It is against the law for felons to possess guns. Therefore, if you are in the possession of a gun no matter where you are, you must be able to prove you are not a felon. We could start branding felons..wait..
Cop calls Constitution bullsh*t and illegally detains a man for LEGAL open carry
- Thread starter sh00ter
- Start Date
It is against the law for felons to possess guns. Therefore, if you are in the possession of a gun no matter where you are, you must be able to prove you are not a felon. We could start branding felons..wait..
You have a very liberal definition of "jack with".
3 pages worth and no one has commented on the guy wearing a kilt? I think you guys should watch the video again for the real reason he was detained.....
Someone asking to check my papers, when I'm not doing anything illegal is my definition.
That's what the bad guys in movies use to do, I won't say who the bad guys were in the movies because ever time someone says nazi everyone........Doh.
There have been quite a few comments made about the kilt...
Maybe the police officer should have demanded to search under the kilt LOL...You can open carry and AR15 in the BLUE state of Oregon but you can't here...most Republicans are just wolves in sheep's clothing here in 2015...it amazes me all the "pro-freedom" conservatives that rationalize people being harassed for legal activities. More than likely that officer (not all police) would smash this man's skull into pieces if some white-haired law maker in a suit told him to...reminds me of spike the dog (ruling class) and the chester the little dog (cop) jumping around trying to impress him asking him if he wants him to go beat up a cat (middle class tax payer) LOL:
Last edited by a moderator:
A police officer must have "reasonable suspicion" that
A: you are about to commit a crime
B: you are in the act of committing a crime, or
C: you have committed a crime
Assuming one is a felon is not reasonable suspicion in my book. YMMV
I am on the fence on this, I can see why some would think it causes negative affects for gun owners, but the guy was doing nothing wrong and had a right to walk away. His assumption was that the initial confrontation was Contact(not Detainment or Arrest). Being a ********* while practicing a civil right is not illegal...it's just not advised.
A: you are about to commit a crime
B: you are in the act of committing a crime, or
C: you have committed a crime
Assuming one is a felon is not reasonable suspicion in my book. YMMV
I am on the fence on this, I can see why some would think it causes negative affects for gun owners, but the guy was doing nothing wrong and had a right to walk away. His assumption was that the initial confrontation was Contact(not Detainment or Arrest). Being a ********* while practicing a civil right is not illegal...it's just not advised.
Oh yes, I totally see why some of these guys think it gives us all a bad name...but that is early 2000's think...in 2015, times have changed and we need people like this activist out there standing up for our rights...I would have agreed with some of these other guys here 5-10yrs ago, but middle class, law-abiding citizens seem to be the bad guy now and we are told by the gov't that the Islamists are all peaceful...what a crock...In my opinion, men like that officer would need to spend some time in a North Korean prison to realize the error of their ways...What these activists are doing is a form of protest...it is also a LEGAL & NON-VIOLENT, "extreme" form of protest...what a better way to oppose tyranny than to follow the law??? There simply is no justification for harassing people who did not break the law. The police are FURIOUS that open carry is legal and so they still find a way to take it out on citizens who do it. Meanwhile, that officer most likely has an M4 in is cruiser...and as for the felon thing, why should some non-violent guy who shoplifted or got a DUI 15yrs ago lose a Constitutional right? Some law makers are re-visiting that one as we speak.
Similar threads
