Fan-freaking-tastic job by this officer. Anyone with local contacts to recruit him here?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3KOIGOMriI
Fan-freaking-tastic job by this officer. Anyone with local contacts to recruit him here?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3KOIGOMriI
That was great! Afterwards I think they were at a loss for words. :)
This makes me sad.
Anti gun people must make big buckets of popcorn while they watch these encounters play out. They're the winners. Not because of the stops themselves, they're inconsequential politically (while potentially lethal at the scene): the analysis afterward is the fruit they reap. Look at the YouTube comments, look how this thread is already going. It should have been titled "YouTube's most boring video of the day : Three armed men having a civil conversation", aka "Anywhere in Texas"
Instead 2nd Amendment supporters across an array are picking sides and calling names. There are a lot more OC douchbags now than years past, right? More baiting by the day? Why do you suppose that is? Hmmm. Why fight the enemy when you can get them to fight each other in the crossfire of a collapsing battle. The anti gun crowd has done a beautiful maneuver in setting us against ourselves.
Good stop to the Officers, good day to the citizens. Why isn't that enough?
Perfect.
The final words about magazine and butt were just what I was thinking. About where he should put his magazine anyway!
Wait a second. His reasonable suspicion that the firearm was an automatic weapon?
Seriously?
I noticed there was no final commentary by the asshat. It sucks when no one will take the bait.
I suspect they tape themselves due to negative previous encounters.
As for the baiting, undercover LEO bait criminals daily. Do we call LEO names for baiting? Filming keeps everyone honest. Video protects the innocent.
Nice job officer, you stopped two guys for no reason and made it look good for the camera. Saving the city a civil rights violation.
Keep recording and stay safe.
Investigating a citizens complaint and being a professional is what I saw in the video. Your statement "making it look good for the camera implies that had it not been recorded that the officer would have handled the stop different. As the officer responds he too is recording the encounter so I suspect the 2nd video made no difference to the handling of the stop.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cornfed1100
Please expound on the validation of baiting to possibly get a career criminal off the street and baiting to possibly ruin the career of officers trying to get the criminal off the street. Would it not be a better and more productive effort to have these activists push to have administrations to better educate and train their officers what to do correctly? I suppose not. That couldn't possibly be a better solution than filming a negative officer contact on the street and plastering it all over the fucking internet while nothing is done departmentally to improve the situation. I tire of this dribble. Neg rep inbound. You've earned it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cornfed1100
You call us asshats and I get neg feed back?
Where is a moderator?
I didn't call you vulgar names.
I'm sorry you don't like OC. I will defend it. I won't call people names for disagreeing.
It's not my job to train departments on the law. I will protect myself via filming regardless of the name you give it. It is amazingly similar to your recording devices. The difference is I decide what's recorded.
Do you give neg feedback to every respectful disagreement?
He's too oblivious to learn, imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cornfed1100
Now this is from an overseas perspective here, but WTF is it about these open carry types?
What possible purpose can someone have for carrying a weapon such as that in the video down a street other than to draw attention to themselves and scare the crap out of members of the public?
Before I'm shot down ( see what I did there? ) I'm nowhere near an anti, I enjoy shooting, have numerous rifles & shotguns but really cannot begin to get close to the thought processes involved here.
Wasn't so long ago that OC went without comment from the public. Not that there were many wearing iron on their hip, but a pickup without a stocked gunrack at the school was uncommon (here anyway) and a revolver in the console was as common as a can of Coca Cola. You and I both are have to struggle to imagine the changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tango Zulu 22
These days OC is primarily political performance art. As I sad initially, makes me sad.
:eek: :laser: :fear: :bolt: :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tango Zulu 22
We like guns and and gun rights, we just don't like the anti-cop douchebaggery of the OC movement. You've brought nothing different here. You come troll here with your ant-cop crap and you wonder why you get negative rep? Go hang out with your tin foil hat OC friends and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cornfed1100
I have a right to drive sheep and livestock through the middle of our town, and to carry an unsheathed sword. Or I did, forget I'm a civvy sometimes still.( we all got the freedom of of the borough award as police officers)
It doesn't mean to say I have to exercise that right just to prove a point.
Besides walking round with a sword causes people to phone the old bill.
It saves everyone alot of time and trouble if I keep my sword sheathed. No euphamisms intended.
By the way.
We have no intention to invade your shores by force. My recon' missions to Washington and New York have revealed that you still do not have the ability to make a proper cup of tea.
Therefore the need to form a militia will not be required. You may all put away your guns.
I think the suspicion is valid. The weapon that this subject was carrying doesn't just happen to resemble a fully automatic weapon by chance. It is designed to resemble one. I think there's a distinct difference there. I don't agree with his verbiage, necessarily, that he might not be in compliance with federal law, etc. Here, fully-automatic weapons are codified prohibited in state statute as Illegal Weapons, just like I'm sure they are there in a similar fashion. I don't enforce federal law, but I do enforce applicable state law counterparts. The MP5 is a fully automatic SBR. The semi-auto derivatives, including this guy's GSG22, came later. Same with the AR-15 that the subject attempts to use as an example. The select fire version came first, then the "civilian" marketed semi-auto version. You could even argue that these versions are intentionally aimed towards a segment of the market of people who desire to own a weapon that is indistinguishable physically from their full-auto cousins, but can't or won't complete the steps to do so.
RAS doesn't say that you should be able, through extensive training and experience, to determine whether someone's committing a crime or not. If a reasonable person would believe that a crime has been, is being, or is about to be committed, then the suspicion is valid right? I would venture to guess that the majority of folks in America (reasonable folks, at that) wouldn't know the difference between a semi-auto and fully-auto variant of a gun that made its name in its full auto form, and would just assume that the gun is fully-auto. Hell, a lot of cops wouldn't either. So a defense attorney might be able to smear a firearms instructor in a suppression hearing, based on his admitted knowledge of firearms and their variants, whether semi- or full-auto. But I bet, however, that there are plenty of cops out there who aren't "gun" types who might truly believe that no such semi-auto version of the venerated MP5 exists.
Let's say this. Let's say open carry was banned in a particular jurisdiction. Can I walk around with an airsoft gun on my hip without potentially being stopped? I think that since the airsoft is designed to resemble a firearm, a police officer would be justified in stopping me to make sure I wasn't committing a crime by openly carrying a real firearm. Even if the officer aware of the existence of airsoft guns.