16 Open Carriers vs Several Police Officers!

[JayC]

I'm very familiar with the sovereign citizen movement, I'm aware of the West Memphis shooting, and the troubled past that family had with law enforcement. But that situation is completely different from this situation...

Nobody is questioning whether police officers can come up to you and start a conversation, ask questions or even ask for ID... nothing wrong with any of that...

The issue comes from not having reasonable articulated suspicion that a crime was being committed... it's clear that a reasonable person who KNOWS the law, that no crime is being committed, and that is the standard in this case. So instead of taking the polite no thanks to showing ID, and leaving since no crime is being committed, the try and get the people tossed out of the restaurant... they pull the guy away from his meal, and bother him for what appears to be nothing else than a lecture.... those actions I have a problem with....

Terry stops require a reasonable suspicion, not a gut feeling, or a what if... They had to have know there was no crime being committed before talking to the restaurant manager about asking these folks to leave... and therefore that action crossed the line.

As for sovereign citizens (instead of the normal it could be terrorists! excuse), the worse thing you could do is have unnecessary contact with them... They don't tend to go out and hunt police officers, they tend to react to perceived violations of their God given rights, so if you suspect that somebody is a sovereign citizen and they aren't breaking the law, the LAST thing a police officer should be doing is forcing contact with them that could escalate to violence is a crowded restaurant.

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.

[hornett22]

I'm very familiar with the sovereign citizen movement, I'm aware of the West Memphis shooting, and the troubled past that family had with law enforcement. But that situation is completely different from this situation...

Nobody is questioning whether police officers can come up to you and start a conversation, ask questions or even ask for ID... nothing wrong with any of that...

The issue comes from not having reasonable articulated suspicion that a crime was being committed... it's clear that a reasonable person who KNOWS the law, that no crime is being committed, and that is the standard in this case. So instead of taking the polite no thanks to showing ID, and leaving since no crime is being committed, the try and get the people tossed out of the restaurant... they pull the guy away from his meal, and bother him for what appears to be nothing else than a lecture.... those actions I have a problem with....

Terry stops require a reasonable suspicion, not a gut feeling, or a what if... They had to have know there was no crime being committed before talking to the restaurant manager about asking these folks to leave... and therefore that action crossed the line.

As for sovereign citizens (instead of the normal it could be terrorists! excuse), the worse thing you could do is have unnecessary contact with them... They don't tend to go out and hunt police officers, they tend to react to perceived violations of their God given rights, so if you suspect that somebody is a sovereign citizen and they aren't breaking the law, the LAST thing a police officer should be doing is forcing contact with them that could escalate to violence is a crowded restaurant.

Good post!

[East_TN_Patriot]

The issue comes from not having reasonable articulated suspicion that a crime was being committed... it's clear that a reasonable person who KNOWS the law, that no crime is being committed, and that is the standard in this case. So instead of taking the polite no thanks to showing ID, and leaving since no crime is being committed, the try and get the people tossed out of the restaurant... they pull the guy away from his meal, and bother him for what appears to be nothing else than a lecture.... those actions I have a problem with....

Terry stops require a reasonable suspicion, not a gut feeling, or a what if... They had to have know there was no crime being committed before talking to the restaurant manager about asking these folks to leave... and therefore that action crossed the line.

Perhaps, but we don't have the entire story here. Just the typical video posted by people who have an axe to grind (whether they are justified or not). The point I am trying to make is that they obviously do this to draw attention to themselves and make a scene. Then they video it to put on the web. This is not the way to sell your political views to a society that generally finds open carry inappropriate at best and criminal at worst. Reasonable suspicion resides in the mind of the officer and ultimately must be communicated to a judge and jury to determine if their suspicion was in fact reasonable given the totality of the circumstances as the officer knew them at the time. We know nothing about any extenuating circumstances, prior history of problems with this group at other businesses, or what may have been said or done by any party involved when the camera wasn't running. I'm very critical of police misconduct and abuse of people's civil liberties and I talk at great length about "noble cause corruption" and how the police subculture justify inappropriate use of authority in the name of arresting criminals. However, if people want to play the "civil disobedience" route and blatantly open carry for political effect, they should expect to raise the ire of people whether justified or not. I frankly don't feel sorry for these people. They went out looking for trouble and found it.

[hornett22]

Perhaps, but we don't have the entire story here. Just the typical video posted by people who have an axe to grind (whether they are justified or not). The point I am trying to make is that they obviously do this to draw attention to themselves and make a scene. Then they video it to put on the web. This is not the way to sell your political views to a society that generally finds open carry inappropriate at best and criminal at worst. Reasonable suspicion resides in the mind of the officer and ultimately must be communicated to a judge and jury to determine if their suspicion was in fact reasonable given the totality of the circumstances as the officer knew them at the time. We know nothing about any extenuating circumstances, prior history of problems with this group at other businesses, or what may have been said or done by any party involved when the camera wasn't running. I'm very critical of police misconduct and abuse of people's civil liberties and I talk at great length about "noble cause corruption" and how the police subculture justify inappropriate use of authority in the name of arresting criminals. However, if people want to play the "civil disobedience" route and blatantly open carry for political effect, they should expect to raise the ire of people whether justified or not. I frankly don't feel sorry for these people. They went out looking for trouble and found it.

It's obvious whats going on in the video. It's not rocket science. The cops gave them what they wanted. The cops look like the dolts they are.

[bubbiesdad]

It's obvious whats going on in the video. It's not rocket science. The cops gave them what they wanted. The cops look like the dolts they are.

The open carriers were doltish themselves.

[hornett22]

I don't think so. Just socialising and enjoying a meal.

[RobertNashville]

It's obvious whats going on in the video. It's not rocket science. The cops gave them what they wanted. The cops look like the dolts they are.

Nothing is truly obvious in a short video recorded and posted by the people trying to support their specific position.

Yes, from the limited video evidence, it looks as if the police who showed up for the call could have handled it better but I does that make them "dolts", I don't think so.

People who open carry ought to be able to figure out then when they do so, they may get a reaction from the unfamiliar, uninformed, and/or those who simply don't like guns - responsible people who chose to arm themselves should at least take that possible reaction into consideration before openly carrying.

[hornett22]

I agree. That was a pretty long video. The suspects seemed to be following the law. This was blown out of proportion by the cops. Many cops have egos and are on power trips. It's sad but true. I have know many cops. Some are laid back and civil, some are just nut cases.

[Major Kong]

If a LEO ask's to search my car and I refuse, am I not wasting my own money? We pay them to enforce the law and if they feel the need to search my car its no sweat of my back. I think if enough people refuse searches they will look at it as a oportunity to creat a law to force searches and ID on everyone. They work for us why give them a hard time about it?

If that works for you that's great. I prefer to keep my Fourth Amendment rights intact along with the rest of them.

As far as creating a law to force searches- again check the Fourth Amendment.