16 Open Carriers vs Several Police Officers!

[broox]

Alot of people seem to think it would be "easier" to just show the police their ID. Alot of people think it would be "inconvenient" to stand up for their rights.

I am glad that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and John Adams and James Madison and all their buddies did not concern themselves with what was easy or convenient.

[TMF]

Alot of people seem to think it would be "easier" to just show the police their ID. Alot of people think it would be "inconvenient" to stand up for their rights.

I am glad that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and John Adams and James Madison and all their buddies did not concern themselves with what was easy or convenient.

Nobody is disputing what their rights are. Not cooperating with police is their right, but "exercising" and "standing" up for is different. I have the right to tell a cop I nailed his wife. If I tell him that am I "standing" up for my right to free speech?

The police have a job to do. If someone calls a MWG in to 911 the police are coming in large numbers. It's that simple. Why not just be nice about it? Why is that so hard? Nobody is "trampling" anyone's rights by simply asking.

[DaveTN]

Alot of people think it would be "inconvenient" to stand up for their rights.

I’m a Tennessee resident. What "right" would I be standing up for when I told a cop I’m not showing ID if someone should happen to see my gun and call it in?

[Oh Shoot]

I’m a Tennessee resident. What "right" would I be standing up for when I told a cop I’m not showing ID if someone should happen to see my gun and call it in?

Well, here of course, you might be sticking up for a perceived right, but at least if the ID requested was a HCP, you'd also be violating a real law.

- OS

[Guest Springfield1911guy]

It was in Liberty, MO. Sez so at the start of the video. I'm no commie, but I'm not going to intentionally make a cop's job harder. I've carried in MO, but didn't pay any attention to the OC laws.

I understand what you mean but, I wouldn't have shown any ID either. I'm no trouble maker either. It's just that this is not Nazi Germany, where we are required to show our papers to the Gestapo on demand.

[Oh Shoot]

I understand what you mean but, I wouldn't have shown any ID either. I'm no trouble maker either. It's just that this is not Nazi Germany, where we are required to show our papers to the Gestapo on demand.

You're required to show them in TN, mein herr. HCP "paper" anyway.

- OS

[JayC]

Nobody is disputing what their rights are. Not cooperating with police is their right, but "exercising" and "standing" up for is different. I have the right to tell a cop I nailed his wife. If I tell him that am I "standing" up for my right to free speech?

The police have a job to do. If someone calls a MWG in to 911 the police are coming in large numbers. It's that simple. Why not just be nice about it? Why is that so hard? Nobody is "trampling" anyone's rights by simply asking.

I don't think anybody is saying the police shouldn't respond, and shouldn't have approached and said hello... even asking for ID isn't wrong...

The issue is once politely told no, seeing that no obvious crime was being committed, they didn't just leave... they pulled the guy away from his friends and his meal to have a "talk" with him alone, and then tried to talk the restaurant manager into kicking these folks out.

The first part is fine, the second isn't. Who can argue with that?

Edited June 2, 2012 by JayC

[TMF]

The issue is once politely told no, seeing that no obvious crime was being committed, they didn't just leave... they pulled the guy away from his friends and his meal to have a "talk" with him alone, and then tried to talk the restaurant manager into kicking these folks out.

The first part is fine, the second isn't. Who can argue with that?

Yeah, I believe that is going over the line from the police side, but I was responding more to the attitude of "this is my right not to show ID" crowd. It's great that we have rights, but that doesn't mean just because we can we always should.

If the police are called on me I'm not going to hesitate to show ID. That has nothing to do with whether or not I have the right not to. It has to do with the fact that I want to help and clear up any misunderstanding as soon as possible so we can all move on about our day. I have nothing against the police and, so long as I haven't committed a crime, they have nothing against me. So why not just be polite and cooperative? Just because you don't exercise a right doesn't mean it's not there.

Edited June 2, 2012 by TMF 18B

[JayC]

How does you showing ID or not showing ID tell them if you're committing a crime (not talking about HCP permits here in TN)? It should have no impact what so ever... either they see you committing a crime, or they don't...

Yeah, I believe that is going over the line from the police side, but I was responding more to the attitude of "this is my right not to show ID" crowd. It's great that we have rights, but that doesn't mean just because we can we always should.

If the police are called on me I'm not going to hesitate to show ID. That has nothing to do with whether or not I have the right not to. It has to do with the fact that I want to help and clear up any misunderstanding as soon as possible so we can all move on about our day. I have nothing against the police and, so long as I haven't committed a crime, they have nothing against me. So why not just be polite and cooperative? Just because you don't exercise a right doesn't mean it's not there.

[TMF]

How does you showing ID or not showing ID tell them if you're committing a crime (not talking about HCP permits here in TN)? It should have no impact what so ever... either they see you committing a crime, or they don't...

Logically you are right. However, police ID folks always as SOP. They weren't the ones who initiated to incident, it was whomever dialed 911. They are obligated to investigate. Asking for IDs is the first thing they do. It just seems proper and polite to cooperate rather than get huffy. I agree 100% with their rights, I just think its better to be polite and cooperative.

[JayC]

Logically you are right. However, police ID folks always as SOP. They weren't the ones who initiated to incident, it was whomever dialed 911. They are obligated to investigate. Asking for IDs is the first thing they do. It just seems proper and polite to cooperate rather than get huffy. I agree 100% with their rights, I just think its better to be polite and cooperative.

But, if you don't wish to give out your ID, and the law requires it... and there is no evidence of a crime what does it matter to the police officer?

I'm not advocating that police officers can't investigate... can't ask questions... only when people choose to legally not cooperate... that lack of cooperation doesn't prevent them from investigating if a crime accorded.

In this case, the video appears to show the police arriving, seeing there was no crime being committed, and instead of leaving they continued to involve themselves, even though everybody involved was acting lawfully. Whatever the reason (although it appears to me to be because people lawfully refused to show ID) the instant they determined no crime was being committed, their entire reason for investigating went bye bye.

[DaveTN]

But, if you don't wish to give out your ID, and the law requires it... and there is no evidence of a crime what does it matter to the police officer?

I'm not advocating that police officers can't investigate... can't ask questions... only when people choose to legally not cooperate... that lack of cooperation doesn't prevent them from investigating if a crime accorded.

In this case, the video appears to show the police arriving, seeing there was no crime being committed, and instead of leaving they continued to involve themselves, even though everybody involved was acting lawfully. Whatever the reason (although it appears to me to be because people lawfully refused to show ID) the instant they determined no crime was being committed, their entire reason for investigating went bye bye.

They ID because it’s how they catch a lot of criminals. In this state if you are carrying a gun or driving a car; it’s a moot point.

It’s something good cops do and it won’t change. You need to ride along with a cop a few times and see just how many arrests come from simply running checks on so called “routine†calls or running plates of vehicles that catch your eye for one reason or another.

[hornett22]

If they weren't committing a crime,they should have talked to the manager first. If he had no issue with them and didn't want them to leave,the police should have left it at that and moved on.

[JayC]

They ID because it’s how they catch a lot of criminals. In this state if you are carrying a gun or driving a car; it’s a moot point.

It’s something good cops do and it won’t change. You need to ride along with a cop a few times and see just how many arrests come from simply running checks on so called “routine†calls or running plates of vehicles that catch your eye for one reason or another.

Well not exactly true, you're only required to show your HCP if you're asked for you HCP. I doubt very many officers go around randomly asking people if they have carry permits.

As for the ride along, I've been on a few with different departments ranging from urban/suburban and rural.

I understand why they're asking for ID, it's a tool they use to catch criminals... My issue is what appears to be in this case, the reaction to somebody legally saying no. It appears to me as crossing the line from keeping the public safe, investigating possible criminal activity.

I watched a show on Discovery channel last night, the title was head games, or something like that, where they went over people's "sheeple" reaction to a man in uniform among other things... My guess is officers rarely get told no by law abiding citizens, and they are pre-programmed (like all of us) to have an irrational response from the non-conformity presented to them. The show was very interesting I'd suggest everybody take a look at it....

Either way, it appears to be that irrational response to non-conformity at work here.

[Guest crotalus01]

Some of the replies here are shocking to me, coming from so-called 2A supporters....

Personally, I do not "cooperate" with the police in any way shape or form; by that, I mean that I keep my interaction with them to the bare minimum the law allows. If I do not have to show my ID, I dont. I NEVER allow a search of anything (remember, if they are asking to search they have no PC to do so 95% of the time, otherwise they wouldnt ask). I am NEVER rude, or condescending, or aggressive to them, and I explain my feelings with a simple, I am sorry officer, I simply do not wish to (whatever, allow a search, ID myself etc) followed by Am I free to go?

In the case of being stopped while OC (which has only happened to me once) I present both my DL and my HCP as required by law.

Rights unexcersied are rights lost (or diminshed). Look at the homosexuals if you want proof of that. THEY exercised their 1st amendment rights and were in our faces every chance they got....and look at them today. 40 years ago homosexuality as an alternative acceptable lifestyle would NEVER have been taught in schools like it is almost universally today. That huge of a change in perception in a paltry 40 years - all because some queers decided to make a LOT of noise.

Perhaps we should think about that lesson.......

[Guest bkelm18]

Nevermind.

Edited June 23, 2012 by bkelm18

[DaveTN]

I NEVER allow a search of anything (remember, if they are asking to search they have no PC to do so 95% of the time, otherwise they wouldnt ask).

How did you come up with that statistic? I did thousands of vehicle stops and searched hundreds of vehicles and never asked for permission to search when I didn’t already have probable cause. Asking was just conversation to determine how things were going to go.

I was never refused permission to search and let the driver drive away without me searching the vehicle for whatever I was looking for. But that was a long time ago, we didn’t ask for permission to search without PC. To test your theory I would be curious to hear from the Officers of today how many people tell them no on a request to search and are allowed to drive away without a search.

[E4 No More]

No permit required to open carry in Kansas if no municipal ordinance forbids it.

Not required by law to show ID just because asked.

Just people standing up for a couple of the few rights they have left, comrade.

- OS

That's Kansas City, Missouri; not Kansas. I used to be a police officer in Claycomo, which is bordered by both Liberty & Kansas City. That Steak & Shake is at a sprawl at the corner of 152 Highway and I-35. I was just there last December. Unless it's changed, Kansas City does not have a law against open carry. Many newpaper delivery people open carried back in the day.

[Oh Shoot]

That's Kansas City, Missouri; not Kansas. I used to be a police officer in Claycomo, which is bordered by both Liberty & Kansas City. That Steak & Shake is at a sprawl at the corner of 152 Highway and I-35. I was just there last December. Unless it's changed, Kansas City does not have a law against open carry. Many newpaper delivery people open carried back in the day.

Yes, I meant to say MO, but both states are same in regard to open carry.

And actually, the gathering was in Liberty, MO, not KC, so local ordinances there in Liberty would apply also since there's no state wide preemption for open carry laws.

- OS

Edited June 25, 2012 by OhShoot

[E4 No More]

Yes, I meant to say MO, but both states are same in regard to open carry.

And actually, the gathering was in Liberty, MO, not KC, so local ordinances there in Liberty would apply also since there's no state wide preemption for open carry laws.

- OS

You are mistaken, (as if it's really important). The only Steak and Shake near Liberty is at 9500 North East Barry Rd. Kansas City, MO 64157, which is very close to the border. Those are Kansas City Police Officers. They also state in the video that they are actually in Kansas City; not Liberty. Liberty drives mostly black & whites whereas Kansas City drives the dark blue cars that they show in the video.

[Oh Shoot]

You are mistaken, (as if it's really important). The only Steak and Shake near Liberty is at 9500 North East Barry Rd. Kansas City, MO 64157, which is very close to the border. Those are Kansas City Police Officers. They also state in the video that they are actually in Kansas City; not Liberty. Liberty drives mostly black & whites whereas Kansas City drives the dark blue cars that they show in the video.

Oh okay, was just going on first caption in video which says

"5/13/2011 KCPD showed up on a MWAG call at our monthly OC meet in Liberty, MO".

Didn't know, just figgered KCPD had shared jurisdiction or something. Didn't watch video again to see where location is corrected. Thanks.

- OS

[E4 No More]

Oh okay, was just going on first caption in video which says

"5/13/2011 KCPD showed up on a MWAG call at our monthly OC meet in Liberty, MO".

Didn't know, just figgered KCPD had shared jurisdiction or something. Didn't watch video again to see where location is corrected. Thanks.

- OS

TRIVIA: In Missouri, the LEO's in a Class A county have law enforcement authority throghout the county. Kansas City spans three counties, (Jackson, Clay, and Platte), but only Jackson County is a Class A county. Clay County, (where Liberty is located), couold be a Class A county, but they don't want to change their charter. A lot of Kansas City PD forget that and think they are LEOs in all of Clay County.

[East_TN_Patriot]

Yeah, 16 folks walk into a steak and shake with a firearm in a holster, with their wives and children, sit down and order food... And obviously they could be some militia unit who is about to Rob the place... Oh wait, they could also be a sleeper cell of AQAP terrorists thee to attack the place!

Come on we can all come up with what if... But none of them reach the level of probable cause...

I don't fault the officers stopping by, saying hello, and interacting with these guys... I don't even fault them for asking for ID, just how they reacted when they were politely told no. It's clear from the video that this was not a group of master criminals, just a bunch of guys who were having dinner, and talking about firearms... And very likely to take offense to be asked for their IDs.

You didn't need 5 or 6 officers to respond or send a patty wagon down there. Two or three officers should have been plenty and it shouldn't have taken them 5 minutes to determine no crime was being committed and move along.

It seems you don't know who the Sovereign Citizens are. That group would likely do exactly that if the mood hit them. A father was pulled over in West Memphis a few years back and his young son jumped out of the vehicle with an AK 47 and killed the cop. Also, the police don't have to legally have PC to talk to someone, or even temporarily detain them. All they need is consent or reasonable suspicion. The police can legally detain someone based on reasonable suspicion long enough to ID them and determine if anything illegal is taking place. If they can't establish probable cause within a reasonable timeframe, then they must release the individual.

Whether we like it or not, the vast majority of people and cops in most places in our society would find this sort of thing quite suspicious and alarming. I'm all for supporting my 4th Amendment rights, but if I am so eager to open carry like that, then I expect to draw attention, which I think is the point of OC in most circumstances. Then when the cops show up, I will be happy to provide ID and try to dispel their concerns. Unless of course, my goal was to make a scene in the first place, then I would OC in a business, wait for the cops, make a scene, video it, and put it on the web so people will look at me and talk about how great of a 2nd Amendment supporter I am.

Frankly, people who pull these open carry stunts are no different than the environmentalists who chain themselves to trees or the Occupy people who camp out in a park to make a political statement. Sorry folks, but this sort of thing doesn't win anyone over to your side of thinking. Nothing wins people over to your side of a political argument like having a bunch of political activists show up to stage a protest and then get in a pissing contest with the police while you are trying to eat your dinner. Instead, it makes all gun owners look bad.

Like I say every time this open carry topic comes up, there is a reason the vast majority of off duty cops carry concealed.

Edited June 26, 2012 by East_TN_Patriot

[TMF]

Unless of course, my goal was to make a scene in the first place, then I would OC in a business, wait for the cops, make a scene, video it, and put it on the web so people will look at me and talk about how great of a 2nd Amendment supporter I am.

^^^^

Apparently if you cooperate with the police you are fundamentally opposed to the 4th Amendment.

That is like saying someone is opposed to the 1st Amendment because they're not constantly speaking their mind in public. Perhaps some people prefer to be quiet. Perhaps some people prefer to be cordial with LEOs. God help us; folks like me will be the end of all our Constitutional rights..... I hear the FEMA choppers coming for me now!!!

[TMF]

Some of the replies here are shocking to me, coming from so-called 2A supporters....

Personally, I do not "cooperate" with the police in any way shape or form; by that, I mean that I keep my interaction with them to the bare minimum the law allows. If I do not have to show my ID, I dont. I NEVER allow a search of anything (remember, if they are asking to search they have no PC to do so 95% of the time, otherwise they wouldnt ask). I am NEVER rude, or condescending, or aggressive to them, and I explain my feelings with a simple, I am sorry officer, I simply do not wish to (whatever, allow a search, ID myself etc) followed by Am I free to go?

Please explain to me how cooperating with the police means I don't support the 2nd Amendment; I am so curious to hear.

Last time I checked I have just as much right to cooperate as I have the right not to cooperate. I get to make choices that are right for me. If you don't want to cooperate with an LEO that is your business. By no means does that put you on some kind of a pedestal above the rest of us in regards to our belief in the 2nd and 4th Amendments. I make my voice heard through the votes I cast, NRA membership and letters to my elected officials. I see no logic behind the theory that my cooperation with LE somehow negates all that.