Calcasieu Parish Sheriff on Open Carry

[DAVE_M]

ffs.

contrary to what the media tells you, cops are not out looking for a reason to get elbow deep in your buttcrack.

OC is dumb imo, speaking from an advantageous point of view. its not a reason to be stopped in and by itself under normal conditions. that being said, if you feel the need to sling your bubbad up SKS to pickup a burger just cause 'merica - you're an a-hole and deserve the incoming proctologist.

Unfortunately, there aren't too many people who understand the difference between this:

And this:

 

[kingfhb]

THIS.


RESPONSIBLE...

And this:

IRRESPONSIBLE...

 

[Wolfgang1952]

The second picture are the guys from Texas. Long gun OC was the only way they could OC at the time. But now they still need a permission slip to OC.

Wolf

 

[DAVE_M]

The second picture are the guys from Texas. Long gun OC was the only way they could OC at the time. But now they still need a permission slip to OC.

Wolf

Yes... I know who they are... and you missed my point.

So let me make it again...

There is this:

And then there is this:

 

[ta2d_cop]

Yes... I know who they are... and you missed my point.

So let me make it again...

There is this:

And then there is this:

And just by reading this thread you can tell who is in line with what camp....

The first 2 are legit OCing IMO (which, for the record I think is stupid. I can do it and still don't) and I would never screw with or even talk to them past a hello unless someone called on them. The second 2 are trying to start **** and make an issue of things for the sake of bringing attention to the OCing issue (which they did with quit awesomely expected results because of their stupidity). I absolutely wouldn't talk to them at all unless I got a call about them, because Id tell them they were ****ing idiots and Id end up on Youtube, in an IAB and suspended............ all over the truth.

 

[dk.easterly]

That all depends on how crafty the officer is and how much paperwork they want to do.

They could EASILY say that you appeared to be intoxicated in public and THAT's why they stopped you. They could easily say that the tint on the windows of your car impaired their ability to see if you were wearing a seatbelt or not, they could say that they received complaints that you were brandishing the weapon and threatening people with it from an anonymous caller.

Believe be, if they want to, they can find a reason. In the military, there were a few UCMJ articles that were "Catch All's" if something you did fell outside the lines of something they wanted to charge you with. All the officer has to do is come up with a reason to "Reasonably Suspect" that you're MAY commit a crime. It doesn't matter what the reason... as long as it makes his case.

And an officer walking up to you while you're in a public place to ask you a question isn't harassment unless they don't have a REASONABLE SUSPICION. You have the burden of proving them wrong. not to mention any legal fees you would incur would greatly surpass the cost of any weapon you're carrying.

Just my overview. I'm not saying I think any of it's right... but it can and does happen.

So which part of "legally" escaped your grasp?

Lying and fabricating charges is not legal last time I checked.

Not trying to be a dick. We can argue semantics all day long.

Again, long story short;

An officer cannot LEGALLY harass you for simply open carrying a firearm.

 

[madwabbit]

And just by reading this thread you can tell who is in line with what camp....

it'll get better. I remember the last time we had this discussion. If thread doesnt get locked before page 4, we're in for a treat.

 

[CavalryJim]

Really? For ANYTHING?? Maybe illegally and if they lie as in your example of swerving. They CAN NOT stop you for just because they feel like it.

Yes, really. All he has to do is articulate a reason....whether that is the true reason doesn't matter. "I thought you matched the description of a suspect in another crime"....How you going to argue with that?

 

[ta2d_cop]

it'll get better. I remember the last time we had this discussion. If thread doesnt get locked before page 4, we're in for a treat.

Yep for real

 

[Nathan Hale]

Calcasieu Parish Sheriff Tony Mancuso seems misinformed (or dishonest) about open carry.

http://www.fox8live.com/story/29645...pen-carry-law-but-there-are-some-restrictions

After the shooting in Lafayette, along with recent tragedies in Charleston and Chattanooga, some people are asking about gun control and gun ownership. So what are the gun laws in Louisiana?

"There are some restrictions, even though yes, technically, it's legal, there are a lot of restrictions in a lot of places," said Calcasieu Parish Sheriff Tony Mancuso.

Open carry is the law of the land in Louisiana but there's still restrictions when it comes to owning and carrying a gun.

"Even though you have the right to carry an open weapon gun, if the police decide to stop you and check your ID and make sure that you're not a convicted felon and legally possess that gun, they have the right to do that," he said . . .

He's full of s***.
See Terry v. Ohio.
It is truly troubling that a senior LEO doesn't know basic 4th amendment law.
If you are stopped without reasonable suspicion, be polite, but don't forfeit any of your rights; and take the LEO to federal court.
You:
1.) do not have to show an I.D. unless you are driving,
2.) do not have to demonstrate (prove) that you are not a "prohibited person" (the LEO has to have evidence of that),
3.) do not have to let them "run your numbers" to make sure your weapon isn't stolen (that is a search and they need your consent to lawfully do that.)
(You know, when it is really hot, I occasionally carry in the open instead of concealing; but, I think I am going to start doing it more often. We have an a**h*** in the White House who makes up his own rules all the time; I'll be damned if I am going to tolerate somebody in my home state doing the same thing, and if I get harassed because I'm exercising a right, somebody will explain to a federal judge and jury why they can do so.)
We are taking about a RIGHT in our state.
p.s. By the way, as an aside and for whatever it is worth, I don't believe that the guy who shot up the movie theater in Lafayette (or the church in Charlotte) was carrying in the open!

 

[Nathan Hale]

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure 215.1 – Temporary questioning of persons in public places; frisk and search for weapons


Current as of: 2014

Art. 215.1. Temporary questioning of persons in public places; frisk and search for weapons

A. A law enforcement officer may stop a person in a public place whom he reasonably suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit an offense and may demand of him his name, address, and an explanation of his actions.

B. When a law enforcement officer has stopped a person for questioning pursuant to this Article and reasonably suspects that he is in danger, he may frisk the outer clothing of such person for a dangerous weapon. If the law enforcement officer reasonably suspects the person possesses a dangerous weapon, he may search the person.

C. If the law enforcement officer finds a dangerous weapon, he may take and keep it until the completion of the questioning, at which time he shall either return it, if lawfully possessed, or arrest such person.

D. During detention of an alleged violator of any provision of the motor vehicle laws of this state, an officer may not detain a motorist for a period of time longer than reasonably necessary to complete the investigation of the violation and issuance of a citation for the violation, absent reasonable suspicion of additional criminal activity. However, nothing herein shall prohibit a peace officer from compelling or instructing the motorist to comply with administrative or other legal requirements of Title 32 or Title 47 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950.

Added by Acts 1968, No. 305, §1. Amended by Acts 1982, No. 686, §1; Acts 1983, 1st Ex. Sess., No. 32, §1; Acts 1997, No. 759, §3, eff. July 10, 1997.

Openly carrying a firearm is NOT an offense in this state; THEREFORE, an LEO needs MORE than that to LAWFULLY stop someone under LCCrP art. 215.1 (a Terry stop.)
This is a REALLY SIMPLE concept. Why is it that so many people seem unable to comprehend this? Is it because people believe firearm possession, in itself, is a crime?
kingfhb, thanks for reproducing LCCrP 215.1. (It is the holding in Terry v. Ohio spelled out by our legislature.)

 

[323MAR]

True, that trailer trash from Alabama was not OC. The perp was 95G.

 

[Nathan Hale]

That all depends on how crafty the officer is and how much paperwork they want to do.

They could EASILY say that you appeared to be intoxicated in public and THAT's why they stopped you. They could easily say that the tint on the windows of your car impaired their ability to see if you were wearing a seatbelt or not, they could say that they received complaints that you were brandishing the weapon and threatening people with it from an anonymous caller.

Believe be, if they want to, they can find a reason. In the military, there were a few UCMJ articles that were "Catch All's" if something you did fell outside the lines of something they wanted to charge you with. All the officer has to do is come up with a reason to "Reasonably Suspect" that you're MAY commit a crime. It doesn't matter what the reason... as long as it makes his case.

And an officer walking up to you while you're in a public place to ask you a question isn't harassment unless they don't have a REASONABLE SUSPICION. You have the burden of proving them wrong. not to mention any legal fees you would incur would greatly surpass the cost of any weapon you're carrying.

Just my overview. I'm not saying I think any of it's right... but it can and does happen.

Most civil/constitutional right violation cases are handled on a contingency fee basis. People are winning these kinds of cases (usually they settle before trial.)
Yes, the burden is on the illegally detained person to prove that the stop was illegal; but, most juries are not made up of stupid people. They usually figure out what went on.

 

[Swampghost]

What about the rights of other people who are around the OC'ing person? I have left several businesses before the point of purchase, because someone was in there was OC'ing. In one of the cases, I looked for a badge and did not see one. Then I started looking for factors that might tell me if the guy was about to draw and "open up" on everyone else in the store. Then, left wondering about the person's mindset and being unable to conduct my business while monitoring the weapon carrier, I left the store. He just appeared to be shopping, but who knows when he would have an "epiphany" and start mowing down people in the frozen food section. There is an intimidating effect when someone is walking around overtly displaying that he or she has the ability and opportunity to commit a mass murder. Would it be OK for someone the walk around in a business with a giant lit torch...or how about a dubiously constrained grizzly bear? I think that our rights, even as gun owners, should not significantly infringe on the rights of others. On top of that, do you really want the negative attention that will certainly come from OC'ing? (possibly) Do you want to have numerous encounters with LE officers who can see that you have the ability and opportunity to kill or maim and are probably on condition "RED" and already calculating how to defeat you. There has to be some way to be armed publicly and not make a spectacle of yourself. I like the suggestion of legally obtaining a CC permit and then living your life (not like your life is an ongoing vendetta).

 

[kingfhb]

So which part of "legally" escaped your grasp?

Lying and fabricating charges is not legal last time I checked.

Not trying to be a dick. We can argue semantics all day long.

Again, long story short;

An officer cannot LEGALLY harass you for simply open carrying a firearm.

The burden of proving the officer is lying is on you... prove that he actually DID see your seatbelt on... prove that you don't resemble even closely any criminal walking the street that he may have access to a picture of and seen at one time or another. I'm not arguing semantics at all... If they are creative and willing to do the paperwork, there's not a damn thing you can do about it... try it with the wrong officer and tell us how it goes. There doesn't have to be any fabricated charge... no harassment (which would have to occur multiple times, a singe instance is not considered harassment)... all completely within the guidelines of the law as it's laid out.

Oh, and... Not trying to be a dick.

 

[US Infidel]

What about the rights of other people who are around the OC'ing person? I have left several businesses before the point of purchase, because someone was in there was OC'ing. In one of the cases, I looked for a badge and did not see one. Then I started looking for factors that might tell me if the guy was about to draw and "open up" on everyone else in the store. Then, left wondering about the person's mindset and being unable to conduct my business while monitoring the weapon carrier, I left the store. He just appeared to be shopping, but who knows when he would have an "epiphany" and start mowing down people in the frozen food section. There is an intimidating effect when someone is walking around overtly displaying that he or she has the ability and opportunity to commit a mass murder. Would it be OK for someone the walk around in a business with a giant lit torch...or how about a dubiously constrained grizzly bear? I think that our rights, even as gun owners, should not significantly infringe on the rights of others. On top of that, do you really want the negative attention that will certainly come from OC'ing? (possibly) Do you want to have numerous encounters with LE officers who can see that you have the ability and opportunity to kill or maim and are probably on condition "RED" and already calculating how to defeat you. There has to be some way to be armed publicly and not make a spectacle of yourself. I like the suggestion of legally obtaining a CC permit and then living your life (not like your life is an ongoing vendetta).

Are you really serious???? How is open carry a violation of anyone else's rights? Because your obviously scared of guns, no one can have them where you can see them???!!! The only thing that isn't completely ignorant in your entire post is walking around with a grizzly bear; that is just bad ass. What factors do YOU look for to see if someone is about to "open up"??? Maybe someone always looking around, not looking like an approachable person who doesn't wants to talk to anyone out in public, someone who doesn't dress the way you expect them to, dirty and greasy after work??? All fits me except the open carry part.

I am not a fan of open carry personally; I am a fan of keeping my rights intact.

 

[kingfhb]

Most civil/constitutional right violation cases are handled on a contingency fee basis. People are winning these kinds of cases (usually they settle before trial.)
Yes, the burden is on the illegally detained person to prove that the stop was illegal; but, most juries are not made up of stupid people. They usually figure out what went on.

Again, if the officer is creative and willing to complete the paperwork properly... the facts (as he/she presents them) are the facts that they can corroborate and verify. We're not talking about an officer going after someone (technically) because they are open carrying a weapon... or at least the officer doesn't ever have to SAY that's the reason. He/She can again just give a simple "I believed him to be someone we were looking for". PROVE that you weren't... again, if they're creative enough and can stick to their story... and you choose to take them to court... (and for what I might add?), most of these pro-bono groups won't even take your case unless it puts them in the spotlight for 10 minutes.

Wear your own body cameras... post your videos on YouTube... but it's naïve to think that an officer with enough wherewithal couldn't come up with a valid reason to detain you legally for anything at anytime. The fact that you're open carrying has nothing to do with it (if the officer is creative).

I think this post is getting a tad bit off topic. Maybe someone should start yet ANOTHER "it's my right" thread.

 

[Swampghost]

Are you really serious???? How is open carry a violation of anyone else's rights? Because your obviously scared of guns, no one can have them where you can see them???!!! The only thing that isn't completely ignorant in your entire post is walking around with a grizzly bear; that is just bad ass.

I am not a fan of open carry personally; I am a fan of keeping my rights intact.

Yes, I am completely serious. I think I laid out how it is a violation of the rights of others pretty well. See...you are that person who enjoys negative attention. I could discern that by your display of a Confederate Battle Flag. I am "scared" that there are still people in society who think that certain identifiable groups of people are somehow less than others and deserving of captivity. Is that your idea of preserving rights?

 

[US Infidel]

Again; are you serious??? Attacking my wording/grammar is the best you have? Thank you for the English lesson. YOU'RE correct. And YOUR attack at my incorrect grammar is noted. Don't be scared, but the person next to you may have a legally concealed handgun with real bullets in it. Please feel free to give me my grade on this post as well teacher.

Edit: Also, the flag is my avatar because of the ignorance and stupidity of the whole flag issue; or non-issue in my opinion. I sometimes change it to topical items.

 

[Swampghost]

I hope they are. I encourage people to legally arm themselves. I deleted the English lesson, complete with a typographical error, before your last post. The main reason was that I liked my other point about the flag avatar so much better. As you are fully aware, I didn't like the fear reference.

I honestly hope you have a nice life. I also hope that both of us learn to treat everyone with dignity and respect.