Philly cops harass man for open carry

S

stealintv

New member
I searched and don't believe this is a repost. Please remove if so mods... thanks/sorry.

A friend sent me this link. I do not intend a drive-by posting. Please watch the video and read the article. Then, read my question to open carriers below.

videohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=agWde2tpfx4

storyhttp://www.newsworks.org/index.php/local/item/47260-guns-/


Since Illinois will probably never let citizens carry, I was wondering how those that open carry feel about a bad guy seeing their firearm and possibly making you the first target. Do you feel you may be targeted, or do you believe by someone seeing your firearm they may be hesitant about going on with their malicious intentions? Is open carry a deterrent in other words? Do any of you that open carry sometimes cover it up? As soon as we get Pat Quinn out of office, Illinois may have a shot at concealed carry again. I've been going to the IGOLD rally for three years, and every year it seems like more people are showing up. Anyway, rambling. On to my thoughts on the video.

I believe the police should question someone at least for a carry permit, but it seems like the second officer had stopped this guy before. PD were just messing with him because they want him to comply with their beliefs and not allow him to do want he wants as the state law says he has the option to do reference open carry.

Thanks for your opinions and sorry, again, if this was a report.

Hope you all had a good turkey day.

Cheers!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The article states he was "brandishing" which is utter nonsense. Open carry does not constitute brandishing.

The California law was amended to disallow open carry after several groups there staged gatherings and dared LEO's to test their resolve. I encourage open carry, but doing so respectfully is the trick.

I've lived in KY five years. Only twice have I ever seen someone OC. My 15 seconds of fame was a brief interview on a local TV news station during the church OC event, but the pastor has since moved elsewhere and I don't think it caught on very well.
 
I used to open carry a Ruger MK1 in a holster when I rode my bike to the IKE's Club on the edge of town on my bicycle when i was 12 Yr old.
Times have changed.
Havning a Cocealed licence for about 40 years I would never carry open and have not.
But what ever floates you boat.
 
Open Carry

I must say, I have conflicted views on open carry. That being said, I live in Indiana and can choose either open or concealed carry. I open carry at least once or twice a week in public. Normally late at night and when I won't find myself visiting highly populated places (like wal-mart or other large stores). I do a lot of driving and it is much more comfortable to leave it on my hip. I can say with quite a bit of certainty that my open carrying of a firearm has deterred at least one crime. I was visiting with a female gas station attendant around 2am and a man, the only other one in the store, was walking around glancing at me as if he was waiting for me to leave. When he caught site of my HK USP he left abruptly without purchasing anything. Was he truly waiting for me to leave? Who knows, probably not. But I like to think I may have prevented something bad from happening to the woman.

As far as making me a target; I don't believe in it. This is the way I look at it, if something is going down I should already consider myself a target. This is where situational awareness comes into play. More and more I find myself constantly scanning the people around me, I try to keep tabs on exits, and I like keeping my back to a wall. I realize saying this is going to make me sound paranoid and who knows what else, but hey, if it saves me or my loved ones some trouble 20 years from now, it was worth every moment of it.
 
article said:
Stanford confirmed that a license to carry firearms affords the bearer the right to carry a concealed weapon in Philadelphia, but also affirmed that police officers have the right to investigate any individual seen carrying a firearm.
Click to expand...
However, another case in Philadelphia a few months ago proved that they do NOT have that "right." In fact, the department supposedly stipulated in the settlement that they had begun to retrain officers so they would know that they do NOT have this so-called "right."

Apparently, they lied.

http://forum.pafoa.org/open-carry-1...-end-offer-judgment-reached-philadelphia.html
 
I don't think the PPD representative misspoke or lied when he said the PPD has the right to investigate. Going and talking to someone and initiating a consensual encounter is different from detaining someone/performing a Terry stop. Unfortunately, the problem in those types of situations is in practice, people, both LEO and John/Jane Q. Public, frequently don't know/understand the difference between a consensual encounter and a detention/Terry stop.

As for OC making people a target, or being a deterrent I don't think there's enough evidence to make a case for either.
 
When the cop calls for backup, it is not a consensual conversation.

Fundamental rule: Do not -- EVER -- give a Philadelphia police officer the benefit of the doubt.

If you think I'm being overly harsh in that assessment, lurk on the Pennsylvania Firearms Owners Association (PAFOA) forum for awhile and read some of the discussions about how the Philadelphia police illegally harass people who dare to wear firearms within city limits. If a "citizen" doesn't know the difference between a Terry stop and a consensual encounter, that's understandable. If a police officer doesn't know the difference, he or she needs to be off the streets, because that difference is crucial and can mean the difference between a casual conversation and a false arrest.

Terry v. Ohio was in 1968. That means the principle of what constitutes a legitimate "Terry stop" has been firmly established for 44 YEARS. That's essentially two entire GENERATIONS of police officers. It is taught (AFAIK) in every police academy in the country. If a particular officer (or a particular department) hasn't "gotten it," it's because they don't want to get it. And that's intolerable in a self-styled nation of laws.
 
Last edited:
I'm not saying that it wasn't an unlawful detainment, just pointing out that the basic practice of an officer going and talking to someone isn't unlawful in itself. I think the PPD representative carefully chose his words as to not lie but give the impression that the action was lawful.

Admittedly, I only made it to the portion of the video where the officer decided to ramble about tactics, but in that time the person never asked if he was free to leave, tried to leave, or asked whether or not he was being detained or under arrest for something.

It doesn't make the officers actions any less dubious, but if one is in a locale where officers are known to harass OC'ers it's to one's benefit to know the laws pertaining to encounters with LEO and exercise that knowledge.
 
This is posted in the Law & Civil Rights forum. Discussion of the practicality of open carry belongs in Tactics & Training.

This is the closest I can see in the OP regarding something germane to this forum:

I believe the police should question someone at least for a carry permit
Click to expand...

That will depend on the locality for the most part. Different states have different laws on carry. Pennsylvania law is pretty clear that there's statewide preemption, but Philadelphia is known for sometimes doing things their own way (there's a weird bit of verbiage about "cities of the first class" IIRC).

Let's keep this thread to the legal concerns.
 
Tom Servo said:
That will depend on the locality for the most part. Different states have different laws on carry. Pennsylvania law is pretty clear that there's statewide preemption, but Philadelphia is known for sometimes doing things their own way (there's a weird bit of verbiage about "cities of the first class" IIRC).
Click to expand...
Correct. A "city of the first class" under PA law is a city with a population greater than 1 million. Since Pittsburgh is currently only around 300,000 or so, Philadelphia is the only city of the first class in the state, and is probably the only one there ever will be.

The only practical difference this makes to us gun owners is that for most of Pennsylvania, concealed carry requires a license but open carry is legal without any license. In a "city of the first class," ALL carry of handguns requires a license. With a license, both open and concealed carry are legal in Philadelphia.
 
I believe the police should question someone at least for a carry permit
Click to expand...
Why do you believe that?

There are plenty of other licensed/permitted activities that most people would think it VERY odd for the police to question them. I don't normally see the police stopping people to make sure they have driver's licenses, building permits, medical licenses, etc.
 
I believe the police should question someone at least for a carry permit,
Click to expand...

Have you ever read the US Supreme court decision on Prouse v Deleware?

Random stops to check licenses are illegal. Doesn't matter if it is becasue you are driving a car, or OCing...that is as you are assuming you need a license to OC. You do not need a license to OC in 29 states, including WA where I live.

You must be presuming that OC is an unlawful activity...or that it "may" be lawful only if you have a license...the law does not work that way. You are to be presumed innocent, unless proven guilty...you are also to be secure in you private affairs, unless you have done something openly unlawful, and LE can get a warrent for it.

I have OC'd since 1970, and have never been hasseled, I did have one time where someone had open stated he was going to beat me to a pulp (I have no idea why) until he noticed I was armed. and then he could not leave the area fast enough. My carry never left it's holster, but he left and I was safe, that is what counts.

My experience has been, OC and you do not have to worry...the criminals will just go looking for someone that has a much lower likelyhook of doing Them harm.
 
Thanks for all the speedy replies. To those that did not like my statement about the police stopping someone at least for a permit. I come from the wonderful:confused: South-west suburbs of Chicago. We are not allowed to carry anything. I have no idea what it is like; thus the questions. I appreciate the input. I guess I won't understand the culture without doing it. I am used to being questioned about everything. And you better comply or you will be on the ground. Those Philly cops are just like most of them around Chicago. That is why the video rang so true.

In my original post I said
I believe the police should question someone at least for a carry permit, but it seems like the second officer had stopped this guy before. PD were just messing with him because they want him to comply with their beliefs and not allow him to do want he wants as the state law says he has the option to do reference open carry.
Click to expand...

I am basing that off of my previous interactions and witnessing others police interactions here in IL. I guess I should have asked if the video was similar police interactions with other OCers in different areas of the USA.

Thanks again for your input and sorry I missed this in the other forum section.

Cheers!
 
I guess I should have asked if the video was similar police interactions with other OCers in different areas of the USA.
Click to expand...

Legally speaking, in my state there is no law that makes OC illegal, as such it requires no permit/license that could be asked for(State preemption in regards to firearms law does not allow counties/cities to make their own laws regarding firearms). In the city I live in, Las Vegas, the LVMPD got into trouble enough times, and in the state in general, dedicated people wrote enough letters etc, that interactions like this rarely happen anymore.
 
I've seen numerous videos where police stop and question anyone they see carrying openly. I would have no problem showing the police I.D. (although I am not required by law to do this) but if they continued to question me after that I would ask them if I am being detained or am I free to go.
 
Warrior1256 said:
I've seen numerous videos where police stop and question anyone they see carrying openly. I would have no problem showing the police I.D. (although I am not required by law to do this) but if they continued to question me after that I would ask them if I am being detained or am I free to go.
Click to expand...
And what's your plan when Officer Friendly says you are not being detained but you are not free to leave? (Or, as one officer famously stated in a case I read about over a year ago, "No, you can't leave. I'm investigating an investigation here.")

You certainly can't argue against logic like that ...
 
^^^^ If I am not free to go, I want to speak to my lawyer, thank you.

Don't know if it will do any good, but it might make him think again.

Rick
 
Philly police currently have a "stop and frisk" directive aimed at getting illegally carried firearms off scuzzbags who shouldn't be armed. As someone who has to worry about said scuzzbags in my neighborhood I don't think that is necessarily a bad idea.


The problem is that I don't think the PPD has squared that policy with how to deal with OC activists. Do you leave OC'ers alone but go after "suspicious types" hanging out on the corner?

There is obviously a racial element at play here too. Reading accounts on PAFOA you'll frequently see something along the lines of "why are they bothering a clean cut white guy like me?" which suggests that police should simply ignore clean cut white guys with visible weapons and focus on non-whites with suspected weapons which is untenable from a policy standpoint. Indeed the whole "stop and frisk" policy has civil rights issues but one criticism since it's inception has been the policy being applied overwhelming to non-whites (not especially unusual due to demographics of high crime areas). Ignoring well dressed individuals with firearms might in practice be ok from a crime fighting perspective but is probably an ACLU suit waiting to happen.


After losing at least one high profile OC lawsuit the PPD has done some work educating officers about OC but it doesn't appear every officer got the message. There isn't really any excuse for officers who don't know the law but that said if you don't want to be "hassled", CC in Philly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top