monkeylizard

From DaveS' linked article:         I maintain that Ohio law says Mr. Call did not have to provide his information unless the LEO had reasonable belief that a crime was, is, or is about to be commited or one was witnessed by the questionee. The question then is does the legal act of openly carrying a firearm, under the circumstances of this call (time and location) warrant a reasonable suspicion that a crime is/was/going to be commited? Chief Reiss (as did the LEO on site) seems to think so. I disagree, but can understand it. This would seem to be the sticky point that I suppose we'll get cleared up by a judge.         First, there's no reason for Chief Reiss to not-so-subtly insult Mr. Call by suggesting he is irresponsible, especially with pending litigation.   Second, his final thought recorded in the article bothers me. It smacks of "do what I tell you or we're going for a ride." It could be argued that a responsible person is one who is knowledgabe of their rights, knows their Constitutional, federal, and state laws, and won't roll over for anyone trying to take that from them. That a responsible person is one who recognizes that a lot of good men and women have died to establish and maintain those rights and that being coerced into giving those up to make things easier on themselves is wrong.   To be clear, this was not a run-in with the Gestapo as some people would seem to think it is. However, the attitude expressed by Chief Reiss in his last paragraph, when it becomes pervasive in a law enforcement community, can be seen as a step in that direction. It's a direction I'd like to think that none of want to travel down.   I'm not saying what Mr. Call did was the right choice. This could have played out several different ways and this ended up being one of the worst outcomes for all parties short of someone getting shot. Mr. Call was being a first rate asshat. But I believe that it's his right to be a first rate asshat in this case. I guess we'll see what a judge thinks.

Dave, what am I missing then? You and I are obviously able to read, and we're reading the same Ohio law. How are we coming to different conclusions about what it says? Here's where my logic is taking me: Ohio law allows open carry without a permit. Ohio law requires disclosure of name, address and DOB to a LEO when the LEO reasonably suspects the citizen is either committing, commited, or about to commit a crime or witnessed the same. Since open carry is legal without a permit, no crime is being, been, or about to be commited by Mr. Call. Therefore, Mr. Call has no legal duty to give the LEO his identifying information. Quite simply, where do you and I disagree on this? Is it #3? Do you see the carrying of a firearm by Mr. Call in a manner that violates no Ohio laws whatsoever as a reasonable suspicion that he is, has, or will commit a criminal act?

Well stocked is anything between enough to see you through a hopefully short-term run like we're in now and enough to last you the rest of your shooting life (the stuff is only going to get more expensive). That number will change depending on how much a person shoots. I don't call it hoarding until a person has, based on their shooting volume, more than they will shoot in their lifetime.

  Later, as in "I'm busy right now but will respond when I can" or Later, as in, "The law doesn't say what I want it to say so good bye" ?

It's also against the law in Ohio for a person wih a suspended license to drive. That doesn't mean the officers can stop a driver who has broken no traffic laws to see their license to see if it was suspended.

No, with all respect, I think you are missing the point. Open carrying a firearm is NOT a crime in Ohio. The MWAG call in this case, under Ohio law, would be exactly the same as if someone had called in a "man walking down the street in a turtleneck sweater"*. It's not a crime. There is no PC that a crime has been or is going to be commited just because a call was placed.       *the fashion police may disagree.

You're right Smith. He could have made things easy in himself. But he didn't have to and chose not to. I'm not sure if I hope he wins or not, but if this played out the way it's described in the OP, he has every right to be upset, especially when the cops started threatening trumped up charges to get a law abiding citizen to consent to be treated like a criminal while being detained against his will for having commited no crime. Bad spot for everyone involved. At the very least I'd like to see the officers in that dept receive better training on how to handle this kind of call.

He could sell it on Gunbroker.   "Some light scratches on the cylinder, but hard to notice. I'd say it's 90%"

    You're making a mistake in your logic there. He was not commiting a crime in Ohio by OC'ing. They have legal OC without a permit in Ohio, as peejman said. Mr. Call believes that the police had no right to detain him and is suing because of it.   No doubt the cops will respond to an MWAG call. They should. But upon arrivng on the scene and seeing Mr. Call doing nothing more than being a normal customer, should have done nothing more than kept an eye on him until he left the store and went on his way.

I thought maybe it was a tactical zombie crayon.

Make it yourself the night before. Makes mornings move faster.

I once worked with a very nice lady named Gay Hooker.

    The things is, I don't think they are any more. S3 was all Rick vs Guv.

The only update I know of is that he no longer holds pig races and replaced the track with a large painted sign of a cross and a star of David.

Yeah, I get all that. But I can get that living vs. living drama in other TV shows. What sets TWD apart is that it has zombies. Marginalize them and the writers have marginalized what draws in new viewers and keeps old viewers interested. I mean, take away the zombies from every episode and replace them with other human survivors of EOTWAWKI and the show is just another suvival show. Cool, but not zombie cool.   I know it has its haters, but I kind of like Falling Skies. They've kept the focus on humans v. aliens. By the end of last season it was starting to get dull because it was becoming human v. human for the last 2 episodes. I hope they get away from that plot quickly for the next season.

There's something similar but far scarier in the works at the DOD called ARGUS. Instead of one camera that moves on a gimbal to point in a specific direction like UAV cameras do now (looking at one thing at a time), it has an array of digital camera sensors. Since each sensor collected its own image, an operator could "zoom in" on one or more specific spot(s) without losing the overall picture. Currently when a UAV camera zooms in, that's all the operator can see. This would allow operators to watch a very large area, but zoom in on a house, or multiple houses while keeping the big picture in place.   Each image from each sensor is stitched together in software to provide the large overall pic and be able to zoom as needed. It also added object tracking capabilities to lock on to a person or vehicle and follow it.   Same concept as in the OP, but real-time, and having both big picture and zoom (and multi-zoom at that). It would be like being able to zoom in on that crowd and see the face (or multiple faces) while still seeing the full cityscape in another monitor, and all from one camera sensor array.   Here's a write-up from the UK's Daily Mail.   http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2269563/The-U-S-militarys-real-time-Google-Street-View-Airborne-spy-camera-track-entire-city-1-800MP.html

  I agree. I said something about that up the thread somewhere. During S1, we were fearful for the characters. During S2, not so much, but that's because there weren't many Zs at all. When they did show up  in S2 (Shane & Otis in town, In town when they picked up the guy from the other group, Rick and Shane at the school to get rid of the same guy, the finale) they were scary and we feared for the characters. All through S3, the Zs have been an annoyance to the group, not a threat.   If the writers want to make this show interesting again, they need to make the Zs scary again. But without doing that with hoardes of them (ie. expensive), I don't see how they can. They made them so easy to kill in S3, so that ship has sailed. There's no plausible way to go back to having to destroy the brain stem like they said at the CDC in S1. Apparently a 2" knife in the eye is enough now.       Bad news on another front: AMC has pushed back the last 8 episiodes of Breaking Bad to August 11 from an earlier reported July airing. Each episode will be followed by Talking Bad much like Talking Dead follows each episode of TWD.

  FIFY!

He is wanted for questioning by both the NOLA PD and E! Network's Fashion Police.

Get  a new mattress.   http://allrecipes.com/recipe/general-tsos-chicken/

I'm also RH/LE. I close my right eye and lean my head over. I know it's not how I'm supposed to shoot, but I'm worthless with my left hand. Shooting clays, I put a sticker over my left lens to force my right eye to provide a single image to my brain. It works well for that, but I can't do that with handguns and rifles. From what I've read from the "experts", learning to shoot lefty is the best way to do it, but most guns on the market are righty, so that adds some challenge to an already uncoordinate left hand.

They do a really funny one of a Michael Buble video.

  Who said it has to "look" like a gun? 3D printing...anything is possible.

The Guv singing about Broadway was perfect.

Bad Lip Reading did some great ones during the Presidential campaign, but I think this is my new favorite. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR4lLJu_-wE&feature=player_embedded