Am I the only one who noticed the kid with a gun pointed at his face?We have lost a lot in the last generation. I'd like to get it back.
Mike
A Policeman does it Right
- Thread starter fanchisimo
- Start date
- Status
beatledog7
Member
No, you're not. But I chose not to comment on it. Looks like he's scratching his nose with it. Not a great plan, but then, not a plan at all most likely. Just an indication of his level of comfort with the revolver.
What's more interesting about it is the proximity of the gun to Kennedy and nobody having a conniption.
What's more interesting about it is the proximity of the gun to Kennedy and nobody having a conniption.
larryh1108
Member
The print and tv ads are all telling us "If you see something, say something." I would say seeing 3 guys with ARs strolling down the street as "something" out of the ordinary. It is the policeman's duty to check it out to his satisfaction.
How many times have we read or heard about a murderer getting pulled over for speeding right before or after he killed someone? They slam him for not being more diligent in searching for weapons or making sure he was of no danger to others.
We read how the Boston bomber could have been stopped if they looked deeper into Russian warnings. If the officer deemed them harmless after a brief stop and they went around the corner and shot up a shopping mall, he'd be crucified and probably lose his job and pension.
Where is the line for the officers who respond to calls of unknown origin? If we see "something" and say "something" then it is the duty of LE to check it out. The Patriot Act has taken away most of our rights if "they" deem it necessary (read about the Verizon BS) and we don't need lawmakers to give more "power" to LE in the name of national security because a few bozos wish to act like immature kids for youtube.
If just one of these attention seeking individuals turns into a mass murderer and he was stopped but not questioned at length, lawmakers will pass laws to give LE more power to detain and interrogate (see Sandy Hook). Knee jerk reactions by lawmakers make stupid moves like this a waste of time, money and can lead to further erosion of our rights.
How many times have we read or heard about a murderer getting pulled over for speeding right before or after he killed someone? They slam him for not being more diligent in searching for weapons or making sure he was of no danger to others.
We read how the Boston bomber could have been stopped if they looked deeper into Russian warnings. If the officer deemed them harmless after a brief stop and they went around the corner and shot up a shopping mall, he'd be crucified and probably lose his job and pension.
Where is the line for the officers who respond to calls of unknown origin? If we see "something" and say "something" then it is the duty of LE to check it out. The Patriot Act has taken away most of our rights if "they" deem it necessary (read about the Verizon BS) and we don't need lawmakers to give more "power" to LE in the name of national security because a few bozos wish to act like immature kids for youtube.
If just one of these attention seeking individuals turns into a mass murderer and he was stopped but not questioned at length, lawmakers will pass laws to give LE more power to detain and interrogate (see Sandy Hook). Knee jerk reactions by lawmakers make stupid moves like this a waste of time, money and can lead to further erosion of our rights.
TCB in TN
Member
Big difference between what you are saying and this situation. Speeders are breaking the law. These guys were not.
There was actual intel from the Russians that the Boston Bombers were planning an attack. In this case we have nothing indicating foreign intelligence agencies were sending warnings about these 3 guy open carrying, with cameras.
If you want to do something to stop crime "proactively" how about keeping violent felons in jail longer. People proven to be violent are a lot more likely to be violent than people who haven't yet.
The whole see something, say something thing is a joke. Just more conditioning to further the nanny state agenda. Also another reason that police resources are "stretched so thin".
As for the idea that even 1 of these guys ends up involved in a mass shooting it will be used to further infringe upon our rights, well yeah you are right. But then again most of the politicians that are being sent to DC or to the State Capitals today are looking for an excuse, and in most cases the idea that one of these guys might do it, is excuse enough. That is a battle that we can't win unless we do a better job of electing politicians.
Every cop I've ever met has tried to ID who they're talking to in any significant contact. That's just part of writing a police report.
Just to give you an idea of what I'm basing this off of it's what I know of policing from responding with our local guys with the fire dept for the last 15 years. :Shrug
Doesn't make me an expert by any means, but it's given me the opportunity to observe them every shift and to hear what they have to say after the call is over and to hear their thought processes. The guys in our dept are pretty pro-2A, but at the same time a few of them are prone towards treating 'Contempt of cop' as an actual crime.
you are right stop everyone every day. lock them all up. when a baby is born lock them up also. when everyone is in jail no more crime (except the crime of locking them up).
RPRNY
Member
Am I the only one who noticed the kid with a gun pointed at his face?
I noticed it but I just assumed the kid was saying " if I have to listen to anymore of this Liberal drivel, I'll pull the trigger. I swear it."
There's still no telling what happened between the time the idiot proving a point strapped on, the 911 call was made, the operator relayed the message, and the cop received it. A neighbor kid around 5 years old had a habit of acting stupid, seeking attention, and no parental attention on a regular basis. His parent left power tools plugged in on a picnic table in the front yard and the kid picked up an electric buffer, turned it on, and approached his younger sister showing off for 2 other similar aged kids. With no parents in sight, I called it in exactly as I saw it - kid flailing an electric polisher (like is used to buff car paintjobs). A few minutes later a highway patrol shows up and the kids run away screaming. After questioning the parent(s), he asked me what I saw, and I told him. The point of this? He doesn't respond to household issues. He was in the area and heard a call on the Sheriff's channels about kids acting in a gangster manner with chainsaws or similar, attacking people in the street. He responded to a terrorist threat. So, from my call to the radio relay, there's no telling who took liberties. My call was a CPS type concern which translated into a terrorist act and it didn't happen on my end. It escalated on the end of the operator. Think about it if I had exaggerated from the start. In the OP, a call still might not have been warranted, but it likely could have been handled much better. "We'll investigate" doesn't ALWAYS have to be the response. A house cat in a tree doesn't deserve an investigation, whereas an alligator in the street might. This could have easily stopped at the dispatcher level as a cat in the tree since, while "unusual", there were still no laws broken.
Orion8472
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,638
So, . . . if you were walking around the city with your AR on your back, and were approached by law enforcement, . . . would you offer your ID so they could check your status?
I'm torn because the officer has a duty to find out if someone with a criminal record is armed or not.
But would I want my ID on record as "having a loaded AR on my back", even though it would be legal to do so?
What would you do?
I'm torn because the officer has a duty to find out if someone with a criminal record is armed or not.
But would I want my ID on record as "having a loaded AR on my back", even though it would be legal to do so?
What would you do?
BADUNAME30
Member
Exactly fanchisimo !
It amazes me how many posters here on THR are so quick to demonstrate thier contempt for Police Officers.
I'd probably give him my first name just for conversational purposes, but they'd have to detain me to get the last name, and I would never provide anything beyond a verbal on my name, as Nevadans are not compelled to provide documentation, nor so much as spell your name, you merely need to state it.
TCB in TN
Member
It amazes me how many police officer have contempt for citizens going about their business, not breaking any laws.
Yeppers, but it's NOT their duty to find out if someone armed is a criminal.
As to offering ID? That depends on how nice they are and their intent. For the video, if I were the anal idiots, I could see saying, "I'm exercising my rights of not being forced to show my ID, but since you're a nice guy asking nicely, here ya go." Of course, I don't go around daring cops to be put in a situation where they feel the need to hit me up... Any time I've been asked, they were justified in asking as I've bent a law or 2 on occasion.
Reloadron
Contributing Member
In this case yes I would. Why create a peeing contest just to make a point? I know my rights and so does the cop knows my rights. What would the point be. Then too, knowing my rights. I would not wander down the street just to call attention to my rights. Why? To make a splash in the pond and call attention to myself?
I have better things to do with my time and as I initially stated so do the cops. Simply stating "because I can" isn't a good reason to do much of anything.
Looking at the video I saw those people as a bunch of fools trying to make a point in all the wrong ways and those needing to grow up. That just being my onion which I have a right to. I saw these guys as baiting the cops. I saw it as a poor way to try and make a point. I saw it as more detrimental to gun rights than a positive note. I can think of many more ways to call attention to myself and gun rights than doing what I see as stupid things. Again, just my opinion and I am sticking to it.
Ron
I have better things to do with my time and as I initially stated so do the cops. Simply stating "because I can" isn't a good reason to do much of anything.
Looking at the video I saw those people as a bunch of fools trying to make a point in all the wrong ways and those needing to grow up. That just being my onion which I have a right to. I saw these guys as baiting the cops. I saw it as a poor way to try and make a point. I saw it as more detrimental to gun rights than a positive note. I can think of many more ways to call attention to myself and gun rights than doing what I see as stupid things. Again, just my opinion and I am sticking to it.
Ron
It was their fellow citizens that called in concerned. why do you think that was?
Thousands upon thousands of people are walking around right now open carrying. Yet they are not drawing attention to themselves performing their day to day activities.
smalls
Member
Yeah, except it's been proven time and time again that a lot of them DON'T know your rights. Or don't care.
I have no contempt for any officer. But if an officer us going to bother an annoy me while I'm legally going about my day, I'm not going to be nice about it, nor am I going to continue the encounter any further than I have to.
"May I see your ID?"
"No, and unless you have something you're arresting me for, I'll be on my way.
Unless they were actively using that AR, there's really nothing that they could do to "check out" these guys. They drive up, they see guys walking with a slung rifle not breaking any laws.
Nothing to see, so move along.
TCB in TN
Member
Don't know and honestly don't care. Unless I am doing something that is illegal, or an officer has some reason to suspect I am doing something illegal then it really is quite honestly none of his business. BTW he stated that there were calls of guys with guns. He didn't say anyone had suggested they were threatening anyone or taking any other illegal action. Baring some other actions not in evidence then there were quite honestly no reason for the officer to stop or question or even interact with them.
RustHunter87
Member
The thing that gets me about it is they were not OCing while they while "performing their day to day activities" they were walking around in town with large obvious weapons for no reason other than to cause a scene.
Exactly. If you're going to walk around the city with an AR on your back, carrying a sign saying "excercise your rights" or "guns aren't the problem" or something would probably reduce the number of people freaking out, and be a little more educational than just looking for a chance to tell a cop to take a hike.
Last edited:
Jim NE
Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2011
- Messages
- 1,888
Yes this cop was good. I think it's obvious that he sized these folks up pretty good from the start by the way he approached them - no gun drawn and not belligerent, but still serious and direct.
When the police ask for my driver's license when I'm driving, I show it to them. Expecting to be able to walk around with AR's in public and not shock or alarm anyone is silly, even though you have the right to do it.
When the police ask for my driver's license when I'm driving, I show it to them. Expecting to be able to walk around with AR's in public and not shock or alarm anyone is silly, even though you have the right to do it.
fanchisimo
Member
I know police are just doing their job. Some are bad, without a doubt, but I bet the majority are good. I am friends with a former officer and some of the stuff he told me, I am surprised they aren't all jerks. There has been two times I've dealt with police (neither gun related) and I hadn't done anything illegal. They asked for my ID and I didn't give it. I talked with them and they were polite and respectful so I eventually handed it over since he "earned" it.
smalls
Member
I re read some of my posts, and I'd like to add this-
I in no way think the officer did a bad job here. He responded to the call to check things out. He has every right to ask for ID, and didn't seem pushy to get them. He was professional and courteous. His only real fault is taking the bait. He should have just left when he came to the conclusion they breaking no laws, and only wanted to stir him up.
My main problem here isn't be necessarily with the officer. It's that this whole ordeal should have been over within a matter of seconds. I don't agree with baiting officers into these scenarios, and I agree the college guys didn't need to do this, nor act the way they did.
But, people are going to keep doing this so long as it'll rile someone up. If you stop feeding them, they'll quit.
I in no way think the officer did a bad job here. He responded to the call to check things out. He has every right to ask for ID, and didn't seem pushy to get them. He was professional and courteous. His only real fault is taking the bait. He should have just left when he came to the conclusion they breaking no laws, and only wanted to stir him up.
My main problem here isn't be necessarily with the officer. It's that this whole ordeal should have been over within a matter of seconds. I don't agree with baiting officers into these scenarios, and I agree the college guys didn't need to do this, nor act the way they did.
But, people are going to keep doing this so long as it'll rile someone up. If you stop feeding them, they'll quit.
BobTheTomato
Member
Other groups such as the gay community took a very in your face approach to their "rights" and have succeed. They exposed everyone to what the felt should be right and have gotten their bills passed in many state houses up to the point where it is now a protected class. It would seem to me the more in the face you are people will get used to it. I don't remember to many struggles where people hid in the shadows and got people used to them.
I have contempt for people who are supposed to enforce the law but do not even know it. How many tax payer dollars are wasted cause some moron in governmental issued costume with body armor violated someone's civil rights? There was the cop in Philly who threatened to shoot the open carrier in the face because he did not like what the guy was doing. If these cops get to think that people who are open carrying are mass murders, why wouldn't I think they are all psychopaths who want a state issued license to kill? Till police departments get their act together people will keep baiting them and getting in their face. I know in PA some of the settlements with police departments have specifically stated that they must give their officers classes in the law on open carry.
larryh1108
Member
I don't know the total count of policemen and women and this country but I bet it's pretty substantial. I believe the number of cops who abuse their power is the same or less than the number of the general population who do the same thing.... pushing the envelope further than they should. The men and women who are there for us when we need them are not infallible to corrupt genes any more than we are but I'll still contend that their numbers are less than the norm. You can't vilify all the police members for the actions of a few just like you can't punish all the gun owners for the actions of a few. It's just not right. My experience has shown me that people who have contempt for law enforcement are that way because they often times cross the line and don't wish to deal with the consequences, whether past or present.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
