Youtube freedom fighter vs. TX cops

[Sam1]

Although it is legal, these guys are going out with the intent to stir up a controversy... looks like he is now in the process of learning an important lesson

 

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/08/30/men-behind-open-carry-demonstration-in-texas-charged-with-crimes-even-though-what-they-did-wasnt-illegal-heres-how-police-are-justifying-it/

[Guest TresOsos]

Loss more to me like a local anti-freedom Police Chief and his minions being pricks.

[TMF]

Meanwhile, I have the rights to fart on a crowded bus.  Gonna go do that now and stand on the Constitution when someone complains.

[Chucktshoes]

Meanwhile, I have the rights to fart on a crowded bus.  Gonna go do that now and stand on the Constitution when someone complains.

Not the same. In your scenario you'd be assaulting them with your farticles that they inhaled.

[Sam1]

a "farticle"....where the hell did that come from??   :rofl:

[Sam1]

Loss more to me like a local anti-freedom Police Chief and his minions being pricks.

 

No one would've probably said a single thing if they were OC'ing a pistol, these guys went out carrying rifles with the intent to stir up issues.  After being asked to leave the coffee shop, they just walked outside and all of them turned on their cameras thinking they were going to get the cops in a "gotcha" moment.  I think those cops handled that one perfectly - let them keep their guns, were careful with their words, wrote them a ticket and sent them on their way.

[TMF]

Not the same. In your scenario you'd be assaulting them with your farticles that they inhaled.

 

You said the secret word!!!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ANxrbjjHhI

[Chucktshoes]

a "farticle"....where the hell did that come from??   :rofl:

Farticles
the particles that are expelled from ones ass when they fart

person 1: i just farted
person 2: i know i can taste your farticles

[bersaguy]

I'm just trying to figure out the intentions of these three guys?  I'm sure it was to draw attention to them selves which they were successful in doing but beyond that point what was their goals. I may be wrong but I think we as gun owners are already facing up hill climb and don't need anyone giving the anti gunners more ammunition to use against us. If my thoughts are wrong someone please let me know. I realize they have the legal right to do what they did but was it necessary?..................JMHO

[mikegideon]

Do something stupid and threatening, get locked up. Been that way all along. I'm sure the City of SA is going to cower to the justice for dipshits campaign. They're some mousy folks. :)

 

Youtube Freedom Fighters... I love it.

[DaveTN]

Dumb, Dumber, and Dumbest. They should have started that video with “Hey Bubba, hold my beer”.

 

If you use a gun to make a statement; the cops are going to respond.

 

They had a chance to walk away, but then they had a brain fart that caused them to think it would be a good idea to turn into Perry Mason.

 

 

[mikegideon]

Dumb, Dumber, and Dumbest. They should have started that video with “Hey Bubba, hold my beer”.

 

If you use a gun to make a statement; the cops are going to respond.

 

They had a chance to walk away, but then they had a brain fart that caused them to think it would be a good idea to turn into Perry Mason.

 

Yeah. These videos have educational value. We're just waiting for the slower members of the class to catch up :)

[Guest nra37922]

Wonder if they are related to our Voldemort? 

[mikegideon]

Wonder if they are related to our Voldemort? 

 

Sorta. They were all dropped on the heads as babies.

[Guest TresOsos]

They were doing nothing illegal, as a matter of fact it was legal under Texas law.

But because we have failed to excersize or rights religiously in the past we are know to the point of loosing them.

We have become a docile people and the bed wetters are winning.

This dofus Chief of Police just found another way for his officers to enforce something he does not support.

If a bedwetter calls in and says I'm scared, that's enough now to charge you with a crime.

The only problem I saw was when they were asked to leave they should have asked if the store manager

was asking them to leave and if so complied.

These cops and this so called Chief of Police and ENFORCER of the Law and his officiers should be

sued as individuals as well as the Police Department and be terminated.

And the fraidy cat bedwetters need grow a pair.

 

Reminds me of when I was in Israel with some guys from CA and few a Europeans.

We'd see Soldiers or civilians on the street with guns, I'd go up and talk guns and stuff

with them and the CA guys and the Europeans would piss themselves.

Edited September 1, 2013 by TresOsos

[mikegideon]

I have no problem with those guys being charged. They weren't exercising rights. They were out to intimidate sheeple and bait cops. They got called on it. They're being charged with disorderly conduct, which really is illegal.

Edited September 1, 2013 by mikegideon

[DaveTN]

I have no problem with those guys being charged. They weren't exercising rights, they were out to intimidate sheeple and bait cops. They got called on it. They're being charged with disorderly conduct, which is really is illegal.

Agreed. And they will have the opportunity to make their case in court. If these three geniuses can convince a DA or a Judge what they did wasn’t disorderly conduct the charges will be dismissed.

If the charges are dismissed will anything change the next time these Officers respond to a man with a gun call? Nope, they will continue to respond and deal with whatever issue they have. Just ask “You know who” he’s now facing felony charges.

The state of Texas is in control of when and where they carry. They will also decide if what they did violated any other state laws.

I’ve never so much complaining about people getting exactly what they want.

[mikegideon]

Agreed. And they will have the opportunity to make their case in court. If these three geniuses can convince a DA or a Judge what they did wasn’t disorderly conduct the charges will be dismissed.

If the charges are dismissed will anything change the next time these Officers respond to a man with a gun call? Nope, they will continue to respond and deal with whatever issue they have. Just ask “You know who” he’s now facing felony charges.

The state of Texas is in control of when and where they carry. They will also decide if what they did violated any other state laws.

I’ve never so much complaining about people getting exactly what they want.

 

But, I think they will stick. Leave it to Texas cops to get it right. 

[mav]

^{Just out of curiosity, I wonder how many crimes involving firearms have been committed by individuals sitting around in public sipping coffee with their firearms resting on a table or the ground for everyone to see.  My guess would be that it has probably never happened.  Upon witnessing such an incident, I can't understand someone's mindset (outside of being an anti-gun busybody) where they freak out "Oh my God! He has a gun!", and call the police.}

[DaveTN]

^{Just out of curiosity, I wonder how many crimes involving firearms have been committed by individuals sitting around in public sipping coffee with their firearms resting on a table or the ground for everyone to see.  My guess would be that it has probably never happened.  Upon witnessing such an incident, I can't understand someone's mindset (outside of being an anti-gun busybody) where they freak out "Oh my God! He has a gun!", and call the police.}

Because when some people see something unusual they report it. We live in a time of mass shootings. They may think if three guys are stupid enough to sit around a Starbucks with AR’s or walk around Nashville with an AR and body armor; they just may be crazy enough to start dropping bodies. The problem doesn’t appear to be with the people calling.

 

Has someone been walking around carrying a rifle and then opened fire on innocent people? I’m guessing the answer is yes. Has someone done it at a Starbucks? I don’t know.

[crossfire]

I'm just trying to figure out the intentions of these three guys?  I'm sure it was to draw attention to them selves which they were successful in doing but beyond that point what was their goals. I may be wrong but I think we as gun owners are already facing up hill climb and don't need anyone giving the anti gunners more ammunition to use against us. If my thoughts are wrong someone please let me know. I realize they have the legal right to do what they did but was it necessary?..................JMHO

I think you are right on the money. :up:

[Sam1]

Because when some people see something unusual they report it. We live in a time of mass shootings. They may think if three guys are stupid enough to sit around a Starbucks with AR’s or walk around Nashville with an AR and body armor; they just may be crazy enough to start dropping bodies. The problem doesn’t appear to be with the people calling.

 

Has someone been walking around carrying a rifle and then opened fire on innocent people? I’m guessing the answer is yes. Has someone done it at a Starbucks? I don’t know.

 

 

Same thing could be argued with an explosion these days.  The first thing that comes into mind is a terrorist act and not someone that just forgot to tighten the gas pipe all the way back up before opening the valve.

[DangerDanJD]

Texas Disorderly Conduct Statute:

 

§ 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:

 

(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;

 

(2) makes an offensive gesture or display in a public place, and the gesture or display tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;

 

(3) creates, by chemical means, a noxious and unreasonable odor in a public place;

 

(4) abuses or threatens a person in a public place in an obviously offensive manner;

 

(5) makes unreasonable noise in a public place other than a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code, or in or near a private residence that he has no right to occupy;

 

(6) fights with another in a public place;

 

(7) discharges a firearm in a public place other than a public road or a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code;

 

(8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm;

 

(9) discharges a firearm on or across a public road;

 

(10) exposes his anus or genitals in a public place and is reckless about whether another may be present who will be offended or alarmed by his act; or

 

(11) for a lewd or unlawful purpose: (A) enters on the property of another and looks into a dwelling on the property through any window or other opening in the dwelling; (B) while on the premises of a hotel or comparable establishment, looks into a guest room not the person's own through a window or other opening in the room; or (C) while on the premises of a public place, looks into an area such as a restroom or shower stall or changing or dressing room that is designed to provide privacy to a person using the area.

[DangerDanJD]

The section they were charged under would have to be: (8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm;

 

I'm not offering my opinion on it one way or another, but the language of the statute is relevant for this discussion. 

[tnguy]

(10) exposes his anus or genitals in a public place and is reckless about whether another may be present who will be offended or alarmed by his act; or

 

So I can moon the cop at the speed trap as long as I'm wearing a g-string?