I never defended any officer violating anyone's rights, in fact I would be the first to call for his job, I have said that I would wait for the full story. Unlike you, I am not going to judge an officer after watching a 30 second video. I just watched a video the other day broadcast by the media that appeared to show officers shooting at an unarmed man walking away from them, however on another car video you can clearly see the suspect pointing a pistol behind himself shooting toward officers......a video does not always tell the entire story, I'd like to see what happened before they started the video and what occurred after.....

And now you are talking garbage......I never said anyone should be arrested because there is a chance he could be any kind of criminal.......ask questions so you can determine if the guy is a threat, if he isn't then leave him alone.

Cdoan, you apparently have an issue with authority and American law enforcement. My conversation with you is finished. My only hope is that everyone is safe and responsible with firearms so we can continue the freedoms we have to own them. This isn't about ego or pride, but you can go ahead and assume it is if you want.

Interesting... I have never had an issue with an officer, and clearly stated that I am respectful and accommodating to any and all officers. And you take that to mean I have a problem with authority?

I think maybe you have an ego problem.

You seem to think it is ok for you to justify an officer's actions, while condemning a citizens actions, but then pretend you are neutral until the "facts come out"? That is a joke. One only need to look through your past posts. All there in print.

Yes, I know you are done. You pull BS out of your backside(serial killers... neutral stance... lol), post misleading information to try to back your statement up, insult me, make wrong assumptions about me that have no factual basis (i.e. no posts I have made would support your accusations), refuse to provide facts to back up your BS, refuse to admit your statement was ridiculous, and conclude by taking your ball and going home.

I've previously stated that you appear to be a good guy, and good police officer, and that I appreciate your service, but I don't agree with any attitude that places police, or any other citizen, above fellow citizens. You have called me, and/or insinuated that I am, a cop hater, unintelligent, inexperienced, lacking in knowledge, and disrespectful of authority.

Sucks being on a message board, eh? It's easier to just talk louder over someone than to intelligently discuss opinions.

when you say what predator goes hunting after armed people? How do you think police officers are shot killed exactly? They are armed and people know it and yet they still go after them or try to get away from them just go to Officer Down Memorial Page www.odmp.org There is over a 100 years worth of officers with firearms being killed with criminals with firearms.

If you can legally possess a gun due to not having a felony conviction or domestic violence conviction then you should have a gun if you want one.

I don't know why you want to give up the element of surprise.

People make a comparison and say "well if the cops carry a gun openly then I should too" The whole premise behind that is because cops wear badges and patches so its no secret they are carrying a gun and there is no element of surprise when facing a criminal.

How are you supposed to tell just by looking at people and tell which ones have a criminal history and which don't?

Concho I am an open carry advocate too, and a lot of what you are saying makes sense. This statement for one, sadly 15 years ago before the militarization of the law enforcement community would have been true. However incident after incident across this country shows they are more likely to harass people. The last run on guns shows a huge amount of city officers against private ownership but the county sheriffs for supporting the Constitution. http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/...l-measures?lite
Perhaps not the rank and file Police as a whole but those in charge. I know a lot of good officers that not only support the Constitution but give most of us lessons on it. A lot are friends and family, and as policy I give a pocket sized copy of the Constitution to my new guys.

The arguments in here won't get resolved or sway the opinion of either you or cdoan, no one wins an argument, calling names and trying to belittle the other (that is for cdoan as well) isn't going to improve the situation. Get together have a cup of coffee and listen to each other, don't try to prove the other wrong, instead try to hear why they believe what they do. Infighting among ourselves isn't going to help the cause at any level, Franklin's appeal applies here.




Also something for all the LEOs (and non-LEOs), to protect and serve has been gone awhile, it is now uphold the law. Huge difference when you boil it down. Officers have no duty to protect the citizens of this country. That is the law of the land.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 04-278
http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/04-278.pdf
(That is the Supreme Court Argument that state officers have no duty to stop a violent crime, even when the victim has a protection order against the perp.)



http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magaz...;issue_id=72004

This is the best reason to carry for a citizen, and remember unless you are a Military LEO you are a civilian yourself. I do know most LEOs would disregard this as nonsense and save a life if they can, but they have no duty to do so.

Also recent voting events in Colorado should dismiss the thought that Gun Control laws are going to be taken lightly by the populace. (Think I mentioned that 3 pages ago.)

For the first part:
Please link me to the open carry demonstrator that shot and/or killed a police officer. Or any other human, for that matter. Yes, police get murdered with guns. Everyone does. That is not any sort of support of police being allowed to detain and illegally arrest open carry demonstrators, just in case they are serial killers.

Having a problem with police harassing law abiding citizens, and abusing their power to punish law abiding citizens, is not the same as saying police have no right to check a situation out.

Furthermore, having a problem with police harassing law abiding citizens yada yada yada is not the same as wanting police to be killed.

Listing murder victims is kind of offensive. If you list the police that were killed by open carry demonstrators, I'd see a point to it. Maybe we can get a list of all people ever killed by a gun, then go on bus tour to read the list in different cities, and try to convince everyone that if only the police were allowed to have guns, then the public would be SAFE. (Wouldn't convince anyone that observes Chicago.)

I'd prefer to use rational thought. If someone wants to murder a police officer, are they gonna sneak up and shoot him, or open carry demonstrate, then tell the police he is just exercising his rights, then tell the police to eff off, then get cuffed and arrested, then...

Here's some common sense for all police. Do you know how to determine if an open carry demonstrator that you are called to investigate is a dangerous criminal? Ask yourself this question: did he shoot at you when you rolled up? No? Hmmmm... Probably not a murdering psychopath. Harsh, I know. But I'd feel comfortable walking up to a guy carrying an AR, and confident in my ability to determine if he is a deranged killer or not. I guess I just expect that anyone who is a police officer should have the same confidence around fellow citizens. Before you get all upset and call me cop hater, just go watch the video. I am 100% confident I could have handled the job of police officer better than he did. Now you can call me armchair quarterback.

Next you talk about the tactical aspect of open carrying. Guess what. I also have a personal opinion. Want to know it? I don't open carry, as it makes me a target, and eliminates the element of surprise. Odds are that if I ever have to use a firearm in defense of my life, and am successful in surviving, one of those 2 reasons will have been why. (Hopefully, it never happens.) Key word? PERSONAL. It's my opinion, so I apply it to myself. Who am I to put limitations on my fellow citizens? I trust they can each handle their own decisions. As long as that decision doesn't harm me (and what if scenarios are not harm... They are emotional), then it's pretty much none of my business.

Your last question is the best one:

"How are you supposed to tell just by looking at people and tell which ones have a criminal history and which don't?"

How could that possibly be accomplished? It can't. It's an insurmountable, impossible thing to do in a free society. If you can't be trusted with a gun, then you can't be trusted, period, and should be locked up or under supervision.

I've been extremely clear in stating I don't think that cops should just not do anything until someone gets shot, and should investigate. But I'm also clear in stating that once it is OBVIOUS that the person is not a danger, then police should NOT abuse their power and punish the law abiding citizen with a BS arrest. They should let them go on their way. Even if they are a prick.

Am I rude to cops? No. I'm nice and respectful of everyone. Do I think it's ok for people to be rude to cops? No. I think everyone should be nice and respectful to everyone. If someone is rude to a cop, do I think that the cop should be allowed to be rude back? No. They should get over it. Everyone has to eat crap from someone. Not everyone has the power to arrest someone for it. If you're willing to arrest someone for being an a-hole, then I don't think you are worthy of being a police officer. But that's just my personal opinion.

So because someone doesn't instantly shoot at you the moment they see you means they aren't going to?

How close should you get to somebody with a rifle to determine their intent exactly?

Like Robbery suspects that display a gun and doesn't shoot, gets what they want then shoot and kill someone? Kind of like that?

Or maybe a Mental Health Consumer who is standing there in the street and doesn't fire upon arrival at officers then decides to do it 5 mins in the conversation while they are talking him down.

The way they are going about Open Carry and use the 2nd amendment is in comparison to Westboro Baptist does to the 1st amendment. Just hide behind it. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

This kind junk is what ruins it for everyone else.

You're comparing law abiding open carry protesters with murderers. I again request: PLEASE link me to the murderer that went open carrying, got police response, then started killing.

And I already know you compare open carriers to people like the westboro church crazies. That's a huge issue.

Once again how do you know what someone's intent is and whether they are apart of the open carry group or some nut?

So a thug carrying around a rifle on the street can claim he is an open carry advocate and heaven forbid we figure out who he is and how do you tell the difference until he commits a crime?

Especially with a bunch of people saying you can't even question them to find out?

Officers supposed to be mind readers or memorize every person they come in contact with criminal history and or any other crime they committed since the last contact?

Your right the Westboro people are complete idiots. You know what they are exercising their 1st amendment rights according to them just like Open Carry is exercising 2nd amendment according to them.

Doesn't mean that it makes it the right thing to do.

Thugs open carrying rifles.

I can't argue with you. You win.

Yeah like Sam Adams and those guys.

I'm not talking about one of the real group members open carry people I'm talking about a literal thug/felon.

Say he wants to open carry a rifle and he says he is part of the open carry movement (which he is not, thought you could figure that out by the context) according to most people in this movement the officers shouldn't be able to even question him on his motives and whether or not he can even possess a firearm?

Sex offenders that claim to join the movement, can they not be questioned while walking around carrying a rifle?

Sam Adams he brews great beer. (yes I realize you are talking about the second president)

I think you mean John Adams

After watching a lot of the open carry videos, I don't see where you get that these members don't think they should be questioned. They are fully aware that they will be questioned, but not harassed and bullied. But at the same time these people aren't going to be respectful to a LEO that is disrespectful. They have the "give respect and get respect" attitude.

No I did not mean John, he didn't take up arms with the fervor that his cousin, Samuel Adams (the leader of the Boston resistance that would become the Revolutionary War), he also signed the Declaration... and less than a month later in front of the Philadelphia State House on 1 August a fairly famous quote some have likely heard comes from Sam not John.

I added the emphasis...

(And I got a little giggle seeing "Originally posted by Samuel Adams" Lol)

The officers were disrespectful because they did what exactly? Cursed at people? Talked about their mama? Smacked them in the head? Tased them randomly?

You have people on video screaming for a name and badge number like he is some undercover informant? My gosh the man wears his name on his shirt with one inch letters.

But having rights also means having the responsibility to know when and how to exercise them and how to protect them. Do many law enforcement need more education and training on Texas' current gun laws? Yes. But antagonizing and pushing the envelope is a good way to get laws passed so we lose options in the future.

Glad you caught that.

Hey Cardbb4144... I just looked over your very few posts, and I have a question for you.

Have you ever read this guide:
http://86262a2d5a8678610839-0d14e49ee6aa...ide%20PDF-1.pdf

Because you seem to be following it to a T. Good job!!!!

Big negative there ghost rider. Your barking up the wrong tree. I'm an NRA member and believe everyone should have firearm that is not a felon and wants one.

Step further I don't understand why more people don't have a CHL and for those that do why they don't take it with them everywhere in public. For those that don't they are too trusting of criminals.

I don't see the need to confront officers to illicit a reaction.

Read all the open carry literature you want and then with a straight face try and tell me they aren't constantly attacking officers.

Please watch this video and tell me that they are attacking officers.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6LRteKrvRWc

Or maybe this one

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=related&v=QzIPfvkagDQ

Dude, I am super confused about that second video... How in the world can those police feel like that was a thorough investigation of the open carry demonstrator?!?!? I mean, they didn't arrest him for disorderly conduct/obstruction/resisting arrest/insert any other BS charge, so how the heck did they determine he wasn't a serial killer or thug?

Oh, they used common sense!!!!! What an amazing idea.

Because the open carry people are just trying for their 5 seconds in the spotlight.....this isn't about open carry or rights, it's about getting on you-tube and trying to irritate police.

By-the-Way, tell the open carry folks Thanks, they got a real reaction, Star Bucks CEO made a statement today that gun toters, even licensed one aren't welcome there.......way-to-go guys!

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/09/18/starbucks-coffee-guns-ceo-schultz/2829937/