Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Open carry legal here - but no matter, you'll get arrested anyway

quote=FreeMe]

So, I call the cops and say there are 5 senior citizens openly carrying 3 legged canes at Culver's and you roll? There are 3 teens with exposed cell phone and you roll?

Well it's the same thing. No law against canes or cell phones in the open. No law against guns in the open. Infact guns are constitutionally protected right. Canes and cell phones are a priveledge.

Excuse me granny, I see you're carrying a 3-legged cane...what's your name?

As pointed out before, it comes down to liability.

I don't, as a rule, get the "camo man carrying a rifle/shotgun" call due to my AO. When I do, I don't waste my time. I let Dispatch know that it's not illegal to carry a firearm and it's most likely a hunter and we call it good.

OTOH, if I get a call about a group of folks with guns at the gas station/restaurant (that's how it's going to come in, BTW, nothing about "peaceful" or "open carry") then I'm gonna have to go just like I have to respond to a bunch of other dumb azz calls that people think are important.

When I get there if it's five guys simply having breakfast carrying open it's a non-issue (unless it's the owner calling who wants them removed but that's another issue that isn't relevant).

If it's guys I know there will probably be some bullchit talk thrown around (Jesus Christ Joe, can't you at least throw a jacket over that so I don't get called by the [bleep] libs). If it's folks I don't know I'm going to ask for ID (Sir, this call just earned me a report. Would you mind if I took your information?) If he tells me to pizz up a rope, I'm out of there. I don't waste my time on pizzing contests that I can't win.

George

And that's why you're one of the good guys, George.

yep.....sounds like how the locals would handle it.....and why i really dont have many issues with them....

Oh crap! That can't be right - Ask Hunter1960!

BTW - now I do recall one instance of a nuisance call that I was involved in. Nature-Nazi called me in for shooting in a "no shooting" area. Problem was I was legally shooting an air rifle in a "no shooting rifles and handguns (firearms)" zone. Officer that answered the call had a hunch and just told the caller to leave a note with the officer's # on my vehicle. I called and explained. Seems he's had these nuisance calls before. I bet he doesn't respond to many of them.

When I read this thread... I keep hearing Obama saying that you are going to get arrested for not having your papers with you when you take your kids out for ice cream. That isnt the kind of America he wants to live in.

I guess that only applys if your illegal!

Yep - focusing on the non-crimes while letting the criminals go free. Wasted time and resources. That is what bothers me about this - besides the political brainwashing involved.

Oops! Gotta go to work....

I guess I don't get it, if it's not illegal to open carry then there's nothing to call about. Would it be OK for me to call in a guy wearing a red shirt (which could be associated with violent street gangs)? Or whatever legal thing that I don't happen to personally like. How about guys with black curly hair? Or just a group of men in general? Even if they're minding their own business, they could be up to something, and you know men *are* more dangerous physically than women, especially in groups. Better check their id's, just to be sure...


Are we really supposed to allow the most paranoid and prejudiced drive these spontaneous id checks?

Yep, when we still had open carry here we would get the occasional "man with a gun" calls. Mostly from snowbirds or recent residents from up nawth. We had to respond but if the person was going about their business there was no point in bothering them and we would just tell dispatch no crime involved and move on. Now that we have CCW and we get such a call and contact the person reported we ask for their CCW and if they have one it is Thank you, sorry to bother you, have a nice day. we do have the right to ask for the CCW under our law but as long as they are legal, TILT, GAME OVER.


I was stopped in Joliet, IL a couple of years ago by an overzealous young City PD officer, they went nuts even after I showed my ID, CCW and HR 218 card. Took me to the station and TT'ed my Dept. to verify I was legit and not lying even though I had all the documentation, just a matter of mindset. I did get and apology from the officer, his Sgt and a follow up call from their Capt. He was concerned that I might take legal action and wanted to avoid any "unpleasantness" between brother officers! So as I say, it is a matter of really knowing the law in your jurisdiction and any laws that make exception to them. Ignorance is a serious problem in bigger dept's IMHO.

Thank God the libs haven't come here in force, seems common sense goes out the window when they arrive en-mass.

Joe's moving north? In my opinion, the ID check for no reason is the serious part.

I would be nervous if I had my family in a restaurant and five guys were open carrying in the corner, even if I were CC. Sounds to me like they were doing it just to prove that they could, without the regards for the other diners. Eight police officers? Confrontation? OK Corral.

I'm glad that my family did not witness this BS.

make no mistake about it... a summons is an arrest....

Not an unusual scene in Arizona. Nobody gets their panties in a wad. Not unusual in Alaska either.

Lots of great conservative folks in Wisconsin, in every county (although I wouldn't recommend anyone live in Dane). It's a beautiful state with a lot of things to do, and good hunting and fishing. Like many other states surrounding it, namely Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Michigan....Wisconsin shares the same problem. The conservatives can't overcome the few large metropolitan areas that have the liberal (and majority) stranglehold on the entire state.
We are presently looking at property just across the IL/WI border, and in a state-to-state comparison, Wisconsin wins hands down over Illinois.

You know full well where he'd stand.

Correct, "summons in lieu of arrest".

George

No, I'm fairly certain you don't. You might not like some of what he says/does but he would be standing between you and those who would actually do it.

George

Exactly.

Couple of points:

One: law enforcement has no affirmative duty to respond, as per SCOTUS decisions (South v. Maryland, 59 U.S. (How.) 396, 15 L.Ed.433 (1856); DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189, 109 S.Ct. 998, 1989 (1989); Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005)).

Two: it would appear from the news articles (more than one) that the two people arrested complied with the actual law and gave names and addresses upon request, but refused to produce identification as per case law in Wisconsin.

Three: the officer(s) in question had the discretion to pursue, or not pursue, a course of action; likely dictated by departmental/city policy. In this case, they (perhaps) chose poorly.

Cannot complain about that.

Big difference between a city PD and in my case a county S.O. City officers don't work directly for an elected official. In an S.O. if policy is that all citizens complaints are acted upon, that's how it'll be. Response shows concern, concern equals votes.

In the case with the camo. man with gun. It's a quick and easy check. The log shows that it was checked and the disposition. That along with manytimes making another citizen (the hunter) happy, by giving him a ride back to his truck.