Quantcast

NH: Vid of my latest open carry incident

Discussion in 'Activism Discussion and Planning' started by DadaOrwell2, Aug 6, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. brerrabbit

    brerrabbit Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2005
    Messages:
    401
    Glenn Bartley

    Hmm, while detaining a person while unable to voice any laws broken, and standing like a statue, which a reasonable person would be concerned about, while interrogating law abiding activists that will sue, that are carrying heat, that also outnumber you and your partner and have you flanked, and on video tape so there cannot be debate about what happened in civil court, in a state that still thinks highly of civil rights, why you are going to initiate force in a situation that does not require it because you feel slighted in some way?

    Somehow this does not sound like a career enhancing decision.

    Please also explain how this is a "Right". As I understand it, LEO do not enjoy rights different than citizens, they enjoy privileges that are a requirement of the job.
     
  2. telomerase

    telomerase Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2003
    Messages:
    5,399
    Location:
    The bear-infested hills of Grafton NH
    Mannix is right about that. Also, if the point is to change people's minds, it would work better if the carrier were a grandmother.

    All that said, it's great that people are working on getting open carry to be more common.
     
  3. scubie02

    scubie02 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2003
    Messages:
    916
    Location:
    ny
    well, when I was telling my brother about this, his first comment was "well, when people call and say 'there's a man here wearing a handgun', why don't the cops just say 'it's not illegal in this state to carry a handgun' and ask if there's anything else?" and he's got a point, really.

    Hell, I called the cops one time in Syracuse when my car was broken into, which IS illegal I believe, and they said they wouldn't even come for something like that, call my insurance company...
     
  4. FieroCDSP

    FieroCDSP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Messages:
    2,146
    Location:
    Wooster, Ohio
    Here's some thoughtful insight from the Original Post, for those of you who say he staged it.

    As I read it, he parked his car (as seen in the video) roughly fifty yards from the meeting place. It looked to be the first or second spot from the corner but I can't be sure. Parking is almost always full in front of restaurants, so choosing this spot is legit.
    As he was walking that distance, the state trooper noticed him and stopped. Knowing what was likely to transpire, he called the hotline to the others, who were already in the restaurant.
    One happened to have a vid-camera. As this was a meeting, some form of recording is helpful in documentation. Whether it was a tape deck or a vid camera, it doesn't matter. Meetings get recorded.
    The encounter ensues, and the others in the meeting, go out to help their brother.

    There is no real evidence that this was staged. Circumstantial, perhaps, but it can be explained by the meeting. IF this was staged, then our friend here is lying to us, and that is just not cool on THR. You always get called on it in the end. I personally to believe his story. The difference between this situation and one many of us could find ourselves in, is that all of the elements were in place through coincidence, perhaps with a little preparedness. What if the cop had turned down the street before? He wouldn't have seen a man OC a gun and decided to stop. Then this wouldn't have become a topic for discussion.

    As the third officer said, it is illegal (or at least in poor taste) to stage an encounter with police to push an agenda. I'm not sure what that is called, but it's probably worth 90 days in the county's guest house. It also wouldn't help the cause at all. It would jeopardize the work they've already done. That is just not how things go if you want to get your point out.

    So for all of you who think it was staged, think about it some more, and at least consider taking our brother at his word.
     
  5. brerrabbit

    brerrabbit Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2005
    Messages:
    401
    Considering that the initial premise of the stop involved no law breaking that either LEO could vocally identify, pray tell us how they staged an encounter when it was the LEO that created the encounter.

    Second off, I would actually be very interested in what law they broke by possibly staging an encounter. Since the LEO instigated the encounter, wouldnt the law fall more heavy on them?

    One of the best conversations I can remember was from an enlisted and vocal activist who said words to the effect that the greatest gain to liberty in the past 30 years was the advent of cheap handheld video recording equipment.
     
  6. joab

    joab Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,827
    Location:
    Ocoee, Fla
    Personally I believe it was staged as much as Rosa Parks bus ride was

    I also couldn't care less
    All but Mr. Stripey Shirt performed and represented their agencies well
     
  7. hankdatank1362

    hankdatank1362 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    2,378
    Location:
    Myrtle Beach
    Terry v. Ohio


    The LEO could articulate that violent gun crime is up, or there was an armed robbery earlier, blah, blah, blah, whatever to the court in order to uphold his invesigatory stop. Just like when they "profile" (I hate that term) someone, pull them over, toss the car, and come up empty-handed, they apologize and say they were looking for the proverbial bank robbers matching the drivers' descriptions.

    Is it right? No, but it's part of life. If the police ask you for ID, and you don't want to make a scene, give them the ID. Of course, if it's a scene that you're looking to make (like this was), then don't. Whatever floats your boat. If this is the battle you choose to pick, then I support you one hundred percent.
     
  8. DadaOrwell2

    DadaOrwell2 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    93
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    << How fortuitous that there was a video camera there. How fortuitous that you just happened to be going to a club meeting of like minded folk. OH PLEASE!!!>>

    This is the kind of problem I want to have....people reacting in disbelief when I show them how fast and effective these folks are becoming. this is their reaction speed when they are caught off guard, I kid you not. There was no expectation this would happen, only planning for a meeting location and a videographer to film the meeting. Until these people came running out I wasn't even sure there friends in the building or that a videographer would be present. The meeting was scheduled to start 15 minutes later.

    There is however a general level of preparedness for open carry incidents, which happen to us a couple times a year. If our reaction seems too overwhelming to be real maybe your standards are too low.

    Since this is a board dedicated to dispassionate determination of fact, do a little sleuthing if you want to find evidence as to whether this incident was set up or spontaneous.

    If you go to forum.nhfree.com you can find most of the folks who were there. Also our trolls on the forum will happily inform you of any false or disingenuous move we've ever made.
     
  9. ScottS

    ScottS Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    Messages:
    415
    Location:
    Live Free or Die
    First, you grossly misunderstand, or at least misstate, Terry. A police officer can't use some vague "violent crime is up" or make up some "armed robbery" to justify a stop under Terry. How long do you think that would hold up in court? You don't think the Court would ask, "And just what robbery was that, Officer?"

    Also, note the standard for Terry is two-fold: "where a police officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to conclude in light of his experience that criminal activity may be afoot and that the persons with whom he is dealing may be armed and presently dangerous..." The officer needs to be able articulate (i.e. explain in detail) his reasons to believe "(1) a crime had been committed or (2) a crime was in the process of being committed or (3) a crime was about to be committed." That's what "criminal activity may be afoot" means. Maybe I missed it; what criminal activity was afoot here?

    Terry is not a blank check to stop everyone and say, "Violent crime is up. I'll frisk you now."
     
  10. hankdatank1362

    hankdatank1362 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    2,378
    Location:
    Myrtle Beach
    I'm not saying there was any criminal activity afoot. Our guy was 100% legal.


    But that's not my point. I'm sure any relatively intelligent LEO can come up with some justification for a Terry stop, or stop-and-frisk. It doesn't have to be "violent crime in the area is up" or "Bank robber matching your description" per se... it would likely need to be a real justification. But that's not too hard to pull out of one's rear. Especially if that LEO has the ability to ARTICULATE well. It could be a real reason, or it could be BS, but as long as the LEO can articulate it well, 99 times out of 100, it will fly.


    If a police officer wants to stop you on the street, he can find a reason. Just like if they want to pull you over... they'll find a reason. (Taillight was out, but now seems to be working) Once again, not saying it's right, but it happens.
     
  11. ScottS

    ScottS Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    Messages:
    415
    Location:
    Live Free or Die
    You said: "Terry v Ohio." If you think Terry applies, then you must think that "criminal activity is afoot." You can't have one without the other. Terry is not a magic word like abbra cadabbra.
    Please provide either experience or evidence to back up this statement.
    Again, that's just factually incorrect. A police officer can approach you on the street, just as any panhandler can. And unless he has a reasonable, articulable suspicion on which to detain you, you are free to ignore him and leave, just as you would with a panhandler. If he detains you on your bull**** criteria, he opens himself up to a lawsuit for "wrongful detention."
     
  12. WeThePeople

    WeThePeople Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2007
    Messages:
    311
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    The usual opinions flourish.

    More of us should be working to ensure that all citizens can carry openly.

    The phone and your friend, well everyone will have a different opinion.

    In the end however, I say 'well-done.'
     
  13. Hendrick

    Hendrick Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2
    Great work! Your actions may very well succeed in preventing this kind of "harassment" in the future. Now perhaps other community groups will also benefit - such as MS13 who will be free to roam your family's neighborhood with weapons and prey on the weak and elderly without being similarly "harassed" by the police department.

    Do yourself and your community a big favor by politely telling police officers your intent and thanking them for checking it out. The last thing you want is a LEO force that either becomes apathetic or the equivalent of U.N. peacekeepers who are legally hogtied from protecting themselves or anyone else.
     
  14. coyote_jr

    coyote_jr member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    Messages:
    456
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    Is there any plan of activism going on here?
     
  15. DigitalWarrior

    DigitalWarrior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    Messages:
    867
    Location:
    Nashua NH
    Wow Hendrick, you are looking at this entirely wrong-headed.

    I know that criminals eat breakfast. However police should not question everyone who eats breakfast. If a police officer asked me why I am eating breakfast, I might tell him that it is none of his business.

    Or do you think that eating breakfast is an unimpeachable right and that open carrying is not?
     
  16. AndyC

    AndyC Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,581
    Location:
    DFW, TX
     
  17. rich636

    rich636 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2005
    Messages:
    273
    Dave, I think you set a great example in the video, independent of the OC issue. You were mature, informed, and steadfast while remaining non-adversarial.

    To a degree I understand where Hendrick is coming from. The idea of having everyone in my city openly carrying is an unsettling notion. With a population of 2 million people, the percent of felons or would be felons translates into a large number I would guess.

    That being said, I wish we could all open carry. I also wish we all had a strong, good, and equal minded value system. I believe vast majority of us on this board do, but not in my city.

    If police could use their judgment to wave and nod at OCers who didn't look like a probable threat, and stop those who did, I think it could work. The problem is that there are some officers who don't have good judgment. The ones that do have good judgment would lose their jobs at the hands of the ACLU or their own PC Administration. It would also create a stronger authority which I'm guessing wouldn't be welcome by libertarians.

    To me it seems tough to find a system that works in a society as complex as ours has become. It makes me wish I was born 150 years ago. I remain open minded and I think it's good that we bounce ideas off each other.
     
  18. Hendrick

    Hendrick Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2
    DW,

    As member of the gun and knife owning community, I have given it some consideration but simply cannot find the logic in your analogy. First, let me state that I am not against conceal carry permits, only the suggestion that they can be exercised with impunity.

    There is wealth of legal jargon available which can be better summarized as a common sense variable to laws and rights. Political correctness is political correctness, regardless of which side of the fence you reside. After 9/11, I found it ridiculous that we used our nation's limited resources to make sure all citizens (e.g., airline passengers) would be treated with equal security suspicion, when it is known that 95%+ of the current threat in this country is from terrorist groups comprised of young males of middle eastern descent. Likewise, your suggestion that law enforcement treat someone wondering through your neighborhood with a firearm equally to someone carrying an egg mcmuffin is patently absurd.

    After all, would you approach these two equally just because they both have a right to do what they are doing? Really?
     
  19. 45Badger

    45Badger Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    1,201
    Location:
    Illinois, about 26 miles west of the cess-pool
    Just wasted @ 10 minutes of my life on the video. Idle curiosity may not kill me, but it sure can eat into free time.

    My biggest take-away from this earth-shattering event-

    The guy in the striped shirt must have had his a$$ kicked weekly in junior high.
     
  20. TonyStarks

    TonyStarks Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    138
    Location:
    Florida
    Lucky you didn't get arrested for video taping a police officer. I have heard of it happening and people have been charged with Felony arrests for illegally recording someone without their consent. Sucks but a felony arrest and your rights are gone.
     
  21. DigitalWarrior

    DigitalWarrior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    Messages:
    867
    Location:
    Nashua NH
    Rich and Hendrick,

    There are a couple of problems with your suggestions.

    First, Political Correctness aside, profiling is counterproductive. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/06/patrick_smith_o.html

    Second, the idea of Felons open carrying might not make you comfortable, but be sure, many of them are carrying concealed. If a person with a gun is not doing something wrong, leave them alone.

    Third, I am pretty sure that police should treat the McMuffin carrier the same, because I have heard that all police should always assume all people are armed, lest they end up ambient temperature. If a person goes for their weapon or a pocket, there should be similar consequences too.

    Really, everyone should assume everyone else is armed. The world would be a better place.
     
  22. coyote_jr

    coyote_jr member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    Messages:
    456
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    Actually it would take a felony conviction
     
  23. AntiqueCollector

    AntiqueCollector Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    842
    A criminal is not going to carry openly and attract attention in an area known for the police to hassle those open carrying.
     
  24. rich636

    rich636 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2005
    Messages:
    273
    DW that sheiner link is a group of handpicked group of cases where profiling would have failed. It is not a true sampling. Science isn't science if you pick a desired result and work backwards. By in large, if it walks like a duck, talk likes a duck, it's usually a duck.

    Does that make profiling a good thing, not always. I would agree with you on that. There will be people who dress "gangster" but are stand up guys. There are people who dress nicely but have dead guys in their garage freezer. To ignore trends is naive though.
     
  25. kingpin008

    kingpin008 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    5,435
    Location:
    Howard County, Merry Land
    Tony - those arrests you've heard about are illegal arrests. If an individual (including LEOs) is in public, they submit to photography/video monitoring by default due to the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy. How do you think all the paparazzi out there get those shots of celebs? They have the right to photograph them because they're out in public. No permissin need be given. Or what about those signs on businesses that say "These Premises are under Video Surveillace"? They're allowed to do that because you have no right to privacy in a public area. Any LEO that arrests an individual taping/taking pics of them in public is asking for a HUGE lawsuit, as long as the person taping/taking their picture was not interfering in the officer's duties.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice