Detained for Open Carry, Portland, Maine 26MAY2012

[sig1473]

This guy has at least another video on Youtube. He really knows his stuff as it shows.

 

[serf]

Public safety issue was the cop sweeping the gun around.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I now love this man. He just listed a 7th circuit case that in IN pretty much forbids officers from demanding ID and stopping a person just for the reason they are carrying a firearm. They can accost(consensual stop) and ask for ID, but they cannot stop and demand.

That case is US v DeBerry.

We have assumed-everyone connected with the case has assumed-that the police, who did not know DeBerry's name and therefore did not know that he was a felon, knew, or at least had reason to believe, that if he was carrying a concealed firearm he was violating the law.   They did know.   It is a crime in Illinois to carry a concealed gun, 720 ILCS 5/24-1(a)(10), with the usual exceptions for peace officers and the like (720 ILCS 5/24-2), exceptions unlikely to be applicable to DeBerry.   Even if this were Texas rather than Illinois, and carrying a concealed weapon was lawful except for felons and a few other classes of ineligibles, the police would have been entitled to accost DeBerry and ask him whether he was carrying a gun.   They might have a hunch he was a felon and so violating the law.   It would not matter, so far as the Fourth Amendment is concerned, as we explained earlier.   But if the asking crossed over to commanding, so that DeBerry was stopped, then it would be essential that the officers have a reasonable belief and not a mere hunch that if he was carrying a gun he was violating the law.   But they would have a reasonable belief, because this is Illinois rather than Texas.
Affirmed.

So it's legal for them in IL but not in IN, because in IN it is lawful except for felons and a few other classes of ineligible to get a LTCH (just like Texas, except they have to carry concealed and it's called a different name) and carry. IIRC about 1 in 10-12 adults in IN have their LTCH, so it's pretty common.

Oh and Kirk, Rhino owes you 9 boxes of .45 ammo. One for each justice. I'll take a box of 9x19 as a referral fee.

 

[mtgasten]

lol too bad this wasnt in Indiana, that cop wouldve committed a felony what with pointing that loaded firearm at him and all hahaha that was an awesome video! thanks Fenway!

 

[Timjoebillybob]

lol too bad this wasnt in Indiana, that cop wouldve committed a felony what with pointing that loaded firearm at him and all hahaha that was an awesome video! thanks Fenway!

I wish. But under IN law it was legal. A LEO can point a loaded firearm at anyone as long as it is in "the scope of his official duties"

IC 35-47-4-3
Pointing firearm at another person
Sec. 3. (a) This section does not apply to a law enforcement officer who is acting within the scope of the law enforcement officer's official duties or to a person who is justified in using reasonable force against another person under:
(1) IC 35-41-3-2; or
(2) IC 35-41-3-3.
(b) A person who knowingly or intentionally points a firearm at another person commits a Class D felony. However, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor if the firearm was not loaded.
As added by P.L.296-1995, SEC.2.

 

[mtgasten]

I wish. But under IN law it was legal. A LEO can point a loaded firearm at anyone as long as it is in "the scope of his official duties"

oh i didnt think about that, good catch though! oh well! thanks for the info!


ETA: would this apply though since it was an illegal seizure of his weapon? would that be considered within the scope of his duties? just wondering cause it just popped into my mind. i would think they would try to say it was officer safety or something ridiculous like that, but still just wondering.

 

[Double T]

I commented. Technically he could have refused the gun back as it was seized illegally...and they could charge him wih receiving stolen property. Zing!

 

[griffin]

I'm amazed that the cop didn't develop more of an attitude and continue to harass this guy.

The guy asked for the shift supervisor.

 

[griffin]

I'm gonna say he's either been through that before, or it was some kind of set up. Seriously, who just happens to know the laws so well?

OK just passed open carry, and the LEO supervisors are already telling the officers to be careful, that people will be open carrying and videotaping to catch them violating their OC rights.

 

[cp009]

Awesome example why it is important to educate ourselves about the laws that protect us law abiding carriers!

 

[Titanium_Frost]

I'm gonna say he's either been through that before, or it was some kind of set up. Seriously, who just happens to know the laws so well? Maybe he was a lawyer of some type or something.

HA! Really? There are several guys right here in INGO that can do that.

So you have to be a lawyer to quote state law, case law and even federal law in regards to carrying a weapon. How sad is it that people think this way. Wouldn't it just be better to go back to the only gun law that matters?

A Well Regulated Militia, being Necessary to the Security of a Free State, The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not be Infringed.

Bet you can't believe I can quote that huh?

 

[KG1]

HA! Really? There are several guys right here in INGO that can do that.

So you have to be a lawyer to quote state law, case law and even federal law in regards to carrying a weapon. How sad is it that people think this way. Wouldn't it just be better to go back to the only gun law that matters?

A Well Regulated Militia, Necessary to the Security of a Free State, The Right to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not be Infringed.

Bet you can't believe I can quote that huh?

Source?

 

[Titanium_Frost]

Source?

Smartass!

 

[KG1]

Smartass!

 

[yeti rider]

HA! Really? There are several guys right here in INGO that can do that.

So you have to be a lawyer to quote state law, case law and even federal law in regards to carrying a weapon. How sad is it that people think this way. Wouldn't it just be better to go back to the only gun law that matters?

A Well Regulated Militia, being Necessary to the Security of a Free State, The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not be Infringed.

Bet you can't believe I can quote that huh?

That right there should seal the deal on open carry vs concealed. People smarter than me are posting about situational awareness, why even put yourself in that situation? It's cool to show people who care about gun advocacy that they CAN win because they ar smarter than "the man", but people who don't like guns are going to think that guy was a real dick (imo).

 

[ATM]

That right there should seal the deal on open carry vs concealed. Why even subject yourself to such ****. Whatever makes someone happy though.....

Many people are happy not only knowing their rights, but exercising them and defending them in the face of error.

The question should not be why subject yourself to such harassment, but why tolerate it or modify your behavior to avoid such errors rather than correcting them.

 

[Hammerhead]

Source?

Smartass!

See what you get for trying to make things up. Really, where do you get off trying to bring such lousy information to the people?

 

[Titanium_Frost]

That right there should seal the deal on open carry vs concealed. Why even subject yourself to such ****. Whatever makes someone happy though.....

There should be any OC vs CC they should both be embraced as methods of carry with the individual to decide what is best for them in that moment.

BTW just because you conceal does not make you immune to this type of harassment. It is YOUR responsibility to know the law.

 

[WC Deer Hunter]

 

[Excalibur]

This is just one of those cops that don't understand the law and whoever called the cops on a guy just open carrying is a dick. He or she wasted this guy's time and wasted police time just for an average joe who is legally carrying.