I am so ignorant, I know nothing about guns. I don’t even know what they sound like.
“Hello police? I just heard what sounded to me like gunshots and now someone is running down the street with what looks to me like a machine gun!”
Gun threads seem to regularly feature Dopers practically expressing a sense of pride in their ignorance. It really is quite amazing.
Yup, but smart enough to dial 911 if I ever see someone carrying a long arm in public. And I vote.
You’re in Rhode Island. Nobody cares.
Last poll showed 60% in favor of an assault weapons ban here. This whole thread I have only said what the social norm on open carry is here. You do you in your own state.
I will, and the SCOTUS will do all of our states.
California, for all it’s liberal progressiveness now, was historically the most fiercely legally racist region of the country for more than a century. They committed the worst atrocities against the natives, made laws against hiring the Chinese and other charming activities.
Too bad THOSE folks weren’t better armed. :rolleyes:
It is their arrogance mixed with their ignorance that keeps things enjoyable.
And that would be a crime in states with open carry. Do it enough times and *you’*d go to jail. Not very smart.
Our Attorney Generals office received a question about that on WILENET:
Dear Dave:
What is your opinion about an open carry situation? A person is wearing a holster on their side. But, they are walking around with a gun in their hand. Let’s say as they walk it is pointed down and swinging forward and back while they naturally swing their arms.
Our DA didn’t feel it was a violation.
Dear “Carrying in Hand, Not in Holster”:
Thanks for your question. Open carry is legal in Wisconsin; only when it is carried in a threatening or malicious way is it illegal. The conduct you describe is obnoxious, in my view, but likely not illegal. I concur with your DA.
Dave 09-09-2016
Wisconsin does not have a “brandishing” law, and “threatening or malicious” would include actually pointing the weapon at someone or specific making threats while armed. Simply having an unsheathed weapon is not illegal.
FYI - some states have laws against harassing hunters, and sportsmen.
OTOH, if you chose to repeatedly report someone who does not appear to be violating any local, state, or federal laws, the police may stop the hunter for identification, and then arrest you for making false reports to the police.
The WI law cited says that you may not be convicted of disorderly conduct merely for carrying a firearm openly. I don’t disagree with that. Your second point does not follow that the carry of an unusual type of firearm for the circumstance is not suspicion that a different crime may be afoot.
But, IMHO, carrying a rifle in town, or carrying an axe in town (and to HD, my definition of “town” is not in the suburbs to your neighbors house; think the business district) is sufficiently unusual to raise that suspicion. I don’t mean possible in the scientific sense, I mean reasonably probable. As an officer on the beat, you would not wonder why this guy was carrying a rifle into Starbucks?
The same suspicion in not there because you are driving your car. As you said, it is possible that you may try to run someone over, but the act of driving gives an officer no suspicion that you are about to do so. Carrying a rifle is so unusual and so needless that it at least raises the reasonable suspicion. If during the Terry stop, the guy says that he is raising awareness about Second Amendment rights and encouraging more people to carry rifles, then he is on his way, but you are still free to observe him to make sure.
Walking past a department store 20 times was one of the facts in Terry that led to the development of the RAS doctrine. It seems that posters in this thread would argue that as walking by a store 20 times is perfectly legal, standing on a street corner is legal, and talking with two other guys is perfectly legal, then the police can just piss off and that they have no right to detain you. Terry says otherwise.
Yes, at that point (and after a Terry stop for carrying a rifle) you have every right to refuse to answer questions, refuse to present ID, and in states without a stop and ID law, refuse to give your name. The investigation at that point has reached an impasse and the officer must let you go if all you are doing is carrying a rifle.
It seems like bad police work to say that in this latest Pittsburgh tragedy, the police could have watched this guy drive up, take an AR-15 from his trunk, load it, sling it over his shoulder, and walk into the Temple, but they could do nothing since open carry ls legal.
You’re ignoring a massive point that I brought up a couple times.
As an officer I can approach an open carrier, ask him questions, talk to them, ASK them to stop and talk to me etc… But unless there are other factors present what I can’t legally do is DETAIN them and tell them they have to stop and talk to me. Many OCers will stop and and talk and as long as there has been nothing to insinuate they are not free to go everything is on the up and up.
But if they tell me to pound sand and keep walking, absent other factors, I cannot legally force them to stop. In my state carrying an AR-15 in public, in and of itself, is not RS that they are going to or already have committed a crime and does not justify detaining someone. You seem to think it is, but your opinion is irrelevant in my state.
Listen, this is not me just saying this, it’s the Attorney Generals Office of my state, judges on some court cases we had here, and State DOJ instructors. You don’t have to like it, but at this time it is the law and policy for law enforcement, regardless of what your opinion on it is.
Isn’t it though? 
Well champ, if you saw my earlier posts I am not too worried about doing it enough times to go to jail. Because as I clearly stated, I have never seen anyone open carrying a rifle around here, and I have lived here over 40 years. And so if I ever saw anyone doing so, it would be so foreign it would be worthy of note, and of notifying the authorities.
They do now. But your dear leader has just reminded us all that the rights laid out in the Constitution are not necessarily guaranteed to be worth the parchment they are written on. By it’s very name, the Second Amendment shows that the Constitution can be Amended.
Oh, and if it is amended by the vote of 2/3rds of the states my vote in Rhode Island is probably more valuable than yours in a bigger state since it is a rare commodity.
That’s not how Article V works. Unless you’re a legislator, you don’t get to vote in a 2/3’d situation…
In any case, I’m not sure why anyone is haranguing you for calling the cops. If it makes you feel better, it’s only your own time that you’re wasting. If your cops feel like bullying some innocent on the street, then it’s a good lesson for that cop, too. As I see it, your meddling, although unnecessary, is really an opportunity to further promote gun rights rather than limit them.
LOL, ok.
“Is anything preventing you from buying as many guns as you want?”
“No”
“And you consider that severely limited?”
“Yes”
:rolleyes:
Not sure how you make it grocery shopping with only 5 kinds of milk available, but you be you.
What do you read? What’s your favorite magazine, tv station, or news source?
Sorry those aren’t available, but you have plenty of others to choose from …
No sir, your freedoms have not been restricted one iota!
I see. So in your view, every kind and type of weapon ever created or will be created should be available for purchase, or your right is “severely limited”?
“Can you buy an unlimited amount of guns? Yes.”
Not limited. It’s right in the “unlimited” part.