-1 IMPD (OC Incident) 86th and Ditch Speedway

[ATM]

Uninformed opinions that defy logic are amusing. I'd have stuck around and argued with the officer, picking his reasoning apart bit by bit until he faked some reason to leave.

 

[KellyinAvon]

OP: You have a good point. In uniform you represent something bigger than just yourself. Send this Po-Po back to remedial professionalism.

Frank: Thank you for the input. I spent 21+ years in a different uniform, but it applies the same: don't make the rest of us look bad because that's the guy everyone remembers.

Long Hair: Are you surprised nobody beat you to the "cocktail" comment??

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Even though that was a consenual encounter, that is a Heckler's Veto. I don't like it therefore I will harass you for exercising your rights.

Next time "Am I free to go?"

What did your grandpa tell you? Don't wrestle with the hog, you both get dirty and the hog likes it.

He is certainly entitled to his opinion and may be correct in certain contexts. However, he is wilfully interfering with your civil rights and is doing so as a government employee. That must be objected to.

Some one needs to explain to him that open carry is very legal, not a cause for a stop in Indiana,

Who is telling you this? What authority are you citing for this statement?

 

[Rookie]

That is a Heckler's Veto. I don't like it therefore I will harass you for exercising your rights.



Who is telling you this? What authority are you citing for this statement?

In IMPD's case, the statement is correct. Unfortunately, it's not the case for any other department.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-legal-directive-how-deal-armed-citizens.html

 

[Kirk Freeman]

In IMPD's case, the statement is correct

There is a distinction between internal policy and constitutional law.

IMPD may have a policy on stopping those for merely openly carrying a handgun. However, carrying a handgun is a crime and reasonable suspicion of a crime is a valid reason for a stop.

What is displayed in the OP is a consensual encounter.

 

[Rookie]

There is a distinction between internal policy and constitutional law.

I understand that.

There is a distinction between internal policy and constitutional law.

IMPD may have a policy on stopping those for merely openly carrying a handgun. However, carrying a handgun is a crime and reasonable suspicion of a crime is a valid reason for a stop.

Agreed. However, my statement was not incorrect. IMPD has a legal directive regarding the carry of firearms. Other departments do not.

 

[indyk]

puberty

Sounds like the cop just made it through puberty, this is the problem with fresh younger 20 something recruits, most dont know you had more training, experience and range time that toy ever has had, that elitism runs deeps with these kinds, I wouldnt have givin them a chance after the first sentence. A thank you without a sir and left.

 

[IndyDave1776]

His opinion. The fact he is a LEO doesn't make it worth any more or less.
Big ****ing deal. Real people, real language.

Bob

Agreed. Too much outrage over language these days. OP, are you genuinely offended by the language, or just mentioning it because it came along side an opinion you didn't agree with?

Would you have the same outrage if the officer had commended you for taking a ****ing stand for gun rights and openly protecting yourself from these ****ing thugs?

Gentlemen, I am going to have to strongly disagree regarding the presentation. Chezuki is absolutely right that the likelihood that someone would take offense to the language is much greater when it is used in the presentation of an opinion which offends the listener. That doesn't change the fact that we get a steady stream of horsesh*t about how superior the police are and thus are worthy of doing and having things prohibited to us (or with prices artificially inflated out of our reach while they still get market-value pricing) and that we should be good sheep and respect our betters as we accept second-class status in the endgame of transforming public servants into public masters. Phylodog, Frank, Joe, Denny, I am NOT talking to or about you in this. You gentlemen just have to understand that in my experience you and a select few others are a minority. Back to the point at issue, if we have to endure this superiority complex applied both directly and vicariously, the least the offending officers could do is present themselves in a professional manner. If you are superior enough to make up your own rules and present them as fact after ordering someone to stop and listen to you, you are superior enough to act enough better than street average to refrain from saying f**k while doing so.

 

[rockhopper46038]

There is a distinction between internal policy and constitutional law.

IMPD may have a policy on stopping those for merely openly carrying a handgun. However, carrying a handgun is a crime and reasonable suspicion of a crime is a valid reason for a stop.

What is displayed in the OP is a consensual encounter.

Curious, Kirk. Consensual because the OP didn't ask if he was free to go? I admit I haven't watched the video yet, but in the OP it was stated that the police officer "commanded me to come near to him". I take it there was something in the video that shows a clear point at which the OP could have declined further interaction and just walked away?

 

[BiscuitNaBasket]

Recording really helps the validity of this claim. Don't let one guy with an opinion ruin your positive view of them all. Hope this gets resolved soon.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

"wow, are you worried that a criminal will shoot you in the back of the head, and take your gun? and your cruiser? no? do you have eyes back there, or is the back of your head bullet proof?"

If he's not, he should be. Sitting in that uniform makes you a target.

Police say couple who fatally shot 2 Vegas police officers and civilian believed law enforcement the 'oppressor' | Fox News

Why Boston Suspects Killed MIT Officer - Business Insider

Lakewood, Washington police officer shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Uniformed cops don't have a choice. Everyone knows they are armed.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

What is displayed in the OP is a consensual encounter.

We'll never know if it really was consensual. If it truly was, the OP could have ignored the officer's command to approach him and gone about his business. Somehow I doubt the officer would have just kicked rocks and gone back to his donuts and coffee.

 

[chachi73]

it sounded to me like he was just offering friendly advice - not citing policy or law. I think you handled it well by not getting your dander up. I wouldn't make too big a deal out of the language if you contact his sup, if it were a real encounter i bet he wouldn't use the fbombs. In his mind he was trying to be cool about talking to you. if he was trying to be a dbag, he would've asked you for your papers.

not to thread jack, but does anyone use a good recording app for android that records immediately to a cloud?

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

I get that the officer should've been more diplomatic in his approach to this situation but is this really cause for the disdain and pitchforks ?

OP , if you feel offended strongly enough by the officer's language to file a complaint , why didn't you feel strongly enough to inform the officer that " OC is legal and not cause for a stop " ?

I'm really ****in surprised at INGO on this one . Ready to start smiting this guy's career over some solid , ****in words of advice .

It seems that everybody's ready to have this guy fired and Kirk's ready to file a ****in case because the OP didn't like the ****in language used while getting some ****in good advice .

Going through life being a ****in professional VAGINA is no way to live .

How bout we look past the delivery and focus on the officer's intent , which seems to be honorable .

 

[Expat]

I get that the officer should've been more diplomatic in his approach to this situation but is this really cause for the disdain and pitchforks ?

OP , if you feel offended strongly enough by the officer's language to file a complaint , why didn't you feel strongly enough to inform the officer that " OC is legal and not cause for a stop " ?

I'm really ****in surprised at INGO on this one . Ready to start smiting this guy's career over some solid , ****in words of advice .

It seems that everybody's ready to have this guy fired and Kirk's ready to file a ****in case because the OP didn't like the ****in language used while getting some ****in good advice .

Going through life being a ****in professional VAGINA is no way to live .

How bout we look past the delivery and focus on the officer's intent , which seems to be honorable .

Come now... it's a cop, we have to pile on.

 

[Dragon]

I get that the officer should've been more diplomatic in his approach to this situation but is this really cause for the disdain and pitchforks ?

OP , if you feel offended strongly enough by the officer's language to file a complaint , why didn't you feel strongly enough to inform the officer that " OC is legal and not cause for a stop " ?

I'm really ****in surprised at INGO on this one . Ready to start smiting this guy's career over some solid , ****in words of advice .

It seems that everybody's ready to have this guy fired and Kirk's ready to file a ****in case because the OP didn't like the ****in language used while getting some ****in good advice .

Going through life being a ****in professional VAGINA is no way to live .

How bout we look past the delivery and focus on the officer's intent , which seems to be honorable .

Not everyone agrees with your assessment nor the officers though. What might be solid advice to you might not be solid advice to others. I don't OC but that doesn't mean that I agree with this and honestly, I think it's none of the officer's business to be offering advice.

OP, take their advice and file the complaint.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

Not everyone agrees with your assessment nor the officers though. .

They're entitled to believe the world's still flat if they wish , doesn't mean it wasn't good advice .

 

[rockhopper46038]

You're still presuming it WAS good advice.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Curious, Kirk. Consensual because the OP didn't ask if he was free to go? I admit I haven't watched the video yet, but in the OP it was stated that the police officer "commanded me to come near to him". I take it there was something in the video that shows a clear point at which the OP could have declined further interaction and just walked away?

Come here a second=consensual encounter.

"Come here a second." Am I free to go?

It seems that everybody's ready to have this guy fired and Kirk's ready to file a ****in case because the OP didn't like the ****in language used while getting some ****in good advice .

I'm ready to do what now? I offer comments and suddenly INGO projects their fears on me again?

Ok, let's review:

1. What was shown was a consenual encounter. If you don't want to talk to cops, don't.

2. What was shown was a governmental employee interfering with the civil rights of a citizen. It should be objected to.

3. Whether the OP should take any legal action is up to him and it is within his best interest to speak with an attorney.

4. I personally could care less about his language, but that is me.

5. I am the only one who has pointed out that: 1. if the OP was stopped it may very well be legal, 2. the officer's comments regarding the dangers of open carry are correct.

 

[IndyDave1776]

How bout we look past the delivery and focus on the officer's intent , which seems to be honorable .

The officer ordered a citizen to stop and listen to 'advice' which is outside the scope of law, presented as a directive rather than advice and a matter of fact rather than the opinion it is. I have in my travels received advice from police, most of it good. I have also received 'advice' such as this from a know-it-all with a badge on occasion which , as with the OP's case was NOT presented as advice, and was lacking any merit whatsoever. If an officer wants to offer advice, doing so like anyone else works well, and generates a far greater chance of being taken seriously. "I noticed you are carrying. You might want to consider...." works a lot better than ordering a person to stop an telling him what he is 'supposed' to be doing, fact notwithstanding that this directive has no basis in fact, unless, of course, we automatically consider an officer's opinion to constitute fact based on the person being an officer. Offering an opinion is one thing. Imposing it on someone is something else entirely.

As for the language, a person cannot simultaneously stand on a pedestal and the gutter which is exactly the argument being made. If this officer deserves understanding and consideration for being a super-professional, he can act like it.