Know Your Rights

Wednesday, June 27th, 2012

It’s a beautiful thing to behold when someone does . . .

 

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

67 Responses to “Know Your Rights”

  1. #1 |  hurrr | 

    Portland Maine cops….
    I live a block away from where this took place. Makes me nervous to CC in the area, but this guy was open carrying looking for a confrontation, just the cop was stupid and took the bait.

  2. #2 |  jesse | 

    I love the response to the cop’s statement “we had reports of a guy carrying a gun.”

    “yep, that’s a report of a legal activity.”

    Have to remember that one.

  3. #3 |  Will | 

    I wish we were all so poised and knowledgable about our rights. Now if only the police had half as much of a clue about it …

  4. #4 |  OldGrump | 

    *applause*

    Both for the law student for respectfully sticking to his, ahem, guns, and to the supervisor, for immediately agree the kid was right and sending him on his way.

    Hopefully the first officer learns the lesson. Sadly, my bet would be he just left ticked off, without grasping the bigger picture.

  5. #5 |  Will | 

    Although we do need to also note that while the cop was wrong to detain the guy, at least he didn’t get irate at being video taped and he didn’t go berserk like some have when confronted with an individual that does know their rights …

    Of course, even as I write that, I’m thinking to myself how sad it is that I feel the need to be “grateful” that the cop is only partially abusing the rights of the person he stopped …

  6. #6 |  Zargon | 

    Of course, it’s only beautiful when the outcome is semi-correct. This guy could have just as easily ended up in a jail cell or the hospital rather than back on his way.

  7. #7 |  Nick T. | 

    I love that the guy was wearing suspenders apparently.

  8. #8 |  Adrian | 

    That’s fun but in a way it actually makes me feel more than a little disheartened. There’s no way I’d be able to pull off that stream of legal citations. Hope that’s not the only reason this guy was released. :(

  9. #9 |  My New Hero: Gun Toting Law Student Puts Cop In His Place « Spatial Orientation | 

    [...] Radley Balko: Share this:TwitterFacebookEmailDiggStumbleUponRedditLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. [...]

  10. #10 |  Psion | 

    Fantastic!

    Only one thing stands in the way of this being a perfect encounter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Bt9zSfinwFA

  11. #11 |  bleh | 

    Somebody obviously got an A in Criminal Procedure.

    That was awesome! Thanks for sharing.

  12. #12 |  Dave Trowbridge | 

    It’s too bad one has to be a law student to retain one’s rights.

  13. #13 |  JSL | 

    Hurrr, how is it that you and so many of my fellow gun rights supporters jump to the conclusion that open carry folks are jerks testing cops? How do you assert your rights without practicing them? If you don’t use them, you’ll lose them. Its the same as “dont talk back to them” yet talking back to them is anything but following their orders, even if their orders are unconstitutional or violating your rights.

    Open carry isn’t always the best option but you won’t change attitudes by covering up your gun. Many cops say they agree with open carry but I think most just say that and don’t really like it because it challenges the police’s current monopoly on a show of force.

  14. #14 |  Burgers Allday | 

    “yep, that’s a report of a legal activity.”

    said the Sanford police dispatcher to George Zimmerman. o, wait. nevermind.

  15. #15 |  Burgers Allday | 

    I am not sure that the student should have cited cases. That might be cited later as a reason supporting “reasonable suspicion.” (in addition to the familiar mantra of agitated subject, bloodshot glassy eyes, high crime neighborhood, suspicions of the caller, etc.)

    Don’t laff. Yesterday I blogged a case where the fact that the (innocent and retarded) “suspect” said “you’ve got the wrong guy” was argued by the policeman, and accepted by the court, as reasonable suspicion supporting detainment.

    Blog entry here:

    http://police4aqi.wordpress.com/2012/06/26/1120/

  16. #16 |  Kevin | 

    This cop wasn’t too bad. Balko posts stories every week about cops who would have beaten, I mean, arrested, this guy for his “suspicious behavior.

  17. #17 |  B | 

    Yay for the guy for knowing his rights, yay for the police for (eventually) respecting them, but

    If you care deeply about owning a gun as a right, you really should take into consideration that walking around openly carrying in an urban setting–however legal it may be–is going to make an awful lot of people uncomfortable. It will attract exactly this kind of attention. And it sure as hell isn’t going to make anyone on the fence about the legal status of gun ownership more sanguine about your side of things.

  18. #18 |  Mike Leatherwood | 

    The quotations of law cases were over the top and, well, smart-assy. Yes, assert your rights always, but don’t come off as a prick. Being right AND being beaten senseless, er, Tasered, er, detained forceably is still a loss.

  19. #19 |  Nullifier | 

    Freakin’ AWESOME!!

  20. #20 |  Alex Wolcott | 

    Sorry to be contrarian but this law student was a freaking IDIOT. He should thank his lucky stars for the professionalism and cool-headedness of the police he encountered.

    As my father once said – there is ZERO upside to going around looking to start trouble with people. And here, Mr. Law Student’s upside is a lot of head-nodding and kudos in the youtube comment section.

    The potential downside – if he’d run into your usual beastly, thug wannabe Navy Seal urban warrior, would have been considerably worse. “Cause that whole “law student” thing won’t do shit for you if you get railroaded into the system and get some sort of conviction hung around your neck. In fact, you can fast-forward a year, or two, or three, past this, to pretty much every state Bar Association refusing to give you a license if you have a criminal record. Or at least making you fight tooth and nail at great time and expense to even be allowed to take the bar exam.

    I’m no apologist for police. I am a former criminal defense attorney. I know very well that the type of guy going around looking to make some sort of “statement” about their “rights” will often end up IN the system with the dreadful, pitiless apparatus of state power on the other side of the aisle in a courtroom.

    You commenters want to be that guy? Well go out there and provoke these police thugs all you want. But bring your health insurance card with you and have the phone number memorized of someone who can float you the retainer money that you will shortly be paying to someone like me. I mean, unless you REALLY want to make your STATEMENT and represent YOURSELF in court. Because THAT usually goes so well.

    My constructive suggestion as an alternative? When police thugs pull their de rigeur shananigans and victimize those who cannot defend themselves you put pressure on them via the interwebs, the media, and the political system if possible. Shine the light of day on their despicable behavior. Much as this website does. This method spares you the broken clavicle and felony arrest record to boot.

  21. #21 |  capn_amurka | 

    @B:

    I disagree. Your reasoning sound a lot like, “Even if you value your rights, don’t practice them, because no one else does.”

    It’s just as reasonable to say that citizens openly carrying their guns was very common 100 years ago, we want to get back to that, and we can if we encourage everyone to carry openly everyday so that no one is afraid to practice their rights for fear of being singled out.

  22. #22 |  el coronado | 

    #17 –

    While your comment seems to makes a lot of sense, common-sense wise, I think I’d have to disagree in the end. Not making use of a constitutional right because it might “make people nervous”, or “get the cops antsy” is a *real* big step on the road to eventually losing that right. Like the spineless morons at the recent ‘Latinos For O’Dipstick’ dinner who sat there quietly like befuddled sheep when the Secret Servicio made them hand in their (potentially deadly) “forks & knives.” ‘Cause they didn’t want to make a SCENE, see.

    And a couple of minutes later, they became the laughingstock of the world. As well as reduced to eating with their hands – which must have made pressing the flesh with Barry later on a tad messy. “The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry.” – Some guy who wrote what is not called the Declaration of Servitude. (and 5 points to supercop for pointing the guy’s gun at him when he racked the slide! now where’d I put that link of the famous video starring the DEA stud shooting himself in the foot…)

  23. #23 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    “It’s an ILLEGAL common practice”

    AW SNAP! Even though state agents tend to do what they please, it never hurts to hold them to the standards they are supposed to be upholding.

  24. #24 |  Difranco | 

    #17

    This law student wasn’t ‘looking for trouble’ as you put it. He was merely prepared for trouble by being knowledgeable and having a audio/video recording device (cell phone). This is no different than having a fire extinguisher in your car; you aren’t looking for a fire because you have it.

    The cops chose to provide him trouble by detaining a person for legal activity. If someone called 911 and said there’s a man watering flowers on Main Street, they would have laughed and said ‘so’ that’s a legal activity.

  25. #25 |  Pale Rideer | 

    This video is nothing to cheer about. The officer was in violation of several laws and will face no charges or discipline. He violated the rights of the citizens he has sworn and oath to protect. In a just world he would get a week of unpaid vacation and be sent back for remedial training on 2nd amendment rights and the laws he is charged with enforcing and would not be let him back on the streets, armed, until he has demonstrated knowledge of the said laws.

  26. #26 |  Fred Mangels | 

    …you really should take into consideration that walking around openly carrying in an urban setting–however legal it may be–is going to make an awful lot of people uncomfortable.

    The cop was the class act in this video as far as I’m concerned. He responded to a complaint and stayed calm, despite the college student trying to act like the tough guy.

    Just the student’s way of speaking I found annoying since the cop was cool and gave no reason for an arrogant response on the student’s end, at least from what I could see from the video. The student could well moved on in half the time if he would have just answered the cops questions and showed him identification.

    And for those of you that think all of us should walk around carrying guns (I am an NRA Life Member and used to hold a Federal Firearms License) this is exactly the sort of thing that resulted in California banning the open carry of both unloaded handguns and long guns recently.

    It used to be legal to openly carry unloaded guns, even here in California. Then a bunch of gun owners got all active about it and made a scene carrying unloaded handguns as a group. The legislature made it illegal, in response to those actions.

    So the same bright guys said, “Ok. Then we’ll just carry our rifles and shotguns around openly and unloaded instead“. The legislature quickly made that illegal, too. Brilliant move, guys!

    I don’t agree with those laws, but just goes to show what happens when you don’t leave well enough alone. Sometimes it pays to keep a low profile.

  27. #27 |  Eric Northman | 

    This guy was a lot more ballsy than I could ever be. I still stick to “I’d like to exercise my right to remain silent” and “I do not consent to any searches” when I have to deal with cops. I’d rather avoid having any argument with the cop, and just save my case for the judge, if necessary.

  28. #28 |  BamBam | 

    Not asserting rights and showing knowledge is a sign of a slave. To label someone as “looking for trouble” simply because they are doing something that most people do not do is dishonest and shameful. This mentality has led to so much immoral pain being meted out: da blacks, da mexicans, da gays, da irish, etc. ad nauseum because “they were different” or “behaved differently” or “looked different”.

    To tremble in fear, and thus never assert yourself, is a great way to allow tyranny to continue. Scared the system might rope you in for ? Shut your mouth and go about your business. Yeah, that’s a slave all right. Slave, how dare you try to leave the plantation (said the slave).

  29. #29 |  HV | 

    That guy’s really lucky he’s not black.

  30. #30 |  BamBam | 

    Just the student’s way of speaking I found annoying since the cop was cool and gave no reason for an arrogant response on the student’s end, at least from what I could see from the video. The student could well moved on in half the time if he would have just answered the cops questions and showed him identification.

    The cop was the jerk, as he kept asking the same question in different ways, trying to obtain ID with no cause, and at one point when the guy refused the cop says “so you’re one of THOSE people”. Tone alone does not indicate aggressor/jerkiness — listen to the words. To side with the cop, you have to agree that the cop has cause to stop someone for a legal activity, and to require ID from said person at his whim. That is a police state which exists because of statist gangbangers like the cop.

  31. #31 |  KristenS | 

    Just because some of you don’t know the case law that reinforces rights of citizens doesn’t make this guy a douche for quoting them.

    And the cop demonstrated his lack of gun safety knowledge, which is terribly frightening. He should go back to training ASAP before he’s allowed in the streets with his own sidearm.

  32. #32 |  TomPaine4 | 

    It used to be legal to carry loaded guns openly in California, until the Black Panthers made a habit of it. Once dark-skinned people were carrying openly, our esteemed solons found open carry to be a threat to the public. (California A.B. 1591, enacted as Stats. 1967, ch. 960)

    Make of all that what you will.

  33. #33 |  Fred Mangels | 

    The cop was the jerk, as he kept asking the same question in different ways, trying to obtain ID with no cause,….

    He responded to a complaint and tried to determine whether the student was legally carrying a gun. I don’t have a problem with that, although I understand some might. I don’t see the cop as being a jerk. He was trying to do what he felt was his job and was being nice about it, despite the in- your- face attitude displayed by the student.

    Had the cop came off with the in- your- face tough guy attitude some other cops might use, I wouldn’t have had a problem with the student responding in kind.

    That might not have been the best course of action for the student to take even under those circumstances, though. Sometimes it’s best to keep a low profile. Unless, of course, you’re trying to create an incident as the student obviously was.

    …And the cop demonstrated his lack of gun safety knowledge,….

    I didn’t notice that. What are you referring to?

  34. #34 |  Burgers Allday | 

    The student could well moved on in half the time if he would have just answered the cops questions and showed him identification.

    This is probably not correct. Giving over the id can cause a lot of trouble.

    One technique is for the policeman to find someone with the same (or similar) name or alias who is a felon. Then the law student is detained until it is clear that the law student is definitely not the same person as the felon. On a similar note, if the guy is a “partial match” to anybody with an arrest warrant in the USA, then there will be an arrest of the guy who was open carrying.

    Another technique is to find that there is a felon who has, at some point in the past, lived at the guy’s address. Then there can be a SWAT raid on “probable cause” that the felon might still be living there and have access to the guy’s gun.

    On top of that, there is the problem that the guy was actually worried about (as he expressed to the policeman), which is that the police will flag his driver’s license as someone who has had an armed confrontation with police. That way, next time he gets pulled over for weaving in his lane, or suspicion of insufficient tire tread depth, or whatever, he get pulled out of the car at gunpoint and gets to really see what it feels like to have a gun pointed at him. Oh, and if there is an armed robbery anywhere in that neighborhood in the next few years, then guess who gets SWAT raided on that.

    At the very least, all the license checks I am sure the officer wanted to run would take a good half hour. At worst, it could have been a lot worst.

    You don’t want to give the license up unless you have to. Perhaps a better way to handle it is as follows:

    “I do not consent to give you any identification papers. Are you ordering me to hand you identification papers?” That was the student is covered if it turns out that the LEO does have reasonable suspicion (a-la Hiibel).

  35. #35 |  Yizmo Gizmo | 

    Not as juicy as the Mark Fiorino youtube encounter, where Fiorino
    almost gets his bean blown off by Officer Pottymouth.
    But then again Fiorino received $20,000 for the ordeal.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-vUYeJXSrA

  36. #36 |  GeneralGarbage | 

    So, if I call the Police and say “I saw a man in a car on the road” the police would be justified in stopping and searching everyone in a car, because, who knows, some of them may not have a license?

    In a state where open carry is legal, how is calling the police because you saw someone with a gun any different than calling the police because you saw someone with a cheese burger?

  37. #37 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    #27 TomPaine4:”It used to be legal to carry loaded guns openly in California, until the Black Panthers made a habit of it. Once dark-skinned people were carrying openly, our esteemed solons found open carry to be a threat to the public. (California A.B. 1591, enacted as Stats. 1967, ch. 960)”

    Excellent point! When the Panthers showed up, even Governor Ronnie Raygun (Thanks to Jello Biafra, I think) turned into a supporter of gun control. Funny how that works out. Gun control in the U.S. has regularly been used to make “those people” easier targets for state repression and the violence of private criminals/terrorists (the KKK for instance). Knowledge of this history could move the debate over guns in the U.S. past the name-calling and hyseria phase.

  38. #38 |  Delta | 

    I applaud this wholeheartedly. Trained citizens testing cops, asserting their rights clearly and firmly, and recording the response, may be the only last chance that we have.

    If you’re not so trained, than I wouldn’t recommend this challenge. But we desperately need people like this, willing to risk their time and well-being for the community.

  39. #39 |  Zargon | 

    #22

    Just the student’s way of speaking I found annoying since the cop was cool and gave no reason for an arrogant response on the student’s end, at least from what I could see from the video.

    Did we see the same video? It’s now been several hours since I’ve seen it, but I remember
    1) The cop pointed a loaded gun at the student (early on, he complained about having it pointed at his legs)
    2) The cop then goes for the social manipulation/guilt-trip when the student won’t tell him his name. “You’re one of those guys”, or something like that, as though they were having a conversation in a bar, rather than the involuntary confrontation that it was. I believe the student even hesitated at that before deciding not to go along with it, but that could be my memory inserting things.

    I’m sure I could find more if I bothered to rewatch it, but I think either of those is quite sufficient for treating an adversarial encounter as exactly that.

  40. #40 |  Ghost | 

    My wife and I just debated this video. She says that cops should have the right to make sure your gun is registered and all that. I respond with, “you need a license to drive a car, so just the fact that you’re driving gives the cops a reasonable suspicion that you don’t have a license?” well, cars and guns are different. “Yeah, cigarettes and soda are different, but look at New York. If we say it is legal to carry a holstered gun in public, which we do, then we can’t say that anyone who adheres to the law should be subject to harassment.” Yes, but a felon could get a gun. “yes, and an uninsured, unregistered, unlicensed driver could get behind the wheel. Both are able to kill someone, only my example is much more likely to kill someone. If you say that cops can harass you just to make sure you are obeying the law, then you are saying that you’re perfectly happy and willing to be stopped randomly on your way to work or home or the store, just to make sure you have a license an your insurance is up to date. Are you okay with that?”
    “…”
    “I’ll take that as a no. We don’t allow cops to stop and question people who are not breaking the law. 4th amendment. We’re protected against unreasonable searches and seizures. It is very unreasonable to search someone who is clearly not breaking the law.”

    Major kudos to the supervisor who understood the law.

  41. #41 |  Kurtz | 

    I’ve been following this incident since it was reported by the uploader of the video on a gun owners forum he frequents. Apparently he has been stopped 7 times by Portland PD within the last 4 years for the same reason. I would say that his expansive knowledge of case laws and citing said laws regarding the issue are more than justified considering the background.

    In regards to the officer racking the slide, the golden rule of firearms is that you never point a rifle/handgun/plasma cannon at something you do not want to see destroyed. This is something that should be INGRAINED into the minds of any responsible firearms enthusiast. I don’t know what’s gotten into the minds of LEOs in this country, but trigger-discipline and responsible firearms handling has gone the way of the Dodo among them, as anyone who watches the SWAT coverage on this site can see. If someone points a firearm at you, especially a carry handgun that is more often than not loaded WITH a round in the chamber (for those who want to be ready to rock and roll as soon as their firearm is out the holster), then you are more than justified in notifying the person doing so and reprimanding them. It doesn’t need to be vicious or vitriolic, it can be as simple as “Sir, you just pointed a loaded firearm in my direction. Do not do that.” Negligence with a firearm should never be ignored, especially when the men committing such negligent acts are those whose salaries are paid by tax-payer dollars and possess qualified immunity. I hope that someday more of the public will come to feel this way.

    That all being said, as a dedicated practitioner of the Second-Amendment and a southern Maine resident, I applaud this gentleman for his knowledge and patience in dealing with these unnecessary detainments. I know that even some hardened firearms veterans are uncomfortable with the idea of open-carry, yet it still baffles me when people get all bent out of shape for someone practicing a right that is ensured by the Constitution of the State of Maine.

    Insert picture of dour-faced aviators wearing man with underlying text “Deal with it.”

  42. #42 |  Bergman | 

    I have to take note of the fact that the officer is ALSO lawfully carrying a holstered sidearm. If the simple presence of the completely legal gun, carried in a completely legal way constitutes RAS of a crime, then so does the officer’s carry.

    Re: hurrr, #1: If he were hassled for openly carrying a book, would you also feel he was trying to provoke a confrontation? Books are also legal objects to carry, and more people have been killed throughout history by malicious application of knowledge than have been killed by malicious application of bullets.

  43. #43 |  perlhaqr | 

    Been there, done that. (Not about open carrying, cops in Albuquerque have never actually given me any shit for that, surprisingly.) Got just as uptight, adrenalized… well, agitated watching this video as I did then.

    The kid was remarkably calm considering a guy with a gun and hundreds of backup on radio tap stopped him and was harassing him for doing something completely legal.

    Oh, and Alex? Fuck off, slaver. Your “solution” of “never challenge the people responsible for upholding the law when they themselves break it” is bullshit.

  44. #44 |  Woog | 

    It’s a beautiful thing to see when someone isn’t killed, caged, or maimed by police in such an encounter, but this video was NOT an example of beauty.

    The student was assaulted, arrested (in the common sense if not legal), and stolen from. The facts that the assault didn’t include bodily harm, the arrest was brief, and the stolen items were returned does not lessen the fact that crimes were committed – by the cops.

  45. #45 |  Woog | 

    That should have read: it’s a beautiful thing to see when someone isn’t killed, caged, or maimed by police in such an encounter? This video was NOT an example of beauty.

  46. #46 |  demize! | 

    #5 “he didn’t go berserk like some have when confronted with an individual that does know their rights …” of course not the dude was ARMED. I believe that’s called the equalizer effect, or that may be from audio engineering, Im not sure…

  47. #47 |  Lefty | 

    Good for him. Kind of surprised he didn’t get beat up or arrested for making the video though

  48. #48 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    Yes, assert your rights always, but don’t come off as a prick.

    I deal with pricks every day at my job stocking shelves at Radio Shack without shooting them. I expect cops to do even better. Yes, you have a right to be a prick and not get splattered across the sidewalk…that should be tested as well.

    Too many times I read citizens criticizing people who might, MIGHT, if you squint real hard, and bend reality, just maybe were a wee bit gruff in their response to a cop…and that gets listed as a reason for cops busting their head in. Are we dealing with rabid grizzly bears or civil servants? It isn’t “Protect and serve only those that are 100% servile and cower at our feet while talking more respectful than an old plantation slave to his master.”

  49. #49 |  WillyT | 

    This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by boyscout399.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0RzAF007LM&feature=player_embedded

  50. #50 |  David | 

    Would have liked to see it before it got yanked. Anybody know of another version/location?

  51. #51 |  Ammyth | 

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfdEbe7e9GE&feature=plcp

  52. #52 |  Name Nomad | 

    Here’s the video in question from the original account. Apparently the one Balko linked to is down: http://youtu.be/jfdEbe7e9GE

  53. #53 |  EH | 

    Copyright claim, WTF.

  54. #54 |  EH | 

    Fred Mangels: The cop was nice because he knew he was overstepping. It’s the same reason why he didn’t answer when asked what law he was suspected of breaking. If the cop knew he was in the right, the guy would have been on the ground instantly.

  55. #55 |  burt hoovis | 

    UGGGG. I waited to later in the day to watch that, and now it’s been taken down due to a copyright claim. SNAP!

  56. #56 |  Fred Mangels | 

    He wasn’t overstepping anything. He was called because some citizens were concerned about some guy carrying a pistol while walking down the street. His job was to investigate it. The student was doing it to provoke an incident. The cop didn’t bite.

    You are correct that the cop was probably taken aback by the verbal assault he ended up getting, but he handled fairly well, I thought.

  57. #57 |  BamBam | 

    …And the cop demonstrated his lack of gun safety knowledge,….

    I didn’t notice that. What are you referring to?

    rule 1 of firearms: never point the firearm at an object unless you intend to destroy the object.

    Cop grabbed the gun and swept the muzzle across the guy. You can see the hand positioning when the cop grabs the gun, and the guy immediately responds “you just pointed the gun at my leg” or something like that.

  58. #58 |  BamBam | 

    To add to firearms rules: rule 2: always assume all firearms are loaded.

    actually that should be 1, then 2 “never point firearm at object unless you intend to destroy the object”.

    If you recognize rule 1 and still point the firearm, then you need a headslap. That being said, I’ve done a few muzzle sweeps in my time because I’m a human, but fortunately my finger wasn’t on the trigger nor was the firearm loaded. These firearms rules should be beat into everyone and constantly retested and watched and called out by everyone. You have multiple layers of firearms safety so if you screw 1 up you should still be safe, but still need a verbal reminder.

  59. #59 |  Ghost | 

    Fred,
    Apparently, his supervisor disagrees. The cop was absolutely overstepping his power. Carrying a gun is not a crime. This cops actions were criminal.

    Learn the difference, dude.

  60. #60 |  Fred Mangels | 

    BamBam wrote, “Cop grabbed the gun and swept the muzzle across the guy. You can see the hand positioning when the cop grabs the gun, and the guy immediately responds “you just pointed the gun at my leg” or something like that..

    So, the guy goes out trying to create an incident carrying an unloaded gun. Then he complains that the cop sweeps the muzzle of the gun across parts of his body?

    So? Why would the guy complain if he knew he had an unloaded gun? He’s trying to pick a fight.

    I realize that’s not considered proper gun handling, but it’s something myself and probably many of you have done at one time or another. I know I have.

    Some of you are nitpicking over what many of us gun owners have done on occasion. Trying to make an issue out of that makes it look like you’re trying to pick a fight too.

  61. #61 |  Fred Mangels | 

    Ghost wrote, “Apparently, his supervisor disagrees“.

    The supervisor showed up after the fact and didn’t have to deal with a major asshole. No problem with the supervisor letting him go (although I don’t recall seeing the supe in the video), but he might have thought differently about it had he had to deal with that student from the start.

  62. #62 |  BamBam | 

    @60 So, the guy goes out trying to create an incident carrying an unloaded gun. Then he complains that the cop sweeps the muzzle of the gun across parts of his body?

    1. You label the person engaging in legal activity as “trying to create an incident”. I know you cannot read minds, so this is a baseless statement.

    2. You state that when one tries to create an incident carrying an unloaded gun, that he deserves having a muzzle swept across his body. In your mind people deserve to have their life threatened for just this matter, or for all matters? That’s pretty sick thinking.

    3. You say the gun was unloaded. How do you know this? One should always assume that ALL firearms are loaded until proven otherwise. The guy states in the video that there was one in the chamber, which means it was NOT unloaded.

    4. You label the guy a “major asshole” simply for engaging in legal activity and asserting his rights. He did not yell or swear at the cop, and stated case law in an assertive tone. How do you purport that one should behave to a cop engaging in illegal activity?

  63. #63 |  el coronado | 

    Cravenly?

  64. #64 |  KBCraig | 

    #51 & #52 gave the proper links to the original video.

    Here is the same link, for those late to the thread.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfdEbe7e9GE

    Here is the where he first announced it.

    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?103248-My-yearly-detainment-in-Portland

    And here is his comment later in that thread:

    “People uploading my video and copying it is irritating to me. I’d rather they link back to my video directly instead of copying it without even attempting to seek my permission.”

    When it started going viral, people started copying it and reposting it as their own.

  65. #65 |  Juice | 

    The title of the post is “Know your rights” but it seems that what is shown by the video is that your rights are far from the only thing you need to know. It looks like you need to know, on the spot, at the point of arrest or detainment, every jot and tittle of the statutory law and case law in your situation. Maybe one day there’ll be an app for that. Of course it will track and trace you like most other apps, but that’s another story.

  66. #66 |  Jim | 

    Ignorance of the law is no excuse, unless you are in law enforcement.

  67. #67 |  RedDevil83 | 

    Why’e you take it down? I never SAW it!

Leave a Reply