Testing of rights/testing police

T

trg42wraglefragle

New member
I have to noticed there are quite a few videos on Youtube of gun owners who are legally allowed to open carry a weapon in public but seem to do so in areas where they know someone will be upset/worried and call the police.
And then argue with police about their rights.

Now I can certainly see why people would be worried with events that are making the news and it's the job of the police to investigate when a member of the public raises a concern.

Why do they do it? Are gun owners not trying to show anti gun or people who are on the fence that they are a reasonable bunch? And to me what they do is not going to back up this argument.
Then they argue with the police to further push the point the wrong way?

Do they really expect the police to ignore than concerned public's call and inform them they are legally allowed to do so? Imagine if someone called up and said they saw someone with a gun, the police did nothing and the person was in fact a criminal and did something to break the law?

I just can't understand the reasoning behind it? It is not at all surprising that it attracts the attention of the police, and it does nothing to convince Joe public that gun owners are nothing to be afraid of.
There is also a refusal to provide the police with personal details, is it legal to do so in the US? In New Zealand you can be arrested for refusing to give the police detail (name and address).
 
Honestly, they are doing it for the attention it gets them. They say they are doing it for their rights, but that isn't it. If that was the case then they wouldn't have 3 or 4 buddies filming the whole thing. All they want is to get the video on YouTube and get comments saying how good they are and how bad the police are.... I hate it, and I hate their agenda.

And unless you are being detained, then yes, you can refuse to give police any identification information. When the police stop these people they usually are not detained in the legal sense of the word. Any information that they choose to give is strictly voluntary.
 
This is a toughy. I would completely say that they are doing it for attention or to harass LEO, but then would I say that about Rosa Parks also??? No.

They are doing it to exercise their rights. That is why I CCW usually.

Seems to me that Police should respond. Identify if the gun carrier is breaking the law, then explain to the person who called that no law is broken and repeated calls with no law broken will cost them money. It is really up to the police to offer some education here.
 
What I think caused the guys on YouTube, though they shouldn't, do this, is a case a while back. I can't remember the state it happened in, but the guy was living in a sub-division, and was open carrying on his own property. Someone called the Police, and they showed up and actually detained him, though it was an open carry state.

In eastern Kentucky, when I lived there years ago, in the 70's and 80's, you could open carry to your hearts content, in the rural areas. Now though, in some states, I think folks are almost scared to take out a shotgun and go hunting, over a bunch of nosy anti-gunners, who like to call 911.

Of course, the 911 operators could be trained to ask if it looks like someone is going hunting, or openly carrying a firearm on their own property, and if so, politely inform them that no law is being broken. Actually, if it is an open carry state, you can walk down the sidewalk with a pistol holstered, and it is legal, as long as you don't brandish it. However, it is according to the state you live ins laws.
 
Some do it for the attention.

Some do it in the hope of suing the police.

Some do it because they hope to teach the police what the law says, and force to police to learn that harassing citizens who are not violating the law is improper.

Take your pick.
 
Last edited:
No doubt some do it because they're narcissistic idiots.

We live in a country in which we have rights but also one in which a vocal minority takes every opportunity to chip away at them.

IMO - actions like these only feed the furnace of our opponents.
 
We had legal open carry here in California until recently. We had a problem with too many hard-core people showing up at 'StarBucks' dressed for a fire-fight, holsters, guns strapped on..etc.

It didn't take long for the news to cover these pre-arranged meetings.

And it didn't take long for the politicians to push thru a new law BANNING legal open carry in California.

Now it is illegal.

While we do have the ability to obtain a 'Carry Permit' (for concealed carry of a handgun) California is a 'May Issue' State. (as opposed to Arizona and 40+ other States that are 'Shall Issue' States).


'May Issue' means that a County Sheriff or Police Chief gets to decide if you are worthy of getting a Concealed Weapons Permit. Some Counties, most everyone gets turned down. Some Counties most everyone gets approved. It's hit or miss; depending on where you live...:eek:

When a new Sheriff or Police Chief is appointed or elected, the rules change willy-nilly on who gets a carry permit.

Bad news for gun rights.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know if I can count how many times this same topic is raised in this forum.

I just can't understand the reasoning behind it?
Click to expand...
Well, you don't really need to. How other people exercise their rights really has nothing to do with you. If they're breaking the law, then there is a concern. Aguila is right. There are several reasons why people do this. The hopes to sue the police is probably very very low on the list of reasons. There's much safer and lower hanging fruit in the litigation world than messing with cops. For me, I find many of the videos educational, and sometimes, entertaining.

In New Zealand you can be arrested for refusing to give the police detail (name and address).
Click to expand...
Same in some places in the USA, but not all. For the most part, in the USA, police can't just interrogate citizens on a whim or a hunch. We can't be arrested because we don't wish to enter into a consensual conversation with them. I kind of like that about my country.
 
Last edited:
Youtube.com yo-yos, street cops...

In my view, I think its wrong & pointless to be a "YouTube Yo Yo" and create videos of confrontations or to be obnoxious just to evoke a LE response.
That said, I also support or agree with a private citizen or gun owner who videos a sworn LE officer who is clearly ignorant or untrained in the law(or changes in the law).

I viewed a clip on YouTube.com of a armed citizen who was treated like dirt by a young sheriff's deputy in a traffic stop because of a concealed carry weapon. Those are events that need more public awareness.
Another recent video clip shown on LE industry websites & forums has a patrol officer in Sidney NE(home of Cabelas) wig out on a young couple who were tracking the cop & documenting his actions.
A senior officer arrives and has to physically separate the irrate police officer from the area. The officer repeatedly yells insults and uses profanity. It's shocking.

CF
 
I am really not sure about this issue. On one side the people against almost seem to be saying "sure, you have a right to carry, but you are an idiot for exercising that right". On the other side, some folks are leaving their houses looking for a confrontation. I can't say I am real comfortable with either position.

I rarely open carry, not because I am against the practice but because I think it puts me at a disadvantage in most self defense situations. I do open carry while hiking or hunting or working around my land. I stopped at a convenience store while on my way to hunt and was asked about my weapon by an officer. He was smart about it and starting talking about guns and holsters which I assumed was his attempt to sort of "feel me out" without directly confronting me about revolver on my hip. If the folks carrying and the officers involved used a little more common sense these videos on youtube would not be very exciting.
 
I rarely open carry, not because I am against the practice but because I think it puts me at a disadvantage in most self defense situations. I do open carry while hiking or hunting or working around my land.
Click to expand...

So what makes open carry while hiking, hunting, or working around your land more advantageous?
 
I think you'll find that a lot of those kinds of people are right here on this forum. Seems a couple of them have already taken the bait.


Sgt Lumpy
 
So what makes open carry while hiking, hunting, or working around your land more advantageous?
Click to expand...

I should clarify, I live in Norfolk but I own property out on the mountains. While hiking, hunting or working on my land out there I am not concerned about 2 legged animals, but more about the four legged threat. The non-human animals don't seem to be able to identify whether I am carrying a weapon or not, even when I open carry ;). When carrying in more populated areas I am generally concerned with other humans. I would prefer to make the decision myself as to whether I get involved in an encounter with another armed individual, if they identify I have a weapon I have lost that choice. I have also lost any advantage I might be able to take by using surprise in any confrontation. And, the reason that people seem to want to argue about all the time, I prefer not to make myself a target for someone wishing to acquire a pistol, for the same reason I do not put any gun related stickers on my house or car.

I am no expert, I am not claiming to be, these are my opinions which I do not assume to be the right choice for everyone.
 
noelf2 said:
So what makes open carry while hiking, hunting, or working around your land more advantageous?
Click to expand...

4 legged creatures are much more sneaky than 2 legged ones... And when he is referencing on his own land he is talking about a larger piece of property where the main threat is animals as opposed to humans.
 
I'm all for open carrying, exercising your rights and doing whatever you want as long as you are not a danger to others.

I even think debating cops on the finer points of civil liberties is a fine cause.

It seems like these dudes though are just asking for trouble and wasting everyones time.

Like overhead said there is a time and a place. "Testing" cops is not something I want to waste my time on, and seems like it could backfire pretty badly if you run into the wrong one that doesn't appreciate it.
 
They are doing exactly what the members of the Westboro Baptist Church are doing - exercising their legal rights, which they properly have, for all the wrong reasons.

I'm not saying these folks are as detestable as WBC, but I certainly do not hold them in high regard. The rights should exist, but they abuse them.
 
Overhead, I get it. I also open carry when hunting and hiking. I open carry there because I carry a different kind of gun. One that is much more comfortable open carried than trying to conceal. Just wanted to see if your choice was because of comfort, speed in draw, etc. I also conceal in public places, not because I'm concerned about frightening others or because I feel it is more advantageous from a self-defense perspective, but because I just don't want to be bothered with people's (including law enforcement) reactions even though reactions are few and far between here in VA. I don't want the confrontations these guys in the videos get, but I'm not concerned about them doing it if they have the time to kill.

They are doing exactly what the members of the Westboro Baptist Church are doing - exercising their legal rights, which they properly have, for all the wrong reasons.
Click to expand...

Have to admit that association made me cringe. I can't even fathom a remote likeness to WBC. Also, we've already mentioned that one of the "right" reasons would be to educate ignorant cops. I can't think of any right reason for WBC doing what it does.
 
Last edited:
It is a kind of trolling. It tends to generate an emotional response. If they can generate enough they can get paid by getting enough ad views on You Tube. Nothing wrong with a little capitalism. News media works exactly the same way.
 
I have yet to see one of these videos where the person exercising their right was polite and confident rather than carrying an air of "Up yours copper! It's legal!"

I saw one video of two guys carrying an AR15 and a .22 lr MP5 clone. The cop stops and asks for identification. He also asks if he can check to make sure they're not fully automatic. He even says that if they're fully automatic they'll just need to show a tax stamp and go on their way. He offers to let the two hold his AR 15 (which he promises is way nicer haha) if they'll let him clear/check theirs.

In the end the cop sends them on their ways but the majority of the time they're just being real brickheads. Those people don't earn us any favors. The cop in the video sends them on their way and thanks them for exercising their 2nd amendment rights (as he puts it, "I know there isn't going to be any crime on this street while you guys are here") but for the most part they just treat him with scorn like he's some kind of lower class citizen.

I know it's within your rights to refuse to identify or hand over your gun, and that a gun in itself does not constitute reasonable suspicion of a crime. In their situation, I would've been tempted to say something like "Yes Officer, you may clear the firearm, but I consent to no further searches at this time." This would hopefully let the cop know I was willing to work with them while still being serious about my rights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top