No, You Can't Slap Cuffs on Peaceful Gun Owners

[BobCat]

This may be in the wrong Forum, but it is related to an LEO contact.

Read a column titled: Federal Appeals Court to Police Officer: No, You Can't Slap Cuffs on Peaceful Gun Owners - the URL is http://www.huffingtonpost.com/evan-bern ... 84562.html (look where it was posted!) and wondered if anyone here had a comment.

It seems to me that this is a good result / finding by the court, and I'm kind of amazed at where it was reported - which makes me wonder if I'm missing some subtle corrosive attitude on the part of the author.

Interested to "hear" what y'all have to say.

[mr1337]

Pretty mad after watching this video [abbreviated profanity deleted] a guy in Oregon legally open carrying a rifle

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He was ultimately released and the weapon was returned to him, but I'm sure it was a very stressful situation to be drawn down on by multiple officers while they detain and disarm you.

[VMI77]

Almost didn't read it when I saw the link to HuffPo. I was surprised they didn't use the incident to attack gun owners and open carry.

[BobCat]

Almost didn't read it when I saw the link to HuffPo. I was surprised they didn't use the incident to attack gun owners and open carry.

Exactly! I stumbled on the link, don't normally read that site, and really wonder what I'm missing. The column seemed rational and not anti- at all; can't figure it.

[cb1000rider]

GRR..
" Bright then appealed to the Sixth Circuit, asserting qualified immunity from suit."

In other words, I'm not liable because it's reasonable for me not to actually know the law...
I find this whole qualified immunity bit ridiculous. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, unless you're a LEO, and then it gets you off the hook.

Really, I don't see how this incident is much different than what happened Grisham up in Temple, which had an entirely different judicial outcome.. (I do acknowledge that with a recording device, Grisham was probably expecting trouble).


Great test case for Ohio. The outcome in Texas, to date, has been very different.

[Javier730]

Pretty mad after watching this video [abbreviated profanity deleted] a guy in Oregon legally open carrying a rifle

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He was ultimately released and the weapon was returned to him, but I'm sure it was a very stressful situation to be drawn down on by multiple officers while they detain and disarm you.

His hair might of caused him to look like he was up to no good. He might of been profiled.

[RoyGBiv]

Almost didn't read it when I saw the link to HuffPo. I was surprised they didn't use the incident to attack gun owners and open carry.

Exactly! I stumbled on the link, don't normally read that site, and really wonder what I'm missing. The column seemed rational and not anti- at all; can't figure it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/evan-bernick/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Evan Bernick is the Assistant Director of the Center for Judicial Engagement at the Institute for Justice, the national law firm for liberty. He works to educate the public and persuade judges about the need to enforce all of the Constitution’s limits on government in every case.

[ScooterSissy]

Pretty mad after watching this video [abbreviated profanity deleted] a guy in Oregon legally open carrying a rifle

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He was ultimately released and the weapon was returned to him, but I'm sure it was a very stressful situation to be drawn down on by multiple officers while they detain and disarm you.

Sorry, as much as I'm a proponent of gun rights, I think the notion of "I'm going to strap on a mean looking weapon, get my 7 months pregnant wife to follow me recording, and walk down a busy road trolling to get stopped" is not the height of good sound judgement.

[suthdj]

Almost didn't read it when I saw the link to HuffPo. I was surprised they didn't use the incident to attack gun owners and open carry.

Exactly! I stumbled on the link, don't normally read that site, and really wonder what I'm missing. The column seemed rational and not anti- at all; can't figure it.

Anti-Leo.

[C-dub]

This may be in the wrong Forum, but it is related to an LEO contact.

Read a column titled: Federal Appeals Court to Police Officer: No, You Can't Slap Cuffs on Peaceful Gun Owners - the URL is http://www.huffingtonpost.com/evan-bern ... 84562.html (look where it was posted!) and wondered if anyone here had a comment.

It seems to me that this is a good result / finding by the court, and I'm kind of amazed at where it was reported - which makes me wonder if I'm missing some subtle corrosive attitude on the part of the author.

Interested to "hear" what y'all have to say.

That is a good outcome. Maybe we're on the path to eliminate or reduce this type of behavior from LE towards law abiding citizens. Unfortunately, it might only be because of other unfortunate events that there is so much push back against LE at this time.

[mr1337]

Pretty mad after watching this video [abbreviated profanity deleted] a guy in Oregon legally open carrying a rifle

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He was ultimately released and the weapon was returned to him, but I'm sure it was a very stressful situation to be drawn down on by multiple officers while they detain and disarm you.

Sorry, as much as I'm a proponent of gun rights, I think the notion of "I'm going to strap on a mean looking weapon, get my 7 months pregnant wife to follow me recording, and walk down a busy road trolling to get stopped" is not the height of good sound judgement.

It's only unsound judgement because of this kind of illegal police behavior. I didn't see anything unlawful in the video. The guy shouldn't have been detained, much less drawn down on. Being that he did not break any laws, the reason why the situation was potentially dangerous was because of the police, not because of anything that he was doing.

[cb1000rider]

Anti-Leo.

I don't think it's anti-Leo. It's definitely related to rights of gun owners. The LEO made the wrong decision here, that's not necessarily an anti-LEO perspective, it's just speaking to the facts of the case outcome.

[cb1000rider]

Sorry, as much as I'm a proponent of gun rights, I think the notion of "I'm going to strap on a mean looking weapon, get my 7 months pregnant wife to follow me recording, and walk down a busy road trolling to get stopped" is not the height of good sound judgement.

So you're a proponent of gun rights, but not a proponent of exercising them in a reasonable manner? I don't mean it as an attack, I'm asking you to distinguish.
This wasn't a guy who was carrying an AR-15 and a concealed side arm, not that such should make a difference legally speaking.
He was OC'ing a handgun in a state that had passed OC... I don't exactly understand how that's behaving unreasonably.

If you're a proponent of gun rights, but don't think that we should have the right to openly carry a firearm in a public place contingent upon how busy that place is... well, I think that's what you're saying.... I don't think the views are *necessarily* incompatible... Just asking for clarification.


I have a video camera in my car. That doesn't mean I'm trolling for an accident of bad police behavior. It simply means that experience has taught me that recording incidents might be in my best interest in the future.

[ScooterSissy]

Pretty mad after watching this video [abbreviated profanity deleted] a guy in Oregon legally open carrying a rifle

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He was ultimately released and the weapon was returned to him, but I'm sure it was a very stressful situation to be drawn down on by multiple officers while they detain and disarm you.

Sorry, as much as I'm a proponent of gun rights, I think the notion of "I'm going to strap on a mean looking weapon, get my 7 months pregnant wife to follow me recording, and walk down a busy road trolling to get stopped" is not the height of good sound judgement.

It's only unsound judgement because of this kind of illegal police behavior. I didn't see anything unlawful in the video. The guy shouldn't have been detained, much less drawn down on. Being that he did not break any laws, the reason why the situation was potentially dangerous was because of the police, not because of anything that he was doing.

I have the legal right to don a pointy white hood and walk down S Market street in Dallas, but that wouldn't mean it's a smart thing to do.

These folks were looking to attract the police. They probably got a bit more attention than they bargained for, but the plan worked. It was a bad plan.

I feel about this much the same way I feel about the whole Garland cartoon contest. It's one thing for folks to be totally incensed if they're doing what they would normally, and are hassled because of doing it. When someone deliberately chooses to do something to attract attention, no matter how just their cause may be, they shouldn't act surprised when the get that attention.

To take this particular case to an extreme, that I hope would make the point I'm trying to make, if terrorists invaded my neighborhood, I'd be there to defend it. I wouldn't ask a pregnant daughter to follow behind me filming it (my wife doesn't stand much chance of fitting that description, so I'll use one of my daughters.).

[jimlongley]

Pretty mad after watching this video [abbreviated profanity deleted] a guy in Oregon legally open carrying a rifle

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He was ultimately released and the weapon was returned to him, but I'm sure it was a very stressful situation to be drawn down on by multiple officers while they detain and disarm you.

Sorry, as much as I'm a proponent of gun rights, I think the notion of "I'm going to strap on a mean looking weapon, get my 7 months pregnant wife to follow me recording, and walk down a busy road trolling to get stopped" is not the height of good sound judgement.

What, pray tell, makes a weapon "mean looking"?