforcement that do not know the law which leads to them stopping people for no reason.

ETA: The "many" is really down to "few" in Michigan at least.
__________________
My current avatar is the logo for my group Young Guns of Michigan. Check us out on Facebook!

Last edited by xmanhockey7; 11-22-2012 at 15:21..
xmanhockey7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 15:46   #62
Bill Lumberg
BTF Inventor
 
Bill Lumberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,307
Well said sir.
__________________
Did someone talk to you about your TPS reports?
Bill Lumberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 16:12   #63
Spiffums
I.C.P.
 
Spiffums's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,397
Quote:
Originally Posted by eb07 View Post
Why are there no man with a book calls?
Because "words will never hurt you"
__________________
Internet Celebrity Personality
Spiffums is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 16:38   #64
F350
Senior Member
 
F350's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Colorado Western Slope
Posts: 1,932
Already posted

Last edited by F350; 11-22-2012 at 16:57..
F350 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 17:03   #65
packsaddle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,116
if an officer responds to an armed subject call, and you are the armed subject, then yes you will likely by asked for identification and yes you are being detained.

yes you will need to present your identification and yes the officer may also run the serial number to check for stolen.

you can resist the officer's demands but i promise it likely won't end well for you.

remember you are the reason for the call for service.

don't be mad at the officer, be mad at the hoplophobiac who called you in.

or, be mad at liberals who created all the hoplophobia in the first place.

or maybe just be mad at yourself for walking around with an exposed gun in a world of hoplophobiacs.

yes it's sad but it's the world we live in and at this point it appears there's no going back.
packsaddle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 17:13   #66
whiskey rebel1
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pa
Posts: 90
It's all about control.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.




whiskey rebel1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 17:52   #67
xmanhockey7
Senior Member
 
xmanhockey7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Kalamazoo, Michigan
Posts: 1,605
Quote:
Originally Posted by packsaddle View Post
if an officer responds to an armed subject call, and you are the armed subject, then yes you will likely by asked for identification and yes you are being detained.
Unlawful detainment

Quote:
yes you will need to present your identification and yes the officer may also run the serial number to check for stolen.
My state is not a stop and ID state. So there is no need to present my ID and no they may not lawfully run the serial number on my gun. However if they do so I will not resist.

Quote:
you can resist the officer's demands but i promise it likely won't end well for you.
Sure I can but I won't. If he wants to violate my rights that's fine. The department can pay for that later.

Quote:
remember you are the reason for the call for service.
I'm breaking no law and I did not call myself in.

Quote:
don't be mad at the officer, be mad at the hoplophobiac who called you in.
Not mad at the cop unless he detains me.

Quote:
or, be mad at liberals who created all the hoplophobia in the first place.
I am.

Quote:
or maybe just be mad at yourself for walking around with an exposed gun in a world of hoplophobiacs.
I'm not. I probably would never have gotten into open carry had the age to get a CPL be 18 instead of 21 (I'm 20 now). So I'd say blame the state of Michigan for getting me into open carry.

Quote:
yes it's sad but it's the world we live in and at this point it appears there's no going back.
The public and law enforcement are becoming well educated regarding open carry and stops are becoming few and far between. Ideally there should be none but that just comes from education. 99% of cops are great guys and many of them know open carry is legal. Even the ones who don't like it realize it's legal and leave those who OC alone.
__________________
My current avatar is the logo for my group Young Guns of Michigan. Check us out on Facebook!
xmanhockey7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 02:59   #68
TBO
CLM Number 122
Why so serious?
 
TBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NRA Life Member
Posts: 46,415
Blog Entries: 1


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragoon44 View Post
Because by design a book is not intended to be a deadly weapon. a firearm is. And so far we don't have people taking their books into schools, playgrounds, churches, malls, and theaters and killing folks with their book.

If a gun is to be viewed no different than a book why not carry a book for self defense and deterrent instead of a gun?
TBO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 05:00   #69
JuneyBooney
Senior Member
 
JuneyBooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 17,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by cowboy1964 View Post
Who says they do? From what I see, most OC stops are caused by citizens calling in "man with a gun". They have to check it out.

When you get pulled over for speeding, aren't they also "assuming" the possibility that you may pull out a gun and kill them?
Soccer moms are guilty.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Cool songs:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Cool car:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
JuneyBooney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 05:06   #70
MeanAction
MeanAction
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 182
I'm still trying to firgure out what people mean when they say they Open Carry? Are all these open carry people tucking their shirt in? I'm calling a foul right there. Why are you tucking your shirt in goobers? LOL. I carry a G36 in a high ride OWB holster with my shirt untucked 4-5 days a week. I find that most people are to preoccupied with their lives to notice a slight bulge on my hip.
MeanAction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 05:50   #71
Roger1079
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South FL
Posts: 2,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpadams6 View Post
Not true. If I pull someone over that has a cpl license and they are not carrying their gun, I ask them "why not. I would if I were you" It is not the LAW ABIDING citizens carrying a firearm we are worried about. Most officers i know do not have a problem with that. Criminals typically do not get their guns legally. Major difference.
I have never had an issue when pulled over with a firearm. One time I offered the information as the driver was presenting her license and registration and the other I was driving and the weapons question preceeded the officer asking for my license and registration. Both stops ended without incident. The stop where I offered the information, the officer asked where the firearm was and I responded that it was in the center console. All he said was to leave it where it was and that was the end of it. The other stop the officer disarmed me and ran the serial. He came back and handed me my firearm, asked me not to reload it until he left, and let me go with no ticket.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpadams6 View Post
As for the police stopping someone open carrying. Do realize how many calls from citizens the police get on "person with a gun"? Police then have to respond and "check out" that person with a gun. But does not mean the police are against that.
The irony of it is that you would think a criminal would not OC to begin with. I would imagine someone intent on commiting a crime would want the least amount of people possible to see the gun until he was actually using it. But then again some criminals do take the cake when it comes to deserving the Darwin award.
Roger1079 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 05:55   #72
Roger1079
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South FL
Posts: 2,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeanAction View Post
I'm still trying to firgure out what people mean when they say they Open Carry? Are all these open carry people tucking their shirt in? I'm calling a foul right there. Why are you tucking your shirt in goobers? LOL. I carry a G36 in a high ride OWB holster with my shirt untucked 4-5 days a week. I find that most people are to preoccupied with their lives to notice a slight bulge on my hip.
My carry weapon is chosen by what I am wearing. Loose fitting untucked shirt and it is either a G27 or a G19 in an OWB holster. Dress clothes and it is a Ruger LCP in a pocket holster. Even if OC was legal in my state, I would never want the attention. I appreciate the job that most police officers do, however I am going to limit my chance of interaction with them whil on the job as much as possible, especially when it concerns a firearm. Although most are ok from my experience, not all officers do share the view that civilians should be carrying weapons.
Roger1079 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 06:52   #73
MeanAction
MeanAction
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger1079 View Post
My carry weapon is chosen by what I am wearing. Loose fitting untucked shirt and it is either a G27 or a G19 in an OWB holster. Dress clothes and it is a Ruger LCP in a pocket holster. Even if OC was legal in my state, I would never want the attention. I appreciate the job that most police officers do, however I am going to limit my chance of interaction with them whil on the job as much as possible, especially when it concerns a firearm. Although most are ok from my experience, not all officers do share the view that civilians should be carrying weapons.
I agree that it's a wise policy to limit interaction with LE.
MeanAction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 07:58   #74
engineer151515
_______________
 
engineer151515's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 20,878


tagged to read thru later
__________________
"...dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal." - Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
engineer151515 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 08:35   #75
Roger1079
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South FL
Posts: 2,250
My opinion is if you are going to openly carry a gun in public, you have no right to be upset about the attention it causes. Many people are afraid of guns and also have no possible idea what a STRANGER's intentions are when they see a gun, hence the man with gun calls that officers are obligated to investigate.
Roger1079 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 09:07   #76
steveksux
Massive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 15,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by eb07 View Post
Why are there no man with a book calls?
Most people wouldn't recognize a book when they see it anymore. It would be a "Man with a vaguely familiar looking object" call.

The thing is, I'm betting that police operate under what the capabilities are rather than the intentions. That's because its hard to gauge intentions at a glance. You have a weapon, its has the capability of being a threat, and due caution will be exercised until they have enough interaction to gauge intentions. You're not looked at as a criminal. You're looked at as a potential threat, a man with a gun call came in by someone concerned (justified or usually not), and has to be checked out.

Criminals tend to be evasive, belligerent, etc. So when an OCer gets his dander up and starts acting like that, it raises red flags. They ARE in fact obstructing, and uncooperative, although that may be justified in their eyes "defending their rights", and may be perfectly legal. While that may be true, it still makes them look like the kind of duck the cops deal with a lot, and the cop will lean toward treating them like that kind of duck.

Perhaps the OCer has an image of "cops" in general and responds to that stereotype, rather than treating this particular cop as an individual, even as he himself rails against being stereotyped and not treated as an individual worth the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.

Randy

Last edited by steveksux; 11-23-2012 at 09:35..
steveksux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 21:28   #77
Kelo6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 201
PREFACE: I SUPPORT OUR 2A RIGHTS 100%! THIS IS MY OPINION ON THE PRACTICALITY OF THE MATTER.

I feel like if more people would OC and cooperate, that it would become more normal and more accepted. Let all the local LEOs know that you're not the bad guys.

Make cooperative, peaceful OC the norm, and eventually the norm will be that LE doesn't even bother OCers.

As long as the OC crowd appears to be beligerent, unreasonable, anti-establishment, poor-legal-verbiage-wielding, argumentative individuals, OC will continue to be rejected by both anti-gun LE agencies, and the anti-gun "hoplophobiac" crowd.


When OC morons misquote or misapply Terry V Ohio and other laws and SCOTUS decisions, then post in on YouTube, they paint everybody else with the same brush.


Guns in public (and firearms in general) became abnormal and limited step by step. Slowly, over the last fifty years. Funny, in 50 years everybody seems to have forgotten one of the greatest wars we've ever fought, and the largest modern society has ever seen.


On that note, that's how the Left has won their battles so far. That's how the German citizens had their firearms confiscated.

Adolf Hitler didn't sign the first Anti-Gun registration in Germany. That happened 10 years earlier in 1919 after Germany signed the Treaty of Versailles. More regulations followed in 1920. Hitler wasn't appointed chancelor until 1933.

Another chancelor enacted stricter regulations in 1938. All the gun regulations happened BEFORE Hitler. He just took advantage of them.

It took a World War 1 and ten years of treaties and regulations for German citizens disarmed.

It took the same amount of time for Hitler to get his Nazi-regime in place and kill off his opponents.

Small incrimental changes in society.

Major societal changes take time.


It has taken three generations for mine to become as lazy as it is. And as connected to technology.


We're not going to change societal opinion quickly or by huge, drastic, changes while being a pain in the ass.

Slow and steady wins the race. Small changes eventually add up to big changes and societal changes, which is how society wound this way in the first place.


I posit if we fight back the same way we will find ourselves to be more successful.



Again, I SUPPORT OUR 2A RIGHTS 100%! I believe we SHOULD change society's perspective of firearms for the sake of our Nation and our society's survival.
I just think there's a better way to do it without looking crazy or doing stupid *$%& that results in MORE regulations.
Kelo6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 06:28   #78
boomhower
Senior Member
 
boomhower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 3,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgiaGlocker View Post
Many in LE believe that only LE should carry weapons.
I'd replace many with some. In my entire county I don't know a single one that believes that. I am very pro CCW and believe everyone who can legally carry should and the CCW laws are to constricting as is and should be opened up considerably.
boomhower is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:09.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,102
281 Members
821 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31