Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Why do LEOs assume that OCers are criminals? I don't understand.

Discussion in 'Carry Issues' started by SCmasterblaster, Oct 4, 2012.

  1. xmanhockey7


    Dec 6, 2010
    I'm not saying it's the OCer who educates the cop. It's the fact the OCer gets stopped then contacts the department about their being stopped that leads to the officers being educated by instructors or attorneys. And you're right most in the general public do not know the laws well at all. I had one guy at a shooting range tell me I committed a felony by transporting my pistol in a case unloaded in the trunk of my vehicle. However there are also many in law enforcement that do not know the law which leads to them stopping people for no reason.

    ETA: The "many" is really down to "few" in Michigan at least.
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2012
  2. Bill Lumberg

    Bill Lumberg BTF Inventor

    Jun 14, 2002

  3. Spiffums

    Spiffums I.C.P.

    Sep 30, 2006
    Because "words will never hurt you" :rofl:
  4. F350


    Feb 3, 2005
    The Wyoming Plains
    Already posted
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2012
  5. packsaddle


    Jan 15, 2009
    if an officer responds to an armed subject call, and you are the armed subject, then yes you will likely by asked for identification and yes you are being detained.

    yes you will need to present your identification and yes the officer may also run the serial number to check for stolen.

    you can resist the officer's demands but i promise it likely won't end well for you.

    remember you are the reason for the call for service.

    don't be mad at the officer, be mad at the hoplophobiac who called you in.

    or, be mad at liberals who created all the hoplophobia in the first place.

    or maybe just be mad at yourself for walking around with an exposed gun in a world of hoplophobiacs.

    yes it's sad but it's the world we live in and at this point it appears there's no going back.
  6. whiskey rebel1

    whiskey rebel1

    Aug 28, 2009
  7. xmanhockey7


    Dec 6, 2010
    Unlawful detainment

    My state is not a stop and ID state. So there is no need to present my ID and no they may not lawfully run the serial number on my gun. However if they do so I will not resist.

    Sure I can but I won't. If he wants to violate my rights that's fine. The department can pay for that later.

    I'm breaking no law and I did not call myself in.

    Not mad at the cop unless he detains me.

    I am.

    I'm not. I probably would never have gotten into open carry had the age to get a CPL be 18 instead of 21 (I'm 20 now). So I'd say blame the state of Michigan for getting me into open carry.

    The public and law enforcement are becoming well educated regarding open carry and stops are becoming few and far between. Ideally there should be none but that just comes from education. 99% of cops are great guys and many of them know open carry is legal. Even the ones who don't like it realize it's legal and leave those who OC alone.
  8. TBO

    TBO Why so serious? CLM

  9. Soccer moms are guilty. :faint:
  10. MeanAction

    MeanAction MeanAction

    Feb 27, 2012
    Murfreesboro, TN
    I'm still trying to firgure out what people mean when they say they Open Carry? Are all these open carry people tucking their shirt in? I'm calling a foul right there. Why are you tucking your shirt in goobers? LOL. I carry a G36 in a high ride OWB holster with my shirt untucked 4-5 days a week. I find that most people are to preoccupied with their lives to notice a slight bulge on my hip.
  11. Roger1079


    Mar 22, 2008
    South FL
    I have never had an issue when pulled over with a firearm. One time I offered the information as the driver was presenting her license and registration and the other I was driving and the weapons question preceeded the officer asking for my license and registration. Both stops ended without incident. The stop where I offered the information, the officer asked where the firearm was and I responded that it was in the center console. All he said was to leave it where it was and that was the end of it. The other stop the officer disarmed me and ran the serial. He came back and handed me my firearm, asked me not to reload it until he left, and let me go with no ticket.
    The irony of it is that you would think a criminal would not OC to begin with. I would imagine someone intent on commiting a crime would want the least amount of people possible to see the gun until he was actually using it. But then again some criminals do take the cake when it comes to deserving the Darwin award.
  12. Roger1079


    Mar 22, 2008
    South FL
    My carry weapon is chosen by what I am wearing. Loose fitting untucked shirt and it is either a G27 or a G19 in an OWB holster. Dress clothes and it is a Ruger LCP in a pocket holster. Even if OC was legal in my state, I would never want the attention. I appreciate the job that most police officers do, however I am going to limit my chance of interaction with them whil on the job as much as possible, especially when it concerns a firearm. Although most are ok from my experience, not all officers do share the view that civilians should be carrying weapons.
  13. MeanAction

    MeanAction MeanAction

    Feb 27, 2012
    Murfreesboro, TN
    I agree that it's a wise policy to limit interaction with LE.
  14. engineer151515


    Nov 3, 2003
    tagged to read thru later
  15. Roger1079


    Mar 22, 2008
    South FL
    My opinion is if you are going to openly carry a gun in public, you have no right to be upset about the attention it causes. Many people are afraid of guns and also have no possible idea what a STRANGER's intentions are when they see a gun, hence the man with gun calls that officers are obligated to investigate.
  16. steveksux

    steveksux Massive Member

    Jul 12, 2007
    Most people wouldn't recognize a book when they see it anymore. It would be a "Man with a vaguely familiar looking object" call.

    The thing is, I'm betting that police operate under what the capabilities are rather than the intentions. That's because its hard to gauge intentions at a glance. You have a weapon, its has the capability of being a threat, and due caution will be exercised until they have enough interaction to gauge intentions. You're not looked at as a criminal. You're looked at as a potential threat, a man with a gun call came in by someone concerned (justified or usually not), and has to be checked out.

    Criminals tend to be evasive, belligerent, etc. So when an OCer gets his dander up and starts acting like that, it raises red flags. They ARE in fact obstructing, and uncooperative, although that may be justified in their eyes "defending their rights", and may be perfectly legal. While that may be true, it still makes them look like the kind of duck the cops deal with a lot, and the cop will lean toward treating them like that kind of duck.

    Perhaps the OCer has an image of "cops" in general and responds to that stereotype, rather than treating this particular cop as an individual, even as he himself rails against being stereotyped and not treated as an individual worth the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.

    Last edited: Nov 23, 2012
  17. Kelo6


    May 20, 2008

    I feel like if more people would OC and cooperate, that it would become more normal and more accepted. Let all the local LEOs know that you're not the bad guys.

    Make cooperative, peaceful OC the norm, and eventually the norm will be that LE doesn't even bother OCers.

    As long as the OC crowd appears to be beligerent, unreasonable, anti-establishment, poor-legal-verbiage-wielding, argumentative individuals, OC will continue to be rejected by both anti-gun LE agencies, and the anti-gun "hoplophobiac" crowd.

    When OC morons misquote or misapply Terry V Ohio and other laws and SCOTUS decisions, then post in on YouTube, they paint everybody else with the same brush.

    Guns in public (and firearms in general) became abnormal and limited step by step. Slowly, over the last fifty years. Funny, in 50 years everybody seems to have forgotten one of the greatest wars we've ever fought, and the largest modern society has ever seen.

    On that note, that's how the Left has won their battles so far. That's how the German citizens had their firearms confiscated.

    Adolf Hitler didn't sign the first Anti-Gun registration in Germany. That happened 10 years earlier in 1919 after Germany signed the Treaty of Versailles. More regulations followed in 1920. Hitler wasn't appointed chancelor until 1933.

    Another chancelor enacted stricter regulations in 1938. All the gun regulations happened BEFORE Hitler. He just took advantage of them.

    It took a World War 1 and ten years of treaties and regulations for German citizens disarmed.

    It took the same amount of time for Hitler to get his Nazi-regime in place and kill off his opponents.

    Small incrimental changes in society.

    Major societal changes take time.

    It has taken three generations for mine to become as lazy as it is. And as connected to technology.

    We're not going to change societal opinion quickly or by huge, drastic, changes while being a pain in the ass.

    Slow and steady wins the race. Small changes eventually add up to big changes and societal changes, which is how society wound this way in the first place.

    I posit if we fight back the same way we will find ourselves to be more successful.

    Again, I SUPPORT OUR 2A RIGHTS 100%! I believe we SHOULD change society's perspective of firearms for the sake of our Nation and our society's survival.
    I just think there's a better way to do it without looking crazy or doing stupid *$%& that results in MORE regulations.
  18. boomhower


    Feb 14, 2010
    North Carolina
    I'd replace many with some. In my entire county I don't know a single one that believes that. I am very pro CCW and believe everyone who can legally carry should and the CCW laws are to constricting as is and should be opened up considerably.