Post by: superdown on March 05, 2015, 01:56:28 PM
Post by: h20hunter on March 05, 2015, 02:00:09 PM
Post by: superdown on March 05, 2015, 02:04:02 PM
Post by: h20hunter on March 05, 2015, 02:11:55 PM
Number one. Yes he is a vetern and has served his country. For that I'm thankfull. However, that does not mean he is a balanced individual.
Number two. The source. This source is clearly agenda minded.
Number three. From what I see it appears that this person has a camera in his left hand. It also appears that this was a set up encounter designed to escalate. His son was prepared to film.
To me nobody should be surprised in the outcome of this encounter. He wanted a showdown and he got it. This could have gone much much worse. He or the officer could have fired shots.
I know we will have plenty of comments about the tyrant government and the losing of rights. I've said it and I'll keep saying it. If you act with the intention of creating an event to show that by golly I can and damn you for saying I can't then buck up and don't be surprised when your face hits the hood.
Post by: Woodchuck on March 05, 2015, 02:24:57 PM
That cop should be fired and charged with assault.Yes, but sometimes when you go look for trouble, you find it. :twocents:
Post by: h20hunter on March 05, 2015, 02:28:39 PM
That cop should be fired and charged with assault.
I disagree. I think a case could be made for the individual to be looking at disordly conduct charges.
I agree with Woodblock. If you want to create a scene you often get your wish.
Post by: jrebel on March 05, 2015, 02:29:01 PM
Post by: h20hunter on March 05, 2015, 02:32:34 PM
Where is the popcorn emoticon????? This one has thread has potential!! May even rival the jeep stuck on a mountain thread. :chuckle: :chuckle:
Okay....follow me here rebel....epic thread idea.
Bikini barista in a jeep, glassing a 2pt, wishing for a 3rd point, AR on their back, recipe for bbq sauce and smoking tips in back left pocket, next to tribal land, unmarked private property close by, and.......AND I SAY......a blurry something that could be a Biggie in the background.
Post by: CP on March 05, 2015, 02:35:50 PM
Post by: jrebel on March 05, 2015, 02:37:09 PM
Where is the popcorn emoticon????? This one has thread has potential!! May even rival the jeep stuck on a mountain thread. :chuckle: :chuckle:
Okay....follow me here rebel....epic thread idea.
Bikini barista in a jeep, glassing a 2pt, wishing for a 3rd point, AR on their back, recipe for bbq sauce and smoking tips in back left pocket, next to tribal land, unmarked private property close by, and.......AND I SAY......a blurry something that could be a Biggie in the background.
Could be a record setting post!!! One I would even follow :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
I really would like to know her secrets concerning the BBQ sauce and smoking tips.... :drool: :drool:
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 05, 2015, 02:41:34 PM
I agree this thread will go far. :tup:
Post by: Angry Perch on March 05, 2015, 02:44:47 PM
That's what it said on www.thefreethoughtproject.com (http://www.thefreethoughtproject.com), so it's exactly what I think! Because if you don't agree with what they say on www.thefreethoughtproject.com (http://www.thefreethoughtproject.com), well then you're not really a free thinker, are you?!
Post by: bearpaw on March 05, 2015, 02:50:34 PM
That cop should be fired and charged with assault.
I agree, 2nd amendment rights were violated. I hope it was a setup and I hope these officers are reprimanded if not fired. They should know the law and follow the law regarding all constitutional rights.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 05, 2015, 02:50:44 PM
The jackboot tyranny in this video BOILED MY BLOOD.
That's what it said on www.thefreethoughtproject.com (http://www.thefreethoughtproject.com), so it's exactly what I think! Because if you don't agree with what they say on www.thefreethoughtproject.com (http://www.thefreethoughtproject.com), well then you're not really a free thinker, are you?!
So you must agree or you're not a free thinker???? Isn't that the opposite of free thinking? Maybe you did that on purpose. :dunno:
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 05, 2015, 02:52:40 PM
I expect that this will be swept to the off topics board before too long.
It actually belongs in Outdoor advocacy with the 2A topics, but it's a good discussion. :tup:
Post by: bearpaw on March 05, 2015, 02:58:09 PM
Quote
I think the most telling part of this video is when one of the cops says that they don't care what the law is...
Post by: h20hunter on March 05, 2015, 03:02:56 PM
QuoteI think the most telling part of this video is when one of the cops says that they don't care what the law is...
Dale.....very damning statement. I'm won't defend the cops actions or say they don't deserve punishment. There also has to be some, not as much but some, blame on this man for creating this incident.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 05, 2015, 03:03:55 PM
Post by: Angry Perch on March 05, 2015, 03:04:37 PM
The jackboot tyranny in this video BOILED MY BLOOD.
That's what it said on www.thefreethoughtproject.com (http://www.thefreethoughtproject.com), so it's exactly what I think! Because if you don't agree with what they say on www.thefreethoughtproject.com (http://www.thefreethoughtproject.com), well then you're not really a free thinker, are you?!
So you must agree or you're not a free thinker???? Isn't that the opposite of free thinking? Maybe you did that on purpose. :dunno:
Sorry, it was meant to be sarcastic. A guy looking for a fight ran into a cop willing to oblige. I try not to waste too much hate on these things. I'd say neither of them are dudes I'd want to spend a day fishing with.
Post by: Firedogg on March 05, 2015, 03:06:56 PM
Some folks do things because they can just hoping to find trouble, looks like the case here. This could have gone bad in so many ways, it's lucky this is as far as it went.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 05, 2015, 03:07:10 PM
Post by: bearpaw on March 05, 2015, 03:08:50 PM
QuoteI think the most telling part of this video is when one of the cops says that they don't care what the law is...
Dale.....very damning statement. I'm won't defend the cops actions or say they don't deserve punishment. There also has to be some, not as much but some, blame on this man for creating this incident.
I'm trying to understand how he broke the law by packing a rifle in farm country? That's the reason the cop hand cuffed him. I probably would have raided my voice at that point too when my rights were violated.
Post by: Firedogg on March 05, 2015, 03:12:06 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 05, 2015, 03:16:59 PM
QuoteI think the most telling part of this video is when one of the cops says that they don't care what the law is...
Dale.....very damning statement. I'm won't defend the cops actions or say they don't deserve punishment. There also has to be some, not as much but some, blame on this man for creating this incident.
I'm trying to understand how he broke the law by packing a rifle in farm country? That's the reason the cop hand cuffed him. I probably would have raided my voice at that point too when my rights were violated.
Watch it again. The cop grabbed him and pulled him in when he put his hands on his firearm. It escalated from there. We have a right to carry. A cop has a right to get really nervous when we put our hands on our firearm.
Post by: jrebel on March 05, 2015, 03:19:06 PM
Post by: Russ McDonald on March 05, 2015, 03:21:41 PM
Both could have and should have made better decisions. That's all I have. :tup::yeah: my thoughts exactly
Post by: Angry Perch on March 05, 2015, 03:34:54 PM
Post by: bearpaw on March 05, 2015, 03:35:25 PM
Show me once where raising your voice to a cop ever got the yeller what they wanted?? It immediately gives you a fail on the personality test.
I don't disagree with not needing to raise the voice, but this cop asked for it, he first grabbed the guys gun without cause and without citing what the citizen did wrong. The cop escalated this situation, the citizen was calm until he was strong armed for no reason by the cop.
Post by: h20hunter on March 05, 2015, 03:38:48 PM
I don't completely disagree with you but rolling up to the situation I bet both him and the cop were far from calm from the very beginnning.
Post by: Mudman on March 05, 2015, 03:45:36 PM
Post by: bearpaw on March 05, 2015, 03:49:21 PM
This same situation could have happened to any one of us if this cop pulled up wjile we were carrying the gun. This situation likely would have never happened if the cop didn't grab the gun.
Considering some of the bad cops that are out there with out of control egos, I think cops should all be checked in situations like this to determine if they are capable of professionally handling the situation, if not, they shouldn't be a cop. This cop failed the test and escalated a legal carry into an arrest.
The germans allowed these same type of tactics by Nazis and then one day their rights were gone and a madman controlled their country!
Post by: grundy53 on March 05, 2015, 03:49:27 PM
I'm all for officer safety but it doesn't give him a right to ignore the law/ constitution.
Post by: Skillet on March 05, 2015, 03:50:19 PM
Two things.
#1. I think the cop looks like a young Mike Holmgren.
#2. I think that as much of a instigator that the guy appears to be, that our young Mike Holmgren here took the bait and needlessly escalated the situation. Of the two, young Mike Holmgren is supposed to be the professional here. That's why we entrust police with the powers that we do. Unfortunately, it looks like young Mike Holmgren is unworthy of that trust.
Post by: grundy53 on March 05, 2015, 03:51:15 PM
I watched the video again and must disagree, the cop interrupted a citizen legally carrying a firearm and the citizen did not escalate his voice at all until the cop grabbed his rifle. The cop was intent on taking the gun before he had any idea the guy might raise his voice.:yeah:
This same situation could have happened to any one of us if this cop pulled up wjile we were carrying the gun. This situation likely would have never happened if the cop didn't grab the gun.
Considering some of the bad cops that are out there with out of control egos, I think cops should all be checked in situations like this to determine if they are capable of professionally handling the situation, if not, they shouldn't be a cop. This cop failed the test and escalated a legal carry into an arrest.
The germans allowed these same type of tactics by Nazis and then one day their rights were gone and a madman controlled their country!
Post by: h20hunter on March 05, 2015, 03:52:05 PM
I don't disagree Mud that the Constitution means less and less....heck Obahma care and the ACA act is about as clear of an example as it gets.
Dale, good points and since mine is only opinion I can't assume I'm right and appreciate your points. Just so that doesn't sound to butt kissing I'll say C-POST!
Well done Skillet.
Don't care for the rape analogy but I'll agree Grundy...he could have asked the man to surrender his weapon up front.
Post by: bearpaw on March 05, 2015, 03:54:06 PM
To all the folks who say it's his fault. "He was looking for it". That is like saying a rape victim was asking for it because of the way she was dressed. Both are b.s. If the cop wants him de-armed then he should ask the guy to voluntarily surrender his rifle until after the cop checks him out.
I'm all for officer safety but it doesn't give him a right to ignore the law/ constitution.
thankyou
"What do you all think of this?"
Two things.
#1. I think the cop looks like a young Mike Holmgren.
#2. I think that as much of a instigator that the guy appears to be, that our young Mike Holmgren here took the bait and needlessly escalated the situation. Of the two, young Mike Holmgren is supposed to be the professional here. That's why we entrust police with the powers that we do. Unfortunately, it looks like young Mike Holmgren is unworthy of that trust.
exactly
I've openly carried side arms as well as my AR...and my AK for that matter. The difference is the time and place I have chosen to do so.
I don't disagree Mud that the Constitution means less and less....heck Obahma care and the ACA act is about as clear of an example as it gets.
Dale, good points and since mine is only opinion I can't assume I'm right and appreciate your points. Just so that doesn't sound to butt kissing I'll say C-POST!
Well done Skillet.
Don't care for the rape analogy but I'll agree Grundy...he could have asked the man to surrender his weapon up front.
I wasn't aware that constitutional rights had a time and place. :yike:
Post by: grundy53 on March 05, 2015, 03:57:10 PM
I've openly carried side arms as well as my AR...and my AK for that matter. The difference is the time and place I have chosen to do so.I don't care for it much either... doesn't mean it's wrong. Both situations are horrible to me.
I don't disagree Mud that the Constitution means less and less....heck Obahma care and the ACA act is about as clear of an example as it gets.
Dale, good points and since mine is only opinion I can't assume I'm right and appreciate your points. Just so that doesn't sound to butt kissing I'll say C-POST!
Well done Skillet.
Don't care for the rape analogy but I'll agree Grundy...he could have asked the man to surrender his weapon up front.
Post by: h20hunter on March 05, 2015, 03:57:29 PM
Post by: bearpaw on March 05, 2015, 04:01:49 PM
Post by: h20hunter on March 05, 2015, 04:04:44 PM
Post by: grundy53 on March 05, 2015, 04:04:59 PM
Post by: h20hunter on March 05, 2015, 04:10:47 PM
Post by: grundy53 on March 05, 2015, 04:14:39 PM
Post by: bearpaw on March 05, 2015, 04:37:52 PM
I totally agree. These actions hurt our cause.
I guess I see it a little differently, I think this guy has brought awareness to thousands of Americans?
Post by: jrebel on March 05, 2015, 04:46:01 PM
Hiker, "Hiking and getting my son his badge for boyscouts."
Officer, "cool...just checking because we had reports of a couple walking down the road with firearms. Do me a favor and don't touch firearm while we are talking." "Mind if I check a few things out so you guys can get back to your hike?"
Hiker, "Sure."
Officer runs the mans name to make sure all is on the up and up and they are on their way in a matter of 60 seconds.
Done....win win.
Instead, the officer touches the firearm and trys to take it before really even ascertaining what was going on. For all the officer knows the two were walking to their next coyote set.
Hiker very easily could have done things differently too. Maybe comply to make the officer feel safe. After everything is worked out the officer would have given the rifle back. Really would have been a non issue.
I think people forget that officers are hated by criminals....and officers unfortunately don't know who all the criminals are. They don't have the luxury to wait until they are wrong to secure the scene. At that point bullets are flying and they are dead.
Post by: Jingles on March 05, 2015, 05:28:07 PM
Well BS they are not only NOT EXEMPT They should be setting the example.. One reason I Love following cops down the highway at 75 in a 60 zone
Post by: LittleJohn on March 05, 2015, 06:04:45 PM
That cop should be fired and charged with assault.
I agree, 2nd amendment rights were violated. I hope it was a setup and I hope these officers are reprimanded if not fired. They should know the law and follow the law regarding all constitutional rights.
I am a bit surprised by your you agreeing with this Dale :}
A lot of great comments on here.
I'll first say that I am a Cop and am trying to be impartial.
The Officer did not handle the situation very well in my opinion. Should he be fired? No :two cents:
Did the individual leave his home with his long gun in hopes of a confrontation? You bet :two cents:
If this Officer does not respond to a citizen request and investigate he is liable. If this guy walks to the neighbors and shoots everyone I am sure you all would like him fired as well :)
Post by: h20hunter on March 05, 2015, 06:11:51 PM
Post by: grundy53 on March 05, 2015, 06:12:49 PM
I totally agree. These actions hurt our cause.
I guess I see it a little differently, I think this guy has brought awareness to thousands of Americans?
He has also caused folks to think what happened to him was justified. I agree there needs to be awareness but not like this.
Post by: Windwalker on March 05, 2015, 06:18:10 PM
Remembered following this back when it happened-
The LEO's were out of line.
Grisham was not out to "make a point" - he was on a Eagle Scout hike with his son, this was one of the few cases/videos where the LEO's were not provoked.
He had a concealed carry for the pistol (not why they stopped him) and there is no law against carrying long guns.
He isn't a whacko-"Grisham has served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan throughout his 18 years in the military. He was awarded the Bronze Star with Valor for his service."
Since then and because of what happened he founded Open Carry Texas.
http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/sunday-commentary/20140704-point-person-our-qa-with-cj-grisham-founder-of-open-carry-texas.ece (http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/sunday-commentary/20140704-point-person-our-qa-with-cj-grisham-founder-of-open-carry-texas.ece)
Grisham, who’s stationed at Fort Hood, was carrying an AR-15 rifle and a concealed handgun, for which he had a permit. Texas law allows for rifles to be carried in public.
As of Oct. 18, 2013
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/18/small-legal-victory-for-military-veteran-arrested-after-rudely-displaying-rifle-on-hike-with-his-son/ (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/18/small-legal-victory-for-military-veteran-arrested-after-rudely-displaying-rifle-on-hike-with-his-son/)
A mistrial was declared Friday in a Texas case against a soldier carrying his assault rifle on a hike, in a proceeding that was being closely watched by gun-rights advocates.
The six-person jury in Belton was deadlocked after two days of deliberations Thursday and Friday. Prosecutors did not immediately reveal whether they intended to retry him.
I looked for more info- looks like there was a retrial resulting in a $2.000 fine.
http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/Soldier-At-Center-Of-Gun-Rights-Debate-Tried-For-Second-Time-232412011.html (http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/Soldier-At-Center-Of-Gun-Rights-Debate-Tried-For-Second-Time-232412011.html)
"Jurors found guilty Grisham Tuesday of interference with the duties of an officer."
"The offense is a class-B misdemeanor punishable by a fine of no more than $2,000 and a jail sentence of not more than 180 days"
Grisham will appeal.
http://kdhnews.com/news/crime/grisham-appeal-centers-on-alleged-errors-by-judge/article_1c848bd8-1dd4-11e4-a084-0017a43b2370.html (http://kdhnews.com/news/crime/grisham-appeal-centers-on-alleged-errors-by-judge/article_1c848bd8-1dd4-11e4-a084-0017a43b2370.html)
Ermis testified in Grisham’s trial that he thought he’d told Grisham that he was going to disarm him but then admitted he did not say that.
The County Attorney’s Office later changed the charge of resisting arrest to interference with the duties of a peace officer.
Ermis’ reason for initially detaining Grisham changed during the trial to walking on the right-hand side of the road, a transportation offense, Rannefeld stated.
What a mess- not sure there would have been a way out regardless of what was said.
What I would have done. Am never confrontational with LEO's for one. First and foremost I want them relaxed knowing I am not a threat.
My first questions if armed. How would you like me to proceed? If they screw up that is for the court to decide at a later time.
Post by: MuleySniper on March 05, 2015, 06:19:58 PM
Post by: LittleJohn on March 05, 2015, 06:43:11 PM
Lil john...thanks for your input. Would you agree that when a person exercises their rights in this manner, with what I assume is a deliberate confrontation, there simply is no reasonable expectation of a good outcome.
h20
I would not say "no reasonable expectation of a good outcome", there are quite a few "good outcomes" on Youtube where the LEO exercised common sense and legal knowledge for a "happy Ending" :twocents: :twocents: :)
A reasonable person would consider open carrying a long gun in public unreasonable :twocents: :twocents:
Post by: Mudman on March 05, 2015, 06:51:47 PM
Post by: AntlerHound on March 05, 2015, 06:56:20 PM
Post by: Gringo31 on March 05, 2015, 07:01:31 PM
The camera may have been due to his hike not necessarily looking for trouble. It's not the path I would have taken but he is within his right to do so and I support that right. The cops got started down a road and didn't have the character to back up once they started. I have a real hard time calling that resisting arrest.
Post by: grundy53 on March 05, 2015, 07:01:54 PM
Didn't look much like "public" looks like a rural area. How do you feel about open carrying a long gun while hunting. I really don't see a difference here. In fact that would have been my first inclination in this situation.Lil john...thanks for your input. Would you agree that when a person exercises their rights in this manner, with what I assume is a deliberate confrontation, there simply is no reasonable expectation of a good outcome.
h20
I would not say "no reasonable expectation of a good outcome", there are quite a few "good outcomes" on Youtube where the LEO exercised common sense and legal knowledge for a "happy Ending" :twocents: :twocents: :)
A reasonable person would consider open carrying a long gun in public unreasonable :twocents: :twocents:
Post by: Curly on March 05, 2015, 07:48:00 PM
Post by: TommyH on March 05, 2015, 08:27:02 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on March 05, 2015, 08:31:33 PM
Post by: Bean Counter on March 05, 2015, 08:34:43 PM
Show me once where raising your voice to a cop ever got the yeller what they wanted?? It immediately gives you a fail on the personality test.
I agree. I don't think this guy was out "asking for it." Or if he was.. he's really stupid. Attempting to have court on the side of the road is plain dumb :twocents: He came semi prepared--video cameras and what not, but he clearly didn't think things through for a coherent strategy. There was no benefit to him to 1. raise his voice at the officers and 2. attempt to educate them on the law (whether he's right or not). These gotcha videos tend to embarrass the cops more when the instigator simply says: "I don't consent to any searches" or "Am I free to go? Or are you detaining me?" Such legalese terms being thrown around will trip up and confuse the officer far more than escalating the adrenaline, which will only cause the officers to go into fight-or-flight mode. He also should have given his son the camera before the walk even began. Whether or not the officers actions were justified leading up to the point of handcuffing the father on the hood, I'm surprised the officer at that point allowed the son to approach to take the camera. At that point in time, I certainly wouldn't have allowed it if I were the officer, though I probably would have done things differently before that point.
Watch it again. The cop grabbed him and pulled him in when he put his hands on his firearm. It escalated from there. We have a right to carry. A cop has a right to get really nervous when we put our hands on our firearm.
When I am approached by gamies in the field (usually them pulling up on me in their truck) I put my rifle down and open the action right as I'm resting it on the ground. Then I take several steps away with my hands clearly visible and tell him that I also have a handgun on, too. Whether we have a right to do these open carry demonstrations or not its clear that this isn't normal behavior, and an LEO will almost always walk into the encounter with an elevated state of vigilance--not knowing whether its a YouTube gotcha game in the making or the "Police State USA" troll who has emerged from his mommas basement and decided to make history that day.
tag. This is going to be political thread of the year. Guaranteed.
Disagree. The "shoot my dog, I'll shoot you" :boxin: :pee: matches are always more heated :chuckle:
Post by: Dan-o on March 05, 2015, 09:04:27 PM
I see no evidence that the guy was "out looking for a confrontation." He's on an Eagle scout walk in the country with his son. Having a camera...... I would.
He's not walking through downtown Houston; He's walking down a country road. I've walked down many country roads with a long gun or shotgun on my way to/from hunts. And I wasn't out looking for trouble.
That cop should be severely reprimanded with time off at a minimum, if not fired.
(I am AMAZED that more on this site don't feel that way.)
Having said that, if LEO approaches me when armed, I'll do the most expedient disarm I can to make the LEO know that I am no threat....... I just think the guy's 2A rights were stolen.
Post by: TommyH on March 05, 2015, 09:07:43 PM
Wow..... I am typically very pro-LEO, but I think this officer was FLAT WRONG.
I see no evidence that the guy was "out looking for a confrontation." He's on an Eagle scout walk in the country with his son. Having a camera...... I would.
He's not walking through downtown Houston; He's walking down a country road. I've walked down many country roads with a long gun or shotgun on my way to/from hunts. And I wasn't out looking for trouble.
That cop should be severely reprimanded with time off at a minimum, if not fired.
(I am AMAZED that more on this site don't feel that way.)
Having said that, if LEO approaches me when armed, I'll do the most expedient disarm I can to make the LEO know that I am no threat....... I just think the guy's 2A rights were stolen.
Agreed
Post by: Jarhead Chase on March 05, 2015, 09:20:06 PM
I don't care if the guy was looking for a police "gotcha" video. As long as he wasn't breaking any laws there shouldn't have been a confrontation.
Post by: LittleJohn on March 05, 2015, 10:08:49 PM
Possession of a firearm is not grounds to be suspected of a crime or detained.
Depending on the information dispatch gave to the LEO from the complainant.
Post by: Bean Counter on March 05, 2015, 10:25:35 PM
http://youtu.be/sj9wahCTz08 (http://youtu.be/sj9wahCTz08)
Post by: Bean Counter on March 06, 2015, 01:39:18 AM
Klamath Falls Police, Open Carry a MP5 and a Handgun. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sj9wahCTz08#)
Post by: Jarhead Chase on March 06, 2015, 09:30:49 AM
Post by: bearhunter99 on March 06, 2015, 10:37:07 AM
The first being we do not know the nature of the complaint that was called in. The officer could have been very on edge due to the information that was given to him. I will say that regardless of the nature of the complaint the officer never should have walked up and started looking at the guy's gun. He should have kept a little distance and explained the situation and asked the guy to place the rifle on the ground.
That being said I am a very staunch supporter of our 2A rights but I am also aware of the political climate we live in. If I am pulled over the first thing I tell the officer is that I have a CWP and there is a loaded firearm in my jockey box or on my side. I also am very careful when I run into an officer in the field to make sure there is no reason for the officer to feel he needs to be wary of me. We have 2A rights but those are constantly under a barrage and I don't feel the need to create situations that will lead to confrontation that could be construed in favor of the gun ban supporters. When an officer asks "why do you have this?" just answer truthfully. Saying "because I can" is just going to escalate a situation regardless of where you are. That statement gets used all too often and doesn't help the cause in my opinion.
Post by: Bean Counter on March 06, 2015, 10:40:57 AM
Post by: bearhunter99 on March 06, 2015, 10:46:42 AM
I doubt he was responding to a call. In the video I posted you'll note two patrol cars pull up. I certainly would want back up before responding to an armed individual.I was just going off the videos, both officers stated that they had received a complaint. I was under the impression that the officer stopped him for that reason, not just because he was walking down the road with a gun.
Post by: Curly on March 06, 2015, 10:53:31 AM
Post by: WAPatriot on March 06, 2015, 10:56:45 AM
Post by: Bean Counter on March 06, 2015, 11:04:33 AM
I doubt he was responding to a call. In the video I posted you'll note two patrol cars pull up. I certainly would want back up before responding to an armed individual.I was just going off the videos, both officers stated that they had received a complaint. I was under the impression that the officer stopped him for that reason, not just because he was walking down the road with a gun.
Oh I thought you were talking about the first video :sry:
Post by: csaaphill on March 08, 2015, 11:04:12 PM
I think the cop is nothing but a bully and anti gunner in disguise and needs to learn manners of rights mean.
Also from what I hear the guy lost his case which with everything latly Not surprised but again this was just after Newtown so.........
Post by: bowbuild on March 09, 2015, 08:08:15 PM
A officer responding to a call to a house does not need a warrant if he feels a crime is being commited abuse, life threatening.....and I think this is how they will spin it. :)