A completely reasonable way to deal with the new wave of open carry morons.....

[Glocktogo]

"Can you pull my magazine out of my butt?"

LOL, perhaps he can get your head out of your butt while he's at it?

These guys are prepared and braced for a confrontation based on an incorrect understanding of their rights. How about putting your responsibility as a free citizen exercising your rights before your desire to educate the police about said rights? The whole "I don't consent to any search or seizure" schtick when the officer is clearly explaining his reasonable suspicion for the detention and inspection is silly. Mumbles wasn't arrested, he wasn't searched and his property wasn't seized. He wasn't even required to produce an ID. This was about as positive as a police contact could be when walking the streets with a loaded GSG5 that's been modified to resemble as closely as possible an MP5A3.

I'm all for them exercising their rights. I just wish they'd do it in a less douchey way. I feel for those Oregon officers having to deal with him and I sure hope none of our folks will be doing that to their fellow Oklahomans come November.

So, excercising your right to open carry makes you an activist? I do appreciate that the police officer acted polite and professional.

That's a little disingenuous. Mumbles is a self professed "MarkedGuardian" who goes around doing this on purpose. He's actively trolling the public and police in an attempt to elicit a negative contact. It looks to me like they're onto his game and aren't going to play along. Most people who open carry don't bring along a cameraman on their daily stroll.

 

[JB Books]

It's coming in November.

 

[oufan24]

Interesting how the douches are free to go, but want to continue the confrontation.

 

[piston10]

Good cop vs tool bag. I have no respect for D bags like this, and I do support open carry.

 

[twoguns?]

it's coming in november.

sssshhhhh!

 

[bulbboy]

"Would you like to park over here?"

What a total D O U C H B A G

Cop handled him very well

 

[11b1776]

Officer did wonderful job IMO.

 

[Sundance]

I feel the officer handled the situation very well. I think that people like that make things harder for the rest of us.

 

[HiredHand]

That's a little disingenuous. Mumbles is a self professed "MarkedGuardian" who goes around doing this on purpose. He's actively trolling the public and police in an attempt to elicit a negative contact. It looks to me like they're onto his game and aren't going to play along. Most people who open carry don't bring along a cameraman on their daily stroll.

I understand but I can see how the media/anti-2A lobby might label anyone who open carries as an "activist."

 

[henschman]

I agree, the cop was very professional... you could tell he was a practiced public speaker, as well as having good interpersonal skills.

BUT, I don't think there was reasonable suspicion that a crime was being committed to allow a stop. I don't think there was there reasonable suspicion of the subject being armed and dangerous to allow the seizure of the gun. I don't think the gun had an immediately apparent incriminating character to allow it's seizure under the plain view doctrine. And obviously there was no warrant to allow the seizure and search of the gun for full auto parts, nor the probable cause that it was an illegal unregistered full auto that such a warrant would require.

I think it is ridiculous to base reasonable suspicion purely on the fact that there are some full auto guns in existence which look like the one in question, when the officer is aware of no other specific facts supporting a reasonable belief that there is a full auto trigger group in a gun. If that were the case, a cop could go to the range and detain everyone shooting an AR-15, to investigate whether it is an unregistered full auto. Or he could stop everyone open-carrying a Glock or Beretta, based on the possibility of it being an unregistered Glock 18 or Beretta 93.

Also, basing reasonable suspicion that a person doesn't have the required tax stamp and documentation, based on their apparent age and type of clothes they're wearing, is pretty iffy too. Not everybody who owns a $10,000 toy always goes around in a tweed suit with a monocle carrying a bag of money.

Now even if there WAS reasonable suspicion of a crime being committed, as the cop believed, that only gets the officer the authority to detain the suspect for a sufficient time to investigate the suspected crime. By itself, it doesn't give him the power to search or seize anything except the suspect himself. The cop didn't explain his justification for the seizure of the gun from the suspect, but if it were true that he had RS of him carrying an illegal full auto, I believe that would also give rise to a reasonable suspicion of the suspect being armed and dangerous (which ought to be met any time you have RS of a guy with a gun walking around with a gun committing a felony). This would allow the cop to seize and secure the gun for his own safety, which implies that he can unload it and put it where no one can get to it for the duration of the encounter, or until the RS is dissipated. However, it doesn't give him the authority to tinker with it in order to find out what kind of parts are inside it. A seizure under Terry is not for investigative purposes -- it is purely for officer safety.

The cop might try to justify the seizure under the plain view doctrine, but that has a higher requirement than just reasonable suspicion -- it requires that the object in question must have an immediately apparent incriminating character (along with being observed from a place the cop has a right to be, and something for which the cop has lawful access to). This is not met for the same reasons I stated with regards to reasonable suspicion. Also, for the plain view doctrine to apply, the object cannot be manipulated. It's unlawful character must be immediately apparent based purely on sight. The fact that the cop tinkered with the gun to see whether it was FA or not negates this.

The way the situation should have been handled is this: The cop rolls up, steps out of the car, and greets the subjects. He says, "we got a call from a concerned citizen saying someone is walking around with a machine gun. That gun isn't a full auto, is it?" The armed subject says "I don't want to talk about it." The cop says, "well, seeing how I have no reason to suspect that it is, or that it is unregistered if it is, have a nice day." The cop then goes back and tells the concerned citizen that open carry is legal, and that since he has no evidence that the gun is possessed illegally, there is nothing more he can legally do.