Philadelphia Police "violate" open carrier?

[wisco]

Would like to know your thoughts on this:






I'm on the fence because I'm unsure of who was in the wrong here. If the guy had and was within his legal rights to carry, does he not have a legal right to refuse an unlawful order (ie getting on your knees)?

I will say it was a stupid move on his part to argue. I would've just done what I was told and brought it to a courtroom.

[3.slow]

The officer was lacking a bit of knowledge, but the citizen was more wrong. He should have followed all police commands, especially when the officer had a bead on him. It would have been much easier to do what the officer said and calmly talked about open carry laws after rather than arguing with an officer who is ready to cap your *** for not following his direction and talking back to him

[cntryboy0531]

Would like to know your thoughts on this:






I'm on the fence because I'm unsure of who was in the wrong here. If the guy had and was within his legal rights to carry, does he not have a legal right to refuse an unlawful order (ie getting on your knees)?

I will say it was a stupid move on his part to argue. I would've just done what I was told and brought it to a courtroom.

I'll be honest, I didn't watch the video. However, I would have to research the case but I read a piece of case law from the U.S. Supreme Court, where they issued an opinion stating that a citizen does not have the right to resist (physically or otherwise) commands/arrest from law enforcement, even if they are unlawful. It was further stated that one should comply, and then fight the detention or arrest in court at a later date, as that's the purpose of the court system.

The whole point behind the ruling was that what may seem "unlawful" to your regular joe maybe something that is completely lawful when viewed in hindsight by the court, given the circumstances. The courts do not want everybody fighting detentions/arrests "in the street". Best advice is to comply, and then take it up in court civily at a later date.

[retdetsgt]

I only listened to the first 15 or 20 seconds, but I got the gist of it. Maybe someone from PA, mcsap or Greg can explain the laws to us.

I think it's stupid to open carry in a city like that unless you have a permit stapled to your forehead. I think the city of Portland has an ordinance against open carry even if you have a CCW permit, but I'm too lazy to research it. Stuff like that were one of the few things that we didn't have a much trouble with. It might make you feel tough to walk around like Gary Cooper, but it will always create a problem in an urban area like that.

[greg72982]

Mcsap would know better than me as he is much closer to there than I am. I do believe Philly also has an ordinance against open carry but I could be wrong. Philly kind of has its own set of rules that it plays by.

[marinepilot]

I listened to about the first 2:00 or so, and from what I heard, I would say the guy was WRONG! Whether he was within his rights to carry openly or not should NOT have mattered at that moment, the thing that should have mattered was complying with lawful orders from a law enforcement officer in the performance of his duties. When I applied for my CCW I was told that I would be held to a higher standard to comply with the law, such as keeping myself OUT of situations where I could use my gun. I look at it this way, the best weapon I have is my brain, and that keeps me from getting into situations that I would need to pull my gun (when not on duty in uniform). Sometimes, however, the world sees things differently than I and pulls a fast one and I may have to be in that position of having to defend myself or others, and that's why I carry.

That being said, this guy should have KNOWN that if he decided to carry, especially openly, that he's held to a MUCH STRICTER standard than the regular person when coming into contact with anyone where the weapon is a problem. When this officer told him, again and again and again, that he didn't know what the situation was and only wanted to detain him for investigation, that is the officer practicing good officer safety skills, and the guy should have complied instead of arguing it. Argue it after I've disarmed you and I feel safe enough to put MY weapon away. Then I'll talk to you about the laws and who you are, or any other thing for that matter, but until that point, he should have obeyed quickly and without question.

[retdetsgt]

I do believe Philly also has an ordinance against open carry but I could be wrong. Philly kind of has its own set of rules that it plays by.

And they probably should given the crime rate.

I'm a big believer in gun rights, I've continuously owned a firearm of some kind since I was 9 years old. But there is a point where common sense comes into play and this guy has none. He's playing some sort of game with the police because he thinks he's right. People like him can end up dead right.

It's everything to do with culture. Where I live, about an hour from Portland I wouldn't give a second thought to some guy with a gun on his hip working around his house or on his farm. But somebody walking down the street in Portland is a different story. Who knows if he's a legal gun owner or is he some dip that just got out of prison and is looking to settle a score with the police or someone else? An urban area like that is not a culture where people walk around like it's the old West and someone displaying a gun is almost always up to no good.

If someone like that thinks they're right and I'm wrong then comply and sue me later. Otherwise it very well might be their estate suing me instead.

[manahmanah]

I am all for gun owner's rights. I own 3 firearms, one of which is on me at all times...although you would never know it because I keep it concealed (that is both per department policy AND common sense). I just don't "get" these open carry nuts, they reek of "Look at me! I am an attention wh0re!" I think they do more harm than good. Think of it this way...as officers the bad guys know we have guns and they STILL attempt to disarm us. We have level 3 (most of us) holsters and are trained in weapon retention. The fact that I am an officer will not stop somebody hell bent on attempting to take my weapon, but at least I have some training to revert to should the worst happen. I have never seen a civilian open carry with a level 2 or 3 holster. Couple that with the fact they have never been trained in weapons retention. All this adds up to a disaster. If a wack-a-do wants to kill somebody he's more likely to disarm some meatball head open carrying than he is an officer. I just don't get it.

[SANE-A30]

I listened to whole thing....YIKES..... the guy was in the wrong for arguing and trying to school the officer on open carry laws and I felt that he was being a nice nasty answering the questions/stating his case..you should always just comply and obey with what the law says...but I do not agree with the statement the officer said around 0:46 ? the guy was questioning the order of getting on his knees and the officer threatened to shoot him if he did not comply with those orders. i could understand if he could not see his hands the weapon etc...but just because he would'nt get on his knees? that just seems extreme to me ....if the guy stayed standing would he have been shot?? I also don't think all the cussing was really necessary but I suppose it happens when your dealing with dummies that won't listen...and plus he RECORDED the whole thing he really is a dummy asking for trouble... just my two cents..

[Citicop]

PA has its share of these guys. A guy from the forums at the PAFOA forums was here a while ago and then started a thread over there complaining that he had been banned "for no reason."

In the interest of defending RP, I went over there and explained what actually happened. Those guys are militant in their views, and anyone reasonable gets shouted down and called names.

One of the more 'reasonable' people there, a lawyer, told me that his advice is to never talk to the police under any circumstances. No witness statements, no crime reports, not anything ever, no exceptions.

They are pro gun and see the police as the enemy, and by and large reject the idea that lawfully armed citizens and cops are on the same side. They feel that if it's legal to OC, then a cop asking for their ID after a call is an infringement of their rights. When I submitted that the choice to exercise their right not to ID themselves or answer any questions/cooperate should be made on a case by case basis, they rejected that idea as well, taking the side that any failure to ALWAYS exercise EVERY right was to completely abandon all liberty.

I'm not going to provide a link publicly, but anyone who wants to take a look can PM me and I'll provide it.

-Citicop.

[retdetsgt]

Back in the mid 90's, when there weren't nearly as many forums around, I was on one that was more or less supposed to be for LE. Police were verified and all that, but the firearms section was frequented by some real nut cases from up state NY. Most never ventured out of the firearms area and their posts made the NRA look like the ACLU. Really scary people.

[Darin]

Back in the mid 90's, when there weren't nearly as many forums around, I was on one that was more or less supposed to be for LE. Police were verified and all that, but the firearms section was frequented by some real nut cases from up state NY. Most never ventured out of the firearms area and their posts made the NRA look like the ACLU. Really scary people.

This guy did this on purpose...why else would he discretely audio tape it? Even without knowing the local ordinances the jackass was wrong.

[Norm357]

Mayhaps the cop should know the laws he is being paid to enforce, or maybe that is asking too much. BTW PA has statewide authority on gun laws so it does not matter one bit what the city of Philly thinks. They have lost that on in court before and the city is going to lose the lawsuit that I hope this guy brings.

[pafindr]

We tried to pass OC law here but they amended the Bill so the OC part was removed. Personally I wouldn't open carry even if it was allowed in FL. There are to many idiots that would try to start trouble because you have a gun. Also, it removes the advantage that one would have carrying concealed.

I really don't buy the whole "I don't know if you are carrying legally" type thing. An officer doesn't really know what drivers are driving legally and you can't stop them just to find out if they are licensed. So, if the law allows for open carry people shouldn't be stopped only because they are carrying. If they do something stupid while carrying, just like when driving, then by all means question them.

This guy would have wound up with the same outcome, but with less drama and less chance of being shot, if he would have just complied with the officer's orders. My bet is that he saw the officer and wanted to have a confrontation from the get go, why else would he be recording the whole thing.

They are going to try to charge the guy for other things because of all this.
Philly Police Harass, Threaten to Shoot Man Legally Carrying Gun - Stossel's Take Blog - FOXBusiness.com

"A new investigation was launched, and last month the District Attorney's Office decided to charge Fiorino with reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct because, a spokeswoman said, he refused to cooperate with police... He's scheduled for trial in July."

[MikeG]

This guy did this on purpose...why else would he discretely audio tape it? Even without knowing the local ordinances the jackass was wrong.

THIS.

The whole point of looser gun control laws is to allow law abiding citizens to defend themselves. Once they realize police and armed, law-abiding citizens are on the same team, these idiots should go away. I can understand carrying and getting caught and even educating the officers on the law. Once the officers realized it was okay and let him go, he should have shook their hands and went on his way knowing that he helped inform an entire squad (quite the wrong way, but decent outcome). Showing them up on "youtube" is the act of the enemy though, not an ally.