Officers just disarmed me in Subway, lectured and took my DL.

[ATM]

Lets, again, define a moron.

That stated, does it not give rise to strongly suspect for the purpose of LE, and likely demonstrate for the purpose of a judicial hearing, that a reasonable belief can infer to the propensity of emotionally unstable conduct?

I already said no. With nothing further to support your assertion, I'll stick with no.

If they could point out some emotionally unstable conduct, they might have reasonable cause for suspicion.

 

[shadohman]

Why don't you go back and read the original post. Sheesh.

I have, he was legal under the law. OC is legal, not having your LTCH on you is legal.

The ISP actions were legal but uncalled for IMO.

Synopsis: Two OCers are sitting at a table, a third walks in the door and the first two look at each other and say what a moron.

 

[Ted]

I have, he was legal under the law. OC is legal, not having your LTCH on you is legal.

The ISP actions were legal but uncalled for IMO.

Synopsis: Two Ocers are sitting at a table, a third walks in the door and the first two look at each other and say what a moron.

MY post upon the subject, post 385.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I already said no. With nothing further to support your assertion, I'll stick with no.

If they could point out some emotionally unstable conduct, they might have reasonable cause for suspicion.

And, to speak for myself... I was poised well, dressed well and nodded to them kindly with a smile. Not much emotional instability there :P

 

[Ted]

I already said no. With nothing further to support your assertion, I'll stick with no.

If they could point out some emotionally unstable conduct, they might have reasonable cause for suspicion.

The lack of good judgement and a firearm is a fairly volatile mix. I'm happy to know that you aren't making the decisions regarding firearms and the mentally retarded.

 

[ATM]

And, to speak for myself... I was poised well, dressed well and nodded to them kindly with a smile. Not much emotional instability there :P

Nodding can be a sign of aggression and dominance in some species.

Not generally so with humans, but it's a huge deal to iguanas.

 

[ATM]

The lack of good judgement and a firearm is a fairly volatile mix. I'm happy to know that you aren't making the decisions regarding firearms and the mentally retarded.

Liberty is not for the timid.

There are many unbrilliant folks who are plenty stable enough to be armed.

There are many smart folks who have proven they are not.

 

[Ted]

I have known enough LEOs over the years to know that the attitude of some of them matches Teds.

Ted obviously cares more about the quantity and not quality of his post. He can post so he does, but he is confused by OCers who do because they can.

I understand.

Just because a person can OC, doesn't mean that its wise to do so, especially when one doesn't have physical possession of their LTCH. The OP is a prime example of his lack of wisdom, but then complains about the cops that do their job.

Shadohman obviously cares more about the quantity and quality of his post. He can post so he does, but is confused by the cops who follow the law and assure that the person is in fact, licensed.

I understand.

 

[MikeDVB]

Unholstering and unloading someone else's sidearm in a room full of people that said officer is unfamiliar with, when the person is cooperative and not acting afool.

This is what bothers me honestly... If an officer wants to stop me and see my LTCH or (if I don't have it on me) wants to verify it over the radio I am fine with that. If a cop wants to make an ass of themselves - that's fine as well.

When they do something dangerous such as clearing an unfamiliar weapon in a crowded room, I have issues with that. Even if the officer was familiar with the weapon - removing it from it's holster alone is too much.

 

[Ted]

Liberty is not for the timid.

There are many unbrilliant folks who are plenty stable enough to be armed.

There are many smart folks who have proven they are not.

I'm not referring to the smart or the unbrilliant. I am, however, giving thought of those that don't possess the good judgement to possess a firearm. If fairly apparent that the police in question had enough suspicion to question the OP's judgement and verify his ability to do so.

Right now, there is a huge debate upon the state of the mental health system in this country, especially when combined with the right of the individual to possess a firearm.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

...fairly apparent that the police in question had enough suspicion to question the OP's judgement and verify his ability to do so.

Bull. Nope. Absolutely not.

My judgement had no reason to be questioned, and their actions and comments show that. The "Does this make you feel proud?" and "We've got nothing better to do..." bullcrap. They were bored and wanted to feel big.

 

[Ted]

This is what bothers me honestly... If an officer wants to stop me and see my LTCH or (if I don't have it on me) wants to verify it over the radio I am fine with that. If a cop wants to make an ass of themselves - that's fine as well.

When they do something dangerous such as clearing an unfamiliar weapon in a crowded room, I have issues with that. Even if the officer was familiar with the weapon - removing it from it's holster alone is too much.

Is he supposed to just take your word for it and allow you to remain armed? Consider the consequences of that action too.

 

[Ted]

Bull. Nope. Absolutely not.

My judgement had no reason to be questioned, and their actions and comments show that. The "Does this make you feel proud?" and "We've got nothing better to do..." bullcrap. They were bored and wanted to feel big.

You were OCing, and didn't have physical possession of your LTCH.

That puts up big red flags to your ability to carry, at least initially.

 

[TheReaper]

I love how the OP is still pissing and moaning about this when the officers didn't even cite him for the suspended license. This is why a lot of officers don't give warnings anymore, because of this type of guy right here. You give them a warning and they still **** and moan for weeks!

 

[ATM]

Just because a person can OC, doesn't mean that its wise to do so, especially when one doesn't have physical possession of their LTCH. The OP is a prime example of his lack of wisdom, but then complains about the cops that do their job.

Ascribing wisdom to your own preference exclusively isn't as bad as attempting to conjure up the need to follow old laws that have been revised.

...the cops who follow the law and assure that the person is in fact, licensed.

Please cite the law which required the officers to check for LTCH.

They only checked because they wanted to and weren't prohibited from pestering the carrier without justification as they are prohibited from randomly checking drivers for licenses.

The disarming had no justification.

 

[shadohman]

MY post upon the subject, post 385.

Encountering an armed moron is a good reason.

But there was nothing to base this opinion on, OC is legal, not having your LTCH on you is legal, so no good reason to think "moron."

By the way your post 385 was"

Why don't you go back and read the original post. Sheesh.

 

[ATM]

I love how the OP is still pissing and moaning about this when the officers didn't even cite him for the suspended license. This is why a lot of officers don't give warnings anymore, because of this type of guy right here. You give them a warning and they still **** and moan for weeks!

If they saw him driving, you might have been able to make this point.

Sorry, no charge possible inside Subway.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I love how the OP is still pissing and moaning about this when the officers didn't even cite him for the suspended license. This is why a lot of officers don't give warnings anymore, because of this type of guy right here. You give them a warning and they still **** and moan for weeks!

Thread was dead for three weeks. It was brought back by someone. Earlier I already admit that I was in the wrong, but my complaint is their ******* behavior. Sorry, this is a subforum about carrying and carrying issues. I'd like to share mine.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

You were OCing, and didn't have physical possession of your LTCH.

That puts up big red flags to your ability to carry, at least initially.

You implied that my carrying in general was enough reason for them to assume my judgement could be off.

Why ask me for LTCH in the first place? How did they know I didn't have it, prior to judging me negatively?

 

[wizard_of_ahs]

Is he supposed to just take your word for it and allow you to remain armed? Consider the consequences of that action too.

Yes, read the IC

You were OCing, and didn't have physical possession of your LTCH.

That puts up big red flags to your ability to carry, at least initially.

Not required to be "on your person"; again, read the IC