Ya that would have ended well.The correct response should have been " Yes, I do but is it your job or just personal preference to meat gaze men leaving the restroom?"
The real crime here is a man wearing tight jeans.
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Ya that would have ended well.The correct response should have been " Yes, I do but is it your job or just personal preference to meat gaze men leaving the restroom?"
The correct response should have been " Yes, I do but is it your job or just personal preference to meat gaze men leaving the restroom?"
40s and 50s, the "kid" who was stopped and questioned is 44 or 45... but I'm still trying to figure out why you think age matters? If it were younger folks, they'd be under more suspicions? Or they're not privy and/or eligible to the protections of the law? Not to sound like "you know who" but... "What difference does it make"? (the age of the person who is being - in my opinion - unlawfully detained and questioned)Which he apparently isnt gonna answer, so Ive drawn my conclusion from that.
I honestly don't feel it's "going to the extreme" to feel somewhat - even slightly - pissed about seeing someone, anyone, walking through a restaurant, bothering absolutely nobody, acting 100% lawfully and peaceful, and happening to pass by two off-duty (if you're at a table eating with the "regular folks", you're off duty. Alert, aware sure but... you're off duty).Going a little extreme. No?
It sounded like a simple question that had a simple answer and response. No need to lawyer up just then. There's plenty of time for that to happen when the LEO blind sides you with any number of bullshit charges just to eff you up and cost you a ton of money with BS legal fees defending something stupid that will get dropped after you are stuck refi'ing your house.
I honestly don't feel it's "going to the extreme" to feel somewhat - even slightly - pissed about seeing someone, anyone, walking through a restaurant, bothering absolutely nobody, acting 100% lawfully and peaceful, and happening to pass by two off-duty (if you're at a table eating with the "regular folks", you're off duty. Alert, aware sure but... you're off duty).
I should also add, and should've added to the OP, that as these two cops were stopping and questioning our friend, in the booth two rows over were a couple of Chelsea dudes who looked and sounded like they'd just bought and sold a kilo of coke and/or robbed a liquor store, but conveniently Officers DoGood and DoWell pick and choose a white guy in his 40s to interrogate as he's on his way to take a piss.... I'm guessing it's all just "coincidental".
Uh-huh.
I honestly don't feel it's "going to the extreme" to feel somewhat - even slightly - pissed about seeing someone, anyone, walking through a restaurant, bothering absolutely nobody, acting 100% lawfully and peaceful, and happening to pass by two off-duty (if you're at a table eating with the "regular folks", you're off duty. Alert, aware sure but... you're off duty).
I should also add, and should've added to the OP, that as these two cops were stopping and questioning our friend, in the booth two rows over were a couple of Chelsea dudes who looked and sounded like they'd just bought and sold a kilo of coke and/or robbed a liquor store, but conveniently Officers DoGood and DoWell pick and choose a white guy in his 40s to interrogate as he's on his way to take a piss.... I'm guessing it's all just "coincidental".
Uh-huh.
So you are willing to go thru a potential $$$hitload of expenses to keep or risk the of loss of your LTC just to prove a point over something so silly?
Did you ever stop long enough to think that if your tight wearing jeans buddy did a better job of concealing his pocket pistol he wouldn't have been bothered in the first place?
I've been around long enough and learned to pick a fight I have a better chance of winning versus jeopardizing my LTC.
I guess I value my license and collection more than some others. Clearly, many others who have posted here feel the same way as I.
That said... I'm out.
I understand that emotion. We shouldn't have to submit to the whole "ihre papiere bitte" BS. So what course of action should one take in a state with discretionary licensing?
If you piss off a cop over this here in MA, it has a chance to go south in a big way. You might "win" in the long run, but you could still be out a ton of money. I applaud those who are willing to stand up in that way (assuming they have thought through the consequences and have the means to pursue the legal action). Personally, I think my life is too short to deal with that crap, and I would show my LTC and then figure out how to better conceal my gun. YMMV.
I honestly don't feel it's "going to the extreme" to feel somewhat - even slightly - pissed about seeing someone, anyone, walking through a restaurant, bothering absolutely nobody, acting 100% lawfully and peaceful, and happening to pass by two off-duty (if you're at a table eating with the "regular folks", you're off duty. Alert, aware sure but... you're off duty).
I understand that emotion. We shouldn't have to submit to the whole "ihre papiere bitte" BS. So what course of action should one take in a state with discretionary licensing?
If you piss off a cop over this here in MA, it has a chance to go south in a big way. You might "win" in the long run, but you could still be out a ton of money. I applaud those who are willing to stand up in that way (assuming they have thought through the consequences and have the means to pursue the legal action). Personally, I think my life is too short to deal with that crap, and I would show my LTC and then figure out how to better conceal my gun. YMMV.
"That said, I'm out "...
Did you ever stop long enough to think we're in a state where this shit should not be accepted as "OK, whatever, don't fuss. Just do what Officer Friendly tells you to do..."
This perception among moonbats is a good thing. They would be shocked if the knew how many people actually did carry.LTC holders that actually carry are still pretty much unicorns.
I may be in the minority, but I don't see a big civil liberty implication in showing a license when engaged in a licensed activity. Does the state need to suspect someone of practicing medicine without a license to see their license? What about renovating a house? Does the state need probably cause to believe unlawful contracting before they ask to see the license display at the job site?
As long as it's not a fishing expedition; the license is accepted as facially valid (as was NOT done in the case with the Springfield attorney); the encounter is terminated once the presence of an LTC is established; and there are no follow-up ramifications (like the LTC revocation in the old Dedham case), it's not a big deal.
This perception among moonbats is a good thing. They would be shocked if the knew how many people actually did carry.
I may be in the minority, but I don't see a big civil liberty implication in showing a license when engaged in a licensed activity. Does the state need to suspect someone of practicing medicine without a license to see their license? What about renovating a house? Does the state need probably cause to believe unlawful contracting before they ask to see the license display at the job site?
As long as it's not a fishing expedition; the license is accepted as facially valid (as was NOT done in the case with the Springfield attorney); the encounter is terminated once the presence of an LTC is established; and there are no follow-up ramifications (like the LTC revocation in the old Dedham case), it's not a big deal.
This perception among moonbats is a good thing. They would be shocked if the knew how many people actually did carry.
In MA, if a cop asks you for your LTC, you are required by law to produce it.
The police officer has to demand it. Not ask
So you believe you can be stopped while driving merely to check your license? So LEO can stop anyone at any time just to do a license check?
I honestly don't feel it's "going to the extreme" to feel somewhat - even slightly - pissed about seeing someone, anyone, walking through a restaurant, bothering absolutely nobody, acting 100% lawfully and peaceful, and happening to pass by two off-duty (if you're at a table eating with the "regular folks", you're off duty. Alert, aware sure but... you're off duty).
I should also add, and should've added to the OP, that as these two cops were stopping and questioning our friend, in the booth two rows over were a couple of Chelsea dudes who looked and sounded like they'd just bought and sold a kilo of coke and/or robbed a liquor store, but conveniently Officers DoGood and DoWell pick and choose a white guy in his 40s to interrogate as he's on his way to take a piss.... I'm guessing it's all just "coincidental".
Uh-huh.
It's Massachusetts. Everyone here makes assumptions about everyone anyways.Good thing you're not upset about the officer making assumptions about you and your friends!
I disagree that we need licenses to do anything. Carrying a firearm is legal. Open carrying a firearm is legal. No probable cause to even look in my direction. If I were to use the firearm in self defense or a crime then ask me. Otherwise you are violating my rights.
I live in Mass so the pols saw fit to it that if I carry then I am agreeing to have my rights violated if a cop sense I have or sees I have a firearm. Nothing can be done about that without some pro 2A votes.
As for fishing or hunting then yes, if you are actively engaged. But carrying a fishing pole near the water doesn't mean you are fishing and carrying a rifle in the woods doesn't mean you are hunting. Is there an incredible chance you are planning to engage in either instance? Absolutely. But until you have a line in the water you are not fishing. And if you are walking along through the woods with a rifle slung on your shoulder you are not necessarily hunting.
So no, they should't have a right to ask for a license in those cases until they see you actively engage in the event.
We have come to accept too many violations of our rights as "normal".
Try applying that logic if you are afield with a shotgun during hunting season without a license and claim you are not hunting.It's not quite the same though because the fishing license is not to carry a fishing pole, it is for fishing so yes, you have to be fishing for the license requirement to apply.
Try applying that logic if you are afield with a shotgun during hunting season without a license and claim you are not hunting.
Borderline. What about a copy stopping your for speeding demanding registration? He has no reason to suspect you are driving an uninsured or unregistered vehicle, so what gives him the authority beyond checking your license status? But he stopped you for a reason. He can't drive around stopping people to check registrations.
Do you think a contractor has the obligation to display a visible permit to prove he is not violating the law? Sure, engaging in business is very different than walking in public at a citizen. For someone to stop you, there has to be a reason and case law as said time and time again that the presence of a firearm is not enough.
Lock him up!!
Sounds like he was brandishing a firearm to me.
maybe even disturbing the peace.