Open Carry Phily Incident Charges Filed

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

It is legal for a LTCF holder to openly carry a holstered weapon within the state of Pennsylvania.

 

 

Ken, just an FYI - you can legally open carry anywhere (other than prohibited zones: schools, federal buildings, etc) in PA, except in a vehicle or in Philadelphia, without a LTCF. Phila is a city of the first class and the UFA (Uniform Firearms Act) allows that exception, you must have a LTCF to carry openly or concealed in Philly.

 

And to the OP: Nobody said anything about Probable Cause. RAS is a lower rationale than PC and the actor didn't even meet that. I repeat: The officer had no right to even stop this guy, let alone treat him as they did.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[Soju 153]

As I have said before, it is the officers JOB to know the laws he is trying to enforce. Of course you can't know every law, but then you don't just go around trying to enforce things on a whim when you don't know what you are enforcing. So right away the officer is wrong. Forget for a second that he is a police officer, or a government employee, or anything. And look at it from the simple standpoint of someone doing their job they are supposed to be trained to do. He failed in this very simple task. Plain and simple. He failed to do his job in almost every capacity.

 

I personally have not encountered this on such a call but have on others.. We get called to fights, kids breaking windows, etc and have seen people walking down the street who were involved like nothing happened..

 

So you haven't, and then you give a completely different and irrelevant scenario (a specific crime has been committed where the officers are around having been called, AND no gun is present) as justification for you reasoning? Well that reasoning holds no water, because it isn't rational, because it is irrelevant. That is called a red herring my friend.

 

You can make all the justifications in the world but none of them will change the fact that the officers had no reason to stop him or detain him, and even less to threaten him. Period. And they did so either because they were abusing their power, or because they didn't know the laws.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

I know you guys on here are all for your right to carry and all that.. I am all for easing up laws to attain guns for recreational and home defense.. but I disagree with carrying a weapon as a civilian.. I know I will get bashed for it but as a cop that is my standpoint..

 

WHAT??? It is not US GUYS, it's not a privilege, it is a RIGHT. Not sure what part of the 2A is so hard to understand by many, but if you look at other states and there respect to the 2A and see how crime statistics correlate, lets call them "Friendly States" I would think any law enforcement officer would not object to Law Abiding Citizens CC/OC.

 

Please tell me 1 Gun Law that actually prevents crime because the way I see it, criminals don't care about the law or they wouldn't be breaking it in the first place, Gun Laws only restrict Law Abiding Citizens, Period.

 

Harry

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

Streaming Live, right now...

 

http://www.streamingthe.net/WPHT-The-Big-Talker-1210-AM-Philadelphia/p/5316

[vladtepes 1,060]

for what it's worth I think there are strategical advantages and disadvantages to open carry.. it is likely this individual was fishing.. as most who open carry in Philadelphia do... even when I am "open carrying" in PA.. when I get out of the vehicle in Philly I will generally make sure my shirt is over my weapon.. to me.. an urban area that is of high crime would not be an area where openly carrying would be an advantage.. the environment there can be extremely unpredictable and I would prefer not to stand out unless I had to all of the sudden due to some situation.... and further I sadly admit I would rather NOT initiate Philly LEO contact.... the account here also plays into why I do not blatantly open carry..

 

in more rural PA like where I took pictures of the farm houses and all.. I would without question openly carry.. I feel it unlikely I would ever even need the firearm.. and I find the community to be more pro-2a.. open carry is generally more comfortable.. so I would likely open carry for comfort.. I am no authority on the matter.. but seems to me it would be to your advantage to make the decision on all variables.. not that you feel like bucking the system that day.... doesn't make the Philly LEO right.. their actions were inexcusable.. but just saying..

[SpecialK 193]

Streaming Live, right now...

 

http://www.streamingthe.net/WPHT-The-Big-Talker-1210-AM-Philadelphia/p/5316

 

listening now, thanks for the heads up!

[bry@n 195]

IDK.. I am a cop and this Officer doesn't seem like he started off wrong.. The guy carrying was not following orders whatsoever.. A cop tells you to do something you do it.. If you have a license to carry then fine.. It will come out in the end.. But to disobey orders is wrong.. The cop telling the guy he would get shot if he moves was in the right.. He warned the guy that if he reached for the gun he would be shot.. As a cop I can tell you that I would probably have done almost the same exact thing this officer did.. I know you guys on here are all for your right to carry and all that.. I am all for easing up laws to attain guns for recreational and home defense.. but I disagree with carrying a weapon as a civilian.. I know I will get bashed for it but as a cop that is my standpoint..

 

On a side note I know its going to be brought up that "this guy wasn't doing anything but buying car parts" but lets look at it like this.. a guy walks into a corner shop and tells the clerk he has a gun and will shoot if he doesn't hand over the cash.. a gun is never brought into view of the cashier but the threat is still there.. so this guy doesn't have to have the gun out or anything.. how does the officer know that the guy didn't just tell the clerk to hand over all the money in the register.. so just because the gun was holstered doesn't mean anything..

 

lastly.. here is how this all could have went based on this the situation that occurred:

 

Officer: (with gun drawn).. Sir put your hands on your head and get on your knees

 

Civilian: Officer, I have a license to carry and it is in my right pocket..

 

Officer: Get down on the ground

 

Civilian: Yes sir.. (gets on ground)

 

Officer: (disarms civilian, secures civilian for safety, and checks for i.d. and license to carry)

 

end of story.. no offense but you want to open carry then you are going to run into this ALL the time.. what cop is not going to stop someone with a gun on their hip.. yea.. let me walk past this guy and not bother to check him out so it turns out he has no license and just went to kill someone..

 

I agree with PB, jersey cool aid. The cop is the one that started the incident by handling it poorly from the get go.

 

 

I personally have not encountered this on such a call but have on others.. We get called to fights, kids breakign windows, etc and have seen people walking down the street who were involved like nothing happened.. It's when they know that we know it was them that they try and run.. One of the smartest criminals are the ones that stay calm.. Because as you said, everyone is looking for a guy in a hood/mask running around waiving a gun.. Watch videos online of guys that walk into a bank like anyone else.. they go up to a teller, slip a note or exchange words, teller hands over whatever it is and the guy walks out.. its only when he is outside that he may run or get in a car and go..

 

I understand the whole "the cops should know the law" and most guys do.. But unfortuantely we dont always know who are bad guys and who are not.. You can look at a cop and know he is a cop.. but i can look at you with a gun on your hip and I dont know what your intentions are.. Do you have a license to carry? Did you just come out of the range and forget to take off your gun? Did you just murder your family and looking to take others along with them? I have no idea who you are or what your intentions are.. The only thing I can do is gain the upper hand (drawing gun) until I determine who you are and what your intentions are.. Again.. I know there are some civilians that can carry but I don't know who they are.. So until I can SAFELY determine if you can carry a gun I will do all that I have to to make sure I go home at the end of the day.. What some are asking is that I have a normal conversation with a guy with a gun to see if he is licensed to carry and if he decided to try and kill me I should just try and see what my chances are in a drawing contest..

 

 

I can see the need to be concerned, but you shouldn't be drawing down for no reason. The fact that you state your looking for the upper hand, means your not properly trained.

 

But again he was told numerous times to do something and wasnt following orders.. In all reality had this guy just obeyed he would have been on his way in 5 minutes..

 

As for the above comment neither of us were in the store so we cannot articulate what the Officer's perspective was of the situation or the exact stance everyone was in.. How do we know the cashier did not give the Officer a "look" as to make the Officer aware that the civilian had a gun on his hip.. There are a lot of unknowns in the situation.. You have to remember that as you said.. Open carry may not justify probable cause.. but the civilians actions himself may have raised suspicion.. or maybe the cashier made eye contact with the Officer which raised suspicion.. or maybe ti was a fellow shopper that noticed it.. there are a lot of variables unknown here..

 

Kenw.. You are right.. In areas where open carry is an everyday occurrence cops might not stop everyone.. but in this area it is unheard of to get a carry permit.. so when someone is carrying chances are higher that he is not legally able to carry..

 

I agree locally it would be an issue, as carry permits are impossible but this happened in the street and not in the store. So looks etc.. are out the window.

[Zed's_Dead 16]

If as you said there was a complaint and a description, THEN the cop has a reasonable suspicion and things go differently.

 

That's not what happened here. Man walking down the street with gun on hip seen by cop, has cop's gun pointed at him and has his life threatened. This particular group of cops were way out of line. Even the Philly PD's lawyer told the reporter the cops had not been trained (WTF?)

 

I know....did you read the quote? I was referring to a general statement made by the poster, not the facts of this case.

[KpdPipes 388]

I agree, i dont know why Philly is giving themselves such a big head ache on this one. They were clearly wrong but just couldn't leave it at that. The funny part is... there's not much they can prove in court... Reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct? Both seem to be nothing but smoke and mirror charges... and now the gun community will be even more pissed off.

 

Philly has always considered itself to be "Separate' from the rest of PA..kind of like NYC and NY state. There is an institutional arrogance on the part of Philly Politicians, as well as the upper Mgmt of the PD, that has existed for decades. Philly sees NYC basically making up it's own laws as they see fit, and then tries to do the same..completely ignoring the fact that Pa has Preemption statutes to STOP that from happening. As for Philly PD, there are some really good guys there, but the bosses have a tendency to turn into politicians after a while, and put out directives that are assinine on their faces, and ripe for Lawsuits, then dump everything onto the street cop when it blows up in their faces.

[PeteF 1,044]

I know....did you read the quote? I was referring to a general statement made by the poster, not the facts of this case.

 

Actually I did, and Jack was right.

 

It isn't you must obey a cop in all but a few situations. It's the exact opposite.

A cop can only order you around in a LIMITED set of cicumstances without breaking the law himself.

 

Situation:

Man is walking down street.

Cop: "Stop I wan't to talk to you."

Man: "Have I broken any laws?"

Cop: "No I just need to talk to you"

Man: "Have a nice day"

[Zed's_Dead 16]

Actually I did, and Jack was right.

 

It isn't you must obey a cop in all but a few situations. It's the exact opposite.

A cop can only order you around in a LIMITED set of cicumstances without breaking the law himself.

 

Situation:

Man is walking down street.

Cop: "Stop I wan't to talk to you."

Man: "Have I broken any laws?"

Cop: "No I just need to talk to you"

Man: "Have a nice day"

 

Pete, I think you've misread my post. This is a direct quote from jack's post: Sorry buddy, but i do not have to obey a police officers demands when i am doing nothing illegal. Police officers cannot detain a person who is legally doing nothing wrong

 

Do you agree that that is a very general statement? That is the only problem I had with it. It's not true 100% of the time. All I was pointing out was that the police do, in certain circumstances (as you've also said), have the right to detain "innocent" people.

 

I certainly agree that the Philly police were misinformed and should have known about the open carry law. Since open carry in Philly requires a LTCF, then gun owners and the police both need to know what the proper protocol is for examining a license if it's requested before they go on patrol, and before the private citizen starts to carry.

 

Can't we all just get along?

[JackDaWack 2,895]

Pete, I think you've misread my post. This is a direct quote from jack's post: Sorry buddy, but i do not have to obey a police officers demands when i am doing nothing illegal. Police officers cannot detain a person who is legally doing nothing wrong

 

Do you agree that that is a very general statement? That is the only problem I had with it. It's not true 100% of the time. All I was pointing out was that the police do, in certain circumstances (as you've also said), have the right to detain "innocent" people.

 

I certainly agree that the Philly police were misinformed and should have known about the open carry law. Since open carry in Philly requires a LTCF, then gun owners and the police both need to know what the proper protocol is for examining a license if it's requested before they go on patrol, and before the private citizen starts to carry.

 

Can't we all just get along?

I do agree that my statement was very general, and i kinda disregarded the scope of my statement as i didn't take into consideration some instances . There are a few circumstances where they can detain you, but there must be a justifiable reason. Like stated before, you must basically fall under some instance of suspicion in order to be detained if you are not doing anything illegal..ex..fit the description of a suspect or something similar....if your driving a white car x make and y model they can stop you..

Again, unless your being charged with something your compliance with the police is really up to you.. Do you have to comply in these types of situations, no. Will it benefit you to comply absolutely.

 

Can we all just get along...lol. Yes of course we can, and i feel like these conversations are very healthy for society.. people need to be aware of there rights and how to act in certain situations... The #1 way to exercise you rights is to know where they start and end. I feel like if people knew there rights we wouldnt have these problems or they wouldn't be so exaggerated since citizens can keep the police in check.

 

And again, you actually bring up a good point. Is it illegal to carry a firearm openly in Philly and the license/permit allows for an exemption? If so you may actually be required to show your ID.

[FearThisInc 35]

Actually I did, and Jack was right.

 

It isn't you must obey a cop in all but a few situations. It's the exact opposite.

A cop can only order you around in a LIMITED set of cicumstances without breaking the law himself.

 

Situation:

Man is walking down street.

Cop: "Stop I wan't to talk to you."

Man: "Have I broken any laws?"

Cop: "No I just need to talk to you"

Man: "Have a nice day"

 

You are right in some sense here.. Yes you can refuse to talk to a police officer IF no crime has been committed or the belief that a crim is being committed does not exist. If I stop you and you say you don't want to talk fine.. But if i say that there was a break in and I need to ask you questions being that you are in the immediate area and you say no we fall back on Obstruction as there is a formal investigation going on.. Also someone mentioned walking away and saying NO when an officer requests to see proper ID for carrying.. Hmm.. You say no.. Where does that leave us.. Oh i guess i better walk away.. No.. I can't vouch for other states that I do not know the law and I am not saying I know every law and every sub part of every law.. But if you are carrying in NJ (which we all know it is almost impossible to get a carry permit) and i ask for id to carry and you say no then you will be detained and possibly arrested.. Am I supposed to just take everyones word for it that they have a permit.. IF thats the case then EVERYONE would just carry out in the open and claim they have a permit.. IF I ask you to produce then you produce the id.. IF you are responsible enough to carry a gun then you should be responsible enough to follow orders given by Police as long as they are not criminal orders.. Let's face it.. Carrying will never be legal if all you are going to get is guys screaming RIGHTS when questioned.. I understand that we were given rights in this country but lets be reasonable.. In this situation.. Yes it could have been handled better.. But I can't stress that WE were not there to know the exact sequence of events or know what the environment was like to be a proper judge in this matter.. and the cops are not 100% to blame.. The guy was being a D$*k.. he was setting the cops up for this and its obvious.. Both sides in this case needed to act moer appropriately.. As stated before by another member.. Why can't we all get along.. YOu want to cry about rights and try and outsmart the system.. But the system is just trying to protect people.. I don't go around on a power trip all day.. I just do my job to the best of my ability.. I try to help the public and do what I can to make sure EVERYONE is safe.. So you know what.. You give respect to get respect.. You cant just expect to walk around with a gun and not have anyone question you.. If you are permitted to carry then you should produce proper id to show that you are allowed to carry..

[kenw 293]

. I understand that we were given rights in this country but lets be reasonable..

Therein lies the basis of your faulty reasoning. We were not given rights. we have rights as a result of our humanity, and it's the responsibility of the government to recognize, protect and ensure that those rights are never threatened. if you believe that we were granted rights, then you believe that they can be rescinded, and that's where your belief in the superiority of government over the individual grows from.

[djg0770 481]

But if you are carrying in NJ (which we all know it is almost impossible to get a carry permit) and i ask for id to carry

 

He told the cop he had a LTCF and the cop persisted and didn't give a **** that the guy did and was willing to show it to the cop.

 

Kinda screws your argument above...

 

See, imo, the situation was this, dick 1 met dick 2. Dick 1 felt he had the right to detain dick 2 even though the law in that state and city did not permit him to. Dick 2 and dick 1 are equals - they are both dicks. Problem is dick 1 felt he was in the right until... a voice recorder appeared - then, all of a sudden dick 1 felt he was setup, until that point, he was really an arrogant prick, then he began to realize the jig was up.

 

The court decision on this will be very very interesting.

[djg0770 481]

Therein lies the basis of your faulty reasoning. We were not given rights. we have rights as a result of our humanity, and it's the responsibility of the government to recognize, protect and ensure that those rights are never threatened. if you believe that we were granted rights, then you believe that they can be rescinded, and that's where your belief in the superiority of government over the individual grows from.

 

 

It's amazing that we have to explain to an officer of the law the difference between a RIGHT and a PRIVILEGE. But I suppose it's because in NJ, it's not a RIGHT.

[almiz111 26]

is it me or is it funny hearing the PD complain about being set up?????

 

Dont they set up drivers every day of the year using speed traps? Whats wrong with catching someone in the wrong???

 

 

Set up or not the Officer is an ignorant a**. Didn't know the basic carry law - oh yeah just like most jurisdictions in New Jersey.

 

Peace to all.

[Damjan 73]

 

The court decision on this will be very very interesting.

 

As someone up in the thread said it the politico chiefs/prosecutors/superintendants......... will encourage this case untill its hopeless to show any cops being setup and then throw the minions under the bus.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

You are right in some sense here.. Yes you can refuse to talk to a police officer IF no crime has been committed or the belief that a crim is being committed does not exist. If I stop you and you say you don't want to talk fine.. But if i say that there was a break in and I need to ask you questions being that you are in the immediate area and you say no we fall back on Obstruction as there is a formal investigation going on.. Also someone mentioned walking away and saying NO when an officer requests to see proper ID for carrying.. Hmm.. You say no.. Where does that leave us.. Oh i guess i better walk away.. No.. I can't vouch for other states that I do not know the law and I am not saying I know every law and every sub part of every law.. But if you are carrying in NJ (which we all know it is almost impossible to get a carry permit) and i ask for id to carry and you say no then you will be detained and possibly arrested.. Am I supposed to just take everyones word for it that they have a permit.. IF thats the case then EVERYONE would just carry out in the open and claim they have a permit.. IF I ask you to produce then you produce the id.. IF you are responsible enough to carry a gun then you should be responsible enough to follow orders given by Police as long as they are not criminal orders.. Let's face it.. Carrying will never be legal if all you are going to get is guys screaming RIGHTS when questioned.. I understand that we were given rights in this country but lets be reasonable.. In this situation.. Yes it could have been handled better.. But I can't stress that WE were not there to know the exact sequence of events or know what the environment was like to be a proper judge in this matter.. and the cops are not 100% to blame.. The guy was being a D$*k.. he was setting the cops up for this and its obvious.. Both sides in this case needed to act moer appropriately.. As stated before by another member.. Why can't we all get along.. YOu want to cry about rights and try and outsmart the system.. But the system is just trying to protect people.. I don't go around on a power trip all day.. I just do my job to the best of my ability.. I try to help the public and do what I can to make sure EVERYONE is safe.. So you know what.. You give respect to get respect.. You cant just expect to walk around with a gun and not have anyone question you.. If you are permitted to carry then you should produce proper id to show that you are allowed to carry..

 

The problem with this is... outside of NJ in a free state, having a gun is legal and a right, unlike nj where it is illegal but legal under exemption. There's nothing about outsmarting the system, its just that there are different systems and you must follow the one which has jurisdiction.

[SpecialK 193]

Let's face it.. Carrying will never be legal if all you are going to get is guys screaming RIGHTS when questioned.. I understand that we were given rights in this country but lets be reasonable..

 

your views on our rights shows how very much you have a job. You do not have a duty. You have no honor and have no respect for Americans.

 

he was setting the cops up for this and its obvious..

 

i could care less if he was or not. I will even agree for the sake of argument that he was setting them up. friggin GOOD! The government needs to be checked and put in its place by it's citizens. He should be getting a medal for his effort for weeding out government officials that do not know how to properly do their job.

 

YOu want to cry about rights and try and outsmart the system.. But the system is just trying to protect people..

 

system? where in the system does it say that you are supposed to ignore the supreme law of the land?

 

I don't go around on a power trip all day..

 

you are not given any power to decide to not follow the law, making decisions that make us "safe" in your opinion sounds like a trip to me.

 

I try to help the public and do what I can to make sure EVERYONE is safe..

 

I live less than 500 feet from a liquor store that the clerk was killed by some degenerate with a gun. Please tell me how people like you are keeping me safe when I walk down my street at night with a murderer in my neighborhood by enforcing unconstitutional laws that do not allow me to keep and bear arms anywhere besides my own property.

 

You give respect to get respect..

 

you started by treating us with ZERO respect when you decided you knew better for us and that our rights were trivial.

[FearThisInc 35]

How do I say I KNOW better.. I just follow the laws that I am told to follow.. Laws are there for the great good.. I have a view on things just like everyone else.. I am not saying your view is right or wrong.. Its a view and opinion on things.. I have biased views being that I am a cop.. You have biased views in that you are pro gun.. So our views are different.. Not much different then say 2 peoples view on abortion.. There is no right and wrong.. You feel one way and I feel another.. I am not disrespecting anyone.. I am one of the easiest going cops out there.. I am not some hard a$$ that gets off on having a badge.. And please don't question my honor or respect.. You don't know me.. And you can know me based off how I felt on one situation.. I admitted that the officer over reacted a bit but lets face it.. We are all human here.. As a cop there are many things that we don't experience on an everyday occurrence.. So this cop ran into a guy with a gun.. NOT an everyday occurrence.. So he based his actions on the side of caution.. But I am not going to keep going back and forth with this.. The situation happened and none of us were there.. So it will be up to a court to decide who was right and wrong and we will see what the outcome is..

 

As for your comment about living near a liquor store where a robbery occurred.. What would have changed should you have had a gun?? What would have changed if the cashier had a gun on his hip?? Probably nothing.. Because by the time the cashier realized what was going on he would have been shot..

 

And what's with this people like you??? I do plenty to help keep people safe.. My presence is enough sometimes to diffuse a situation.. I have rolled with my fair share.. I have chased down my fair share.. Too many people out there think that the world would be a better place if there was no law.. Laws were put into place to help the people for the greater good.. I can't stand when people think the world would be so great if there were no cops, no government.. We would all be walking around with our guns on our hip and do as we please.. But without the government what would happen to this world.. Chaos.. This world would be free reign for criminals.. People would be killed, robbed, raped, beaten, etc on a regular basis.. After all who are you going to call?? Where is the punishment for those that rape someone or kill someone.. Who is going to hunt down the crimnial and bring them to justice?? No one.. Because we are all out of ourselves in this new world.. I am sorry.. But I understand we have rights as human beings.. And believe in what you will.. But while the government is not perfect it is better then no government at all.. And if you feel so strongly about regulations you have options.. If you don't like the way NJ is you can always move to a more "free" state.. If you like the idea of carrying a gun around in the open you have plenty of states that will allow it.. It just so happens that NJ is not one of them.. Maybe one day down the road things will be different.. But at this point in time this is the way it is..

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Just to let you know, I don't think the majority of the people here want to abolish law enforcement, actually if you read what a lot of us as you call it PRO GUN types are NOT against Punishment of Criminals. What we are against are the laws that contradict the Constitution. We will bring up these rights and they are not a Privilege, they are a right, and with that being said, many of us, I can't say all but I'd bet more than 99.9999% of us want stronger punishment for criminals who use a gun in a crime, a real crime, not a home invasion where the legal homeowner defends them selves or like scenario.

 

I do have to ask, what gun laws on the books in NJ really prevent crimes with a firearm in this state? I may be one sided on the issue, but I see gun laws that do not conform to what was written in the constitution do NOTING to prevent crime but only restrict the law abiding gun owners from there given rights in this country. Also I will agree LEO visibility is a deterrent, but you can not be every where all the time and you job is not to protect me as an individual, is it? Why am I not afforded the right to protect myself and my family outside the home? I would bet you might feel a little different if you while off duty were only able to defend yourself and family at home but out and about your free game like the rest of us.

 

You have to understand, we as a group are not anti LEO, but like the old saying as to the question on why I carry a gun, because caring a cop is too heavy does have some Merritt.

 

Harry

[Maksim 1,504]

How do I say I KNOW better.. I just follow the laws that I am told to follow.. Laws are there for the great good.. I have a view on things just like everyone else.. I am not saying your view is right or wrong.. Its a view and opinion on things.. I have biased views being that I am a cop.. You have biased views in that you are pro gun.. So our views are different.. Not much different then say 2 peoples view on abortion.. There is no right and wrong.. You feel one way and I feel another.. I am not disrespecting anyone.. I am one of the easiest going cops out there.. I am not some hard a$$ that gets off on having a badge.. And please don't question my honor or respect.. You don't know me.. And you can know me based off how I felt on one situation.. I admitted that the officer over reacted a bit but lets face it.. We are all human here.. As a cop there are many things that we don't experience on an everyday occurrence.. So this cop ran into a guy with a gun.. NOT an everyday occurrence.. So he based his actions on the side of caution.. But I am not going to keep going back and forth with this.. The situation happened and none of us were there.. So it will be up to a court to decide who was right and wrong and we will see what the outcome is..

 

As for your comment about living near a liquor store where a robbery occurred.. What would have changed should you have had a gun?? What would have changed if the cashier had a gun on his hip?? Probably nothing.. Because by the time the cashier realized what was going on he would have been shot..

 

And what's with this people like you??? I do plenty to help keep people safe.. My presence is enough sometimes to diffuse a situation.. I have rolled with my fair share.. I have chased down my fair share.. Too many people out there think that the world would be a better place if there was no law.. Laws were put into place to help the people for the greater good.. I can't stand when people think the world would be so great if there were no cops, no government.. We would all be walking around with our guns on our hip and do as we please.. But without the government what would happen to this world.. Chaos.. This world would be free reign for criminals.. People would be killed, robbed, raped, beaten, etc on a regular basis.. After all who are you going to call?? Where is the punishment for those that rape someone or kill someone.. Who is going to hunt down the crimnial and bring them to justice?? No one.. Because we are all out of ourselves in this new world.. I am sorry.. But I understand we have rights as human beings.. And believe in what you will.. But while the government is not perfect it is better then no government at all.. And if you feel so strongly about regulations you have options.. If you don't like the way NJ is you can always move to a more "free" state.. If you like the idea of carrying a gun around in the open you have plenty of states that will allow it.. It just so happens that NJ is not one of them.. Maybe one day down the road things will be different.. But at this point in time this is the way it is..

 

 

Thank you for your service and putting your butt on the line. I don't think anyone here is stating that we don't need law enforcement. I think what the problem is, is your general attitude of gun owners, as evident by your posts. Might I ask how you found the forum?

 

I totally get things from your perspective, however please understand it from ours. There are many LEO on this very forum, and I am afraid none have ever communicated their feelings, in terms of "US" (LEO) vs "them", law abiding gun owners. Your are perhaps the only LEO I have met through this forum with that attitude.

 

Please spend more time here, and most of all get to know us in person, instead of accumulating your posts protecting your own at the expense of grouping everyone else into "inept sheep."

 

I have biased views being that I am a cop.. You have biased views in that you are pro gun..

 

This portion of your post really pisses me off though, more than that, it makes me feel let down that the LEO whom are there for our good, paid for by our dollars, has a "us vs them" mentality. Keep in mind, unlike a private enterprise, you work for us. Most of all, we are your boss's boss.

 

Are your views that because your a cop, that your views, along with other LEO are in direct contradiction with civilians who happen to support the 2A? If so, I would really think long and hard. The vast majority of the LEO in this community do not view themselves as "Cops vs 2a", they view themselves as guys just like us, whom take the risk of putting their lives on the line. They are gun owners, and supporters of the 2A just like everyone else. They never present themselves in a manner indicating that they are better than us or anyone else.

 

May I ask where your work and what community you serve and protect? Are your views perhaps jaded by that?

 

Lastly, to further ask about your comment as to why you believe that we should not have the right to protect ourselves? (concealed carry).

[Maksim 1,504]

PS.... public thank you to ALL the LEO on the forum, whom know who they are, and all the state police reading this for being there for our community. It is a shame that the powers that be, politicians don't see it that way. Thank you for doing your job and risking your lives.

[FearThisInc 35]

Just to let you know, I don't think the majority of the people here want to abolish law enforcement, actually if you read what a lot of us as you call it PRO GUN types are NOT against Punishment of Criminals. What we are against are the laws that contradict the Constitution. We will bring up these rights and they are not a Privilege, they are a right, and with that being said, many of us, I can't say all but I'd bet more than 99.9999% of us want stronger punishment for criminals who use a gun in a crime, a real crime, not a home invasion where the legal homeowner defends them selves or like scenario.

 

I do have to ask, what gun laws on the books in NJ really prevent crimes with a firearm in this state? I may be one sided on the issue, but I see gun laws that do not conform to what was written in the constitution do NOTING to prevent crime but only restrict the law abiding gun owners from there given rights in this country. Also I will agree LEO visibility is a deterrent, but you can not be every where all the time and you job is not to protect me as an individual, is it? Why am I not afforded the right to protect myself and my family outside the home? I would bet you might feel a little different if you while off duty were only able to defend yourself and family at home but out and about your free game like the rest of us.

 

You have to understand, we as a group are not anti LEO, but like the old saying as to the question on why I carry a gun, because caring a cop is too heavy does have some Merritt.

 

Harry

 

 

As I stated.. I am not totally against the idea of civilian carry.. I just think it should be more then a few days of classes.. There should be more extensive training and should have restrictions.. Age limits.. etc.. If regulated civilian carry can work.. But not a "ok take these 2 classes, get a permit, and have fun.." In my "opinion" I would allow civilian carry under such regulations:

 

1. Minimum age of 23-25

2. Carry restricted in certain places.. Courts, schools, bars, gambling facilities, etc

3. Restrict alcohol consumption while carrying..

4. Extra punishment for those caught carrying while committing another crime such as having CDS on their persons

5. Subject to stop by an authority and must show, upon request, permit to carry

6. Limit on number of rounds permitted to be carried on a person

7. Minimum 4 weeks of classes/training..

8. Extensive background check which must be conducted on a yearly basis to ensure no changes..

9. If caught committing a crime in which gun was utilized and found guilty permanently restricted from getting carry permit in future..

 

These are just some regulations that I feel would make open carry more secure.. Again this is my opinion on the matter..

 

 

 

Also I am not saying that everyone on here wants to abolish law enforcement.. I was just reaching out to one extreme side.. Most people fall in the middle somewhere.. The process is what it is.. You are right.. A lot of law abiding citizens have to jump through hoops to get a permit.. but this just helps weed out SOME of the guys that would get guns and commit crimes with them.. As the old saying goes.. a criminal will get what they want no matter what.. if they want a gun they will find a way to get one.. but the state has the process to help deter criminals from getting guns and try to make it harder for them to get them.. unfortunately that means that law abiding civilians also have trouble getting them..

 

Also its not a Us vs Them attitude that I have.. When I say I have a biased opinion it is because I look at the situation strictly as a cop.. not as a civilian or a civilian carrying.. It is no a Us vs Them.. More of "i want to go home at the end of the day" type of attitude.. Call it what you want but you will always see it something from your side of the fence.. Its just the way people are.. A guy who smokes weed all the time is going to feel greatly that it should be legal and allowed.. While others will still be against it.. We see things from our own perspective and that is what makes us human.. We have our own opinions on matters.. And perhaps you are right.. Maybe it is just that I have spent all my life in NJ and it was not until I got on the job that I began dealing with guns that I have the attitude that I have.. And maybe spending time with guys like those on the forum will open my mind more.. Time will tell.. But don't think I am against anyone in particular or putting down anything.. I am open to many things.. But I guess when you are used to things being a certain way change isnt always easy to process..

[Maksim 1,504]

You know of an other country that did the same type of registration?

 

Nazi Germany. I hear it worked out really well.

 

 

Unlike a drivers license, the 2a is a RIGHT, not a privilege. If you are old enough to die for this country, you should be able to protect yourselves, or do what is reasonable to feel that way.

 

I don't think many will argue against an educational requirement, but we are not talking about a doctorate degree in shooting dynamics... if we had an extensive firearms education requirement, we would not need SWAT.... just get any gun owner, give him a remington 700, or better yet, just have him get the rifle from his car, odds are, he will be better equipped.

 

Just wondering, how many rounds a week do you practice? Do you do any competitive shooting like IDPA/Steel/USPSA?

 

but.... thanks for explaining yourself. I respect your right to your opinion. I don't think many people will agree with it, however you have the right to your opinion. The discussion for CCW is a different topic all together.

[matt6669 71]

Minimum 4 weeks of classes/training

 

heh you crack me up man. I can't believe I just wasted my time reading this entire thread and reading the crap you posted in this. So because you sat in a classroom and did minimal hands on training with a yearly take 50 shots to pass this test you are the awesome most pro shooter so you should be ok to shoot.

 

Yet the people on this forum who shoot 2-500 rounds every weekend or every other weekend now have to go for 4 weeks of classes and training.

 

When you feel as if you can return to reality and take away your I'm a cop so I'm right mentality maybe you can join the discussion with the rest of the LEO on this forum who contribute day in and day out and help serve and protect our community in a positive way not in a negative way.

 

And you can carry your XXX with 10-18 rounds in a mag but once again because I'm a lowly citizen I should be restricted to only one round that I have to carry in my back pocket with an unloaded gun if we get a carry permit I'm sure that would make you happy.

 

Minimum age 23-25

 

Minimum age to join the military 18. So it's ok for us to be given M16's and patrol and protect our country, but when we are home on leave we can't protect ourselves. Yup that makes sense.

 

Restricted areas of carry. courts schools etc. Clearly because it's a school a criminal isn't going to bring his criminal activity to a place like that because I mean heck they have signs that read gun-free zone so my gosh I can't commit a crime there. I'll just go down the street to the mall instead to do my shooting. Are you this blind to reality. Do you not realize that criminals do not care about a single gun law that is passed in this state. That the further passing of more restrictive gun laws only hurts us in the long run.

 

I really wish I could remember what state it was, possibly Texas I believe who just recently passed a law allowing the carrying of guns on school campus's state wide and the campus's can not dictate whether they will follow or not, they MUST follow. I remember reading a quote by someone who survived Columbine. It said something to the affect that he wishes that somebody on campus was carrying a gun because the situation they were in was we had nothing to protect us, and they just kept shooting. He fought for this law in Texas because he didn't want to see another Columbine happen somewhere else.

 

Luckily I still have faith because for every one LEO like you I meet, I meet another 3 LEO's who think the complete opposite of you and who actually get it.

[FearThisInc 35]

You know of an other country that did the same type of registration?

 

Nazi Germany. I hear it worked out really well.

 

 

Unlike a drivers license, the 2a is a RIGHT, not a privilege. If you are old enough to die for this country, you should be able to protect yourselves, or do what is reasonable to feel that way.

 

I don't think many will argue against an educational requirement, but we are not talking about a doctorate degree in shooting dynamics... if we had an extensive firearms education requirement, we would not need SWAT.... just get any gun owner, give him a remington 700, or better yet, just have him get the rifle from his car, odds are, he will be better equipped.

 

Just wondering, how many rounds a week do you practice? Do you do any competitive shooting like IDPA/Steel/USPSA?

 

but.... thanks for explaining yourself. I respect your right to your opinion. I don't think many people will agree with it, however you have the right to your opinion. The discussion for CCW is a different topic all together.

 

Lol.. i wasn't talking 4 solid weeks and maybe at that its excessive.. But I think that most of what we are trained should be trained on civilians who are looking to carry.. I stand by age requirement though.. alot of people arnt mature at 18.. and lets face it.. a guy can go and die for his country but cant come home and have a drink... so it is what it is.. my opinion is that 18 is too young.. i don't know any 18 years olds I would trust with a bb gun let alone a real gun lol.. I go as often as I can to practice.. Some guys on this job go strictly for qualifications.. I can't stand that.. I like to go at least on a bi-weekly routine out to the range.. I usually go through a minimum of 100 rounds (roughly).. I don't do any competitive shooting.. Just go out for practice on my own.. Was thinking of getting into it but never did anything before with competitive shooting..

 

Also military would qualify on a level as police.. And age requirement would not be in effect..

[Maksim 1,504]

Lol.. i wasnt talking 4 solid weeks and maybe at that its excessive.. But I think that most of what we are trained should be trained on civilians who are looking to carry.. I stand by age requirment though.. alot of people arnt mature at 18.. and lets face it.. a guy can go and die for his country but cant come home and have a drink... so it is what it is.. my opinion is that 18 is too young.. i dont know any 18 years olds I would trust with a bb gun let alone a real gun lol.. I go as often as I can to practice.. Some guys on this job go strictly for qualifications.. I can't stand that.. I like to go at least on a bi-weekly routine out to the range.. I usually go through a minimum of 100 rounds (roughly).. I don't do any competitive shooting.. Just go out for practice on my own.. Was thinking of getting into it but never did anything before with competitive shooting..

 

 

21 would be the limit as per federal law... which you should be aware of.

 

So a typical LEO like yourself who goes through 2 boxes every two weeks should be able to carry, yet an NRA instructor, with military training, or someone who takes defensive classes and goes through 300 to 500 rounds a week, shoots numerous events where they are on the clock are obviously not qualified.

 

Is my statement taking it to the extreme? Sure... however please think through your posts before hitting submit. You are not making a very strong point where you blabble something, hit submit, then go back and keep changing. There are sharks here, who will examine every word and let you have their opinion.

 

Point is... there are a ton of people whom are probably much more qualified with a firearm than you, or a lot of law enforcement officers. You have to really get to know the shooting community besides the newbie at the gun range showing off to his girlfriend, and most of all, drop the preconceived notions. Not every gun owner is a sheep with a dream and a checkbook (to own a gun), and there are plenty who will run circles around your gun skills. No one cares that you are a cop, people care about you as a person, and what your beliefs are. A cop is what you do, it is your job. It is not who you are. You can be a douchebag and be a cop, and you can be the nicest guy in the world and be a cop. But you are never a douchebag because you are a cop. Get it? Welcome to the forum.

[FearThisInc 35]

Minimum 4 weeks of classes/training

 

heh you crack me up man. I can't believe I just wasted my time reading this entire thread and reading the crap you posted in this. So because you sat in a classroom and did minimal hands on training with a yearly take 50 shots to pass this test you are the awesome most pro shooter so you should be ok to shoot.

 

Yet the people on this forum who shoot 2-500 rounds every weekend or every other weekend now have to go for 4 weeks of classes and training.

 

When you feel as if you can return to reality and take away your I'm a cop so I'm right mentality maybe you can join the discussion with the rest of the LEO on this forum who contribute day in and day out and help serve and protect our community in a positive way not in a negative way.

 

And you can carry your XXX with 10-18 rounds in a mag but once again because I'm a lowly citizen I should be restricted to only one round that I have to carry in my back pocket with an unloaded gun if we get a carry permit I'm sure that would make you happy.

 

Minimum age 23-25

 

Minimum age to join the military 18. So it's ok for us to be given M16's and patrol and protect our country, but when we are home on leave we can't protect ourselves. Yup that makes sense.

 

Restricted areas of carry. courts schools etc. Clearly because it's a school a criminal isn't going to bring his criminal activity to a place like that because I mean heck they have signs that read gun-free zone so my gosh I can't commit a crime there. I'll just go down the street to the mall instead to do my shooting. Are you this blind to reality. Do you not realize that criminals do not care about a single gun law that is passed in this state. That the further passing of more restrictive gun laws only hurts us in the long run.

 

I really wish I could remember what state it was, possibly Texas I believe who just recently passed a law allowing the carrying of guns on school campus's state wide and the campus's can not dictate whether they will follow or not, they MUST follow. I remember reading a quote by someone who survived Columbine. It said something to the affect that he wishes that somebody on campus was carrying a gun because the situation they were in was we had nothing to protect us, and they just kept shooting. He fought for this law in Texas because he didn't want to see another Columbine happen somewhere else.

 

Luckily I still have faith because for every one LEO like you I meet, I meet another 3 LEO's who think the complete opposite of you and who actually get it.

 

 

Ok.. You know what I give up.. You are right and I am wrong.. Everyone 18+ should be allowed to carry a gun... You win.. You win.. Ok Gov.. give everyone a permit to carry.. Let EVERYONE who applies carry a gun.. Actually forget it.. No permit needed.. No rules.. Just buy the gun and strap it on.. I will guarantee you that in the first week you will get about at least 100 shootings.. They will be mixed between criminals committing normal crimes that they now have access to a gun by just going to the store and purchasing.. and the home owner who saw someone in their yard, got scared, and opened fire.. only it turns out the guy was so drunk he had no idea where he was.. or how about the lady who wasnt expecting someone at the door and is scared as no one is supposed to be goign there that late.. should she call the cops.. nah.. she just got her gun... but whatever.. I am done going back and forth.. You win.. Let everyone carry... Good night..