Do Americans have a right to carry?

[ServebotFrank]

While I think that he should've gotten on his knees and the whole thing would've been over with like that, the cops were unprofessional in the way they handled the situation. Pointing a gun at him is not a great idea if your a cop and you see someone openly carrying which shouldn't raise alarms in a cop's mind. "Openly carrying, this guy must have a license shouldn't hurt to check though." The fact he pointed a gun at him was stupid idea. Do you think the person you're stoping is going to be compliant with a gun pointed at his face? No! If anything that would scare the fuck out of him and make the situation worse. He should've just told Florino that he was going to check him at the station and that he would give a ride back if it inconvenienced him.

Oh and charge him with disorderly conduct my ass. If anything the cop should be punished for threatening him with lethal force when it was not needed.

 

[Canid117]

This guy has a gun, he isn't listening to the officer, taser the fuck head.

Regardless if he has a right to carry the weapon, he is blatantly defying a police officer.

-'A. SINCE A SEPARATE LICENSE IS REQUIRED IN PHILADELPHIA
AND IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY OFFICER TO KNOW WHO DOES
AND DOES NOT HAVE A VALID CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE, IT
IS ENTIRELY REASONALBE FOR OFFICERS TO TEMPORARILY
DETAIN AND INVESTIGATE ANY INDIVIDUAL CARRYING A
FIREARM EXPOSED TO DETERMINE IF THE PERSON IS
OPERATING WITH THE LAW.

B. IMMEDIATLEY SEIZE ANY FIREARMS FOR OFFICER SAFETY
DURING THE STOP AND UNLOAD THE FIREARMS IF POSSIBLE,
BUT ONLY IF IT CAN BE DONE SAFELY.-'

Yeah, this dumb dumb will more than likely have his license revoked.

More like he can sue the police department for their actions and their demeanor. And win.

 

[Canid117]

This guy has a gun, he isn't listening to the officer, taser the fuck head.

Regardless if he has a right to carry the weapon, he is blatantly defying a police officer.

-'A. SINCE A SEPARATE LICENSE IS REQUIRED IN PHILADELPHIA
AND IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY OFFICER TO KNOW WHO DOES
AND DOES NOT HAVE A VALID CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE, IT
IS ENTIRELY REASONALBE FOR OFFICERS TO TEMPORARILY
DETAIN AND INVESTIGATE ANY INDIVIDUAL CARRYING A
FIREARM EXPOSED TO DETERMINE IF THE PERSON IS
OPERATING WITH THE LAW.

B. IMMEDIATLEY SEIZE ANY FIREARMS FOR OFFICER SAFETY
DURING THE STOP AND UNLOAD THE FIREARMS IF POSSIBLE,
BUT ONLY IF IT CAN BE DONE SAFELY.-'

Yeah, this dumb dumb will more than likely have his license revoked.

More like he can sue the police department for their actions and their demeanor. And win.

You can sue people for their demeanor in Philly? Wow.

As for his 'actions', a lawyer might attempt that, but I would bet you a dollar it's thrown out.

They illegally arrested a man while forcing him to the ground while he was not a threat. They pointed their weapons at him and as he was trying to tell them that he had a license for his weapon their response was "Shut the fuck up." Such lack of professionalism alone would not win the case but this case would easily go to a jury and the jury will not like how this cop spoke to a seemingly reasonable individual who was just trying to buy auto parts and was not breaking the law. A 25 year old IT employee who has had several friends mugged is a lot more lawyer friendly than a guy who pulls his weapon on the first person he sees with a publicly displayed firearm.

 

[ZeroMachine]

This guy has a gun, he isn't listening to the officer, taser the fuck head.

Regardless if he has a right to carry the weapon, he is blatantly defying a police officer.

-'A. SINCE A SEPARATE LICENSE IS REQUIRED IN PHILADELPHIA
AND IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY OFFICER TO KNOW WHO DOES
AND DOES NOT HAVE A VALID CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE, IT
IS ENTIRELY REASONALBE FOR OFFICERS TO TEMPORARILY
DETAIN AND INVESTIGATE ANY INDIVIDUAL CARRYING A
FIREARM EXPOSED TO DETERMINE IF THE PERSON IS
OPERATING WITH THE LAW.

B. IMMEDIATLEY SEIZE ANY FIREARMS FOR OFFICER SAFETY
DURING THE STOP AND UNLOAD THE FIREARMS IF POSSIBLE,
BUT ONLY IF IT CAN BE DONE SAFELY.-'

Yeah, this dumb dumb will more than likely have his license revoked.

The thread should have ended here... what could have happened to cause it go go on for six...

... Oh. One of those conversations.

Rather pointless, unfortunately. Seems a lot of people here never once think about the cop's side of the story.

He may have been a bit harsh, but the guy was an idiot for not following the cop's instructions. What would have been so wrong with just listening to him and proving the cop wrong afterwards? Was he rushing somewhere?

 

[ZeroMachine]

This guy has a gun, he isn't listening to the officer, taser the fuck head.

Regardless if he has a right to carry the weapon, he is blatantly defying a police officer.

-'A. SINCE A SEPARATE LICENSE IS REQUIRED IN PHILADELPHIA
AND IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY OFFICER TO KNOW WHO DOES
AND DOES NOT HAVE A VALID CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE, IT
IS ENTIRELY REASONALBE FOR OFFICERS TO TEMPORARILY
DETAIN AND INVESTIGATE ANY INDIVIDUAL CARRYING A
FIREARM EXPOSED TO DETERMINE IF THE PERSON IS
OPERATING WITH THE LAW.

B. IMMEDIATLEY SEIZE ANY FIREARMS FOR OFFICER SAFETY
DURING THE STOP AND UNLOAD THE FIREARMS IF POSSIBLE,
BUT ONLY IF IT CAN BE DONE SAFELY.-'

Yeah, this dumb dumb will more than likely have his license revoked.

The thread should have ended here... what could have happened to cause it go go on for six...

... Oh. One of those conversations.

Rather pointless, unfortunately. Seems a lot of people here never once think about the cop's side of the story.

He may have been a bit harsh, but the guy was an idiot for not following the cop's instructions. What would have been so wrong with just listening to him and proving the cop wrong afterwards? Was he rushing somewhere?

Yeah, sorry, a lot of those posts were mine ; )

If he just would have listened to the police, this wouldn't be an issue.

Oh, I looked through all of it, I know it was you a lot.

The cop ended up being way too harsh by the end- there is no denying that whatsoever.

But if the guy had just listened to the cop, the ENTIRE FUCKING SITUATION would have been avoided.

Gah, I better just walk away from this thread before I get pissed. Good luck, Sober.

 

[ServebotFrank]

I'm taking the time now to watch the rest of the 40 minute video and my opinion is not changing. After backup arrives the sgt. started lying to backup about what happened. He said that, "Florino responded by going, 'Junior? Who's junior?' which degrades his word. The cop lied to get his way and that's illegal.

 

[Canid117]

This guy has a gun, he isn't listening to the officer, taser the fuck head.

Regardless if he has a right to carry the weapon, he is blatantly defying a police officer.

-'A. SINCE A SEPARATE LICENSE IS REQUIRED IN PHILADELPHIA
AND IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY OFFICER TO KNOW WHO DOES
AND DOES NOT HAVE A VALID CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE, IT
IS ENTIRELY REASONALBE FOR OFFICERS TO TEMPORARILY
DETAIN AND INVESTIGATE ANY INDIVIDUAL CARRYING A
FIREARM EXPOSED TO DETERMINE IF THE PERSON IS
OPERATING WITH THE LAW.

B. IMMEDIATLEY SEIZE ANY FIREARMS FOR OFFICER SAFETY
DURING THE STOP AND UNLOAD THE FIREARMS IF POSSIBLE,
BUT ONLY IF IT CAN BE DONE SAFELY.-'

Yeah, this dumb dumb will more than likely have his license revoked.

More like he can sue the police department for their actions and their demeanor. And win.

You can sue people for their demeanor in Philly? Wow.

As for his 'actions', a lawyer might attempt that, but I would bet you a dollar it's thrown out.

They illegally arrested a man while forcing him to the ground while he was not a threat. They pointed their weapons at him and as he was trying to tell them that he had a license for his weapon their response was "Shut the fuck up." Such lack of professionalism alone would not win the case but this case would easily go to a jury and the jury will not like how this cop spoke to a seemingly reasonable individual who was just trying to buy auto parts and was not breaking the law. A 25 year old IT employee who has had several friends mugged is a lot more lawyer friendly than a guy who pulls his weapon on the first person he sees with a publicly displayed firearm.

Alright... a dollar bet it is!

Once people hear he didn't listen to the officer, it should end rather quickly. But who knows, I doubt this story will go anywhere, and even if so, someone would need to report it.

If you really think that is resisting arrest then you sir have never had anything near a misunderstanding. He was offering to present his license and was trying to be as helpful as possible to the police officer. The officer was having none of it and quickly became aggravated for no apparent reason. Any lawyer worth their fee could crush the police department in this case. The Philly police department better hope this guy doesn't decide to sue.

 

[fooddood3]

Yeah...

I am not surprised by this, and I reckon the cops in question will get off scott free.
As they always seem to do over there.

The police in the US seem like they are above the law, and can nearly do as they damn well please with little to no punishment.

It's disgusting to see in a modern, secular state.

It's definitely not a purely American problem.

 

[bushwhacker2k]

Amazing how the police can damn near shoot you when you try to be the reasonable one.

Though you could argue about being reasonable by carrying a firearm at all times...

But I don't wanna bring up the old gun-crazy American stereotype again so please don't take it the wrong way.

We open carry for self defense, it is perfectly reasonable to want to keep yourself alive.

Like he said, don't take it the wrong way, we could debate this but this is a different thread.

snip

He has a license and was being incredibly reasonable, cop should have been more well informed. Frankly the cop was freaking out like crazy, if you are honestly saying this was necessary then I don't even want to argue with you, as you obviously have odd opinions about what cops should be allowed to do on a whim.

snip

Ever heard of a license? No offense, but your argument is totally invalidated by the fact that the fact that one can in fact obtain a license and he was being quite reasonable about it.

If a cop pulled a gun on me and told me to get on my knees for a reason that didn't make sense, I'd have a problem with it too.

 

[Keldon888]

Cop was a royal tool. Many Cops are for one reason or another.

Though I would like to know why this guy had an audio tape running in the first place...

And the guy was a tool too, I realize you don't want to be degraded or whatever, but when a cop asks you to do something like get on your knees you cooperate, not give them lip.

There are easier ways to convey your argument than trying to out shout a cop. He sounded like a total jackass the whole time.

Cop was in the wrong but I hate to see/hear baiting like this.

 

[Canid117]

This guy has a gun, he isn't listening to the officer, taser the fuck head.

Regardless if he has a right to carry the weapon, he is blatantly defying a police officer.

-'A. SINCE A SEPARATE LICENSE IS REQUIRED IN PHILADELPHIA
AND IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY OFFICER TO KNOW WHO DOES
AND DOES NOT HAVE A VALID CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE, IT
IS ENTIRELY REASONALBE FOR OFFICERS TO TEMPORARILY
DETAIN AND INVESTIGATE ANY INDIVIDUAL CARRYING A
FIREARM EXPOSED TO DETERMINE IF THE PERSON IS
OPERATING WITH THE LAW.

B. IMMEDIATLEY SEIZE ANY FIREARMS FOR OFFICER SAFETY
DURING THE STOP AND UNLOAD THE FIREARMS IF POSSIBLE,
BUT ONLY IF IT CAN BE DONE SAFELY.-'

Yeah, this dumb dumb will more than likely have his license revoked.

More like he can sue the police department for their actions and their demeanor. And win.

You can sue people for their demeanor in Philly? Wow.

As for his 'actions', a lawyer might attempt that, but I would bet you a dollar it's thrown out.

They illegally arrested a man while forcing him to the ground while he was not a threat. They pointed their weapons at him and as he was trying to tell them that he had a license for his weapon their response was "Shut the fuck up." Such lack of professionalism alone would not win the case but this case would easily go to a jury and the jury will not like how this cop spoke to a seemingly reasonable individual who was just trying to buy auto parts and was not breaking the law. A 25 year old IT employee who has had several friends mugged is a lot more lawyer friendly than a guy who pulls his weapon on the first person he sees with a publicly displayed firearm.

Alright... a dollar bet it is!

Once people hear he didn't listen to the officer, it should end rather quickly. But who knows, I doubt this story will go anywhere, and even if so, someone would need to report it.

If you really think that is resisting arrest then you sir have never had anything near a misunderstanding. He was offering to present his license and was trying to be as helpful as possible to the police officer. The officer was having none of it and quickly became aggravated for no apparent reason. Any lawyer worth their fee could crush the police department in this case. The Philly police department better hope this guy doesn't decide to sue.

Lets look at the facts here. Guy has a gun, officer tells him to get on the ground. Guy refuses to comply, he wants to go into his pocket...

This isn't going to go well for the guy.

He resisted when he failed to comply. (like I've said 20 some times in this thread)

A man HAD A GUN! How can you say the cop had no reason to be blunt with his words?! He could have been any sort of crazy! The law says he must be detained. The officer was met with verbal resistance/attitude, and then called for back up so another officer could cover him to fully detain the guy with a gun.

According to the law where this occurred the police officer is allowed to request proof of right to carry and arrest if proof is not present. The officer did not have a right to arrest and so this arrest was illegal. The man offered to present his license and information and remained calm. The officer was not willing to allow this to happen. The officer had his weapon drawn on a law abiding citizen. THE OFFICER WAS POINTING HIS GUN AT A RANDOM STRANGER. The officer had no reason to suspect he was a criminal beyond the officers misconception that open carry is illegal because Criminals. do. not. open. carry. Even if he was reaching into his pocket the most dangerous item he could produce is a knife an the officer had a gun. I dont care that the officer drew his weapon. I care that the officer pointed it at a bystander out of his own ignorance and proceeded to become angry and unprofessional without legitimate cause. It would be very similar to a police officer pulling me over for a legal right turn on a red light and then pointing his weapon at me when I cite the traffic law allowing me to do so and offering to produce my drivers license.

 

[Canid117]

I'm done answering the same thing different ways. Thanks for not being rude to me.

Cheers!

All right if you are tired of the argument I'll let you go. Has fun elsewhere.

 

[Hagi]

Regardless of whether the right to bear arms in the US is a good or bad thing ( not getting into that ) I must say I'm happy that in Europe it's pretty clear on situations like this.

If a guy that's not wearing a police uniform is carrying a gun then he's trouble. Very simple, no confusion possible.

And rules on the police are very strict as well, so not really worried about them doing anything crazy.

We still have gun crime of course, but at the very least things like these are avoided for which I'm happy.

 

[KingofallCosmos]

Scared people and scared cops and they all carry guns. You think it's strange these things happen?

Glad I live in Europe.

 

[The Grim Ace]

Speaking for CA, we have open carry only and -- even then -- the cops never honor it. A friend of mine has his license and he keeps his .45 on him at all times and the cops always give him trouble. I believe in gun rights but with paranoid cops all over Southern California I prefer to not even try and carry.

 

[lemiel14n3]

This guy seems like he knows what's up. He was calm, rational, he explained his rights and his awareness of the law. By all accounts he was behaving in a peaceful manner.

It's interesting to me that as soon as the officer in the recording realized he was wrong and going to get in trouble, he changed his story to "he wasn't cooperating", rather than he was carrying a weapon.

All of the recording in mind, Philly is a dangerous city to be a cop. They were well in their rights to stop him and question him as to why he was carrying a gun.

THAT in mind the cops had no right to:

-threaten him with deadly force

-threaten him with non-deadly force

-force him on the ground

-force hand cuffs on him

-Remove, and from the sound of it, attempt to destroy his recording device.

That last one offends me the most, no matter what he was doing removing his possessions as well as his independent means of verifying his side of the story was WRONG to the point of being downright evil.

At my count the Philadelphia police violated three of his basic rights as an American citizen

1:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

2:A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

4:The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I don't know anything about the gun laws in the states but shouldn't it at least be concealed?

NO! All too often carrying a concealed weapon gets you in deeper trouble. He had the permit, he knew the law allowed him to carry his weapon openly, he was following the law.

He had a carry license? Or a concealed carry license? Makes a huge difference. I don't know PA laws or anything, but if he's not allowed to carry it in view, then he's not allowed to carry it in view.

PA gun laws are notoriously complicated, but if he has a legal permit then the police are in the wrong.

Yeah...

I am not surprised by this, and I reckon the cops in question will get off scott free.
As they always seem to do over there.

The police in the US seem like they are above the law, and can nearly do as they damn well please with little to no punishment.

It's disgusting to see in a modern, secular state.

WHAT?! Have you lived in a city before? it's a dangerous place, the cops have every right to be paranoid.

SNIP

He didn't listen to the officer. He should have been on his stomach, then hand cuffed, then placed in the back of a squad car until this was cleared up. That's the law. That's what 'TEMPORARILY DETAIN' means. A person a few posts up quoted the law relevant here.

It's still assault. IF he had his hands clearly visible and was answering in a calm, collected manner, then the cops had no rights in "detaining" him.

 

[Treaos Serrare]

the cop was in the wrong from the beginning,proper behavior for ANY cop is thus
A) you Announce that you are and officer of the law, and provide proof to that fact beyond being in uniform, any asshole can get a gun and a uniform.

B) you never point a gun at a suspect unless he has a weapon IN HIS FUCKING HANDS, you especially don't approach someone you suspect is armed from behind unless they are openly threatening, you are far more likely to get shot that way than any other.

C) be polite, for fucks sake is it that goddamn hard to just keep a civil tone, honestly "shut the fuck up!, Get the fuck on the ground!" are not conducive to getting that result.
again being an asshole to someone you think has a weapon is a good way to get shot/stabbed/whatever

 

[RaNDM G]

This guy has a gun, he isn't listening to the officer, taser the fuck head.

Calling someone that is the fastest way to getting banned on this site. Idiot is fine. Jerk is fine. You might be able to get away with an abbreviated "mofo." Just don't drop the f-bomb.

Also, I realize that you're quoting from another source but writing in all caps is considered shouting. If a moderator walks in, your post is the first he's going to see. It'll take a little while but it's just better if you retype it.

I'm not trying to trash you or anything. If you thought that guy was in the wrong, than I respect your opinion. Just try to tone it down.

 

[Viral_Lola]

Well, if he had the gun registered and a license to carry then there should not have been a problem. I mean, was he waving the gun around? Was he doing something suspicious? I mean, I live in the south and there are places that you can't bring a gun and I know that most cops down here just ask if you have a license to carry. But then again, it is the south. Also, we do have the right to bear arms.

 

[RaNDM G]

Why you would attack me personally is another matter. Zero friends, really? That's not even a clever insult! But alas, fear not. I won't report you for it.

Also... nice EDIT.

I edited because I knew you would take it the wrong way. I was even considering taking it down until you quoted it.

But that's good. I managed to get your attention and tell you what a jerk you sounded like. I don't hate you personally, but I hate when I go to a site like this one and see people talking a lot of smack.

Thanks for not reporting me, but even if you did I wouldn't have regretted it.