TexasCHLforum.com

Its hard to imagine a human can be this stupid, ignorant, or hard headed...and then every day i see examples of why Im wrong.

The ski mask was definitely a bit over the top. It looked cold out, but he could have removed it before entering the building. That said, the reaction of the LEO's was also a bit much unless there is more to the story. I am not an expert on Michigan law, and this is with the assumption that they had every right to carry their weapons into that police station, and based on the fact that they were carrying their weapons in a totally non-threatening manner from what I could see on the video..

To flip the situation around, I highly doubt that a LEO would react well to a home owner drawing on him and ordering him to get his face on the ground just because he openly carried a weapon onto their front porch. Would we be so quick to blame the LEO in that situation?

Seeing as there like here in Texas, open carry into the police stations is legal.
seeing as they had cameras very visible.

I "THINK" I would take that situation as it appears until needed otherwise..
I "THINK" I would with a command voice tell them, yes you have a right to stand there politely with an open carried weapon.
But I also have a right to shoot you if I feel threatened. I don't feel threated yet, but very close, if you make an abrupt movement, if you act aggressively, if you touch the weapon in a manner I perceive to be threatening, I will shoot you center mass several times until I feel you are no longer threatening me.... Are we clear?

Good, how may I assist you then?

All that said, in the world we live in, the brazen attacks we have seen on police, and the desire of those attackers to document and show the world what they did.... i can see officers reacting as those did. .. We have no back story, no past threats on that station or its officers, no recent dealings with gangs or individuals that threated to get :even and show the world" We don't know what threat briefings the Day shot was given this morning..

Soccerdad1995 wrote:The ski mask was definitely a bit over the top. It looked cold out, but he could have removed it before entering the building. That said, the reaction of the LEO's was also a bit much unless there is more to the story. I am not an expert on Michigan law, and this is with the assumption that they had every right to carry their weapons into that police station, and based on the fact that they were carrying their weapons in a totally non-threatening manner from what I could see on the video..

To flip the situation around, I highly doubt that a LEO would react well to a home owner drawing on him and ordering him to get his face on the ground just because he openly carried a weapon onto their front porch. Would we be so quick to blame the LEO in that situation?

Usually we are on the same page, but not lately!

upon entering the building (first set of doors) you can see the masked man puts his hand on the handle of the rifle. this, to me, would be an aggressive action. once he is past the second doors you can not see the handle of the rifle (out of frame), but I would not doubt he did the SAME action by putting his hand on the rifle. 2nd guy, can't see his hand on the rifle or hand gun as he is mostly out of frame. SORRY dude, I 100% think they got everything they deserved.

Flipped situation? next time you have a conversation with a LEO, and you are CC. Why don't you un-tuck and expose your sidearm and simply put your hand on it and let me know how that goes? YES, it is legal to do so, as long as you don't remove your sidearm from the holster, but is it the RIGHT thing to do?

"To flip the situation around, I highly doubt that a LEO would react well to a home owner drawing on him and ordering him to get his face on the ground just because he openly carried a weapon onto their front porch. "
Lets try it this way. Joe white, living in a very hostile neighborhood and he knows that half the population would like to harm him, so he sits on the couch facing the front lawn and has a shotgun next to him. he sees walking up to his door, a man in a skimask with a holstered gun with HIS HAND ON IT. The man walks up to the door like he own the place. You tell me? what happens next?????

E.Marquez wrote:Seeing as there like here in Texas, open carry into the police stations is legal.
seeing as they had cameras very visible.

I "THINK" I would take that situation as it appears until needed otherwise..
I "THINK" I would with a command voice tell them, yes you have a right to stand there politely with an open carried weapon.
But I also have a right to shoot you if I feel threatened. I don't feel threated yet, but very close, if you make an abrupt movement, if you act aggressively, if you touch the weapon in a manner I perceive to be threatening, I will shoot you center mass several times until I feel you are no longer threatening me.... Are we clear?

Good, how may I assist you then?

All that said, in the world we live in, the brazen attacks we have seen on police, and the desire of those attackers to document and show the world what they did.... i can see officers reacting as those did. .. We have no back story, no past threats on that station or its officers, no recent dealings with gangs or individuals that threated to get :even and show the world" We don't know what threat briefings the Day shot was given this morning..

please look at :36 seconds into the clip. HAND ON HANDLE.

man, I wish I could cut the image and post to show you guys, but I am not that good with computers.

TreyHouston wrote: please look at :36 seconds into the clip. HAND ON HANDLE.

man, I wish I could cut the image and post to show you guys, but I am not that good with computers.

Yes I see that, but I doubt the officers did, that was as he was just coming in the door.
As well as.... I don't take that as threatening, maybe to my detriment,,,but 30 years of seeing that day in and day out as the only way to "correctly" hold a rifle.. my mind does not jump to see that as a threat.

To me, that is simply keeping proper control of your weapon. ..Its how I have carried ed a rifle for my entire adult life

These are the type of containers for feminine hygiene products, who give MDA and all other gun grabbers all the ammo they need. They had an agenda, trying to evoke the exact response that they got, and then wanted to argue rather than comply. They may have been legal in carrying guns into the police station, and had they had them slung on their back, probably would have been no issue, but walking in with the same type of masks seen on left wing rioters, and carrying a rifle at low ready, was beyond stupid. To say that they felt threatened, by police, during a traffic stop, on their own video, does not endear them to anyone, either. Maybe the cold has caused frostbite on too many brain cells.

This seems more like a case of....just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

Unless I'm getting ready to go into combat, I probably would carry a rifle slung over my back, barrel down. If I wanted to make a "point" by carrying in a police station, I'd probably open carry a full size pistol, in a holster, of course...

I didn't see the citizen with his hand on the rifle handle. I will say that if he acted in a hostile manner (which would include gripping any of his firearms), then that changes things. I also agree that we really need more back story on this. Especially regarding the history between these folks and that police department. They mentioned at the outset that they had been pulled over earlier. Did they make threatening statements during that traffic stop?

My point in general is that the citizens had just as much legal right to be in that police station with firearms as a LEO has to be at my house with a firearm (I'm making an obvious assumption here about Michigan law). If a LEO (or anyone else) walked onto my porch with a visible weapon, I would not draw on them and order them onto their face with the threat of deadly force if they did not comply. This would also hold true if the officer had his/her hand on the grip of their weapon.

Personally, I do not believe that there should be a different standard between the two. Others may well disagree. To me, this naturally flows from the belief that rights are given to us by our creator and that we choose to give governments and their agents (including LEO's) very limited powers to help protect those rights for us. IMHO, no agent of the government should ever have more rights than the citizens they serve.

Stupidity isn't illegal. What they did may technically be legal but it was stupid and dangerous.

Unbelievable stupidity. Just because something is lawful doesn't mean it's smart. To quote a fictional character, "the law is not intended to outline every possible infraction one may commit, however the spirit of the law is clear: blatant disregard for the safety and well-being of others will always be a punishable offense." These morons are lucky they weren't gunned down. Covered faces, loaded weapons, and hands on said weapons do NOT make for anything but a threatening image, especially given the current anti-police mentality around the country.

For comparison, the law here in Texas says that we may use deadly force to stop the commission of criminal mischief during the nighttime. A 12-year-old tagging your fence with a smiley face 29 minutes before sunset meets the letter of the law, but would you shoot in that instance? And if you did, can you think of a court on Earth that would not convict you of SOMETHING, even if the conviction was a contrived last-ditch effort to put you in prison?

Even a double face palm is inadequate for this situation.

ScottDLS wrote: If I wanted to make a "point" by carrying in a police station, I'd probably open carry a full size pistol, in a holster, of course...

Yeah, but I'm still not sure what their "point" was. They said they felt threatened during a traffic stop, although they didn't look too worse for wear. But if you felt "threatened" by the police, why would you do something to antagonize them? Just youtube trollers who make life tough for everybody. They should feel lucky, that they were still alive to post their video. JMHO

mojo84 wrote:Stupidity isn't illegal. What they did may technically be legal but it was stupid and dangerous.

I agree completely with this statement.

Excaliber wrote:Even a double face palm is inadequate for this situation.

Yep, requires a "Shiva - multi-arm facepalm"
[img]http://www.hinduwebsite.com/buzz/i ...