http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-vUYeJXSrA&feature=player_embedded

Philadelphia. It’s only a matter of time before the cops shoot an open carry advocate. Whose fault would that be? Who would that please?

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

12 COMMENTS

  1. The Philadelphia PD has long been known for their circumspection and restraint. This guy is extremely lucky he wasn’t 1) ventilated, 2) tazed or 3) introduced to a few of the responding officers’ batons.

    You’re right, someone trying to make a point about open carry will eventually be shot. It’s inevitable. The fault will be evenly distributed between the carrier (who likely won’t be as polite and responsive as this guy was) and the LEOs who automatically see anyone carrying a gun as a threat.

    The sergeant told this guy that the gun has to be concealed. Because a concealed firearm is much less dangerous than an openly carried gun. Who can argue with logic like that?

    • “The Philadelphia PD has long been known for their circumspection and restraint.”

      Dogs, you are one funny dude!

  2. This guys got a set of BRASS balls. Thank the heavens that the officer didn’t just shoot more than his mouth off. I listened to this twice and part two has some background conversation which is real interesting. I won’t rely on my forty plus hearing to repeat it though. The NRA needs to pin a medal on this one. I’m not worthy. I’m not worthy……………………

  3. Memo from Philadelphia Chief of Police to Storm Troopers: Exercising a constitutional right in a lawful and peaceful manner is just plain wrong and must be stopped. What comes next? Public speaking? Voting? Marriage between the races? I’m telling ya, we gotta nip this freedom shit in the bud.

    Here’s advice for all you legal open carry folks, from Ralph: Remember the civil right activists of the sixties. One man exercising a right will get shot, so don’t do it one guy at a time. Group together and do it by the dozens or the hundreds. And have lots of cameras. Nazis don’t like cameras.

  5. Feeling the brotherly love.

    As I’ve said before, I expect you guys to be equally outraged when the cops are abusing someone you disagree with.

  6. Funny how the OC dude tells the cops he has nothing left to say to them and then continues debating with them (they’re cops, not judges, not juries, not DA’s, they don’t care what the statue states they are about control).

    Anyways prudence would dictate that if one is going to push social norms (e.g. open carry, sitting at the lunch counter, etc) then one should be prepared to spend a lot of time in custody and possibly end up dead. Comply, shut up, get arrested/booked/released and sue the city/county/state for violation of civil rights.

    YMMV.

    • Agree. When the LEO is in an obvious agitated state, the wrong time to argue agency directives is when he’s pointing his handgun at you, calling for backup. Without knowing the complete circumstances of this encounter, it’s kind of hard to make an informed judgement. For example, what caused this encounter in the first place? What happened between the officer and armed individual prior to the recorder being turned on? Should the officer have called for backup prior to making contact with the armed individual?
      In the final analysis, both side probably could have handled it differently. Too many unknowns here.

  7. Would it have made a difference if the guy had told the officers he was only carrying a kinetic defense device? I didn’t think so.

  8. There a story somewhere behind what happened here? Did they let this guy go? I couldn’t hear much of the conversations at the end.

  10. Remember that the police *are* the government. They are the iron fists of government. These police were behaving exactly the way the government wants them to behave. Wait, didn’t I just say that they are the government?

Comments are closed.