Open Carry Incident - Vincennes

[David D]

After finally completing all previous posts in this thread, and flip flopping several times on my own opinion, I have to sum up my thoughts as this :

1. Without knowing more than was presented, I believe the OP and friends were desiring an encounter.

2. The OP and friends were doing nothing illegal, and the LEO involved handled the encounter very poorly.

3. As the OP was not doing anything illegal, there was nothing to gain by stirring this pot.

4. Whether we like it or not, logical reality is that if change is forced for this type of situation, it is most likely to be a change that none of us want to see.

My bottom line is the same as many others have stated; JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN, DOESN'T MEAN YOU SHOULD!

 

[Gluemanz28]

I'm not even reading 27 pages of this... Was there a point to carrying a long gun into a restaurant? Did they serve really ****ty food to you last time? I mean, I know that McD's takes forever and often screws up orders but jeez, just go to the one on Hart St.

It goes faster when you have the trolls on your ignore list.

 

[Gluemanz28]

After finally completing all previous posts in this thread, and flip flopping several times on my own opinion, I have to sum up my thoughts as this :

1. Without knowing more than was presented, I believe the OP and friends were desiring an encounter.

2. The OP and friends were doing nothing illegal, and the LEO involved handled the encounter very poorly.

3. As the OP was not doing anything illegal, there was nothing to gain by stirring this pot.

4. Whether we like it or not, logical reality is that if change is forced for this type of situation, it is most likely to be a change that none of us want to see.

My bottom line is the same as many others have stated; JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN, DOESN'T MEAN YOU SHOULD!

+1 Very well said my friend well said!!!!!!!!

 

[Expat]

Yes, I do. Look at what happened in CO.

 

[churchmouse]

stephen87,

I know we need a united front. That is how any change occurs.....
How do we unite. We find common ground and use our heads to show we are responsible gun owner/operators.
In my way of looking at the world the actions of this very small group is detrimental to such change. They were self centered and not looking at the big picture. JMHO

In the world I grew up in your view of this was the norm for the most part but men did not carry long guns into restaurants. They did carry them in the rear window of the truck but it stayed there. Just no need to make a scene.
Times have changed and I have been watching the change through the 63 years of my life. I do not like what I see but I found it a waste of time and effort to try and stop it. I have not given up. I have raised 5 young men and woman to see the world through my eyes (well, somewhat...) and they in turn are raising their children in the same manner. Hopefully we can re-infect rational thought and behavior into at least a part of society. We need help in this as there is so much stupidity to over come.

 

[Gluemanz28]

And we need to stand to find a way to get gun owners to stand together. Our voice matters just as much as their voice, but we can't even band together.


So by that account, I can't protest or exercise freedom of religion because it might draw unwanted attention to me. I wouldn't want that. Right?

How did you slip through my ignore list???? Ok its fixed now. Troll on

 

[88GT]

I would think that as intelligent as I find you to be you would see I do not support or condone the police action in this. Just that a wise move would be to leave the long gun in the vehicle or not take it at all.

I bought a pistol first and then a series of long guns. For what I consider rational thought and decision making I/we would not carry a long gun into any public place unless we were planning on doing some harm for "Good" reason.

I will repeat my earlier statement....
Is this a legal action...yes
Is it defensible in court...yes
Is it a wise thing to do in today's world...No it is not.

I would be 1st to line up in defense of this mans rights to do this. My entire group would be there as well.
None of us would do this for rational reasons. This should not be to confusing.

I am pleased to see the argument has maintained a civil tone through the night as it should have.

But you do, because you grant them immunity by accepting it as "the way it is." Oh sure, you give great lip service to the fact that these cops in this circumstance were a tad excessive. But neither you nor anybody else has addressed the reality that a legal action is being illegally prohibited by LE on a routine basis. And I would bet money that even if the cops behave less like asshats, you'd still be shrugging off the fact that they prohibited someone from exercising his rights. It's not what they're doing that bothers you and the others. It's only how they do it. Stomping on rights if apparently fine if they ask nicely and keep the weapons pointed in a safe direction.

I'm tired of sitting at the back of bus to avoid raising the public's ire. If it's my right, why do people like you have to try and convince me it's not a good idea? Why aren't you out there supporting the free exercise of rights and trying to change the public's opinion, condemn LE response? I'm tired of being at the mercy of whatever prevailing morality happens to find favor that day. I'm tired of being told to sit down and shut up because at least I can still carry. I'm tired of hypocrites who speak out of both sides of their mouth saying they support freedom and then condemn the exercise thereof.

Frankly, I'm going to do what I want because if this is the majority view of gunowners, we'll always be relegated to 2nd class citizenship in public opinion because we don't demand anything else. But it's okay, the chains are still light enough not to be too burdensome, I suppose.

Exercising your rights when they do not necessarily need to be exercised draws unneeded attention .

Why do you decide when it's appropriate for me to exercise my rights?

If I have to chose between not exercising my rights or drawing unneeded attention to decide the fate of my rights I will choose the lesser of the two.

Well, at least no one is trying to tell you how to behave, huh? That would suck.

After finally completing all previous posts in this thread, and flip flopping several times on my own opinion, I have to sum up my thoughts as this :

1. Without knowing more than was presented, I believe the OP and friends were desiring an encounter.

So what?

2. The OP and friends were doing nothing illegal, and the LEO involved handled the encounter very poorly.

This is being treated as the side issue in this discussion and yet I see it as the main problem. A legal action being prohibited by LE. And the most common response is some version of "Play stupid games."

3. As the OP was not doing anything illegal, there was nothing to gain by stirring this pot.

I agree. LE should have behaved like adults and after determining that no threat existed, gone on their merry way.

4. Whether we like it or not, logical reality is that if change is forced for this type of situation, it is most likely to be a change that none of us want to see.

Ignoring the large dose of ASSumption in your comment, do you have any other suggestion for "forcing" a change wherein the citizens of this state/nation are freely allowed to exercise their rights without being bullied by LE?

My bottom line is the same as many others have stated; JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN, DOESN'T MEAN YOU SHOULD!

Love it. Every last individual using this stupid line is guilty of violating it.

 

[bwframe]

all guns are loaded ...

Rule number one doesn't seem to be a very big part of this discussion, does it?
Nor does rule number two - Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy
How does this get done in a busy restaurant where the focus is on food, rather than maintaining proper control of your weapon?

 

[88GT]

How did you slip through my ignore list???? Ok its fixed now. Troll on

He is not a troll. But it doesn't surprise me that you would equate someone having a different opinion as a troll, given the arguments you've presented in this thread.

 

[Gluemanz28]

He is not a troll. But it doesn't surprise me that you would equate someone having a different opinion as a troll, given the arguments you've presented in this thread.

Congrats you have been added as well. Troll on

 

[Birds Away]

I have been a INGO member for about 7 months and the thing I notice the most that seems to take over every post is the you trampled all over my Rights statement. I am pretty sure that most everyone on here would stand beside you and assemble ourselves together to protect our Rights. I see a pattern with the same people no matter what the subject is that goes straight to "Your trampling on my Rights" Guess what?????? Nobody is trampling on your rights. Get over it.

Well, you are absolutely wrong. I am sitting there eating a meal, while doing nothing illegal, and a LEO comes in and points a gun at me for no lawful reason. If you don't see a problem with that then I think we have identified the real problem.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

I posted in this thread.

AND haven't added anyone to my ignore list. Yet.

-J-

 

[Birds Away]

So, a woman is breastfeeding her baby in public. Someone phones the police to complain. How would you feel if the LEO arrived and attempted to publicly shame the woman for doing something that she can but shouldn't do? I am certain we could find just as many people who think that she should take the baby into the restroom to do this. How is this different. The ONLY issue with this thread is that the LEO used excessive force and then tried to publicly shame the individual who was breaking no laws. The LEO should have turned to the manager and inquired if they had asked the man to leave. If not, there is no issue here. If you are okay with this LEOs actions then you are also okay if he kicked down your door and pointed a gun at your head for no reason. I respect LEO and am not a basher. However, humans are humans and if boundaries are not enforced then they do not exist.

 

[Gluemanz28]

 

[SteveM4A1]

I love when people ignore others so that every comment they see agrees with their beliefs. Talk about living in a fantasy world where my way is the only way. For one, I like discussions such as these, because I like to see others' opinions. I do see how individuals think that carrying long guns in public will do nothing but hurt the cause, but I simply do not agree with it. I think others have hit the nail on the head when stating the responding LEO's handled this situation very poorly, and it is incidents like this that demand more attention. I personally have no way of knowing how well the long gun carrier controlled his weapon, and whether he was sweeping people or not.

 

[Gluemanz28]

So, a woman is breastfeeding her baby in public. Someone phones the police to complain. How would you feel if the LEO arrived and attempted to publicly shame the woman for doing something that she can but shouldn't do? I am certain we could find just as many people who think that she should take the baby into the restroom to do this. How is this different. The ONLY issue with this thread is that the LEO used excessive force and then tried to publicly shame the individual who was breaking no laws. The LEO should have turned to the manager and inquired if they had asked the man to leave. If not, there is no issue here. If you are okay with this LEOs actions then you are also okay if he kicked down your door and pointed a gun at your head for no reason. I respect LEO and am not a basher. However, humans are humans and if boundaries are not enforced then they do not exist.

Find your reading glasses and reread the post. I was referring to the people posting not the OP post. I never said that I agreed the way LEO handled it. I never said Moe, Curley and Larry didn't have the right to do it. But if you cook yummy bacon on a stove you are liable to get burnt.

 

[Denny347]

I hate it when people use this argument against OC. This was pretty much the ONLY legal way to be somewhat armed in CA since the CC permit there is like hen's teeth. The liberals would have banned it long ago if they knew it was legal.

I don't give 2 craps about OC and am not making an argument against it. He wanted an example, I gave him one.

Rather than say "normalize" or to argue it will push someone away lets all agree first that we, as responsible members of society with some amount of common sense SHOULD NOT WANT to carry a freaking rifle inside of a restaurant.

Do you (not you, Denny but anyone contemplating carrying a rifle inside an occupied building) REALLY think you are going to use it in there and for what situation do you see yourself lighting someone up with 5.56 rounds in the middle of a restaurant which itself is in the middle of a city. What the hell is your backstop?

My shotty is my preferred go to gun in a building if I want to step up from my pistol. I love that thing.

 

[Denny347]

And we need to stand to find a way to get gun owners to stand together. Our voice matters just as much as their voice, but we can't even band together.


So by that account, I can't protest or exercise freedom of religion because it might draw unwanted attention to me. I wouldn't want that. Right?

Ah, so carrying the rifle to Mc D's WAS a form of protest huh?

 

[printcraft]

I posted in this thread.

AND haven't added anyone to my ignore list. Yet.

-J-

Almost all of this thread is blank............. weird.............

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Congrats you have been added as well. Troll on

Stephen87 and 88GT are hardly trolls. From the time I've been "contributing" on this forum, they a couple of the best here. If you keep adding folks to your "ignore" list at this rate, INGO is going to seem awfully desolete, pretty quick.