Detained for Open Carry (Guy owns officers)
- Thread starter dreamache
- Start date
what permit
yes
I'm friends with a few open carry activists and I'm pretty sure that's not their primary motive.
not me bro
edit:nvrmnd :thumbsup:
This isnt about being apathetic or submissive to exercise your rights. This is nothing more than a pre law student wanting to prove that he is smarter than the cops. He was looking for trouble from the get go and its to bad he didnt find it
edit btw if you think i am wrong here is another one of his videos
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ifv5qfuXmKQ"]Detained by Biddeford PD for Open Carry - YouTube[/ame]
Uhm, that's what the video is about. The cop had no authority to demand his permit.
How could you possible know he is pre-law?
And if he is smarter than the cops, doesn't that say something?
I'm starting to think this "to" stuff is code for troll. If so, and I've spotted it, I present myself with the following gif.
As I'm in the UK, and this whole scenario seems totally fucked up from both sides (the fact you can open carry, and the fact the cop doesnt have the right to demand a permit), could someone please explain to me, why Americans think that a) it's OK to carry a gun (or any other deadly weapon) and b) that cops shouldnt be able to demand a permit?
Because people that are not prelaw dont talk like that.
It says that we have police officers to use their interpretation of the law to enforce it, and prosecuters to actually know and defend the law. Sorry if you dont like that reality but its simply the way it is
Because we have something called the Bill of Rights, which, ironically enough, was written to protect us from you douchebags back in the day.
Can you explain to me how submitting to an unlawful search would not have been a submissive position to take?
It seems like the cop was "looking for trouble", fortunately, the citizen's knowledge of the 4th amendment and other laws prevented the officer from trampling on his constitutional rights.
Doesn't it bother you that some citizen has a better understanding of the laws that govern his behavior than the people who are paid to uphold them?
I'm not pre-law, and I've cited legal precedent in situations where I felt it was to my advantage to do so.
Seriously, the guy was walking around with a gun. Whether or not it's legal is not the point. People got concerned, called the police, and the cop was just responding to a call. It's their job. They have to investigate when a call is made.
I think the cop handled himself pretty damn good to be honest. Most douchebag cops would have rolled up on this guy all trigger happy and this video would have had a much, much different outcome.
I think the cop handled himself pretty damn good to be honest. Most douchebag cops would have rolled up on this guy all trigger happy and this video would have had a much, much different outcome.
I talk like that and I dropped out of university by correspondence 3 months in.
What does that mean?
Are you trying to tell me that the Police can violate the law if they want to interpret it any way they want?
It's OK to carry a gun because the act of carrying a gun doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights, and there is no prophylactic consideration in the law.
The police can't demand a permit in this situation because the citizen was within his rights to carry the weapon and as he was not suspected of committing any crimes, the officer had no reason to detain or search him.
(a) Self defense.
(b) Another person shouldn't be able to demand anything from me if I don't pose a threat; carrying a gun is not one.
Because it is legal, and because it is handy for self-defense.
Because cops are not allowed to stop or harass anyone unless they suspect a crime. He was carrying a weapon legally, so there was no reason to stop him over the weapon.
By your rationale, the police should be able to stop you anytime, without any good reason. 1984 anyone?
I can practically guarantee you he is not a pre law student and is in fact a shrimper or a second shift pallet loader who will be voting for Ron Paul and is pissed the fuck off at his country, his countrymen, and his politicians, and wants to put his will to the test to provide his fellow Portlanders with some mild shock value to jolt them out of their stupors.
Maybe he was looking for trouble maybe he wasn't, but it's likely just not that simple. I was born and raised in Portland and have lived in Maine most of my life. There is a big, big culture of independence in Maine. I think it's probably more accurate to say that he was exercising a right with the clear understanding that he may find trouble as a result, but his intentions were to demonstrate to himself and to others that it is perfectly legal to walk down the street with a gun regardless of what the gungrabbing media whores have been pumping out for lo these many years.
Whatever you think of his exercise in civil rights, I'm pretty confident it is not simply a matter of him going out looking for trouble the same way a belligerent punk runs around town yelling at people and throwing bottles at cop cars. He's doing something proactive in public and his actions speak louder than any words he said on the film. In three minutes he has accomplished more to further his worldly convictions than 99% of people reading this have done to further theirs. Gotta give him props for that.
The statement I should have made was " he is either pre-law and wants to show he is smarter than the cops, that or he is just trolling." It wasnt until after I posted that till I had proof he was just trolling and going around looking for trouble as evidenced in his other videos
It means that with over 20000 local, state, federal, and international laws on the books it would be unreasonable to expect a police officer to know them all. For the vast majority they do the best that they can to keep the peace and protect and serve our citizens. Because it would be impossible for them to know all those laws if they believe someone is breaking one its their duty to handle the situation, and leave the prosecutors to prosecute them.
theyd pull a couple guns from their own stash and fight the intruders themselves. no cops needed. whether thats their best option might be questionable, but its what they do. thats precisely why they want gun laws to be lax. because they want to be able to take care of themselves. but explaining that is pearls before swine because mentally castrated fags like you will never get it. theres more to life than following arbitrary rules.
anyone having the guts to actually stand up against authority has my respect. whether its stupid hipsters demonstrating some 99% bullshit or gun nuts shooting cops up.
sure, the gun must have been brandished for someone to call the cops. or that someone was just some anti gun fag making a scene over nothing. whats the guy supposed to do? carry it concealed? im not familiar with all your rules, but dont you need a special permit for that as well?