Gun-Toting Subway Customer Gets Into Open-Carry Dispute With Police (CT)

[davidpdx]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by NH Ethylene (a host of the General Discussion forum).

Open-carry gun laws are stirring up a fresh debate about citizens' rights in Connecticut. A cell phone video uploaded to LiveLeak on January 12, captures a Subway customer carrying a holstered pistol and several Bridgeport, Conn. cops in a heated debate over the state's open-carry law.

In the cell phone footage shot by the customer, an officer repeatedly requests to see the man's open-carry permit. "Why do I have to show you my permit? I don't have to show you my permit, right? I'm not showing you anything. I want to order my food and get up out of here," says. "Let me see your permit please," the officer responds. "Why are you requesting my permit?" the customer asks. The officer replies: "Because you're armed in a public..." to which the armed customer asks pointedly, "Is that illegal?"

Later, several more officers approach the man, one of whom asks the restaurant to refuse the man service. The man then leaves, but continues to argue with the officers. In a second video, the man appears to be followed into another shop by an officer who continues the confrontation over the permit, stating that the department has received multiple complaints from business owners in the area.

According to the Connecticut Post, state laws and police training mandates appear to contradict each other when it comes to citizens' rights to open carry. Under state law, people may open carry, so long as they're also carrying their permit. State police have been trained that they should not arrest citizens "merely for publicly carrying a handgun in plain view." However, if an individual does not produce his or her permit, officers may arrest them for interfering with police. In comparison, the law specifies that police may only request to verify permits or identification if there's "reasonable suspicion" that the gun carrier has committed a crime. Business are also permitted to refuse service to open-carry customers under state law.

Videos at the link:

http://www.eater.com/2016/1/15/10775084/open-carry-law-customer-subway-connecticut-police-dispute

[onehandle]

1. Whenever I see someone with a gun in a situation like that...

A situation where a gun is clearly inappropriate, I call the cops.

Better safe than dead in a mass shooting.

[TeddyR]

13. Why was the gun

"Clearly inappropriate"?

[TransitJohn]

27. Hand guns have one purpose: killing human beings

Anyone carrying a handgun in public is prepared to kill the human beings around them. Thus, they are inappropriate in polite, civilized society.

[yeoman6987]

107. Their legal even in Connecticut

At least find out the law before calling the police.

[TransitJohn]

124. I didn't really say anything about legality?

[yeoman6987]

167. Ok sorry.

[TeddyR]

111. Well

I don't like open carry but I'm not going to run to the cops about a person who is t breaking a single law. Cops should focus on criminals, not respond to pointless complaints.

[onehandle]

56. Open carry is an behavioral aberration, unless you are heading into a gun range or the woods, etc.

Walking into a sandwich shop with a gun is an act of terrorism, unless you are a cop.

Wanna carry a gun? Get a concealed weapons permit. But make sure it's well concealed, because if I spot it, I'll call the cops.

[Duckhunter935]

64. that is the problem

You all are against that also, lol

[stone space]

84. Why is that a problem? We're talking about a resturaunt, for God's sake! (nt)

[Duckhunter935]

87. so you would be fine if he

was carrying concealed, good to know.

[stone space]

90. No, I would not. Where did you ever get such a stupid idea? (nt)

[Duckhunter935]

102. because this is what I was responding to

when you decided to enter the thread.

Wanna carry a gun? Get a concealed weapons permit. But make sure it's well concealed, because if I spot it, I'll call the cops.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7535434

He said it was fine to have a firearm as long as it was properly concealed. But I also know from his posting history he is really against that also. Seems to be like that with the controller crowd. They say one thing and then when you take them up on it, that is not good enough and they want everything their way and are not willing to compromise like firearms owners.

[stone space]

108. You aren't making any sense here. (nt)

[Duckhunter935]

126. yes I am

it is not my problem if you do not understand. I prefer concealed carry if it is legal over open carry. The poster did not want open carry and stated concealed carry would be fine. I just noted that I know his history is against all forms of guns and carry options and he was being untruthful. That is my problem with him. You are the one that seems to be following me and entered the conversation after begging me to leave you alone the other day.
Base thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=184205
lots of insults directed at a couple of us from you in that

You begging for us to leave you alone
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=184922 Thu Jan 14, 2016, 10:31 PM
Me agreeing as requested
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=184924 Thu Jan 14, 2016, 10:33 PM

I guess you feel different today. Funny part is after you begged me to leave you alone and I did, you whet and posted an attack directed at me in GD, remember?
And here is the locked thread attacking me, notice how you use the singular term so it must be directed at an individual, right?

I can't tell you how many times that I've had a pro-gun advocate tell me right here on DU on that I should be fired from my job teaching mathematics at a public university.

Do they just hate education?

Is it anti-intellectualism?

Have they been watching too many episodes of The Apprentice?

Is it part of some Faculty Union-Busting fantasy?

Why would people who claim to be Democrats want people fired?

We're only three weeks from the Democratic Caucus here in Iowa.

That's a hell of a time for folks on some Democratic website to start telling us that they want us fired from our jobs.

This is not the proper way to relate to voters.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027531114 Thu Jan 14, 2016, 11:01 PM

[SoCalDem]

172. Imagine the distress of the workers

Is the guy with a gun going to rob them? or order food?

Way too much stress for a minimum wage worker....

[Duckhunter935]

180. Seems like he was in the process

of ordering food. I would be more worried about the hidden weapon or the person that has a weapon out and pointed ant someone.

[sarisataka]

15. Can never be too sure

Just ask Tamir Rice and John Crawford

[Rex]

136. Good to know there are 'responsible citizens' out there concerned over the safety of others.

Seems in rare supply. I think I will start doing the same thing, for safety sake...could be robbing the place...why take the chance? Good call.

[Lizzie Poppet]

2. This incident shows that open carry is often (usually?) a form of protest, not security.

That should be obvious, since open carry as a personal security measure is deeply flawed, tactically (might as well paint concentric circles on the back of your shirt...). Not obvious to some, though...

But I have little doubt that most open carriers these days are doing so as a form of political statement. That's foolish, too, as it unquestionably does more harm that good for the cause of 2nd Amendment rights. Idiots like this guy in CT think that they're somehow acclimating people to the sight of openly-carried firearms and "making a statement" about their right to do so. But then they act like an entitled asshole to the cops, and once again do harm to the cause they think they're supporting.

[daleanime]

5. +1

[katsy]

29. +1

[mountain grammy]

33. Agree.

[BuddhaGirl]

93. +1

[Paladin]

95. A form of protest, and an example of gross public intimidation.

Those who are genuinely, legitimately concerned with personal protection should find concealed carry more than adequate. Those who feel they have to resort to open carry should be avoided as potentially dangerous---and that goes triple for somebody who doesn't comply with a reasonable law enforcement request to produce their permit.

[Iggo]

173. It's exhibitionism. Nothing more. Nothing less.

[Duckhunter935]

3. firearms owners should follow the law

If he had a permit as required he should have produced it. Then the police would have no say in it.

[underpants]

7. Just like any other license you have to able to produce it

Driving
Hunting
Fishing
Open carry

If a person of authority asks for it you have to show it. Unless, for some reason,Connecticut has a really stupid law saying they don't.

[wordpix]

44. Ct law says you can open carry if you have a permit and there is no breach

Of peace. That is where the confusion lies. If I'm at the grocery store and some guy walks in with his big military style rifle oc, i could consider that intimidation and a breach of peace. Others might not. Seems CT tried to make this law fair to all after Sandy Hook and has failed miserably. I am not surprised. This is a state that regularly passes laws without legislators reading them or knowing anything about what they're voting for. The state sucks and that's why people are leaving in droves.

[Duckhunter935]

51. of course this is a properly holstered pistol

So why are you bringing rifles into this, trying to confuse the actual facts?

[wordpix]

71. Whatever, pistol, rifle, military assault weapon...personally, i don't want them near me

In a store, theater, or on the street. Why didn't the guy just show his permit if he has one?

[Duckhunter935]

76. shows your true colors

Facts do not matter and you have to try and distort the truth.

[wordpix]

81. I did say "personally "and i don't appreciate being bullied

For stating my own opinion that is different from yours. You are a bully.

[Duckhunter935]

83. ok, my apologies

But let's keep to the facts of the story.

[branford]

80. It was probably because his open carry was a form of political protest,

both of CT's largely strict gun laws and the fact that police cannot make demands of anyone without reasonable suspicion, and simply not obeying a police request when you're otherwise doing nothing illegal does not constitute reasonable suspicion.

[Duckhunter935]

85. quite possible

I have an issue with the police telling the business to refuse service to him.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

16. He did follow the law...

Did you miss this part: "...the law specifies that police may only request to verify permits or identification if there's "reasonable suspicion" that the gun carrier has committed a crime."

[Duckhunter935]

17. it sounds like he

Could have just shown the permit and filed a complaint instead of getting in a heated argument. He may have been technically correct but could have handled it better than the police. Always best to take the high road. He could even take it to the news and publicize how the law is written.

[treestar]

22. True, even the cop should not have gotten into it

the guy has a gun clearly, after all.

The police have no authority to stop cars just to see if the driver has a license.

[wordpix]

48. Uh, i got stopped in CT bc the cop put my tag no. in

some device and discovered my tags were expired. I was just driving thru the town center at the speed limit and there was no reason for him to stop me, but he did thanks to technology. The expiration was bc i had been out of state and ct doesn't send messages and reminders out of state to forwarding addresses, so i didn't know it was renewal time for registration.

[Duckhunter935]

53. no registration stickers?

I know when all three of my vehicles and 4 dates they must be registered. Curious, how far out of date was it?

[wordpix]

75. It was 6,mos out of date and i was back in CT all that time

Never got any renewal notice

[Duckhunter935]

82. in your other post

Your excuse is you were out of state and now you admit you were in the state and it was 6 months expired. I have no sympathy for that and when I was in El paso, that was one of my pet peeves. Long expired registrations, safety inspections and Mexican plates on vehicles owned and driven in Texas. They used to do checkpoints to catch this. I guess in those 6 months you never looked at the date sticker either?

[treestar]

94. Yes one is responsible for it

rather than holding the state responsible for sending a renewal notice.

[Duckhunter935]

99. wel we all make mistakes

just have to learn from them

[wordpix]

98. I was out of state, no notice. I came back to state, no notice

Clearly it was my own fault for not paying attn to the lack of notices and time. I paid the ticket. End of subject, counslor, you are bullying the witness yet again.

[Duckhunter935]

104. which one of your posts is correct?

Can't have it both ways

It was 6,mos out of date and i was back in CT all that time

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027534988#post75

[wordpix]

110. How about f you and stop the bullying. Does that answer your q, counslor?

I feel sorry for your wife or gf, if u have one

[Reter]

158. NY is so much easier

The sticker itself on the car says when it expires.

[Duckhunter935]

168. Same here in OK

[treestar]

92. Doesn't that show on the plate?

We have tags to put on the plate so it can be seen if they are expired.

But he stopped you for not having registration, not just randomly to check your license, and that was my point. He had some reason to stop you. Likewise with the carry license. So your snotty "uh" was uncalled for.

[wordpix]

105. He randomly put my plate no. in his device

I had no idea plates were expired, but the uh was for getting flagged for doing absolutely nothing wrong, driving wise, yet getting stopped. But yes, i was expired and i paid the price.

[Duckhunter935]

115. appears not, stupid if you ask me

Local police say that's a bad deal for crime-fighting and road safety. The absence of registration stickers will make enforcement more difficult and add to the slew of unregistered, uninsured drivers in the state, they say.

In Stratford, a large number of the drivers stopped for operating unregistered vehicles are caught due to the stickers, color-coded by expiration year for easy detection, said police spokesman Capt. Kenneth Bakalar.

"You could just look at the car," he said. "If you saw it out of date, then that justified a stop immediately."

Bakalar said a lack of such indicators, especially in towns where the random running of license plate numbers is frowned upon, "will make it much easier for people to hide the fact that (a car) isn't registered."

http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/DMV-plans-to-halt-registration-stickers-574568.php


Police want to bring back car registration stickers in Connecticut
http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Police-want-to-bring-back-car-registration-1392319.php

[NutmegYankee]

164. Connecticut did away with the license plate stickers.

There was a problem with plates getting stolen and the only way to find them was to enter the numbers into a computer. So the state moved to a sticker on the windshield for about 3 years then got rid of those as well. Too expensive supposedly. Today there are no registration stickers other than you know every 12 months that you get a notice. On even number of years after purchase it's the registration renewal (for 2 years), on odd number of years it's for an emissions test (starts on fifth year after new purchase).

[Duckhunter935]

170. Texas had both

as windshield stickers. That is a crazy system you have.

[NutmegYankee]

171. Other states are moving to simlar systems.

With computers in every police car, a sticker is no longer needed.

[Duckhunter935]

181. yep sad in my opinion

I am glad I get a card in the mail anyway even if I know my sticker is there to remind me. Nov, Dec and Mar for me. Every year.

[treestar]

174. Oh i see

Then to enforce the law, the state has to check its records. And it appears the random cop can run the plate on any car he sees and see if it is registered. Still it seems maybe less likely people would get dinged for not being registered as the cops have to take the time to do it.

[NutmegYankee]

182. I'm sure less people get caught

Though I believe the state checks on those who expire to verify plate status. The state, especially in the rural/suburban areas, has always had a laid back law enforcement posture. There is no county government, and no sheriffs, so unless a town runs it's own police force it relies instead on the State Police Resident Trooper program.

The town I live in doesn't have it's own independent police force. We have Constables under the authority of a Resident State Trooper.

[Duckhunter935]

183. My guess

is the plate readers are on all of the time. I am curious how accurate and at what distance and angle they work at. We do not have front plates either.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

23. When I'm in a situation with police where I feel I'm being mistreated or having my rights...

...violated by them, I get snippy too.

Also, ALL cops legally lie. That alone is enough for me to challenge them.

[stone space]

88. It's one thing to get snippy with cops.

It's quite another thing to get snippy with cops while armed in a crowded restaurant with innocient people all around you.

Most folks don't want to dine out with their families right in front of two armed dudes getting snippy with each other.

[B Calm]

19. The crime is not having a permit.

[NutmegYankee]

30. Such a scenario would be circular logic and by any legal definition - unreasonable.

[Duckhunter935]

40. so you are saying

A police officer can pull anyone over for just driving a car and demand your license for no reason?

[B Calm]

46. No, I'm talking someone not being a responsible gun owner. If someone drove his car inside the

Subway I do think the police have the right to ask for your license!

[Duckhunter935]

50. from what the story said

He was fully responsible. Holstered weapon, did not remove it. He was just carrying in a legal manor. So yes you are wanting a double standard. Not surprising you fail to admit it.

[wordpix]

57. Breach of peace is the important phrase in the law

I might say it's a breach of peace that this guy is oc in my grocery store or movie theater and someone else thinks it's no such breach bc he's not waving the weapon around acting crazy. Therein lies the problem, in the way the law is written and interpreted.

http://www.nhregister.com/general-news/20131207/connecticut-allows-open-carrying-of-firearms-with-exceptions

[Duckhunter935]

63. yep badly written

[NutmegYankee]

72. Breach of Peace has a pretty clear defintion.

Sec 53a-181. Breach of the peace in the second degree: Class B misdemeanor.

(a) A person is guilty of breach of the peace in the second degree when, with intent to cause inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, such person: (1) Engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior in a public place; or (2) assaults or strikes another; or (3) threatens to commit any crime against another person or such other person's property; or (4) publicly exhibits, distributes, posts up or advertises any offensive, indecent or abusive matter concerning any person; or (5) in a public place, uses abusive or obscene language or makes an obscene gesture; or (6) creates a public and hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which such person is not licensed or privileged to do. For purposes of this section, "public place" means any area that is used or held out for use by the public whether owned or operated by public or private interests.

(1) Engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior in a public place; or
(2) assaults or strikes another; or
(3) threatens to commit any crime against another person or such other person's property; or
(4) publicly exhibits, distributes, posts up or advertises any offensive, indecent or abusive matter concerning any person; or
(5) in a public place, uses abusive or obscene language or makes an obscene gesture; or
(6) creates a public and hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which such person is not licensed or privileged to do.

[wordpix]

96. In these days and times of mass public massacres, every week

It is threateatening to many people...i am one... to see someone open carrying. I don't know if this oc person is a wonderful guy who is out to protect the public from wackos who would shoot up the place, or if he IS the wacko.

[B Calm]

97. Exactly! A RESPONSIBLE Gun owner would have understand that and showed his permit!

[NutmegYankee]

100. That doesn't matter one bit under the law.

Fear of someone does not constitute breach of peace. Some white people feel threatened by a black male because they are racist - that doesn't mean the black guy is breaching the peace by walking in public. Well, almost doesn't - police officers seem to get a pass lately.

[randr]

35. If I see a person with a weapon in a fast food joint

Can I have a reasonable suspicion a crime is about to be or has been committed?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

37. The wording does not include anything about suspecting that a crime is "about to be" committed. nt

[Rex]

133. Why not? Since they love to beat us over the head about this being a free country.

Then I guess you are just being a 'responsible citizen'.

[wordpix]

38. Confused law, for sure. Cannot oc if there's breach of peace

Anyone can interpret that any way

[Waldorf]

103. It appears from reading the story he was following the law but not the cops. If they ask for the

permit you are to produce it but the cops can't ask for the permit unless they have "reasonable suspicion" that the gun carrier may have committed a crime.

[Reter]

154. The article said police can only ask for it if there's suspicion the person is committing a crime

In this case, the police were wrong.

[Duckhunter935]

155. Seems so

[ileus]

4. Reads like the cops need proper training.

and stop harassing citizens.


I always get a kick out of stories like this because you can bet your ass the person that OCs knows the law and their rights 100%.

[daleanime]

6. And is well aware of what they're doing to the businesses they visit...

And how little they care about that. But you have a lovely day.

[Hoyt]

8. And probably know exactly what to say to police if they pull a Zimmerman and shoot

an unarmed kid - - that's what "knowing the law" means to a lot of these losers.

[Logical]

9. Stop being an asshole and just show the cop your permit. He was being a gun nut at that point. nt

[SickOfTheOnePct]

10. If the cop had no right to ask for the permit

Why should he have to show it?

Obviously the cops knew they weren't supposed to ask, otherwise they would have arrested him for refusing to show it.

[Logical]

26. Just don't be an asshole is one reason. It would take 5 seconds. No drama. nt

[SickOfTheOnePct]

28. Yes, it's assholish not to show it

I would have shown it if asked.

I just find the hypocrisy pretty funny.

[Reter]

161. Maybe he was being asked daily

I would have shown it too, but I am a kiss-ass with cops.

[wordpix]

32. Cops have the right to ask and oc asshats need to show the permit. Twisting what the law clearly sta

Last edited Sat Jan 16, 2016, 12:25 PM - Edit history (1)

Shows ignorance. The prob here is that the CT law says you can open carry with a permit and provided there is no breach of peace. The last phrase is open to interpretation. But obviously, if someone is oc and a permit is required, police can ask to see the permit, just as they can ask to see your driver's permit.

[NutmegYankee]

52. Where do police have a "Right" to ask?

Last I checked there were restrictions on police performing terry stops on people.

Or did we become a police state overnight?

[wordpix]

59. Oc requires a permit and police have the right to ask for it.

This guy did not have one, or he wasn't carrying it. Don't you carry your driver's license when you're driving? Same rule applies.

[NutmegYankee]

62. They can only ask if they have a reasonable suspicion of a crime being committed.

For instance, police cannot just pull over a driver to check if they have a license because they are driving.

[NickB79]

65. Only when a reasonable suspicion of a crime is present

Per the article in the OP:

In comparison, the law specifies that police may only request to verify permits or identification if there's "reasonable suspicion" that the gun carrier has committed a crime.

Unless the police had a reasonable suspicion the person had or was in the process of committing a crime, they had not legal basis for asking for his permit. If they had, and he failed to provide the permit, they would have arrested him rather than simply following him out of the store.

[Duckhunter935]

67. not if he was doing nothing wrong

Just like they can not ask for your driver's license if you were doing nothing wrong.

[NickB79]

60. Per the article, the cops did NOT have a right to ask

In comparison, the law specifies that police may only request to verify permits or identification if there's "reasonable suspicion" that the gun carrier has committed a crime.

[wordpix]

66. If I'm a business owner and ask someone to leave

Who's oc, and said oc person won't leave, i would consider that breach of peace and intimidation and would call cops. At that point, cops can then ask for permit. This oc man should have had his. Period.

[Duckhunter935]

68. did you even read it

The business had no problem with him. It was the police that ordered the business to refuse service and the he tried to go to another business.

[NickB79]

79. Did the Subway owner call the police?

The article does not make it clear that Subway was the one who called the police or asked him to leave, or if a police officer was simply nearby when he saw the man. It simply says the police claim to have received complaints from unspecified businesses in the area, after they follow (but still do not arrest) the man out of the Subway and into another store.

If the OC guy did refuse to leave, then the police had clear cause to ask for his permit. But if that's the case, why didn't they arrest him when they had plenty of cause to do so?

[Blue_Tires]

73. Reasonable suspicion is easy to justify...

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

159. And knows they can wave their dick in public and intimidate others

They get off on it.

[KG]

11. the daily heartwarming responsible ammosexual story....

[Stinky The Clown]

14. "ammosexual"

[Duckhunter935]

20. that us all some have

Just post insults

[TeddyR]

12. So better training for the cops?

And this guy being less of an asshole? If you are carrying just show the permit and be on your way. Though open carry is a silly practice.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

18. I would have just shown my permit as well

That's because to me, if a cops asks me to do something, I'm going to do it, assuming he's not asking me to do something illegal.

However, the anti-police brigade here on DU are usually quite vocal about how people aren't required to comply with police requests, so I find it pretty funny that now it's "Just do what the cop says!" because it pertains to something they despise, i.e., guns.

[sarisataka]

21. It depends how the law is written

permiif it says you must show the permit whenever a law enforcement officer asks for it then he must show the permit. If the law does not require that then the police have no more right to ask to see the permit then they would to ask you for your drivers license as you're getting in your car at the grocery store.

For myself, it isn't a big issue so I would have produced my permit; not that I would OC in the first place

[B Calm]

24. Next time I'm asked by a game warden for my fishing license, I'll tell him I don't

have to.

[NutmegYankee]

36. Normally the law states that you have to show your fishing license on request to a game warden.

I know that the fishing licenses state that in Connecticut. It appears the law is different for a carry permit.

[B Calm]

39. and a responsible gun owner would have shown his permit.

[NutmegYankee]

42. Police had no right to ask. They had no reasonable suspicion except racism. nt

[B Calm]

47. With the mass shootings today, you really think customers are not suspicious of some nut

openly displaying a firearm and not be worried.

[NutmegYankee]

49. Police are held to the standard of "reasonable suspicion".

An attempt to make the argument you made in court would just result in taxpayer pain.

[sarisataka]

179. I strongly suggest

You check your state regulations first.

Here (Minnesota) we are required to show a fishing license if asked by a game warden and there are some special requirements you need to know if you set up an ice fishing house.

Also, were a LEO ask to see my firearms permit, our law says I must show it. Not all states have that same standard. In those you may choose to show a permit or not, per state law.

[Duckhunter935]

184. good advice

The person shall be required to have possession of his or her valid handgun license and a valid Oklahoma driver license or an Oklahoma State photo identification at all times when in possession of an authorized pistol.
The person shall display the handgun license on demand of a law enforcement officer ; provided, however, that
in the absence of reasonable and articulable suspicion of other criminal activity, an individual carrying an
unconcealed or concealed handgun shall not be disarmed or physically restrained unless the individual fails to
display a valid handgun license in response to that demand. Any violation of the provisions of this subsection 3
may be punishable as a criminal offense as authorized by Section 1272 of this title or pursuant to any other
applicable provision of law. Any second or subsequent violation of the provisions of this subsection shall be
grounds for the Bureau to suspend the handgun license for a period of six (6) months, in addition to any other
penalty imposed.

https://www.ok.gov/osbi/documents/SDA_LAW_BOOK.pdf

Even ours is interesting

[Katashi_itto]

25. I see an open carry i call the cops. I dont know their intent.

[wordpix]

31. CT, where the Sandy Hook massacre occurred, can't get its f-ing act together

In my small town, gun lovers including police were open carrying as they walked the road from their cars to a commercial gun range that the owner said was a continued use of an earler, long defunct community gun club. No one was checking permits. Neighbors were terrified as these asshats walked the streets with their high powered semi automatic weapons ready for ...??? Finally the Zoning Board of Appeals ruled the so called gun club was not a continued use and the owner needed to go through the zoning permit process for a commercial training operation. The owner has taken the issue to court, but also has the property up for sale. CT is not the gun control state many think it is after Sandy Hook .

[NutmegYankee]

54. That's because Connecticut still has a lot of rural areas.

The urban areas are very anti-gun, and the rural areas are very gun friendly, even in Connecticut.

[wordpix]

69. True but those rurl reas are now mostly suburbanized except in the parks and state forests.

In my town , the commercial gun operation was very close to homes and someone could have been accidentally shot. This in a so called rural area.

[valerief]

34. WTF is wrong with Connecticut allowing open carry? Of course, the cops

are going to stop him. I think his hand in the video was black. Cops always stop black people. It's their main function. It used to be to 'Protect and Serve.' Now, it's 'Harass Black People.'

Of course, the gun carrier was a complete shithead asshole for carrying the goddam gun. But the cops are just doing their racist thing. This is America, where you can be free to what you want as long as you're being an asshole.

[NutmegYankee]

41. When people open carry in a place like Connecticut it's usually to challenge police overreach.

That the man carrying was black is probably the protest point - despite the police having no right to ask unless they have a reasonable suspicion of a crime having been committed, they see a black guy and make that assumption right away. The only thing that saved him was the camera.

[valerief]

55. That's a real possibility. Of course, you don't have to be white to be an ammosexual either. nt

[NutmegYankee]

61. Agree.

In a state like mine, CT, any open carry is just to challenge police or for protest. It's like navies sailing the lines of international waters to continue to prove freedom of the seas. In an act like this, police going beyond their legal authority is what is being tested.

[valerief]

70. But if you're black, you can get yourself killed pretty quickly doing that.

It's quite a challenge.

[NutmegYankee]

78. Step one is to act.

The police won't stop killing black men for fun until protests and public pressure make it difficult for the police to do so.

[Duckhunter935]

43. same as the other 40+

States

[tabasco]

45. So you have to show your permit for carrying a fishing pole, but not a gun?

What a fucked-up country.

[Vinca]

58. I had no idea ordering a meat sandwich was so frightening.

How many guns does he need when he orders pizza?

[Kingofalldems]

74. Gimme my guns! I even take a bath with my guns!

Filthy gun grabbers11!!1!!

[stone space]

162. Bathtime can be dangerous. You can't be too prepared.

Gimme my guns! I even take a bath with my guns!

[stone space]

77. If I see some Open Carry Ammosxexual in a resturaunt, I'm running for my life!

More precisely, I'm calmly getting up with my family, and slowly walking to the exit, as if nothing is happening, so as not to tip off the Ammosexual of our intent to leave.

The moment we're out of sight of the Ammosexual, my calm walk will break into a frantic sprint, putting as much distance between my family and the Ammosexual in question in as little time as possible.

Superfluous in this particular case, of course, but my next step, once my family is safely out of range of the Ammosexual's Metalic Dildo, would be to dial 911 to report the Ammosexual.

[Shrek]

89. Call 911 and report him for what?

Behaving in a lawful manner in public?

[stone space]

91. Carrying a gun in a resturaunt. It's called Domestic Terrorism. (nt)

[hack89]

101. Can you cite the actual law? nt

[Duckhunter935]

106. lets see the law that covers this

looks like you are once again not telling the truth. Why does that not surprise me.

[stone space]

112. Look, I'm not going to expose my family to some Ammosexual's Matallic Dildo.

I'm out of that restaurant.

I'll let the Ammosexual pay the tab.

[Duckhunter935]

127. yep, that is all you have

insults and theft of service since you refuse to pay. Just like not doing your job and expecting the public to keep paying you, lol

[stone space]

128. Are you accusing me of not doing my job?

Just like not doing your job and expecting the public to keep paying you, lol

What's with the personal insults?

[Lizzie Poppet]

114. Do please use that term to the 911 dispatcher.

Hopefully the recording will go viral. Comedy gold...

[stone space]

116. Why should we expose our families to terrorists?

Let the terrorist pick up the tab.

[Lizzie Poppet]

118. It's sure obvious you don't teach philosophy.

I'm just sayin'...

[stone space]

120. What is this personal remark all about? I don't understand.

It's sure obvious you don't teach philosophy.

Why are you getting personal, here?

What does my profession have to do with anything?

Yeah, I'm a Logician by profession.

So what?

[Duckhunter935]

130. you did to me the other day

Is that OK only for you to do?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027531114

[stone space]

131. Are you attempting to hijack this thread to justify personal insults here? (nt)

[Duckhunter935]

139. I am trying to point out that

you are the one that posts insults and the complains when a person in this thread say your stance on this is garbage. You do not have clean hands and have no reason to complain about insults when you have been on many vacations for doing just that very thing.

Note to jury as I am sure he will alert, those are just facts and nothing is directed to personally insult that poster.

[stone space]

142. Your stalking from thread to thread does not justify the unprovoked personal insults here. (nt)

[Lizzie Poppet]

132. It's editorial.

A critique of your "contributions" on this subject, if you will. Specifically your tendency to reply with tangential deflections and/or outright non sequiturs... So I made one of my own, a bit of satire which incorporated criticism of those tendencies. I've been reading your gun-related posts for long enough to realize that an actual substantive conversation on that topic just isn't going to happen, ever. Usually, I simply "walk on by." This time I didn't. So sad!

As it happens, I do logic for a living, too...and I'm pretty good at it. Next time I think you've committed a demonstrable fallacy (almost certainly an informal fallacy of argument, not a violation of symbolic logic, the latter seldom being applicable to internet argument), perhaps I'll point it out and we'll see if you can back up your claim. Though neither of us would benefit from holding our breath on that, I imagine.

In any case, feel free to return to your usual MO in gun threads. I'm done for now, I suspect.

Ta!

[stone space]

135. Why are you injecting my personal real world employment into this thread?

Have I criticized you for your employment here?

Are you as stalker?

[Duckhunter935]

141. you bring it up all the time

You can not have it both ways

[stone space]

143. What does my personal real world employment have to do with this thread.

No, I didn't bring it up here.

It was brought up by a stalker.

[Duckhunter935]

145. "stalker"

[Lizzie Poppet]

152. See above; repeat as needed.

[Duckhunter935]

129. yep, over the laughter when they

ask what he is doing. "well, he has a properly holstered pistol" and is doing nothing wrong.

[TeddyR]

122. Your irrational

Fear doesn't equate to a crime

[stone space]

125. There is no need for personal insults here.

Your irrational

[Duckhunter935]

134. you do to us all the time

please stop the insults directed at us then.

You sound like Donald Trump here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=184880

Whiney-ass gun-licking Trump supporters are looking for a Union to bust.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=184883

What's wrong with me getting paid? You sound like Trump.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=184899
want more, plenty to post

Not to mention the new post in GD attacking me personally.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027531114

[stone space]

138. Please stop stalking me. Your stalking somebody from thread to thread...

...does not excuse the personal insults here in this thread.

[Duckhunter935]

144. If you look at the time stamps, You followed me here and

replied to one of my posts. I know you are embarrassed that I can link and post your insults directed at me and others.

[stone space]

146. Nobody followed you anywhere.

And nobody attacked you over your personal real world employment.

[Duckhunter935]

149. your first post in this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7535558
Who did you reply too? Funny you picked me, right?

[stone space]

150. This is the post that you linked to.

Why is that a problem? We're talking about a resturaunt, for God's sake! (nt)

Please tell me how that post insults you over your real world employment.

[Duckhunter935]

153. reading the content subthead is

fundamental

[stone space]

157. Where have I insulted you over your real world employment? (nt)

[Duckhunter935]

160. You have not as I do not inject my employment

into the thread like you do. You do however insult me on an almost daily basis due to me being a RKBA supporter.

I also do not insult you on the type of employment you tell us you do. I think college instruction is a great job. I just point out you should not be paid a public salary for refusing to to your job.

[stone space]

163. Neither did I. A stalker injected my real world employment into this thread, not me.

You have not as I do not inject my employment

[Duckhunter935]

165. you have on many occasions

and that poster knows it from all of those dozens of times you have posted it.

[stone space]

169. We are talking about this thread. Stalking is no exccuse. (nt)

[Duckhunter935]

176. so why do you start new posts attacking me in GD

while at the same time ask me to leave you alone which I did?

Please leave us alone. (nt)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=184922 Thu Jan 14, 2016, 10:31 PM

good night

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=184924 Thu Jan 14, 2016, 10:33 PM

I can't tell you how many times that I've had a pro-gun advocate tell me right here on DU on that I should be fired from my job teaching mathematics at a public university.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027531114 Thu Jan 14, 2016, 11:01 PM

Please do as you say sir.

[stone space]

177. Why are you changing the subject? (nt)

[Duckhunter935]

185. That is what I figured

it is fine for you to do the same thing you are complaining I have done. Another post that shows your true colors when pointed out.

Have a great day!

[Rex]

137. Nothing wrong with being a 'responsible citizen' worried about the safety of others.

I hope that catches on in OC states...after all if you don't report it and the person robs the place or kills someone...then you will be an 'irresponsible citizen'.

[NickB79]

86. Some Black Lives Matter protesters have started open-carrying in protest of police brutality

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/10/armed_activists_walked_through.html

Complete speculation, but I wonder if the person in the video was open-carrying in the same vein as those in Birmingham were doing, as political speech?

[Jackie Wilson Said]

109. Was the person here African American? The one holding the phone, the one open carrying?

Do these officers confront all open carry or just certain open carry?

[PumpkinAle]

113. Kudos to the police

and the businesses. If this guy was all about gun rights he should have had no problem showing his permit.

[PumpkinAle]

117. Kudos to the police

and the businesses. If this guy was all about gun rights he should have had no problem showing his permit.

He comes across as a real ass-hat who was hoping he would be challenged and have an argument.

[LynnTTT]

119. Conundrum

So if Subway posted that open-carry isn't allowed, customers will leave their guns in the vehicle on the seat.... but leave it unlocked... some one will notice and steal the gun...... and then the customer will blame Subway ...... and also the feds because the owner will have to report the gun as stolen.

[stone space]

123. That sounds pretty damn irresponsible to me.

customers will leave their guns in the vehicle on the seat.... but leave it unlocked

Dude should have all of his guns confiscated and lose his gun rites for life.

[Duckhunter935]

147. why, he did the responsible thing

he had his firearm properly holstered. Nowhere does it say Subway had a no firearms sign posted. It appears Subway did not call the police and was serving the gentleman at the time.

[stone space]

148. Reading is fundamental.

You do understand how DU's quote mechanism works, don't you?

If you read carefully, you might be able to figure out what folks are talking about.

customers will leave their guns in the vehicle on the seat.... but leave it unlocked

[Duckhunter935]

151. yes it is

A cell phone video uploaded to LiveLeak on January 12, captures a Subway customer carrying a holstered pistol and several Bridgeport, Conn. cops in a heated debate over the state's open-carry law.

Later, several more officers approach the man, one of whom asks the restaurant to refuse the man service. The man then leaves, but continues to argue with the officers. In a second video, the man appears to be followed into another shop by an officer who continues the confrontation over the permit

I just pointed out what actually happened.

Update, 1/15, 12:11 p.m.: A Subway spokesman tells Eater that the company does not have a blanket policy on firearms at its restaurants. "All Subway restaurants are individually owned and operated by franchisees who are part of the communities in which they live and work. We require franchisees to follow all local, state and federal laws."

http://www.eater.com/2016/1/15/10775084/open-carry-law-customer-subway-connecticut-police-dispute

[stone space]

156. My post was a response to the passage I quoted, not passages that you quote after the fact.

You do get that, right?

Reading is fundamental.

You don't get to add your own quotes after the fact and claim that my post was a response to them.

My post was a response to the passage that I quoted.

Given time, you'll figure out how it works.

[Duckhunter935]

166. OK

in that hypothetical situation that never happened I agree with you.

[Fairgo]

121. As I commute on the train,

trapped in a metal tube between stops, civilised society affords me the assurance that no one needs or is allowed to carry a gun...other than those screened, trained, and managed by the government to enforce the peace. A handgun on the hip of anyone else says, "I am the law and I claim the power to kill you if I deem that you are a threat to my version of the law". We all make concessions to the collective to build community within civilisation. This gun obsession reveals a very sick society, democratic dry rot, dessicated individualism crumbling into the most ignorant form of cowboy anarchy.

[AlinPA]

140. If someone walks into my business establishment holding a gun, I will call the police. To hell with

their "open carry" laws. Holding a weapon in your hand is a threat.

[Humanist_Activist]

175. Question, if several of the businesses in the area were filing complaints, do they have the right...

to forbid him business for carrying a gun?

[Duckhunter935]

178. My guess would be they can

only cover their business if it is indeed a private establishment. I do not think they are allowed to speak for others.

[Chemisse]

186. Sorry, we're locking this.

Please consider posting this in one of the Gun groups.


GUNS
News stories (and related content) from reputable mainstream sources about efforts to strengthen or weaken gun control legislation in any jurisdiction in the United States, national news stories (and related content) from reputable mainstream sources about high-profile gun crimes, and viral political content from social media or blogs that would likely be of interest to a large majority of DU members are permitted under normal circumstances.

Local stories about gun crime and "gun porn" threads showing pictures of guns or discussing the merits of various firearms are not permitted under normal circumstances and should be posted in the Gun Control and RKBA Group.

Open discussion of guns is permitted during very high-profile news events which are heavily covered across all newsmedia.