thoughts on this video???

[jmra]

Well stated.

[steve817]

I don't mind activism when it is directly related to politics. People should be involved in local political processes. I do mind activism when it is just some guy with a huge chip on his shoulder looking for trouble. This guy could have simply shown the cop his ID and been on his way in 2 minutes. Instead, he turned it into a confrontation which he recorded. I suspect that he turned it into a confrontation just so that he could record it and post it on youtube. In other words, it was a stunt.

Reasonable people might ask, "to what end?" Here's my take........ He actually did a disservice to the open carry movement. If he thinks his stunt convinced anyone who is against open carry to change their minds, he's delusional. What he has done is A) preach to the already convinced choir; and B) confirm to anyone who might have been sitting on the 2nd Amendment fence that gun owners are a bunch of irresponsible rabble rousers who probably shouldn't be trusted with their guns. People might be wrong about (B), but they do have opinions, we help them to form those opinions by our behaviors, and they vote accordingly! Open carry advocates are already going to vote politicians into office whose views are consistent with their own. But fence sitters should be convinced to vote with us, not against us, and these types of aggressive, in-your-face, gotcha tactics play perfectly into the hands of those who would ban the free expression of our rights, and they convince fence sitters to vote against our interests. In short, the guy who shot this video is a complete moron.

Here would have been a MUCH better approach: Friendly, cooperative, and on his way......and videotape that instead. Then, the fence-sitters might say, "gee-whiz, that guy was pretty reasonable. Maybe these gun folks aren't so bad after all."

I'm not against open carry. If anyone here searches my posts on the matter, I've said repeatedly that the best possible scenario is Constitutional Carry, like what Arizona has. But there are responsible and irresponsible ways to be an advocate for it, and the idiot in this video did more damage than good to the cause.

That's my 2¢.

[speedsix]

...TAM, where OC is legal, (or CC, following the same principles), and there are officers trampling citizens' rights, I'm all for videoing and recording audio...it's the only accurate way to show the public and the dept. responsible for training that there are problems that need fixing...without proof, it's the officer saying the guy did/said thus'n'such and the guy saying the officer was unfair...anyone watching this video would see the facts...

...I've seen videos online of those being just plain agitating jerks looking for trouble...this guy wasn't ...but neither was he going to be herded into the officer's corral...the officer was 100% wrong in what he did and the citizen handled it very carefully, while letting the officer hang himself...as that kind of officer is want to do...

...if the guy was within his rights, as events when the supervisor showed up quickly showed that he was...why should he cave to some badge-heavy person who wanted to violate the law and trample his right to carry on with his day peacefully? Short answer...he shouldn't..."show me your papers" happens often enough...when it doesn't apply, why cave to the demand???

...the right and legal thing for the officer to have done was to take the call from HQ (if there really WAS one) and go out to see for himself that all was in order...as it obviously was...maybe speak to the citizen...maybe just wave and go on by and tell HQ nothing was wrong out here...because there wasn't...until he strutted into it...I'm never for giving an officer attitude...and I'm never for taking it off one, either...we're SUPPOSED to be on the same side...

[Jumping Frog]

When it comes to people wrongfully charged, if you do not have audio or video evidence to rebut the LEO's testimony, you don't stand a chance. An officer on the stand is going to be believed every time unless you have objective evidence to the contrary.

Every armed person, open carry or conceal carry, should be prepared to record such LEO interactions on a daily basis. It is simply a different aspect of preparation.

[WildBill]

When it comes to people wrongfully charged, if you do not have audio or video evidence to rebut the LEO's testimony, you don't stand a chance. An officer on the stand is going to be believed every time unless you have objective evidence to the contrary.

Or unless you happen to have several witnesses ... who happen to be a nun, a priest, a rabbi, an LEO, a FBI Special Agent, Chuck Norris or the Pope.

[speedsix]

When it comes to people wrongfully charged, if you do not have audio or video evidence to rebut the LEO's testimony, you don't stand a chance. An officer on the stand is going to be believed every time unless you have objective evidence to the contrary.

Every armed person, open carry or conceal carry, should be prepared to record such LEO interactions on a daily basis. It is simply a different aspect of preparation.

...not so unilaterally...all judges aren't fools, nor are all juries made up of fools...a lot of good folks have developed the gift of smelling a lie...
...we had a cop who liked to write traffic tickets...I sat in court one day and watched a judge take the citizen's side three cases in a row, and say very delicately that sometimes an officer develops a habit of exxagerating what happened or not seeing what he thought he saw...basically telling the whole courtroom the jerk was lying...which he was...three strikes in a row and he sat down whipped...then my case came up...I told what happened and the citizen started off on a spiel about how I was lying because I must have had a bad day and he couldn't possibly.......and the judge cut him off...he told him that the officer on the stand now was NOT the last officer that had been up there, that he knew if I said it, it happened that way...and assessed the fine...I had EARNED that over the years...by not betraying public trust...
...I will say that whenever there can be witnesses, video, or even audio to clearly support what was said...that's much better than two opposing stories, neither supported by anything...

[speedsix]

When it comes to people wrongfully charged, if you do not have audio or video evidence to rebut the LEO's testimony, you don't stand a chance. An officer on the stand is going to be believed every time unless you have objective evidence to the contrary.

Or unless you happen to have several witnesses ... who happen to be a nun, a priest, a rabbi, an LEO, a FBI Special Agent, Chuck Norris or the Pope.

...good thing I'm not the judge, 'cause I wouldnt believe four of THAT list on a GOOD day!~!!

[Jumping Frog]

...not so unilaterally...all judges aren't fools, nor are all juries made up of fools...a lot of good folks have developed the gift of smelling a lie...

True, there are the exceptional cases.

...I will say that whenever there can be witnesses, video, or even audio to clearly support what was said...that's much better than two opposing stories, neither supported by anything...

But I am placing my bets on evidence instead exceptions.

[Big Tuna]

It's the same reason cop cars have cameras, so no honest cop should object.

[speedsix]

It's the same reason cop cars have cameras, so no honest cop should object.

...I think dashcams/lapel mikes help KEEP 'em honest...if HQ's watchin'...they might just behave more professionally...back in our day, they'd put a bug in the car...and we'd give 'em plenty to review...

...what's good for the goose is good for the gander...

[RoyGBiv]

It's the same reason cop cars have cameras, so no honest cop should object.

...I think dashcams/lapel mikes help KEEP 'em honest...if HQ's watchin'...they might just behave more professionally...back in our day, they'd put a bug in the car...and we'd give 'em plenty to review...

...what's good for the goose is good for the gander...

For the same reason, my kids already understand why I will randomly test them for drug use. Do I think for even a millisecond they are using illegal substances? No. But if (when) they are approached, "I can't, my dad is drug testing me" is a much more potent defense against peer pressure than "no thanks, I don't want to".

[Jim Beaux]

I appreciate this policeman's efforts while responding to a mwg report. So he fumbled the ball, big deal, no one got hurt. We all goof up at times. He was professional & conscientious. He conceded without attitude. I believe he is capable of mending his ways without being penalized. He is the type of leo our society needs to nurture. I expect with time & experience he just might be an exceptional leo.

[Jasonw560]

So, how should one handle the ID question here in CC country, since we don't have the "stop and identify" law in Texas without seeming to belligerent?

(As an aside, I cold TELL them my last name, but it's not spelled like it sounds, so they wouldn't find anything on me)

[Jaguar]

So, how should one handle the ID question here in CC country, since we don't have the "stop and identify" law in Texas without seeming to belligerent?

(As an aside, I cold TELL them my last name, but it's not spelled like it sounds, so they wouldn't find anything on me)

I would expect MWG calls here in Texas would be more of a concern than states with open carry laws, since we would be in violation of law being seen with a handgun. In the more rural areas of my county it is normal to see rifles in truck windows, but carrying an AR down main street in town would be disruptive to the general public, so I would assume that would warrant a "stop and identify" contact. How to handle that? I don't know, maybe don't carry AR's down main street.

I am all for open carry, just because, well, the second amendment should trump the portion of the TX constitution that says the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime. To me, keep and bear arms means carry personal arms, and while the CHL program does indeed allow the majority of TX citizens to bear arms, why should it cost $140 to exercise a constitutional right?

In this case, when the officer asks what he should call me so we could have a conversation, I would simply reply, "call me Sir." I believe the person in the video was in the right; states with open carry laws should not allow police to stop and identify someone committing a legal action any more than pull over every driver over to see if they have a valid drivers license because they are driving in accordance with all laws. IANAL, YMMV, ETC.

Jag

[Jasonw560]

I should have bern clearer. If you were in public, carrying concealed, and you helped a little old lady with her groceries, and all of a sudden your 2nd amendment was showing, and you didn't know it.