Philadelphia Police Threaten To Kill Open Carrier

[djg0770 481]

Speak for yourself junior. There are plenty of people who argue for the rights as Americans who think people who carry guns should have a little instruction.

 

I think people who speak should have a little instruction as well.

[SpecialK 193]

So Libel and Slander should be ok too? How about kiddie porn? First Amendment. You have to take every issue to the very absurd. Because that is what the anti gun people do.

 

libel, slander and kiddie porn are all things that should have been taken care of with Amendments to the Constitution. The Supreme Court giving itself Judicial Review then using that self appointed power to make decision is one of the major flaws of this Country. The Constitution is no longer applicable unfortunately. To often is it referred to as an "Historic Document" and not The Supreme Law of The Land.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

I agree that the police should've known the law before hand and that the first officers on scene did a terrible job communicating and understanding the situation. Your absolutely right, the civilian did offer his license and drivers license to verify it was him but the officer was too busy being a hot head. I also do a terrible job in trying to make my point in my first post.

 

we dont know what would have happened but if it was me I would have followed the directions, did what the officer told me to do. He probably would have taken the firearm from me and his hostile attitude and behavior(i would hope) would have dropped down a level or two. At this point I would have given him my creditials and began to explain why I was OC and how I am not breaking any laws.

 

Thats just me, I love to kill people with kindness. I feel it gets the point across much better then being argumentitive. I personally feel this sargent would have felt dumb for pointing his weapon at the civilian and would have walked away with more knowledge then he is now and the whole thing would have been 5 minutes.

 

-Scott

You would probably be right most of the time, and this guy just may have had his head 1s from being shot off. The way i see it, gun is pointed at me, either way right or wrong i'm gonna do what he says. People think more rash when there not feeling threatened too. Do i think this guy is nuts absolutely, but i don't think he was wrong. He proved his point i guess..

 

Let me ask this, if this was in Florida could the OC'er have shot the cop? Since its legal to defend your life when u feel it is being threatened there?

[JimmyAGR 54]

So Libel and Slander should be ok too? How about kiddie porn? First Amendment. You have to take every issue to the very absurd. Because that is what the anti gun people do.

 

 

There are laws against libel and slander as well as kiddie porn. He was not breaking a law. If he was watching kiddie pawn while OC then the cop would have been in the right. So should they regulate what gets said on a forum because it might cause someone undue stress? You can not pick and choose what parts of the Constitution you want to uphold. It is a package deal.

[DevsAdvocate 112]

oh, I am not defending these LEO in any way. they are completely out of line, and I would of probably reacted the same way. But I would of not put myself in that position to look for trouble in the first place.

 

But you cannot expect the LEO to know every law. Once again, that is what the courts are for. They make mistakes. I make mistakes. I do not know 100% of my job. Anyone that says they know everything is an ignorant liar. Lawyers dont know everything, Cops dont know everything, accountants do not know everything. Having the expectation of Law Enforcement to know every law is irrational. It is perhaps great to think that they should know it all, but they do not. They are people like you and me.

 

That's unacceptable. How can you enforce something you don't know?

[PeteF 1,044]

Now lets say you are an LEO... you are driving your car, you see someone with a gun strapped on their hip, are you not going to get suspicious?

 

 

This is exactly what got the officer in NY shot by the transit cop. Some one saw an plain clothes cop with a rifle, yelled "gun"

and that's when the undercover officer got shot.

 

It's an "area" mentality thing. I was watching "Alaska state troopers" and they handle interactions with people with firearms completely differently. Just because you see a gun doesn't mean anything wrong is occurring. Around here a gun seen in public is a major offense even if nothing is occurring.

[SpecialK 193]

Speak for yourself junior. There are plenty of people who argue for the rights as Americans who think people who carry guns should have a little instruction.

 

advocating laws for mandatory instruction to bear arms is the exact same as advocating 15 round magazine limitations. They are both "reasonable restrictions" on a Right that should not be tolerated.

 

I always have to remember how far behind NJ is when talking on these forums. When I lived in Colorado we fought for getting rid of the need for a CCW permit. Here you just fight to have one with a ton of restrictions, training and fees.

 

Being afraid of a situation that you cannot imagine doesn't make your opinions right grandpa

[bbk 188]

What you said Pete has been said prior in the thread, and I think a lot of people forget that point. According to principle, what the individual was doing was lawful, but in the context it was stupid (albeit lawful).

 

The thing about standing up for one's principles is that the victors are the ones who choose whether or not to make their specific actions morally/lawfully 'right' or wrong.' So, in five or ten or twenty years, if NJ and the surrounding area gets to be a gun-friendly state, would it turn out that this individual was a pioneer? Maybe. But for such a 'battle' that we, as a community, are facing in making this a more gun-friendly area, we have to be more prudent in our decision-making.

 

ETA: Removed a portion of the original post as it was based on assumption and not facts.

[PeteF 1,044]

But you cannot expect the LEO to know every law. Once again, that is what the courts are for. They make mistakes. I make mistakes. I do not know 100% of my job. Anyone that says they know everything is an ignorant liar. Lawyers dont know everything, Cops dont know everything, accountants do not know everything. Having the expectation of Law Enforcement to know every law is irrational. It is perhaps great to think that they should know it all, but they do not. They are people like you and me.

 

But when you make a mistake you don't point a loaded weapon at someone, and threaten to kill them. How often do we here about people at ranges or stores in NJ getting swept by the muzzle of a firearm. The first cop should be fired and prosecuted for illegally threatening the life of the person.

[Maksim 1,504]

advocating laws for mandatory instruction to bear arms is the exact same as advocating 15 round magazine limitations. They are both "reasonable restrictions" on a Right that should not be tolerated.

 

I always have to remember how far behind NJ is when talking on these forums. When I lived in Colorado we fought for getting rid of the need for a CCW permit. Here you just fight to have one with a ton of restrictions, training and fees.

 

Being afraid of a situation that you cannot imagine doesn't make your opinions right grandpa

 

 

Goes both ways Kevin. In a small state like NJ, where there are 6 million plus people, within a 2 hour drive, the situation is completely different than that of Rural CO. If NJ was all farmland, I would be singing a different tune. But the fact of the matter is, there are alot more hoodrats in NJ, than in alot of other places. That is the problem. Go walk through Philadelphia, you will quickly see. It is the same as walking in NYC with a gun on your hip. People in NJ are not polite townspeople. We are pissed off at Philly and NY people driving on the pike or the parkway to our beaches, causing traffic.

[mipafox 438]

Not commenting on the dude in Philly. But I thought I would provide a little of my perspective.

 

I carry outside waistband, on my hip, every day. For almost three years. And I go to stores every day of the week. Usually more than one. I need fresh food. I carry everywhere I go except the post office. During every season except the winter, you would call this open carry. Because I often wear a coat during the winter, but not always then either. Don't need a coat for running into a store and don't like wearing them inside a car.

 

I spend most of my time in Lehigh Valley. But have been everywhere east of Harrisburg (including Harrisburg) from north to south, and never had any problem - including Philly. When I go to my Wegmans, which is at least twice a week, about 1/4 to 1/3 of the cars in the parking lot have NJ plates (sprinkled with NY plates). When I go to my bank, at least 1/3 of the plates in the parking lot are from NJ or NY. Yes, I carry inside my bank. Yes, on my hip, in the open. To my knowledge, nobody has ever called the cops on me over the past 3 years. One time, I did have a cop stalk me into a state store, but he never even approached me.

 

I have had people ask me questions about it or give me thumbs-up about once every other month or so. Particaularly women. I met two women that wanted to carry but never got around to figuring out the whole process to get a license to carry firearms. One time a black woman in line at Walmart seemed nervous because she thought I was security and maybe following her. Other than that, nothing negative has ever happened.

 

So, people will not freak out if you carry a gun on your hip. Even thousands of people from NJ and NY, over a period of years, even inside banks.

 

If you think it's a bad idea, that's fine. If you think it will instantly cause widespread panic outside of some place "out west," you are simply uniformed.

[PeteF 1,044]

Maybe ill word it differently so you cant skirt around my point. A gun can kill directly. Words can kill indirectly. However it would be the gun directly killing the guy with the words.

 

My opinion is that people who are allowed to carry should have a little instruction/class. I think a 1 hour class should do it. It won't hurt, it will only help

 

 

I agree that anyone who decides to carry, or even to own a gun should have some kind of training and I think anyone who doesn't is a moron. My problem is that YOU should decide to take the training, not have it mandated by the gov. Once they mandate something, they regulate it and all of a sudden a right becomes a privilege granted by the government.

[Maksim 1,504]

But when you make a mistake you don't point a loaded weapon at someone, and threaten to kill them. How often do we here about people at ranges or stores in NJ getting swept by the muzzle of a firearm. The first cop should be fired and prosecuted for illegally threatening the life of the person.

 

 

If there is a muzzle pointed at me at the range, bet your ass my hand is on the holster to reach for mine. This is why I hate shooting at public ranges. Way too often do we get swept.

 

The cop was unaware of the law. He believes it is illegal to OC in Philly. Knowing that, if you believe that it is illegal to Open Carry in your town, and probably no one ever does, do you react differently?

 

Granted I would not use foul language, I would absolutely be interested as to why someone is carrying. Same example... if you are carrying a strapped rifle in the middle of major NJ city, do you expect any different result?

[Babaganoosh 192]

I think people who speak should have a little instruction as well.

 

We do, it's called school.

[Anselmo 87]

But when you make a mistake you don't point a loaded weapon at someone, and threaten to kill them. How often do we here about people at ranges or stores in NJ getting swept by the muzzle of a firearm. The first cop should be fired and prosecuted for illegally threatening the life of the person.

 

I can't agree with this. If the LEO and OCer are both holstered, the LEO is equal. The LEO has to have the upper hand and take charge. The LEO wants to question the OCer for suspicion of illegal activity. Of course the LEO would draw and take charge. The OCer has a gun and the LEO does not know his intentions. If the LEO knew there was no illegal intentions there would be no reason to talk to the OCer to begin with.

 

Swept at the range is not equivalent to an LEO drawing on you.

[JimmyAGR 54]

Goes both ways Kevin. In a small state like NJ, where there are 6 million plus people, within a 2 hour drive, the situation is completely different than that of Rural CO. If NJ was all farmland, I would be singing a different tune. But the fact of the matter is, there are alot more hoodrats in NJ, than in alot of other places. That is the problem. Go walk through Philadelphia, you will quickly see. It is the same as walking in NYC with a gun on your hip. People in NJ are not polite townspeople. We are pissed off at Philly and NY people driving on the pike or the parkway to our beaches, causing traffic.

 

Maks I drive for work everyday and see asshats on the roads all the time. Do I get pissed? Yes. Do I curse? Yes. Does that mean I would shoot them if I was OC or CCW? I don't think so. Have you ever driven in traffic in Miami, no one gets shot. Saying that we have congestion and it's a reason we can't have sensible laws like America just feeds into the arguments that the anti's use.

[The Dark Knight 11]

To be quite honest, I think open carry is a bad idea for most. Don't get me wrong, I do NOT think it should be illegal, but I do agree that most people who open carry are not actually prepared to do so. The typical gun board self defense fantasy is always "guy with a knife 30 yards away" but real life isn't like that.

 

Unless people have trained and practiced gun retention in a hand to hand struggle, they really are asking for trouble when they open carry should someone try to snatch it from them. Cops have training in this. Typical fat old guy with a shiny 1911 on his hip probably hasn't. It really doesn't take a whole lot to get a gun snatched from you. And some of these people probably couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag.

 

I just hope that those who do open carry at least are aware of this and attempt to practice retention in a struggle.

[Maksim 1,504]

Maks I drive for work everyday and see asshats on the roads all the time. Do I get pissed? Yes. Do I curse? Yes. Does that mean I would shoot them if I was OC or CCW? I don't think so. Have you ever driven in traffic in Miami, no one gets shot. Saying that we have congestion and it's a reason we can't have sensible laws like America just feeds into the arguments that the anti's use.

 

 

I don't disagree with you at all. I agree 100%. I have no problem with people carrying. At all. In fact, I wish everyone carried. Everyone with a bit of instruction. I just do not believe having someone take a basic intro course to CCW, or even an online exam (such as for drivers license) is unreasonable. Ie, how many people who have CCW's actually know all the CCW laws?

 

How many people in NJ believe the FID gives them the ability to carry?

 

Having someone complete a FREE basic firearms safety and carry course is not unreasonable a requirement, and does not infringe on any rights.

[axeman_g 128]

Being shot for an expression of your rights, seems a little extreme to me

 

"Tell that to all the people in the military and the people who died in fighting to found the USA. I think they would disagree. "

 

Please understand that I believe there is a difference between expressing your rights and fighting for your rights. This is not fighting for your rights, this is provoking a scene where it is not needed. He could have simply walked into the local precinct and explained that he is going to OC, the locals would have know what is going on and whammo....

 

"No Mam, we are not going to come out to see the man with the gun, it is holstered and that is legal."

[JimmyAGR 54]

I don't disagree with you at all. I agree 100%. I have no problem with people carrying. At all. In fact, I wish everyone carried. Everyone with a bit of instruction. I just do not believe having someone take a basic intro course to CCW, or even an online exam (such as for drivers license) is unreasonable. Ie, how many people who have CCW's actually know all the CCW laws?

 

How many people in NJ believe the FID gives them the ability to carry?

 

Having someone complete a FREE basic firearms safety and carry course is not unreasonable a requirement, and does not infringe on any rights.

 

Maks, I agree some people who carry could be scary. A lot of drivers are scary, I ride a motorcycle so I am more careful when there are cars around. I am also not crazy about some people I end up riding with. Having them have to pass a test did nothing to stop idiots from getting behind the wheel or handlebars. Driving is not a right, self preservation is. Testing someone for a drivers license is not violating the Constitution.

[Maksim 1,504]

Maks, I agree some people who carry could be scary. A lot of drivers are scary, I ride a motorcycle so I am more careful when there are cars around. I am also not crazy about some people I end up riding with. Having them have to pass a test did nothing to stop idiots from getting behind the wheel or handlebars. Driving is not a right, self preservation is. Testing someone for a drivers license is not violating the Constitution.

 

and that is exactly how I feel about safety class, I do not believe it is a violation of rights. =) At least the vision test keeps SOME drivers away. =)

[mipafox 438]

Maks, I agree some people who carry could be scary. A lot of drivers are scary, I ride a motorcycle so I am more careful when there are cars around. I am also not crazy about some people I end up riding with.

 

I agree. And yet, somehow, by a miracle, nothing seems to happen. Even though about 1/20 carry outside of NJ, MD, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Cali.

 

Referring to carry of firearms, certainly not riding bikes or driving cars. And a hell of a lot more people carry than ride.

[tony357 386]

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

He could have simply walked into the local precinct and explained that he is going to OC, the locals would have know what is going on and whammo....

 

"No Mam, we are not going to come out to see the man with the gun, it is holstered and that is legal."

 

 

Again, you are missing the point. It was not (and should not be) incumbent on the OCer to notify LE that he was going to exercise a right. It was incumbent on the LEO to know the law and that in the absence of RAS he had no right to stop the OCer and/or check his credentials. The whole scene should have happened like you portary in your last sentence, with no officer involvement.

 

I stated before that it was unrealistic to expect every LEO to know all the laws - and I stand by that. But when it comes to something potentially as deadly as firearms, there is good reason for them to be well versed in the law governing them. MPOTEC (Municipal Officers Training and Education Commission) realized that and specifically addressed the issue in their annual training agenda. I also pointed out that because of a previous encounter with this same OCer, the Philly PD generated their own internal document about the same topic. Obviously the mindset at the Philly PD about training is the same as it is about people's rights.

 

One last comment about the training component for civilians. The training component that a lot of states mandate is nothing more than a "lick & a promise". To become proficient and safe with a firearm requires constant use and study. I would say that any responsible gun owner takes on that responsibility, without it being mandated. Statistics would seem to bear me out. To those that would hold up the training that LEO's get as the ultimate, FBI studies have shown that in officer involved shootings the LEO hits his intended target 23% of the time. The hit ratio for civilian involved shootings is above 60%.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[axeman_g 128]

I personally think OC is great, done it myself while living in Ga. Does not cause much of an issue in most places. I had one suburban mommy give me the evil eye at a filing station once, but it could have been because I was checking out her caboose and she caught me, but it might not have been. The issue I have with EXPRESSING your right to OC is the choice of local, why in Philly? The answer is clearly to provoke a scene. I still say he could have achieved more education with the LEO if he had met with them first. In a high crime environment, which is already using stop and search techniques, why would you even want to put yourself in that situation.

 

How about the basic concept of widsom. As a CCW permit holder you are taught to show restraint, judgement and patience. Provoking a OC encounter flies in the face of those concepts. Not wise...

 

I would not go to a Lilith Fair festival and scream I hate women.... It would be expressing my first amendment right, but not wise.

[axeman_g 128]

Again, you are missing the point. It was not (and should not be) incumbent on the OCer to notify LE that he was going to exercise a right. It was incumbent on the LEO to know the law and that in the absence of RAS he had no right to stop the OCer and/or check his credentials. The whole scene should have happened like you portray in your last sentence, with no officer involvement.

 

Bob... I believe your right, but I am sorry if this insults any LEO here, but you are placing to much optimism into the hiring practices of the City of Philadelphia. Must of these guys failed the longshoreman local test, so they became cops. If they were smarter they would not be working for the city of Philly. LEO are usually bright, energetic and enthusiastic... in other parts of the world, not in Philly. These guys are not going to know EVERY LAW. If they did they would have become a LAWYER and not a patrolman. I am sure there are the scattered few that are on it... this OC character found one that was clearly not. Philly does not hire brains there, they hire braun and attitude for a reason. Leadership gives them the freedom to go out and clean house on the citizens, bad and good. Then the leadership clears the issues their patrolmen create at a later date, with the lawyers if necessary. This is the way they are fighting crime here, by being the baddest gang bangers in town.

 

I work in Philly every day, often with city LEO/FIRE/OEM. I am often humored/frightened at the city LEO.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

I still say he could have achieved more education with the LEO if he had met with them first.

 

 

Maybe I have a slight advantage because I've followed this fellow's exploits, from the beginning, on the PAFOA forum. He did indeed try to "educate" the Philly PD prior to the incident we are discussing.

 

As a result of his first stop (where his gun was illegally confiscated BTW) he met numerous times with the Philly PD in an effort to get them to learn the laws regarding OC. The internal bulletin generated was the direct result of those meetings, so someone at the PD was concerned, or just paying him lip service. Given the number of officers and supervisors at the scene of his latest episode, that had no clue whether he was in the right or wrong, I'd have to say that sadly, it must have been the latter.

 

How do you expect people to get acclimated to the sight of a gun, and thus become more familiar with the right and the responsibility that goes with that right, if you keep trying to "regionalize" it. Are the rights guaranteed under the constitution somehow diminished as the population increases? Nobody is accusing this kid of using good judgement, but likewise he shouldn't be castigated for exercising a right we all wish we could, here in NJ.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[axeman_g 128]

How do you expect people to get acclimated to the sight of a gun, and thus become more familiar with the right and the responsibility that goes with that right, if you keep trying to "regionalize" it. Are the rights guaranteed under the constitution somehow diminished as the population increases? Nobody is accusing this kid of using good judgement, but likewise he shouldn't be castigated for exercising a right we all wish we could, here in NJ.

 

Ok... I concede that I am regionalizing it. Maybe because I believe this area sucks and OC or CCW will NEVER happen. I come from a free state and I miss having my liberty 100%... but as of right now I will not change it for reasons personal to me. And this incident did not happen in NJ, it happened in a free state and they still have issues with it. And like you pointed out, due to a lack of education on the subject. I get that.

 

You know what, I never OC'd in downtown Atlanta. I would not suggest OC in New Orleans... or Phoenix either. It is just not necessary... so why? Sure, you can do it. I bet you nothing would happen... But then again, you dont get to IQ test all the LEO out there.

 

I quess my beef is why even OC, if you have a CCW, and you must have a CCW in PA to OC, why? Other then to create a scene... why? Is causing a furor with Philly LEO really garnering a new light for 2a rights? Seems to me he is making our collective fight harder by being a tool.

[PeteF 1,044]

I can't agree with this. If the LEO and OCer are both holstered, the LEO is equal. The LEO has to have the upper hand and take charge. The LEO wants to question the OCer for suspicion of illegal activity. Of course the LEO would draw and take charge. The OCer has a gun and the LEO does not know his intentions. If the LEO knew there was no illegal intentions there would be no reason to talk to the OCer to begin with.

 

Swept at the range is not equivalent to an LEO drawing on you.

 

Why is that? Will a gun at the range kill you any less than a cops gun? Having a gun pointed at you is having a gun pointed at you! Why does the cop need to have the upper hand? Why does the cop need to draw a gun when there is no threat to him or anyone else? A gun in a holster is not a threat. By PAs own laws, a LEO does not have the authority to stop an open carrier, who has done nothing else to arouse suspicion.

 

If the gun was in the guys HAND that is a completely different story.

 

I have no problem with cops. (well except if they are in my rearview mirror)

I am not bashing cops in general, just cops who blow things all out of proportion to "assert their authority".

 

Look at it this way, if you are pulled over for a broken taillight would you think it is reasonable to have a gun pointed at you? I don't think so. When a cop pulls his gun it needs to be in response to an actual threat.

[PeteF 1,044]

I quess my beef is why even OC, if you have a CCW, and you must have a CCW in PA to OC, why?

 

 

You don't need a LTCF to open carry in Pa, ONLY in Philadelphia. Since this rule is specific to Philly you would think

Philly cops would know the ins and outs of it.