[jdavionic]

Originally Posted by AKmik

Jdavonic,
I see your arguement to a point. Me, if I was on a bike I personally would look for another option for carry. Although I have this mental picture of a spandex clad bicyclist with a gun belt I suppose CC could be difficult.
I CC for personal protection because the law allows it, if it only allowed unloaded CC, I would not. Fighting for rights is one thing but busting the police officers balls on the street will go nowhere.
The OP asked for Opinions, harassment or not. I still say no.

First off...no spandex I commute via bike now. The bike shorts are the baggy mountain bike ones. I am working on another option for carrying. However for now, OC is the most reliable option. I am shopping for a fanny pack...I know, might as well carry open. The challenge for biking is to have ready access, but strong & reliable retention...while not obstructing pedaling the bike.

My issue with your comment was not a contradiction of your assessment on my OP. What I took exception to was your point that OC serves no purpose that you see...therefore you'd had no issue with the elimination of OC for everyone.

[kensteele]

Originally Posted by AKmik

I CC for personal protection because the law allows it, if it only allowed unloaded CC, I would not.

You don't understand unloaded CC. I get it.... it's not for you... so you put it down. But I'm still thinking you don't fully understand it.

Which is ok, if you wouldn't do it, I guess you don't need to understand it at all. The anti-gun folks don't understand loaded CC and they put that down, too. Understandable.

[AKmik]

Agreed guys,

My problem is more with the video clowns than OC.
They target the police to somehow prove their rights are being violated. It just drives me batty to watch these guys mouth off rather than just show ID and be on their way.

Its all just opinion gents. I am not working to outlaw OC, Don't take it that way. I do think that in the eyes of the general public or antis CC and OC are no different, which is why I frown on OC. It draws attention to the average joes ability to carry a weapon and it gives the antis more to work with.

[Bill Lumberg]

Some permittees who OC where concealment is legal are fools. Some are squared away. All who seek out encounters with LE are complete idiots. They hold ( and display for your viewing pleasure) every juvenile, narcicisstic,and cognitively distorted trait that anti-gun anti-permit groups incorrectly assume are present in all non-LE who wish to carry firearms.

Originally Posted by AKmik

Agreed guys,

My problem is more with the video clowns than OC.
They target the police to somehow prove their rights are being violated. It just drives me batty to watch these guys mouth off rather than just show ID and be on their way.

Its all just opinion gents. I am not working to outlaw OC, Don't take it that way. I do think that in the eyes of the general public or antis CC and OC are no different, which is why I frown on OC. It draws attention to the average joes ability to carry a weapon and it gives the antis more to work with.

[noway]

Originally Posted by AKmik

Agreed guys,

My problem is more with the video clowns than OC.
They target the police to somehow prove their rights are being violated. It just drives me batty to watch these guys mouth off rather than just show ID and be on their way.

So what that approach, the persons feed up with taxes, shouldn't have throw the tea in port @ boston

Rosa Park, should have just sat in the back of the bus

And the Vietnam protestors should have shut up and not carry signs or protest

Must I go on?

Regardless, the OC'er did nothing wrong, was target twice for doing nothing wrong , followed the letter of the law in doing "nothing wrong" twice if I may state.

[slickt0mmy]

Originally Posted by noway

So what that approach, the persons feed up with taxes, shouldn't have throw the tea in port @ boston

Rosa Park, should have just sat in the back of the bus

And the Vietnam protestors should have shut up and not carry signs or protest

Must I go on?

Regardless, the OC'er did nothing wrong, was target twice for doing nothing wrong , followed the letter of the law in doing "nothing wrong" twice if I may state.

You're seriously comparing this clown to Rosa Parks?

[AKmik]

Whhhhhheeeeewww....Thats quite a stretch there. Apples to Volkswagens.

Sorry, some smart ass with a gun and camera who heads out looking for confrontations with law enforcement is not even in the same ball park as Rosa Parks.

Regardless, the OC'er did nothing wrong, was target twice for doing nothing wrong , followed the letter of the law in doing "nothing wrong" twice if I may state.

Yes the OC'r did nothing wrong, and once his ID was checked and he was found to be in compliance with the law he was on his way. I do not feel that having to prove you are legal by showing ID if you choose to display a gun for all to see is infringement of your rights. You have got to know its coming if you are OC in FL.
OC in Florida is not very common, there are many many shootings in the state, there are readily available CCW permits if you feel the need to be armed, and weapons make the general public nervous. Like I said before, I would want to see him checked if I was there with my family.

[RussP]

Originally Posted by noway

So what that approach, the persons feed up with taxes, shouldn't have throw the tea in port @ boston

Rosa Park, should have just sat in the back of the bus

And the Vietnam protestors should have shut up and not carry signs or protest

Must I go on?

Regardless, the OC'er did nothing wrong, was target twice for doing nothing wrong , followed the letter of the law in doing "nothing wrong" twice if I may state.

noway, which will happen first, the law prohibiting general open carry will be repealed, or the law allowing open carry while hunting, fishing or camping will be repealed?

[Sharky7]

We should come up with a Glocktalk drinking game.

-Everytime someone compares a nut to Rosa Park, take 1 shot.

-Everytime someone compares the police to Nazi's, take 2 shots.

-Everytime someone compares showing an ID to "show your papers" take 1 shot.

[slickt0mmy]

Originally Posted by Sharky7

We should come up with a Glocktalk drinking game.

-Everytime someone compares a nut to Rosa Park, take 1 shot.

-Everytime someone compares the police to Nazi's, take 2 shots.

-Everytime someone compares showing an ID to "show your papers" take 1 shot.

[RussP]

Originally Posted by Sharky7

We should come up with a Glocktalk drinking game.

-Everytime someone compares a nut to Rosa Park, take 1 shot.

-Everytime someone compares the police to Nazi's, take 2 shots.

-Everytime someone compares showing an ID to "show your papers" take 1 shot.

[noway]

Originally Posted by RussP

noway, which will happen first, the law prohibiting general open carry will be repealed, or the law allowing open carry while hunting, fishing or camping will be repealed?

Don't know, my crystal ball is broke and out for repairs

Regardless he didn't break any laws & the LEO knew that and insist into encounter him twice.

[mrsurfboard]

Originally Posted by AKmik

These videos kill me. I am no sure what would make any gun owner want to go out and bait the cops. Like it or not in todays day and age when an officer sees a weapon on someone not wearing a uniform he is probably going to investigate,that is a proven fact. every one of these videos is the same, some smug little smart ass proving that he has the right to carry, thats great.
The thing that burns me up is the attitude they take in trying to get a reaction out of LE so he can somehow prove that his rights are being violated. There is no winning that one, if the cop asks for ID he is wrong and abusing his power. If the guy strolling down the crowded pier full of sheeple pulls his gun and starts shooting and the cops did not challange the gunslinger, then they are wrong for letting it happen. Its easily twisted and can be argued forever.

This is not the old west, he is in FL where CCW licenses are very easy to obtain. The guy is a tool who is wasting the officers time, distracting him from his job. No one needs to know you are armed.

I have been carrying concealed for twenty years, five of which were in FL, and I have never had any issues with law enforcement trying to infringe on my second amendment right to bear arms.

The video proves Officer McGee was paying attention, if my family was out on the pier that day I'd be glad he checked that guys ID and varified he is legal.

[mrsurfboard]

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg

Some permittees who OC where concealment is legal are fools. Some are squared away. All who seek out encounters with LE are complete idiots. They hold ( and display for your viewing pleasure) every juvenile, narcicisstic,and cognitively distorted trait that anti-gun anti-permit groups incorrectly assume are present in all non-LE who wish to carry firearms.

100% agree!

[DScottHewitt]

Originally Posted by jdavionic

Police harassment or trolling for attention or both?

What say you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBWgh...ature=youtu.be

The problem with trolling for attention.....

















































































is sometimes you catch it.

Clearly, the video poster had an agenda.....

[disappointed] "Oh, is it just a car?" [/disappointed]
"No, there's someone in it."

[DScottHewitt]

Originally Posted by MinnesnowtaWild

These videos are f-ing annoying. Give them you're g-dang ID and be done with it instead of being a know it all lawyer wannabe.

Please.

And buy a frakking windscreen for your camcorder!!!!!

[kenpoprofessor]

Originally Posted by AKmik

Whhhhhheeeeewww....Thats quite a stretch there. Apples to Volkswagens.

Sorry, some smart ass with a gun and camera who heads out looking for confrontations with law enforcement is not even in the same ball park as Rosa Parks.




Yes the OC'r did nothing wrong, and once his ID was checked and he was found to be in compliance with the law he was on his way. I do not feel that having to prove you are legal by showing ID if you choose to display a gun for all to see is infringement of your rights. You have got to know its coming if you are OC in FL.
OC in Florida is not very common, there are many many shootings in the state, there are readily available CCW permits if you feel the need to be armed, and weapons make the general public nervous. Like I said before, I would want to see him checked if I was there with my family.

I would also like to see ministers licensed before I see them on a street corner preaching, or in church. I'd like to see press credentials of every person taking pictures/video. I'd like gov. licenses to make sure that reporters report stories properly. I'd like to see that you're free from disease before you or yours get anywhere near me in case you're contagious.


I could go on, but "shall not be infringed" means something.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

[noway]

Originally Posted by kenpoprofessor

I would also like to see ministers licensed before I see them on a street corner preaching, or in church. I'd like to see press credentials of every person taking pictures/video. I'd like gov. licenses to make sure that reporters report stories properly. I'd like to see that you're free from disease before you or yours get anywhere near me in case you're contagious.


I could go on, but "shall not be infringed" means something.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

ditto


And how about the police stopping you while driving your car just to make sure you have a license and insurance with no reason outside of just stopping you?

How about patting you down, due to a bulge in your coat or maybe you wife is carry a gun/bomb in her purse or your kid having drugs in his/her book bag?

Now I bet if any of the above happen to you/yours your would be here post a whoop-haw over your rights being infringed by the police.

Rights/Laws where created for a reasons

just food for thought as you go thru your merry ways. I too don't carry for his action, but once again he did nothing wrong or illegal.

[slickt0mmy]

Originally Posted by kenpoprofessor

I would also like to see ministers licensed before I see them on a street corner preaching, or in church. I'd like to see press credentials of every person taking pictures/video. I'd like gov. licenses to make sure that reporters report stories properly. I'd like to see that you're free from disease before you or yours get anywhere near me in case you're contagious.


I could go on, but "shall not be infringed" means something.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

And I'm sure if you asked a preacher, none of them would have a problem showing you such credentials. They might think it's a bit of an odd request though.

But why would someone taking pictures need press credentials? Not all photographers are with the press.
Why would a reporter need a government license? I assume you realize the media and the government are two separate entities, correct?

[noway]

Originally Posted by slickt0mmy

And I'm sure if you asked a preacher, none of them would have a problem showing you such credentials. They might think it's a bit of an odd request though.

But why would someone taking pictures need press credentials? Not all photographers are with the press.
Why would a reporter need a government license? I assume you realize the media and the government are two separate entities, correct?

I'm sure he was being sarcasmatic & in his example and how they would infringe on a few of the rights identified by our own gov

[kenpoprofessor]

Originally Posted by slickt0mmy

And I'm sure if you asked a preacher, none of them would have a problem showing you such credentials. They might think it's a bit of an odd request though.

But why would someone taking pictures need press credentials? Not all photographers are with the press.
Why would a reporter need a government license? I assume you realize the media and the government are two separate entities, correct?

Really? You obviously didn't understand the context of my post,

I don't have credentials to show to say that I am indeed an ordained minister with the Universal Life Church, and I'm an atheist

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

[steveksux]

Originally Posted by AKmik

sorry, I see no value in carrying an unloaded weapon, just stupid. So some thug can beat his ass and take it, now weapons free for the taking. Its good for .......?

It was the best way to get the legislature to ban unloaded OC in CA just like loaded OC was banned. That's how it turned out.

Randy

[RussP]

Originally Posted by noway

Regardless he didn't break any laws & the LEO knew that and insist into encounter him twice.

The question is at what point did the LEO know he was wasn't breaking the law. Did you read my earlier post?

Originally Posted by RussP

Some observations that have not been made yet.

In the first part of the video:

Mr. Traub pulls into the pier parking lot to "go fishing".

He sees a police car. He sounds disappointed that it might only be "a car", but, then he sees the officer inside.

He parks in front of the patrol car.

He exits his car to "go fishing".

Problem is, he has no fishing gear with him, only a folding chair.

Observation: What evidence did Officer McGee observe that indicated Mr. Traub would be fishing from the pier?

Mr. Traub told Officer McGee his gear was already on the pier. How did it get there and when?

In the second part of the video:

Mr. Traub is standing on the pier, away from his fishing gear.

Mr. Traub is not holding a rod.

Observation: What evidence is visible that indicates Mr. Traub is engaged in lawful fishing?

Was Mr. Traub trolling for an encounter with Venice Police? Why, yes he was.

Did Mr. Traub give any physical indication he was on his way to fish when he exited his car? No, a blue folding chair is not normally used to catch fish from a pier.

Did Mr. Traub give any physical indication he was actively fishing while standing away from his fishing gear? No, he didn't.

Had Mr. Traub ever touched his gear which somehow was already on the pier? Don't know.

Would the police have approached him the second time if he had walked over, picked up his rod and actually "fished"? In my opinion, probably not.

Did Mr. Traub do anything to show, before police contact and questions, he was complying with the Florida law regarding open carry? No.



Edited to add: Oh, and when he refused to stand in front of the patrol car, after being told to (how many times?), was that real smart?

[slickt0mmy]

Originally Posted by kenpoprofessor

Really? You obviously didn't understand the context of my post,

I don't have credentials to show to say that I am indeed an ordained minister with the Universal Life Church, and I'm an atheist

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

Haha woah. I just reread the post and I don't know what was going on the first time but I definitely read it incorrectly. I apologize.

[noway]

Originally Posted by RussP

The question is at what point did the LEO know he was wasn't breaking the law. Did you read my earlier post?

Yes I did and can't answer that. So he didn't know if the OC was breaking the law and how does that fit into his OC right not to be infringed upon?

So it's okay for the LEO to stop, investigate, request ID, callin and check out the OC twice ? ( okay the 2nd time they didn't call in or request id )

I can't speak on what the officer did or not know at the time , but still the OC'er did not break one letter of the law as it is written.

What happen, would be the same as if a LEO stop you while driving and ask you for your ID and name, just to see if your breaking the law.

What you be happy with that?