• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Showing ID to police

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
In your opinion. Others see it differently.
No, actually, I really don't think this is a matter of opinion. Either the video's taker has the motive you attributed to them, or they did not. Either your accusation is true and accurate, or it is not. I can guarantee you that it is not true of everyone that has posted such videos on youtube, even if it may be true for one or two. Yet, you make no distinction, and rather plump ALL such videos together, and accuse them all at once, making your statement surely incorrect, surely wrong. That is not a matter of opinion. You made a sweeping accusation that is untrue. It is unfortunately. I won't hold it against you.
 

Nang pa

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2015
Messages
64
Location
United States
No, actually, I really don't think this is a matter of opinion. Either the video's taker has the motive you attributed to them, or they did not. Either your accusation is true and accurate, or it is not. I can guarantee you that it is not true of everyone that has posted such videos on youtube, even if it may be true for one or two. Yet, you make no distinction, and rather plump ALL such videos together, and accuse them all at once, making your statement surely incorrect, surely wrong. That is not a matter of opinion. You made a sweeping accusation that is untrue. It is unfortunately. I won't hold it against you.
Thank you for sharing your opinion.

We can parse those who genuinely want change from those who want YouTube hits by looking at their behavior. First if the camera is rollong before the encounter begins, that's a sign of a drama queen. More importantly, IMO, is if the citizen is confrontational with the policeman. Someone out with a point to prove will be a rules lawyer, while someone hoping to make real change will be conversational.
 
Last edited:

Nang pa

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2015
Messages
64
Location
United States
Granted he has only been here 5 months, but I would think he would have picked up on the direction of this site. Speaking for myself I do not just recognize gun rights, I recognize the whole package, the big picture, the BILL OF RIGHTS.

I would suggest that people be careful of name calling when they have been around such a short time as to know whose toes they are stepping on.
You're saying this site exists to facilitate drama queens? If that's the case, no, I haven't picked up on that at all. I thought this site was for responsible open carry, not for people who only want to stir up trouble any way they can. Please correct me if I was mistaken.
 
Last edited:

Nang pa

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2015
Messages
64
Location
United States
Another thought:
Hi, in a lot of the open carry videos on YouTube I see people refusing to show their ID to police when asked. Is there a reason for this? I know in a lot of states you don't have to, but why wouldn't you? All it seems to do is create hostility which is the last thing you want. If you have no criminal record and you're legally able to own and carry a gun, why not just let them run a background check?
They could misidentify you. Sure you know you're not a criminal, but if the policeman misspells your name, or if dispatch makes a typo, or if a real criminal has a slimier or same name, you're probably getting arrested.

And yes it would eventually get cleared up, but what if this happens on your way to work your employer doesn't excuse your absence, and you're fired? You probably can't sue the police because they were "acting in good faith" and thus have various legal immunities.

What if it happens to someone on their way to pick up their children for visitation? Now the visit was missed, which is not only bad in and of itself but gives the ex grounds in future court battles.

And your car will be towed, which you have to pay for even if you're innocent.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,631
Location
here nc
You're saying this site exists to facilitate drama queens? If that's the case, no, I haven't picked up on that at all. I thought this site was for responsible open carry, not for people who only want to stir up trouble any way they can. Please correct me if I was mistaken.

nang, you seem to have done quite an exemplary job of stirring up trouble all by yourself; therefore, i guess you do not require any correction since apparently you are not mistaken, whatsoever.

ipse
 

Nang pa

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2015
Messages
64
Location
United States
nang, you seem to have done quite an exemplary job of stirring up trouble all by yourself; therefore, i guess you do not require any correction since apparently you are not mistaken, whatsoever.

ipse
I note a difference between people who go out of their way to set up confrontations with police, and people who are just going about their day who are confronted by police.

In the first, the OC'er is the aggressor and is in the wrong, but in the second the policeman is the aggressor and is in the wrong.
 
Last edited:

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
I note a difference between people who go out of their way to set up confrontations with police, and people who are just going about their day who are confronted by police.

In the first, the OC'er is the aggressor and is in the wrong, but in the second the policeman is the aggressor and is in the wrong.
Wow, I am terribly disappointed to see this unfortunate use of 'aggressor.' You've gone from accusing these OCers of being overly dramatic to accusing them of aggressing against police officers. You've essentially doubled down on the stupid accusation making it not just a stupid one but an extremely dangerous one on top of it. Do you understand your saying the OCers are aggressors could be taken as you justifying the police to use force against them?
 

Nang pa

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2015
Messages
64
Location
United States
Do you understand your saying the OCers are aggressors could be taken as you justifying the police to use force against them?
The reason you can't quote me saying all OCers are aggressors is because Iv'e said no such thing.

There are 2 groups.
Group A: Drama queens who use OC as a gimmick to get YouTube hits, who don't care about OC one way or the other beyond it's use as a gimmick.
Group B: Regular people who OC for lawful self defence and are then bullied by police.

I dislike Group A. I like Group B.
 
Last edited:

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,463
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
The reason you can't quote me saying all OCers are aggressors is because I've said no such thing.

There are 2 groups.
Group A: Drama queens who use OC as a gimmick to get YouTube hits, who don't care about OC one way or the other beyond it's use as a gimmick.
Group B: Regular people who OC for lawful self defense and are then bullied by police.

I dislike Group A. I like Group B.
In effect you have.

You cannot bait someone into committing a crime who does not have criminal intent in their heart.

What you call "gimmick" gets no hits on youtube unless the police give them some action to share.

I also fixed your spelling errors.
 

Nang pa

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2015
Messages
64
Location
United States

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,337
Location
Valhalla
The reason you can't quote me saying all OCers are aggressors is because Iv'e said no such thing.

There are 2 groups.
Group A: Drama queens who use OC as a gimmick to get YouTube hits, who don't care about OC one way or the other beyond it's use as a gimmick.
Group B: Regular people who OC for lawful self defence and are then bullied by police.

I dislike Group A. I like Group B.
IMO - the implication is there.

No need to be so negative either. Being an active participant is not being an aggressor.

Seeing a problem and stepping forward to correct it, is sometimes simply shinning a bright light in a dark place.
 

Nang pa

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2015
Messages
64
Location
United States
IMO - the implication is there.
I have no control over the concussion you draw. I tried to clarify.

No need to be so negative either. Being an active participant is not being an aggressor.
As I've said, someone trying to correct a problem is conversational, not combative.

Seeing a problem and stepping forward to correct it, is sometimes simply shinning a bright light in a dark place.
And many shine lights not to illuminate dark places, but just to get attention.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,242
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
The reason you can't quote me saying all OCers are aggressors is because Iv'e said no such thing.

There are 2 groups.
Group A: Drama queens who use OC as a gimmick to get YouTube hits, who don't care about OC one way or the other beyond it's use as a gimmick.
Group B: Regular people who OC for lawful self defence and are then bullied by police.

I dislike Group A. I like Group B.
What about Group C, D, E, F and G?

I personally have a big problem with Group T.

Everyone on here have opinions. But, you are trying to justify your opinion and then hard sell it to non-buyers. If you have not recognized that fact yet, it's time you do. If this goes on much further I'll bet on Grape's decision making skills.

I'm just say'n......
 

Nang pa

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2015
Messages
64
Location
United States
So, doing, a liberty check is being a drama queen?
Yes.

I fail to see how that is.
It's seeking confrontation.

I fixed them when I quoted you.
There's only one, but it remains in my post. I think you need mod privs to edit other people's posts. Did you notice your improper use of a comma in your first sentence? You seem to be sensitive to that sort of thing so I wouldn't want you to look like a hypocrite or anything.

Now, go back to your bridge.
I'll have to ask you to move out from under it first.
 
Last edited:

Nang pa

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2015
Messages
64
Location
United States
What about Group C, D, E, F and G?

I personally have a big problem with Group T.
If you would identify these groups we could review them.

Everyone on here have opinions. But, you are trying to justify your opinion and then hard sell it to non-buyers. If you have not recognized that fact yet, it's time you do. If this goes on much further I'll bet on Grape's decision making skills.

I'm just say'n......
Your meaning is lost to me. I don't require that others agree with me.

And I'm not sure what spelling has to do with the topic, either.

Care to comment on my redress of OP?

Another thought:

They could misidentify you. Sure you know you're not a criminal, but if the policeman misspells your name, or if dispatch makes a typo, or if a real criminal has a slimier or same name, you're probably getting arrested.

And yes it would eventually get cleared up, but what if this happens on your way to work your employer doesn't excuse your absence, and you're fired? You probably can't sue the police because they were "acting in good faith" and thus have various legal immunities.

What if it happens to someone on their way to pick up their children for visitation? Now the visit was missed, which is not only bad in and of itself but gives the ex grounds in future court battles.

And your car will be towed, which you have to pay for even if you're innocent.
Seems relevant:

[video=youtube;6wXkI4t7nuc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc[/video]
 
Last edited:
Top