BadTrainDriver

I could take the time and provide links to prove you wrong...but I don't have the time right now, and I really don't care if believe me or not...so I'll just leave this here: You're wrong. Very wrong.

I see what you're saying about mass education, r1crusher. My main point was in the first sentence: It is worthwhile for 911 centers to identify people who make exaggerated emergency calls, and to inform them about the associated costs and hazards. To me, the "order of stupidity" in this case is: #1. The person that made the 911 call. I fully believe he should have been the one questioned, educated, and cited. #2. The Police Chief. He sounds like a complete idiot, that has zero concept of the law. He is #2 because he is the "leader", and the "leader" is ultimately responsible for the action of his troops. #3. The responding police officers. I'm sure they were doing what they were taught, but a lot of a cops day to day activities involve split second decisions. When those decisions are incorrect, you've got to man up and pay the price. #4. The 911 operator. See above.

First, you said: "The problem is only partially with the police. The real problem is Suzie Q. Freakout and John D. Mind-your-own-business. The people need to be taught that it is legal to OC. When people understand this fact, the calls will stop going to the police, the police will not harass the rest of us doing perfectly legal activities." Then you said: "I would love to see a TV ad campaign aimed at simply telling people in Ohio that OC'ing is a legal activity just as concealing is. I'll respectfully disagree. First, I never said anything about people detaining, questioning, stopping the OC'ing person(s) so I'm not sure where you're coming from with that statement. Second, it's not the job of the dispatchers to educate anyone, period. They have enough things to deal with. The job falls squarely upon the shoulders of those who wish to OC and those parties wanting to help us keep our rights intact. The NRA has enough money at their disposal that they could easily put together a simple 30 second ad that would inform the public and reach WAY more people than a dispatcher can in your scenario." To your two statements, I also respectfully disagree. Ignorance of the law is not a reason to not abide by it. It is not the responsibility of the law abiding citizen, or the NRA to educate ignorant people. It is SOLELY up to the "enforcer(police)" to educate, and sometimes the best education comes at an expense(fine, ticket, verbal). I don't give a rats ass if the 911 operator was busy. It's their job to relay information to the police for further investigation. If the given information didn't necessitate a further investigation, the "situation" should have ended there. If the 911 operator didn't have the time or intelligence to realize the call didn't necessitate a further investigation, that's when the police get involved. When the police get involved, it can be handled in several different ways, anywhere from a fine, to a warning. This is directly from a 911 policy page on exaggerated calls. Response to Exaggerated Emergency 911 Calls Targeting education to the people responsible. It is worthwhile for 911 centers to identify people who make exaggerated emergency calls, and to inform them about the associated costs and hazards. People who live or work in areas with particularly severe crime problems, such as open-air drug or prostitution markets, sometimes make such calls out of fear and frustration, believing that a quick police response is essential. Rather than educating these callers individually, it may be more economical to do so in a group format (perhaps in a block meeting). Police should come prepared with alternative ways to address the problem(s) prompting the original 911 calls. In addition, police should monitor any future calls from the targeted group to determine if education efforts have resolved the matter, or if more coercive remedies, such as fines or other sanctions, are necessary.

I agree completely, EXCEPT, "the people" cannot stop, question, and detain you. The 911 operator should have been the first to "educate" the caller, and if further education was needed, then the PO should get involved. Imagine the police showing up, finding out who called 911, very politely asking the open carrying citizen to come join their conversation, and also very politely telling the 911 caller that what the person is doing is LEGAL, and is NOT grounds for a 911 call. Then, the whole situation would end by thanking the open carrying citizen, and citing the 911 caller with a nice little $100 fine. THAT is how this all should have played out!

I'll admit I didn't read all 300 posts on this thread. I started to, but quickly realized most posts were back and forth bitching... The WHOLE POINT of why this is wrong, and how this is just another example of our rights slowly eroding away, is in the last paragraph of the provided link. Chief Reiss added: “With carrying a firearm openly, there also comes responsibility with that. People should realize that they may, given a certain set of circumstances, draw the attention of law enforcement. A responsible person would just identify themselves if there’s a brief check to be done and then they would be on their way.” It is LEGAL to open carry, this we all know. It is ILLEGAL for police to stop, question, and detain you without proper cause. A phone call to 911 saying someone is walking around with a gun on their hip is the same as someone calling 911 and saying someone is walking down the street with their hands in their pockets. It's LEGAL!! Point #2, and remember, this is the Chief of Police talking, so this is what is being taught to the lower level officers. But Riverside police Chief Mark Reiss said his officers acted correctly and all Call had to do was cooperate. “Had he been truthful with the police and simply provided his identification so that they could have quickly ran it, that encounter would have been over very quickly, within a minute or two,” Reiss said. That is a God damn big NEGATIVE! What "probable cause" did the officers have to stop, question, and detain Mr.Call OUTSIDE of the initial phone call and report? Did the officers WITNESS Mr.Call doing something suspicious(besides walking around with his gun on his hip, which is perfectly legal)? It sure doesn't sound like it to me. Lastly, the final quote from the Chief of Police. “Given the time of the day, the location, and the fact that convenience store/gas stations are typical targets for robberies in the middle of the night,” Reiss said. “It would seem reasonable in the eyes of a police officer to ask someone who was carrying a gun if it was legally permissible for them to do so.” Another big ass NEGATIVE, and another way the lower level police officers are being taught incorrectly. Time of day, location, the fact that it was a gas station...it doesn't fucking matter! Same as it doesn't matter if it's raining outside, or if the man was African American...none of that is a reason for probable cause for a stop, question, and detain. Personally, you may not agree with what I'm saying, and personally, maybe you'd never open carry...so this won't apply to you, and that's fine...you have that choice... BUT WHAT YOU NEED TO REALIZE, WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH IT OR NOT, IS THAT THIS IS JUST ANOTHER RIGHT THAT'S BEING TAKEN AWAY, AND BEING TAUGHT TO BE TAKEN AWAY, FROM THE VERY TOP OF THE POLICE CHAIN OF COMMAND! IF NO ONE STANDS UP FOR OUR RIGHTS, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM WILL BE GONE BEFORE WE KNOW IT! There is nothing more to argue or debate, that's it. Those are the facts as we know it. I hope Mr.Call get's paid big time, and I hope several officers get fired.

Road block. Seriously. The trooper that clocked me called it in, and two other troopers where waiting for me at the end of the road. The road "T"'ed. The had me. I had no choice.

You've got to be shitting me! This really happened, and you didn't kick the guys ass? No fucking way in hell I'd let that go. I wouldn't have even said anything either...I'd have just cold cocked the guy. Sit on my bike without permission? Hell, you might as well fuck my wife, or piss in my beer. No fucking way I'd let that slide. Not even once, not for a second. I don't care if this happened in front of a police parade...I'd deal with the consequences later.

Something like this happened to me once. I followed the guy, he eventually pulled into Walmart. I went straight, then circled back around from the other entrance. I saw him walk inside, I parked my Jeep between the front door and his truck, then promptly removed all four of his valve stem cores. I relocated to WAY across the parking lot and waited... He came back out twenty minutes later, and I think he was pissed. He slammed his bag of walmart shit on the ground, kicked one of his flat truck tires, and proceeded to call someone from his cellphone. I wonder if he ever found his valve cores, neatly placed on his windshield, above his wiper blades. True story.

So, Brakes.

I came here to post this.

Not a single fuck was given, non literally.

$157.50 to be exact, for my 125 in a 55.

I wouldn't have stopped. They would have had to arrest me on the shitter.

My 125MPH ticket in Tennessee about ten years ago was just a little over $100, thankfully!

Fresh raccoon is good eating! Did you bag it and take it home?

Hilliard to Plain City is a big ride??

I hope you at least got anal later...

Did you get his number...for a later date?

I can't say without incriminating myself, but I'll say it's been over 15yrs since I've received a ticket...

Will you show us your tits? Do you screw on the first date? Do you like guns? Answer yes to all three, and you might just fit in. Welcome!

You should have ran...i mean, why take the chance...

Report it to the DOT.

4/15/13 18:42 After.

I completely agree with what you're saying now.

So you're saying that if this happened to you, you could have reacted and "disposed" of the threat...or at least damaged the pigs arm?