|
Post by OutlawwithaSnipeSniper on Aug 22, 2013 6:55:39 GMT -6
To quote snipe, "Long guns (rifles / shotguns) do not have to be concealed, but must be carried in a manner not calculated to cause alarm, and do not require a license.". Apparently someone called in and felt alarmed by the manner the individual was carrying his weapon. If that was the case then I would say yes, the cops could stop you because you are not properly handling your weapon. NORTHSIDER, Front carry on a single point sling IS proper. There IS, NOR EVER HAS BEEN, any EVIDENCE that he carried any other way to the contrary. So if I think you are up to no good walking down the street, do I have the right to have you interrogated? How about we stop the 5th grade drama queen crap?
|
|
|
Post by northsider on Aug 22, 2013 16:25:39 GMT -6
5th grade drama queen crap is what got this whole thread started. That guy is quite the pansy if he felt like that cop was using brute force against him. You are right about one thing snipe, had this gone down in Chicago he would probably have gotten a genuine helping of brute force at the hands of some real rogue cops. And he wouldnt have any video for utube because the camera would have been busted and shoved up his azz. He should consider himself lucky the cops kept their composure the way he was spouting off. I see that he has made the rounds on the right wing media over this though. Hope he enjoys his 15 minutes of fame.
|
|
|
Post by 34bears on Aug 22, 2013 16:57:22 GMT -6
5th grade drama queen crap is what got this whole thread started. That guy is quite the pansy if he felt like that cop was using brute force against him. You are right about one thing snipe, had this gone down in Chicago he would probably have gotten a genuine helping of brute force at the hands of some real rogue cops. And he would have any video for utube because the camera would have been busted and shoved up his azz. He should consider himself lucky the cops kept their composure the way he was spouting off. I see that he has made the rounds on the right wing media over this though. Hope he enjoys his 15 minutes of fame. I agree. Stop and frisk is a good policy!
|
|
|
Post by dog on Sept 25, 2013 11:40:43 GMT -6
This was in rural Texas, the Vet was hiking with his son for his Eagle award, and the LEO certainly did violate his rights. He will end up with a settlement. Had it been downtown Chicago, then the situation would be far different. This is how the officer SHOULD have handled the situation: If you notice, the one guy has a rifle slung in front of him, just like the guy in the first video. No over-reaction by the officer.
|
|
|
Post by northsider on Sept 25, 2013 15:12:00 GMT -6
No overreaction by the protestors either. Works both ways.
|
|
|
Post by dog on Sept 25, 2013 15:14:54 GMT -6
No overreaction by the protestors either. Works both ways. Which wasn't the case in the first video either. The guy in the first video was reacting to the improper handling of the situation by the officer. I believe it was you, Northsider, that said the original video person was carrying in a menacing fashion. You might fall into the category of one of these "uneducated on gun" folks that needs to be educated like the cop in the 2nd video was talking about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2013 17:00:04 GMT -6
Troll, that statute refers to a handgun. I do not believe he was openly carrying his handgun. He was perfectly within his rights on the rifle, from: www.texasgunlaws.org/Q: Can I carry a firearm on my person? A: Yes, with proper licensing (Concealed Handgun License) you may carry a pistol or revolver on your person so long as it remains concealed. Long guns (rifles / shotguns) do not have to be concealed, but must be carried in a manner not calculated to cause alarm, and do not require a license. Carrying one with the muzzle down on a single point sling could only be cause for alarm for people such as Butters, and obviously this rouge cop. Psssst...neither you or I know how he was carrying his rifle. We only know how HE said he was displaying this firearm. Evidently, he did something with it that caused a passerby to inform the police. Right?
|
|
|
Post by dog on Sept 25, 2013 17:15:20 GMT -6
Evidently, he did something with it that caused a passerby to inform the police. Right? You are correct, we dont know how he was carrying his gun prior to the police encounter or the start of the video. If he was displaying his gun as the video showed, the "something" he was doing was perfectly legal and it did cause a passerby to inform the police.I remember the phrase "ignorance of the law, is not a defense", in this case the passerby was quite possibly "ignorant of the law" but instead of the police explaining the law to the passerby, they chose to harass someone who, by only using the evidence of this video to base my assumption on, was doing something that was perfectly legal.
|
|
|
Post by OutlawwithaSnipeSniper on Sept 25, 2013 17:52:37 GMT -6
Psssst...neither you or I know how he was carrying his rifle. We only know how HE said he was displaying this firearm. Evidently, he did something with it that caused a passerby to inform the police. Right? Psssttt. You have evidently missed the MULTITUDES of rogue cops violating the Constitution. This isn't romper room, if YOU put yourself out there as a trusted professional, then YOU had better follow the law. Not on the same exact topic, but I had one of Streator's finest tell me he was going to ticket me for a set of tires he deemed "Illegal" because they were not DOT approved. When shown the DOT number, he said it didn't matter.................. How do you argue with logic like that? The only real difference is now Cops shoot first and get their excuses in line later.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2013 17:58:29 GMT -6
Psssst...neither you or I know how he was carrying his rifle. We only know how HE said he was displaying this firearm. Evidently, he did something with it that caused a passerby to inform the police. Right? Psssttt. You have evidently missed the MULTITUDES of rogue cops violating the Constitution. This isn't romper room, if YOU put yourself out there as a trusted professional, then YOU had better follow the law. Not on the same exact topic, but I had one of Streator's finest tell me he was going to ticket me for a set of tires he deemed "Illegal" because they were not DOT approved. When shown the DOT number, he said it didn't matter.................. How do you argue with logic like that? The only real difference is now Cops shoot first and get their excuses in line later. Regardless of your deflection, my observation is the truth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2013 17:58:44 GMT -6
Psssst...neither you or I know how he was carrying his rifle. We only know how HE said he was displaying this firearm. Evidently, he did something with it that caused a passerby to inform the police. Right? Psssttt. You have evidently missed the MULTITUDES of rogue cops violating the Constitution. This isn't romper room, if YOU put yourself out there as a trusted professional, then YOU had better follow the law. Not on the same exact topic, but I had one of Streator's finest tell me he was going to ticket me for a set of tires he deemed "Illegal" because they were not DOT approved. When shown the DOT number, he said it didn't matter.................. How do you argue with logic like that? The only real difference is now Cops shoot first and get their excuses in line later. Regardless of your deflection, my observation is the truth.
|
|
|
Post by OutlawwithaSnipeSniper on Sept 25, 2013 19:38:09 GMT -6
Regardless of your deflection, my observation is the truth. Regardless of your observation, you remain blind and unwilling to look at what we do know about the situation. Bootlick much?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2013 4:08:02 GMT -6
Regardless of your deflection, my observation is the truth. Regardless of your observation, you remain blind and unwilling to look at what we do know about the situation.Bootlick much? You poor guy, I stated what we know about the situation and you simply followed the gun lobby's talking points. For a self-proclaimed genius, your arguments suck.
|
|
|
Post by OutlawwithaSnipeSniper on Sept 26, 2013 6:56:00 GMT -6
Butters, I haven't made any points about the argument yet, for instance, how long does the typical career military guy last not following the letter of the rules? Would you say it is normal for a man who is actively working with his son on his Boy Scout Eagle project to openly violate the law? How many documented instances just last year do we have of Police Officers violating civil rights, up to and including gunning down innocent people?
You may want to genuflect to tyrants, but I ain't.
|
|