Open carry..part of the problem is Police actually responding...

[Vern Humphrey]

Again, where would the liability fall if a shooting DID occur, and we had refused to respond?

Where would the liability fall if you didn't respond because you were checking out a panhandler, mediating a dispute over rent, or explaining it is not a crime to grow petunias instead of gladiolas?

It seems to me that your manpower is already being mis-managed.

 

[yhtomit]

"Overwhelm them. They'll get tired of it and stop responding."

This, and the "deer in the yard" story above, make me a bit leery. I have seen a case (just last week in fact) in a local court where a frustrated -- but not all that bright -- fellow made several calls to 911 over a parking dispute, and even said something like "Oh, I've got a lot of friends with cell phones! We'll just keep calling until you do something about it!" (At the time, his earlier calls were already being responded to, and he was just angry that the cops hadn't yet arrived.)

Upshot: charged with filing false reports. Not something you want on your record.

timothy

 

[xjchief]

Quote:
I wonder if they're obliged to show up if you simply call in a weird person walking down the street unarmed.
It happens all the time. "obliged" by law, no, by policy, likely. Sadly it's most frequently to handle some poor white person who got scared when a black or Latino person walked into their Aryan bastion of safety.

Nice. Really nice.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Upshot: charged with filing false reports. Not something you want on your record.

Two points:

1. If there's a deer in your yard, and you call your County Supervisor, that is hardly a "false report."

2. The people who open carry are not calling in any reports at all -- it's the nervous nellies who see them.

 

[WayneConrad]

coloradokevin, You practically did get sent out on a "the grass is growing" call!

Thanks for the well-reasoned response and the peek into the kind of calls you have to take. I'm sure the police in Arizona have to take a fair amount of that type, too.

What's fascinating to me is why the police here in Arizona don't dispatch to all "man with gun" calls, and police in a different state, where open carry is also lawful, are always dispatched to "man with gun" calls. My questions are, to what degree is that difference in dispatching driven by practical matters ("'men with guns' here are almost always criminals: We better check them out, or we'll be sorry!"), or prejudice ("men with guns scare people!"), not just for your area, where you indicate that it is usually criminals seen with guns, but for other areas as well. And then, what will it take to change things so that open carry is possible in all states without your bosses needing to dispatch you to investigate every instance.

Colorado's complicated "home rule" laws need to be straightened out. They could be helped by Arizona style "non preemption" law, where local law is not allowed to override state law on most matters where firearms are concerned.

 

[coloradokevin]

Colorado's complicated "home rule" laws need to be straightened out. They could be helped by Arizona style "non preemption" law, where local law is not allowed to override state law on most matters where firearms are concerned.

I agree. Who would have thought that something as simple as "open carry" could bring up so many questions in a given state?

I'd never really heard of such a thing (as "homer rule") until I moved to Colorado some years back.

Where I grew up it was always Fed trumps state, state trumps local.

The home rule thing wans't even brought up in our academy either... I first heard about it while assigned to patrol, during a roll-call debate about what the actual gun laws currently are in our area.

Scary part of the discussion was when we realized the number of different interpretations we collectively had of something that should be a black-and-white yes/no kind of question! Either something is legal, or is not... Colorado started to play in shades of grey, apparently.

So, as a LEO, instead of pulling out the state statutes to obtain the verbage of laws, I guess I am also supposed to consult local ordinances and court case law... then draw up something resembling my own conclusions accordingly?

Most of our issues in this state have evolved as the result of a dispute between the city of Denver and the state legislature on who gets to call the shots within Denver itself (I think a few smaller cities were also involved, but Denver is kind of the "big fish" in CO).

Here is a link to one of the articles about the current situation in Colorado. I believe this is the most current position on this situation:

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4753558,00.html

And here is the text of the legal ruling from the Denver District Court:

http://www.courts.state.co.us/exec/media/cases/03cv3809order.pdf

 

[Mainsail]

It all will depend on how common open carry is where you live. When I started carrying openly here in Tacoma, I was stopped by a police officer, disarmed, and lectured with hostility for 45 minutes. He told me that because I have a permit that I couldn’t carry openly (not true). He told me it was illegal in the park I was in (not true). He told me that if he ever heard about me carrying openly again he would respond, even if he wasn’t the one dispatched to the call, and confiscate my pistol.

He later lied in a written report to his sergeant over the matter, and more shamefully, made his partner lie to cover for him. Fast forward eight months; I have some museum security ninjas call the cops because I traversed their property. Same officer responds and asks (much nicer this time) for my permit. I refused to give it to him because I wasn’t carrying a concealed weapon. I ask if I’m being detained, he says no, we part company.

Today I walked around a different park with my Sig 1911 on my belt. I saw at least five police cars (or the same police car five times), one of which drove right down the path through the center of the park, and two motorcycle officers. None stopped. If they were dispatched because of a MWAG call, they did their investigation without even getting out of the car.

There is no firearms exception to the rules of Terry. A police officer cannot detain you without reasonable articuable suspicion that a crime is afoot. If open carry is legal, what can he use to justify seizing you?

 

[WayneConrad]

Please let me make one request. This has been a remarkable conversation, rational and clear, occupying the high ground all the way. However, with Mainsail's story, it has the potential to veer off into cop-bashing territory in with terrifying rapidity.

Let's not go there, m'kay?

My gripes, if I have any, have been with the policy makers, not with the flatfoots themselves, and I hope I've made that clear. Mailsail got a bad rap from a bad flatfoot, but stood his ground, and things improved in his area.

Let's keep this conversation on the high ground where it belongs, please.

 

[Mainsail]

I wasn’t cop bashing, I was reporting the facts of two disparate encounters with an officer.

 

[yhtomit]

1. If there's a deer in your yard, and you call your County Supervisor, that is hardly a "false report."

And the ladies would call at all hours of the day and night, "There's a deer in my yard!! I had to take my children inside for protection!"

Forgive me; it sounded like the ladies might be calling for effect rather than because they had just ("at all hours of the night") had to take their children inside.

2. The people who open carry are not calling in any reports at all -- it's the nervous nellies who see them.

Overwhelm them. They'll get tired of it and stop responding.

Again, perhaps I misunderstood -- I thought you were advocating that pro-open carry callers overwhelm the police lines with their own (facetious) nervous-nelly reports, because that's what it sounds like to me.

timothy

 

[frogomatic]

Consider the culture we live in... Departments are very very worried about liability. Every time a mass shooting occurs, the finger starts being pointed at the LE agencies saying: "they knew X, Y, and Z, why -- oh why -- didn't they stop this??".

and this is evidence of a great portion of the population that doesn't want to take responsibility for itself. It is sad that so many stand idle, point, and blame everything else for the problems of the world.

 

[k_dawg]

You know.. why doesn't the NRA have a campaign to inform the police AND the public? [ where it is legal to openly carry. ]

 

[WayneConrad]

Mainsail, I know you weren't cop bashing. I apologize for giving the impression that I thought you were. But someone was gonna come along behind you and start in. Based on past performance in previous threads.

 

[TexasRifleman]

You know.. why doesn't the NRA have a campaign to inform the police AND the public? [ where it is legal to openly carry. ]

So you'd rather have the NRA spend money in a place that, for all intents and purposes, the 2A war is won rather than spend it in places where it's not?

If you live somewhere open carry is legal you're ahead of 99% of the country.

You really want NRA spending money THERE?

 

[Kpdpipes]

coloradokevin, You practically did get sent out on a "the grass is growing" call!

Thanks for the well-reasoned response and the peek into the kind of calls you have to take. I'm sure the police in Arizona have to take a fair amount of that type, too.

Wayne, close to 80% of calls an average Police Dept responds to are "Service" in nature, rather than Criminal in nature. In an average shift we respond to Animal Complaints (barking dogs, **** ther's a Bat/Raccoon/Possum in my house/hallway) Car and house Lockouts, Civil issues such as landlord/tenant disputes or neighbors arguing over fenclines..you get the idea

 

[Aguila Blanca]

In general ... the police are obligated to respond and investigate if there is a report of illegal activity. They are not obligated to respond to reports of lawful activity. Want to test it? Call your local ploice department and tell them you just saw someone walk past the front of your house with a dog on a leash. Betcha they'll tell you there's no law against that, and hang up. They might even wish you (insincerely) a nice day.

"Man with a gun" calls *SHOULD* be handled the same way, in jurisdictions where carry is legal. Sadly, too many police and dispatchers are both ignorant of the laws AND predisposed to think that ordinary people should not have guns, so they are generally happy to respond whenever there's a report of a man with a gun. Doesn't matter if the report doesn't suggest that anything illegal is taking place. They'll drop their donuts and hot-foot it over there anyway. And then they usually harrass the person who is lawfully carrying, rather than informing the idiot who called in the report that what they reported is completely legal, and asking them to please not bother the police with nuisance calls any more.

But ... that won't allow them to pursue their objective.

If this appears to be cop bashing, please keep in mind that I do not live in AZ, VT or AK. I know for a fact, first-hand, that in my state the state and local police make up rules against personal carry (open or concealed, but especially open) that go far beyond the minimal restrictions actually established by state law. If the basis of law is that "that which is not written as illegal is thus legal," then a law that says only that I must have a permit to "carry a handgun" must, since it does not specify "concealed," therefore allow open carry as well as concealed carry.

The police in my state do not view it quite that way.

 

[LAK]

In any state where open carry is perfectly legal the first question a dispatcher should ask a complaintant is, in effect; is this person engaged in or appear to be engaged in the commission of a crime? And if "yes"; what [specify] crime?.

If the caller can not articulate one of these, or simply insists "someone is wearing a gun" they should be advised that open carry is not a crime in [state]. A competent dispatcher should be able to tell if the caller starts attempting to build up some story in order to persuade a response.

---------------------------------

http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org/oldindex.html
http://www.gtr5.com
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[partyharty]

(coloradokevin)

Additionally, the area where I work is one of the highest crime areas in our region.
... At the very least, I think it is not inappropriate for an officer to drive by and check on the situation. Again, where would the liability fall if a shooting DID occur, and we had refused to respond?
(/coloradokevin)

I do have a problem with this although I believe that the rest that you have written was very well thought out.

#1 If someone has a gun carried openly, it is generally for an unlawful purpose.

This is an over generalization pretty much anywhere. I am not aware of the laws in CO but is it legal for someone to carry openly? If so then your above comment stands. Otherwise you have made an assumption prior to finding out the facts, thus the decision has already been (mostly) made prior to finding out what was going on. If it is in a high crime area I would want to carry simply for protection (although I would CC simply for the "surprise" factor).

#2 where would the liability fall if a shooting DID occur, and we had refused to respond?

This is easy, ON THE SHOOTER. Case law has already shown that the PD does not have an obligation to protect, or even to respond.

 

[44AMP]

Even though open carry may be legal....

There are a couple of potential pitfalls, other than underinformed LEOs. And they can happen without any action on your part, other than just being there, carrying openly.

Although different states use different language generally the two issues are called "brandishing a firearm" and "disturbing the peace"

The "brandishing" charge usually requires some form of agressive behavior, such as pointing the gun at someone or something, or generally waving it about. Now, you would not do this (at least without a valid reason) but you might be reported as doing it, by someone with an agenda, either against you personally, or against the principle of open carry. This can cause a bit of hassle for you, even if when the cops show up your gun is holstered and you are calm and reasonable. If the caller says you were doing it when they called, and you (naturally) say BS, then the cops have to decide who is telling the truth, and they could decide against you. If they do, you must comply with them, including submitting to arrest, but you do have legal recourse. If the decide the caller is lying, they will go after them for filing a false police report. Either way, it is likely that you are going to be detained until the situation is sorted out.

The other situation can be even more sticky. Suppose you are minding your own business, walking down the public street, carrying openly, and some idiot yells "He's got a gun!" People start running, maybe fall down, get hurt, panic ensues, maybe even someone runs infront of a speeding motorcar! The Horror!

In a perfect world you would not be charged, or if charged, would be exonerated, as you did nothing to disturb the peace, it was the idiot who yelled "he's got a gun!" who caused the trouble. BUT, we live in a far from perfect world. Be prepared for a big hassle, if you exercise your legal rights in an area that is not used to seeing people exercise their right to be openly armed.

You can also use the argument that your carrying a gun (in a completely legal manner) is a political statement, an exercise of your First Amendment rights. Just as burning a flag is legally protected speech, your legal carry could be as well. This might even go over better with some people than claiming a 2nd Amendment right (that they don't happen to believe in). I'm no lawyer, so this advice is worth what you pay for it, and it would be a wise move to have an actual attorney advise you on whether or not it is a valid argument before attempting to use it, but it makes sense to me.

 

[JesseL]

There are a couple of potential pitfalls, other than underinformed LEOs. And they can happen without any action on your part, other than just being there, carrying openly.

Since people have been open carrying for some time now and we should have a pretty good handle on what the real consequences result from OC, how often do these incidents actually happen?

It's funny that people like to speculate as if open carry was a new phenomenon. It's not. Most of the places where OC is legal, it's been legal for going on a hundred years or more.

 

[WayneConrad]

The other situation can be even more sticky. Suppose you are minding your own business, walking down the public street, carrying openly, and some idiot yells "He's got a gun!" People start running, maybe fall down, get hurt, panic ensues, maybe even someone runs infront of a speeding motorcar! The Horror!

I think I saw that sketch. Buster Keaton wasn't it? Or was it Charlie Chaplin?

Where did you get that from? Let's stick with reality.

 

[partyharty]

,<quote>The other situation can be even more sticky. Suppose you are minding your own business, walking down the public street, carrying openly, and some idiot yells "He's got a gun!" People start running, maybe fall down, get hurt, panic ensues, maybe even someone runs infront of a speeding motorcar! The Horror!</quote>

Regular and off-duty LEO's open carry all the time. Since I have yet to hear of the situation above I can pretty much rule out that this is going to happen simply because a "commoner" is carrying a weapon.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Regular and off-duty LEO's open carry all the time. Since I have yet to hear of the situation above I can pretty much rule out that this is going to happen simply because a "commoner" is carrying a weapon.

I have seen people I personally know as police officers openly carrying, with no uniform and no badge showing.

And funny thing -- no idiot yelled "He's got a gun!" People didn't start running, fall down, get hurt. No panic ensued, no one ran infront of a speeding motorcar! The Horror just didn't happen.

Maybe these people were ignorant of the fact they were supposed to panic?

 

[Intune]

And funny thing -- no idiot yelled "He's got a gun!" People didn't start running, fall down, get hurt. No panic ensued, no one ran infront of a speeding motorcar! The Horror just didn't happen.

Maybe these people were ignorant of the fact they were supposed to panic?

Dang, you're smooth Vern. But, if Halley's Comet was streaking across the skies during a full solar eclipse while an F5 tornado was raging and a tsunami was bearing down on us during a 7.5 earthquake and someone reported your OC or CCW gun... I'd have to haul you in... Public safety, don'tchaknow!

We'll sort this out down at the station & don't you get uppity with me about the law whippersnapper.

P.S. If you were born before '58, I'll come up with another label. But I still gotta take you in. You, you,... Public Disturbance you! :banghead:

 

[Blackbeard]

You could start making your own "man with a gun" 911 calls every time you see a LEO carrying.

"Yes, he's dressed all in black and has a paramilitary style hat. He also appears to have a radio so there may be others. I don't know what they're planning."