Philadelphia PD won't Look the Other Way on Open-Carry Gun Owners


PDA






usmarine0352_2005
May 21, 2011, 04:21 PM
.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/21/altercation-philadelphia-police-say-wont-look-way-open-carry-gun-owners/


After Altercation, Philadelphia Police Say They Won't Look the Other Way on Open-Carry Gun Owners

By Stephen Clark

Published May 21, 2011

| FoxNews.com


With a shocking altercation between Philadelphia police and a 25-year-old IT worker putting the spotlight back on open-carry gun laws, local authorities are warning gun owners that they will be "inconvenienced" if they carry unconcealed handguns in the city.



.

If you enjoyed reading about "Philadelphia PD won't Look the Other Way on Open-Carry Gun Owners" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
usmarine0352_2005
May 21, 2011, 04:23 PM
.

Just because someone is open-carrying doesn't mean they are legal. Although the chance of that is slim to none.



If someone needed to be stopped in this situation having them put there hands up, removing the pistol, checking their carry permit and then giving them their pistol back and sending them on there way isn't unreasonable.

.

9MMare
May 21, 2011, 04:34 PM
So according that article, people are stopped by the police for no legal reason. They are doing nothing illegal or even suspicious (because if it is legal, it's not suspicious by definition), and the police ask for ID and SEARCH them.

This is worse than the NC drivers license random checks.

I hate to bring up the N-word....and it's not the one related to racism....but that's what this makes me think of. (This and the laws they are trying to pass restricting people from taking pics or videos of police activity)

SharpsDressedMan
May 21, 2011, 04:47 PM
If just walking down the street with open carry is legal without a permit, what is the probable cause for a stop? When I was a cop, I always asked myself what my probable cause was. This is what happens when the masses do not regularly exercise their rights, and excise unwanted and stupid policemen...............

AK103K
May 21, 2011, 04:55 PM
If just walking down the street with open carry is legal without a permit, what is the probable cause for a stop?
As silly as it seems, open carry requires a concealed carry (LTCF) permit within the city limits in Phiily. Not sure how that works, as its not an issue anywhere else in the rest of the state (as far as I know), but, Philly is Philly, and they always want to be different. :)

One thing that is probably a good point to it though, at least you can carry the gun loaded in your car (you cant if you dont have a permit) the way they have it set up. If they are worried about the gun being in the holster, can you imagine the ruckus if the cop drove by and saw you standing there, gun in hand, loading up next to the car right after you got out? :)

SharpsDressedMan
May 21, 2011, 06:03 PM
We had some laws in some Ohio cities that exceeded the state laws regarding ownership and such of handguns, assualt rifles, etc. They were recently shot down in the supreme court (Ohio) as being unconstitutional BECAUSE they exceeded the authority of the state. Perhaps a strong challenge in the PA supreme court would nullify the Phillie law.

General Geoff
May 21, 2011, 06:45 PM
Perhaps a strong challenge in the PA supreme court would nullify the Phillie law.
There already is established case law, specifically in terms of carrying a firearm in Philadelphia. The police do not even have reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime being committed in order to detain a man open carrying a firearm, let alone grounds to charge him with a crime. See: Commonwealth v. Hawkins (http://reference.pafoa.org/caselaw/PA/commonwealth-v-hawkins/).

4thPointOfContact
May 21, 2011, 07:14 PM
If just walking down the street with open carry is legal without a permit, what is the probable cause for a stop? When I was a cop, I always asked myself what my probable cause was. This is what happens when the masses do not regularly exercise their rights, and excise unwanted and stupid policemen...............

Agreed. Although a citizen must have a permit in Philadelphia, the conduct is as legal as driving an automobile. Do the police make a habit of targeting drivers to ensure they are properly licensed on a random basis?

M-Cameron
May 21, 2011, 08:21 PM
With a shocking altercation between Philadelphia police and a 25-year-old IT worker putting the spotlight back on open-carry gun laws, local authorities are warning gun owners that they will be "inconvenienced" if they carry unconcealed handguns in the city.

umm.......wouldnt it be simpler......and all around more effective.....if you warned your officers not to "inconvenience" the gun owners....?

Steve in PA
May 21, 2011, 08:38 PM
All police officers received the word during their official updates a few years ago that open carry was in fact, 100% legal in PA to include Philly.

Apparently the Philly officers either fell asleep during this topic, or as it seems, just choose to ignore the law.

Lacking any reasonable suspicion that the open carrier was involved in criminal activity, the police have ZERO authority to stop and/or detain the person. Its the same thing with driving a vehicle, the police can't just stop you to see if you have a drivers license.

Philly is an embarassment to PA and Philly LEO's are an embarassment to law enforcement.

SharpsDressedMan
May 21, 2011, 08:57 PM
For a while in my nearby town, before the state ratified a CCW law, the local police chief stated his men would probably stop a guy for open carry (which he knew was legal, but like Phillie, and other places, had become so uncommon that cops just thought they would intercede to "protect the public". I seriously considered drafting a handout, with my picture on it, and a statement that I was a citizen, not of ill intent, not under indictment, etc, and was going to be exercising my right to bear arms in the town, and that the notice was for the benefit of all the officers' knowledge of who I was, etc, so I would not be "molested". I figured they'd shake me down once or twice anyway, but after that, it would become harrassment, since I had carefully informed them of who I was and what I was doing. I contemplated strapping on a gun openly and doing all my downtown business that way, to re-establish the public right to bear arms. I guess I never got mad enough, or lost interest, and shortly later, Ohio became a CCW permit state. We STILL need to educate the cops and prosecutors, and take back our rights, but for now, packing concealed serves my purpose. Had I done all that, and been harassed, I would have miked it to the max with the press, attorneys, and any pressure I could muster to roust the city admin, police, etc, until they acknowledged the public's right to be armed openly as long as no ill intent was accompanying it.

9MMare
May 22, 2011, 12:17 AM
Agreed. Although a citizen must have a permit in Philadelphia, the conduct is as legal as driving an automobile. Do the police make a habit of targeting drivers to ensure they are properly licensed on a random basis?

Apparently they are doing exactly that in NC.

PavePusher
May 22, 2011, 12:51 AM
I love it when the police publicly announce their intent to violate the Citizens' Civil Rights. It make the resulting law suits so easy.... :evil::banghead::fire::cuss:

EddieNFL
May 22, 2011, 08:25 AM
Typical "head in the sand" attitude: "If I can't see it, I'm in no danger."

Recently, a bill was introduced to allow OC in FL. The sheeple are in a panic as they believe those who now carry concealed will somehow become blood lusting murders if they're allowed to OC.

Deanimator
May 22, 2011, 09:10 AM
I love it when the police publicly announce their intent to violate the Citizens' Civil Rights. It make the resulting law suits so easy....
The Philly PD and prosecutor have made SO many damaging statements against penal interest that General Francisco Franco has a better chance of survival than their malicious prosecution. And when the victim's civil suit gets to court, the Philly PD is TOAST.

If I were the victim, I'd take half of the settlement or judgment and use it to give out free video cameras just to make the Philly PD's life REALLY interesting in the future.

One-Time
May 22, 2011, 09:16 AM
If OC is legal, then they have NO legal grounds on which to stop a person abiding by the law. You cannot as a LEO stop someone for following the law, if you cited that reason in court youd lose

'Your honor I stopped the defendant because he was following the law'

you did what...case dismissed

Deanimator
May 22, 2011, 09:23 AM
If OC is legal, then they have NO legal grounds on which to stop a person abiding by the law. You cannot as a LEO stop someone for following the law, if you cited that reason in court youd lose
It's happened elsewhere and even MORE blatantly.

A guy here obeyed officers' orders to remain silent during a felony stop, after trying to obey the "notification" requirement. After ***51*** seconds, he managed to inform... and was charged with... "failure to PROMPTLY inform". It actually went to trial and he was of course acquitted.

Malicious, retaliatory prosecutions are a Philadelphia PD thing, but not EXCLUSIVELY a Philadelphia PD thing.

jiminhobesound
May 22, 2011, 12:04 PM
Seems to me this is another case where the police department needs to be severly punished for illegal, unconstituional activities. As stated in the case precedent there is a good basis for a suit involving substantial intentional harm to a law abiding citizen. When I lived in PA the sheriff issued the ccw permits.

MICHAEL T
May 22, 2011, 12:13 PM
What has happened The states and the cities that figured so much in our rebellion and writing of the Constitution. Have become the states for most part with the worst gun control laws, High's taxes and general harassment of its citizens

9MMare
May 22, 2011, 12:19 PM
What has happened The states and the cities that figured so much in our rebellion and writing of the Constitution. Have become the states for most part with the worst gun control laws, High's taxes and general harassment of its citizens

In WA St, we have pretty good gun laws, including open carry and Shall-Issue cc permits within 30 days.

Seattle has tried to pass its own more restrictive gun laws (last yr most recently) and has been overruled because the laws went against the State Constitution.

People over here on the west side do tend to freak out when they see open carry tho. It makes the news and the cops are often called by citizens.

Shawn Dodson
May 22, 2011, 09:13 PM
Looks like its time for Philly gunowners to organize and walk the streets in large groups - open carry style.

Deanimator
May 22, 2011, 10:02 PM
Looks like its time for Philly gunowners to organize and walk the streets in large groups - open carry style.
Already done, last week I believe.

The fact that they didn't hassle anybody just makes their case against Viper even weaker.

SharpsDressedMan
May 22, 2011, 10:48 PM
Bully for the Philadelphia gun owners march!

JTHunter
May 22, 2011, 11:23 PM
Malicious, retaliatory prosecutions are a Philadelphia PD thing, but not EXCLUSIVELY a Philadelphia PD thing.

Tell me about it!!
Be glad you aren't in Illinois and ESPECIALLY not in St. Clair, Madison, or "Crook" counties!

Owen Sparks
May 23, 2011, 01:07 AM
The way to counter this is for enough people to open carry that make it too much like work for the cops to check all of them and they will soon tire of it and look for easier pickings.

PCGS65
May 23, 2011, 01:14 AM
What gets me is why do we need permits/permission to excercise our constitutional rights/the 2A?
Then we still get hasseled/arrested when we do abide by all these unconstitutional laws. :rolleyes:

The 2A specifically states
the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

HOOfan_1
May 23, 2011, 10:05 AM
I don't understand the Philly PD's assertion that he was inviting trouble either.

Fiorino wasn't the one waving his gun around, the police officer was.
Fiorino wasn't the one using inapporpriate language and being agressive, the police officer was.
Fiorino wasn't causing trouble for anyone or harrassing anyone, the police officer was.

If Fiorino had been stopped for this several times, yet not a single time was he breaking any laws, then I would say it was not Fiorino causing the troubles, it is the Philidelphia Police department that has failed to learn from their "mistakes". It is they who are breaking the laws and they who are harrassing and causing trouble for people.

How is he inviting trouble by taping the proceedings either? If they have nothing to hide, then they should not mind the fact that they are being taped. If they mind being taped, they have something to hide, and they should be investigated for corruption.

Sounds to me like Fiorino is excersising both his second ammendment AND first ammendment rights. Philadelphia police officers must not take their oaths to uphold the Constitution or maintain ethical conduct very seriously.

swinokur
May 23, 2011, 02:06 PM
Yes, that's right. Just move to the back of the bus like they tell you to. Get away from that lunch counter. Don't drink at that water fountain. Don't cause a commotion. They're just doing their job.

Vector
May 23, 2011, 02:54 PM
As silly as it seems, open carry requires a concealed carry (LTCF) permit within the city limits in Phiily. Not sure how that works, as its not an issue anywhere else in the rest of the state (as far as I know), but, Philly is Philly, and they always want to be different. :)

One thing that is probably a good point to it though, at least you can carry the gun loaded in your car (you cant if you dont have a permit) the way they have it set up. If they are worried about the gun being in the holster, can you imagine the ruckus if the cop drove by and saw you standing there, gun in hand, loading up next to the car right after you got out? :)

That is a good point. What exactly is considered "the proper place" to take your unloaded firearm out of the car(for those states mandating it), and loading your gun and wearing it?

Guns and more
May 23, 2011, 04:43 PM
Just because someone is open-carrying doesn't mean they are legal.
I've been to Philly.
The cops better watch the gang bangers with their stolen pistols in their hoodies, and stop worrying about the OC bunch.

it is the Philidelphia Police department that has failed to learn from their "mistakes". It is they who are breaking the laws and they who are harrassing and causing trouble for people.
Philly cops are one step away from the crooks they watch.
They are above the law, and would get away with shooting an OC civilian. ("He pulled his gun on me." Case closed.)

RS14
May 23, 2011, 08:50 PM
There already is established case law, specifically in terms of carrying a firearm in Philadelphia. The police do not even have reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime being committed in order to detain a man open carrying a firearm, let alone grounds to charge him with a crime. See: Commonwealth v. Hawkins (http://reference.pafoa.org/caselaw/PA/commonwealth-v-hawkins/).

Commonwealth v. Hawkins was good reading, and I particularly got a kick out of

The Commonwealth takes the radical position that police have a duty to stop and frisk when they receive information from any source that a suspect has a gun. Since it is not illegal to carry a licensed gun in Pennsylvania, it is
difficult to see where this shocking idea originates, notwithstanding the Commonwealth's fanciful and histrionic references to maniacs who may spray
schoolyards with gunfire and assassins of public figures who may otherwise go
undetected. Even if the Constitution of Pennsylvania would permit such invasive police activity as the Commonwealth proposes -- which it does not --
such activity seems more likely to endanger than to protect the public.

It isn't, however, as relevant to OC as you claim it is: the justices conclude
We do not address the scenario in which the officer has an independent reason to believe that a crime (carrying an unlicensed gun) may be in progress, inquires as to whether the gun is licensed and the person does not answer.

grubbylabs
May 23, 2011, 10:10 PM
Every officer at that stop should loose their job.

xfyrfiter
May 23, 2011, 10:43 PM
Man, Philly sounds as bad as Las Vegas, sooooo glad I live in a mostly free state.

HOOfan_1
May 24, 2011, 09:59 AM
It isn't, however, as relevant to OC as you claim it is: the justices conclude

We do not address the scenario in which the officer has an independent reason to believe that a crime (carrying an unlicensed gun) may be in progress, inquires as to whether the gun is licensed and the person does not answer.


Yet that is not what happened in the situation described in the original post.

The Police Officer obtained Fiorino's attetion with a condescending remark, while pointing a loaded gun at his chest. The officer didn't ask any questions. Fiorino offered to show him proof of license and the officer refused.

If you enjoyed reading about "Philadelphia PD won't Look the Other Way on Open-Carry Gun Owners" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!