There have been a lot of times where a person openly carrying a gun been about to start shooting people in some public place.
Bullshit.
To take just one example, folks who are planning on going out in a blaze of glory don’t always hide their weaponry.
The OP mentions videos of people testing their right to open carry. I know this is a bit of a hijack, but it’s an honest question: are there any videos of people who aren’t white doing this?
Good discussion in Pinner v. State, an Indiana Supreme Court case that draws on the reasoning in Florida v JL.
The answer is no: the mere display of a legally carried firearm is not reasonable articulable suspicion.
I’d agree that my logic was convoluted if it weren’t for the fact that in most of these situations that we’re talking about the people were very explicitly trying to intimidate people with the gun on their backs.
But I certainly agree we should amend that archaic piece of idiocy. Not that I think the current federal government is really in the mood for doing anything reasonable.
:dubious:
Would carrying an axe or sword be grounds for reasonable suspicion? I once got a bunch of weird looks when I came into the city from the countryside to get my axe handle repaired.
Yes … errr … maybe. Truthfully, I’ve got somewhat mixed feelings on this too, and I don’t think one rule will fit all circumstances. On the one hand, if we said, “yes”, I could imagine a few panty-twisted liberal bed-wetters parking themselves outside of a gun range / gun store and calling the cops on everyone that walks out with a rifle, just to harass them by proxy via the police. The cops aren’t justified in stopping all those people, IMHO. Likewise if there’s some announced “Second Amendment Rally” or something and hundreds of people are showing up to protest / support some government policy at the capitol building, many with scary guns. The cops shouldn’t have free rein to detain and investigate everyone open-carrying a rifle in those circumstances either.
OTOH, I’m not sure a hard and fast “no, Terry stop is never allowed for the mere open possession of a long gun” is the best rule either. There might be circumstances where it would make sense and the police ought to have some latitude to investigate (spitballing here, but something like pacing back and forth on the sidewalk outside of George Soros’ house).
One guy walking down a street is on the border in my mind. It would depend on the particulars. Is it the middle of the night or daylight? Is the gun cased / slung / carried in-hand? Is the guy wearing body armor and a balaclava or dressed in jeans and a T-shirt (or hunting camo on a rural road). Is the street residential or commercial. Is it near a gun store / range?
Don’t they tell us: “If you see something, say something.”? Guy walking down the street with AR-15=something.
Whatever.
News organizations are derelict in not obtaining and publishing crime scene photos of mass shootings. Legislatures that suppress the release of same are complicit in the ongoing slaughter.
I own several AR-15s. Therefore, it means I am plotting murder? :dubious:
This post is sheer is ignorance on display.
The one big thing I learned from being on a grand jury a number of years back was that most criminals are dumber than shit.
I tried to add a sheer, and didn’t proofread. I’d rather have my grammatical error than that deeply-flawed understanding about firearms.
But more seriously, what an AR-15 or similar weapon is good for is to kill a lot of people in a hurry. That’s pretty much its only use. Please explain to me why civilized persons should not regard anyone who owns or desires to own such a weapon as someone who doesn’t belong in a civilized society.
In response to Crafter_Man, your ownership of AR-15s or similar weapons doesn’t mean you’re plotting murder.
However, your desire to retain a right to ownership of such weapons enables those who would use them to slaughter large numbers of their fellow citizens in a short time, as happened just this morning.
You make their atrocities possible. Congratulations.
As a bystander with incomplete information, the question isn’t: is the probability over 50% that the person with a prominently-held rifle likely to commit a crime? It’s: when I see someone prominently holding a rifle, am I significantly likelier than normal to be on the verge of witnessing, or falling victim to, a crime?
It may be that 99.99% of the time when you see someone with a rifle, they’re not about to commit a mass shooting. But it also may be that 99.9999% of the time when I see someone without a rifle, they’re not about to commit a mass shooting. If my risk of being in the presence of a mass shooter just went up by a couple orders of magnitude, it’s rational for me to be wigged out.
I disagree. They’re useful for hunting small game, they’re useful for recreation. They’re very modular and can be adjusted to suit the needs of a wide range of shooters (different grips, stocks, fore ends, optics / iron sights, etc. They are, for rifles, light-weight and maneuverable which makes them easy to use in a situation like home defense, etc.
Would you say that airline passengers made 9/11 possible? Technically, it’s probably true, but I think you’d probably recognize that’s a fairly asinine thing to say, right?
Seems like the main difference is carrying vs. brandishing.
if someone has a pistol holstered in their belt, I wouldn’t call the cops or feel alarmed. But if someone is holding out their pistol with both hands in a supermarket, I’d call 911 ASAP and/or assume a mass shooting is imminent.