# Are OPEN CARRY VS. POLICE street stops going to come to a head? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 1, 2014, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134 "2014-10-01T22:44:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![JesterX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/439d5e/32.png) [@JesterX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JesterX)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/161 "2014-10-06T05:46:35Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > Can you post a cite that shows open carriers have been a significant target by muggers, rapists, etc.? As soon as you can post a cite that shows muggers, rapists, etc. have been significantly deterred by open carriers. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/162 "2014-10-06T05:53:03Z")
> [@JesterX](#): > > As soon as you can post a cite that shows muggers, rapists, etc. have been significantly deterred by open carriers. I’m not required to prove a negative, newbie. You need to cite your claim. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/163 "2014-10-06T05:59:22Z")
> [@JesterX](#): > > As soon as you can post a cite that shows muggers, rapists, etc. have been significantly deterred by open carriers. There’s a great movie that demonstrates this. It’s called Death Wish, starred Charles Bronson and was made in the early to mid 1970s. It proves just how open carriers can deal with violent crime. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 6:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/164 "2014-10-06T06:59:58Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > There’s a great movie that demonstrates this. > > It’s called Death Wish, starred Charles Bronson and was made in the early to mid 1970s. > > It proves just how open carriers can deal with violent crime. Also Death Wish II, III, IV, V, VI… > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Not really. Openly carrying guns is generally a sign that someone is likely to start a fight or bully someone. And often is a sign that they are dangerously irrational. As a general rule, yes: open carriers all too often are trying to start a fight, bully someone, act out their problems with authority or their funhouse mirror distorted risk perceptions. [Gun crackpots](http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/watch-what-happens-when-police-confront-white-open-carry-gun-nut) will be inspired by this bozo in pajamas. [This](http://www.policeone.com/Officer-Safety/articles/4105481-Video-Great-police-response-to-open-carry-activist/) wannabe tough guy talked big on rights and liked making things difficult for the cops, but wouldn’t back his posturing up with his real name, though he did post his shots of the cop on You-tube. No shots of him, just the officer trying to do his job. Forbes reports that [Texas Gun Bullies Use Semi-Automatics To Terrorize Mothers Against Guns](http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/11/11/texas-gun-bullies-use-semi-automatics-to-terrorize-mothers-against-guns-nra-remains-silent/) while the NRA Remains Silent (the NRA later commented then retracted IIRC). [These scumbags](http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2014/05/31/open-carry-holds-rally-in-north-richland-hills-met-by-protestors/) get off on scaring kids and making problems for businesses concerned about the family unfriendly environment that open carry rifles engender. [More](http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/09/09/idiot-open-carry-mob-surrounds-cops-in-texas-none-dead-but-some-jailed-videos/). Once is too often. ## Over in Milwaukee, [this open carry fanatic](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zx_YUO4SzcY) was successfully robbed at gunpoint using the obvious technique that JesterX alluded to. The guy’s neighbors implied he was a weirdo with a gun unsurprisingly. The crime victim/gunnut simply had his gun taken away from him. He thought he would be invincible: instead he was a goat. Or so I surmise: the open carry mugging victim wasn’t interviewed. Ok, I found a real link. [How Should the Police Respond to a Report of a Man with a Gun?](http://nccriminallaw.sog.unc.edu/how-should-the-police-respond-to-a-report-of-a-man-with-a-gun/), by a legal blogger. He covers the Wisconsin situation. He doesn’t think the case law is fully settled with regards to open carry practitioners. It links to 2 guidance documents for law enforcement, one by PA, one by Michigan. They are relevant to the OP: they make some of Bricker’s points in greater detail. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/165 "2014-10-06T07:16:25Z")
More seriously, I should mention some factors that give me pause. In the old west, bad guys concealed weapons and good guys open carried in jurisdictions where guns were permitted. (Many cities such as Dodge required people to check their guns at the border. [Cite](http://www.nytimes.com/1990/09/02/opinion/l-dodge-city-believed-in-strict-gun-control-237490.html): there are others.) If there were reasonable licensure requirements, I wouldn’t have a problem with open carry. And my upthread wisecracks notwithstanding, I concede there are circumstances where openly carrying a handgun would be prudent and socially acceptable. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 11:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/166 "2014-10-06T11:02:54Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > IMHO, if an officer sees a person carrying a rifle in a populated area, he has a reasonable suspicion that crime is afoot. Afoot? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/167 "2014-10-06T11:58:15Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > I can only respond regarding the laws of my own state. How, exactly, would I avoid disciplinary action and a civil lawsuit for hassling an open carrier without any other factors, when state law, state supreme court decisions, and Attorney General opinions, all clearly say there is no violation of law and no reasonable suspicion? > > > > There have been several cases in Wisconsin of your way happening, and in every one of those cases the police departments ended up paying out thousands of dollars. > > Did those cases involve rifles? If they did, then they are absolutely absurd. I’m sure that’s a comfort to the taxpayers of those localities, the ones who bore the burden of paying those settlements. Apart from your announcement of how ‘absurd’ it is, do you have any insight on what law the police should have pointed to as justification for believing a person with a rifle can be seized and questioned without legal probable cause or legal reasonable suspicion of the violation of any criminal statute? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/168 "2014-10-06T11:59:11Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > OK, show me the law against it, that a policeman could use to stop me for doing so. Since when does that matter? If the cops want to stop you, they will. Having a gun doesn’t stop them; all it does is make you look suspicious & dangerous, and make it easy for them to get away with killing you if that’s what they want to do. > [@JesterX](#): > > As soon as you can post a cite that shows muggers, rapists, etc. have been significantly deterred by open carriers. > [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > There’s a great movie that demonstrates this. > > It’s called Death Wish, starred Charles Bronson and was made in the early to mid 1970s. > > It proves just how open carriers can deal with violent crime. :dubious: You’re actually posting a movie as a “cite”? Does that mean that if I post a link to _Superman_ you’ll accept it as a cite that I can fly? > [@kayaker](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > IMHO, if an officer sees a person carrying a rifle in a populated area, he has a reasonable suspicion that crime is afoot. > > Afoot? Well, if they’re _carrying_ it they probably aren’t in a vehicle; so \*of course \*crime is afoot. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/169 "2014-10-06T12:15:59Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Since when does that matter? If the cops want to stop you, they will. Having a gun doesn’t stop them; all it does is make you look suspicious & dangerous, and make it easy for them to get away with killing you if that’s what they want to do. It’s a truism that, regardless of any law, police officers can choose to stop you, search you, or kill you. I think the discussion is about what consequences the legal system will impose upon police officers who do these things. In other words, if i were to say, “Police can’t arrest you without probable cause,” I recognize that police actually can arrest you without probable cause, but the arrest will be voided and the police subject to legal sanctions if the police cannot subsequently prove that probable cause existed. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/170 "2014-10-06T14:12:11Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > If there’s nothing “paranoid” about people thinking they need to carry guns because of potential danger from other people carrying guns, It isn’t just other people who might have guns. This is where so many gun control advocates get it wrong, thinking that if only there were no guns the whole danger level would be de-escalated for everyone. I want to carry a gun not just against others who might assault me with a gun, but with a knife or a baseball bat. Or the bully who’s 6’6" and 275 lbs of solid muscle. Or the five guys roaming the streets looking for some fun. I want the personal equivalent of nuclear weapons, the deterrent that says “If you attack me you will be in a world of hurt”. I would guess that like me, the majority of carry advocates believe in being “porcupines”: harmless if left alone, painful if molested. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/171 "2014-10-06T14:43:12Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > As a general rule, yes: open carriers all too often are trying to start a fight, bully someone, act out their problems with authority or their funhouse mirror distorted risk perceptions. [Gun crackpots](http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/watch-what-happens-when-police-confront-white-open-carry-gun-nut) will be inspired by this bozo in pajamas. [This](http://www.policeone.com/Officer-Safety/articles/4105481-Video-Great-police-response-to-open-carry-activist/) wannabe tough guy talked big on rights and liked making things difficult for the cops, but wouldn’t back his posturing up with his real name, though he did post his shots of the cop on You-tube. No shots of him, just the officer trying to do his job. Forbes reports that [Texas Gun Bullies Use Semi-Automatics To Terrorize Mothers Against Guns](http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/11/11/texas-gun-bullies-use-semi-automatics-to-terrorize-mothers-against-guns-nra-remains-silent/) while the NRA Remains Silent (the NRA later commented then retracted IIRC). [These scumbags](http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2014/05/31/open-carry-holds-rally-in-north-richland-hills-met-by-protestors/) get off on scaring kids and making problems for businesses concerned about the family unfriendly environment that open carry rifles engender. [More](http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/09/09/idiot-open-carry-mob-surrounds-cops-in-texas-none-dead-but-some-jailed-videos/). This are good examples of what I mentioned earlier: principled defense of civil liberties pretty much inevitably means you’ll end up defending the rights of assholes. If you believe in the first amendment, you hold your nose and defend the rights of Nazis, the Klan and Fred Phelps. If you believe in the second amendment, you hold your nose and defend these douchebags. Doesn’t mean you have to like any of them. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/172 "2014-10-06T14:56:38Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > :dubious: You’re actually posting a movie as a “cite”? Whoooooosh! ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/173 "2014-10-06T15:53:54Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Long post swallowed by the hamsters here. Summary: > > Open carry of pistols is fine and shouldn’t be the subject of attention by law enforcement. If you are open carrying a fucking rifle in public then the police aren’t doing their jobs if they don’t at least stop and question you. Not that I’m a fan of open carry of long guns, but I see it more of a spectrum rather than a bright line difference. Like speech, not all of it is good, but especially abhorrent speech needs protection. > [@JesterX](#): > > Having said that, I’m not against people having guns. They have the right. I just don’t support open carry. I think guns should be restricted to the home and only carried by people who carry excessive valuables or something similar. Based on the above, and post #155, I’m not clear if you’ve read Heller. Have you? Separately from that comment, what do you think the word “bear” means in the 2nd? Have you read Peruta from the 9th circuit, and and Moore vs. Madigan from the 7th circuit (these are split from other circuit decisions that ruled differently). ---
**Author:** ![JesterX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/439d5e/32.png) [@JesterX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JesterX)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/174 "2014-10-06T15:56:22Z")
> [@furt](#): > > The vast majority of police spend the vast majority of their time doing things that are not dangerous. Even in major cities, 95% of cops will never use their sidearms; not even once in their whole 20-year career. In smaller jurisdictions, it’s more like 99.9%. They carry them 24/7 – including off-duty – because “you never know what might happen” or “it’s good to be prepared” or because the mere threat of having one enables them to ward off threats … all of which are the exact same reasons private citizens give. > > Now if you want to adopt a policy that police should be restricted to keeping guns in the station (or perhaps the car) and only carried by officers heading into a high-risk situation or something similar, well, I’d disagree, but at least you’d be consistent. Except for a cop, a gun is a “tool for the trade”. The same way a carpenter carries a hammer for every job they go, even if they don’t need one for that particular job. Or a plumber might carry a monkey wrench, a cop carries a gun. It’s part of the job. That is NOT the case for citizens. So you really can’t apply the same standard for both. > [@furt](#): > > Alternatively, you could just fess up and say that you’re okay with police being a different class of citizen, with more of a right to defend themselves than mere “civilians.” It’s a popular opinion; I’d guess ~70% of the populace holds it, though most won’t phrase it that way. Well police are, in fact, a different class of citizens. They have authority normal citizens don’t have. They have more than the right to defend themselves, they have the DUTY to defend others. As I said, normal citizens don’t have that. [/QUOTE] > [@furt](#): > > But that just brings us back to what **Kimstu** said, and my response to it: Some (most) people trust the police more than they do the average law-abiding citizen, and see them as “the good guys.” Others of us are more inclined to see them as not much better nor worse than humanity in general. (And of course, in places like Ferguson, some people trust them _less_ than the average person…) I’ll make the same point as Kimstu… when we see an unidentifed person carrying a gun, just HOW are we supposed to know that person is actually an “average law-abiding citizen” and not someone with ill intent? > [@furt](#): > > And other people have noted it too, but yeah, the idea that “people who carry excessive valuables,” and who presumably live and travel in upscale environs, should be able to protect themselves, but the blue-collar guy in a shit neighborhood who risks getting mugged by a crackhead looking for a $20 fix everytime he walks home late should just take his chances … yeah, that’s pretty damned appalling. Talk about “disparate impact.” It’s not a preference. It’s not like anyone is saying they, personally, PREFER to see only people carrying valuables with guns because it makes them feel good. It’s about choosing the most LIKELY person to be attacked. And like the point I made earlier, if a crackhead wants your $20 bad enough and knows you’re armed, he/she is simply going to plan for it. Crime, specifically ROBBERIES, are all about getting the drop on your victim, catching them by surprise before they know they’re going to be robbed. ---
**Author:** ![JesterX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/439d5e/32.png) [@JesterX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JesterX)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/175 "2014-10-06T16:03:29Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > I’m not required to prove a negative, newbie. You need to cite your claim. The point was… how do you cite a stat or example of what is/was in someone’s head? I can’t cite when a criminal deliberately targeted an open carrier anymore than you can cite one when a criminal was specifically deterred by an open carrier. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/176 "2014-10-06T16:10:56Z")
> [@JesterX](#): > > Except for a cop, a gun is a “tool for the trade”. The same way a carpenter carries a hammer for every job they go, even if they don’t need one for that particular job. Or a plumber might carry a monkey wrench, a cop carries a gun. It’s part of the job. That is NOT the case for citizens. So you really can’t apply the same standard for both. Providing for one’s own self defense is everyone’s responsibility. > [@](#): > > Well police are, in fact, a different class of citizens. They have authority normal citizens don’t have. They have more than the right to defend themselves, they have the DUTY to defend others. As I said, normal citizens don’t have that. Police have no duty to defend others. They are granted certain arrest powers, and certain types of immunity when performing their jobs, but they have no more duty to defend me than you do. > [@](#): > > I’ll make the same point as Kimstu… when we see an unidentifed person carrying a gun, just HOW are we supposed to know that person is actually an “average law-abiding citizen” and not someone with ill intent? You’re not. But you don’t know that about anyone you see. The idea of open carry is normalization. At some point people became comfortable with walking adjacent to fast moving vehicles, the idea of standing 3 feet away from a speeding train (subways, etc.), and generally becoming accustomed to other potentially dangerous activities. If ~50% of the people you saw were openly carrying, at some point you’d probably treat it as an everyday occurrence and not think twice about it. ---
**Author:** ![JesterX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/439d5e/32.png) [@JesterX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JesterX)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/177 "2014-10-06T16:34:52Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Providing for one’s own self defense is everyone’s responsibility. Self defense doesn’t require a gun. When you phrase it like that you make it sound like someone is being irresponsible if they DON’T carry a gun. > [@Bone](#): > > Police have no duty to defend others. They are granted certain arrest powers, and certain types of immunity when performing their jobs, but they have no more duty to defend me than you do. I see. So when someone calls 911 because someone is breaking into their home, police response is optional for them? > [@Bone](#): > > You’re not. But you don’t know that about anyone you see. The idea of open carry is normalization. At some point people became comfortable with walking adjacent to fast moving vehicles, the idea of standing 3 feet away from a speeding train (subways, etc.), and generally becoming accustomed to other potentially dangerous activities. If ~50% of the people you saw were openly carrying, at some point you’d probably treat it as an everyday occurrence and not think twice about it. That’s an adjustment I’d rather NOT make. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/178 "2014-10-06T16:48:24Z")
> [@JesterX](#): > > I see. So when someone calls 911 because someone is breaking into their home, police response is optional for them? Yes. In practice, this is mainly to prioritise responses, so that if there’s more serious crimes occurring they aren’t liable for not responding to yours. Short of having several cops available per property, there’s no way for it to be otherwise. This is magnified in certain areas, where the distance the police would have to travel to reach you is large. ---
**Author:** ![Scumpup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce73a5/32.png) [@Scumpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scumpup)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/179 "2014-10-06T16:48:28Z")
> [@JesterX](#): > > I see. So when someone calls 911 because someone is breaking into their home, police response is optional for them? [Nope.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia) [They](http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html) [don’t](http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.com/2013/02/police-have-no-responsibility-to.html) have an obligation to protect you. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 6, 2014, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134/180 "2014-10-06T16:53:34Z")
> [@JesterX](#): > > So when someone calls 911 because someone is breaking into their home, police response is optional for them? Yes. If they did not respond, what remedy do you imagine you’d have against them? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-open-carry-vs-police-street-stops-going-to-come-to-a-head/700134.md?page=10)