Washington state Man gets abused by COPS for Open Carrying (VID)

[Nobleneckbeard]

That's precisely what I'm saying, they're good cops for not shooting him when he was armed and not making his intent clear.



No it's not. A reason would be "I'm heading to X Y Z place where it's all cool to have firearms. You're welcome to accompany me so I can show you I'm not lying". Whereas "But I'm allowed to carry this weapon and do whatever da fukk I want with it" is not a valid reason.

Just because there's laws making acquiring firearms difficult here, doesn't mean we're anti gun. I support those Ameribrahs who still want to keep their firearms, I don't support people being idiots.

The reason is implicit in his actions: he's exercising his 2nd Amendment right
He is not required to tell anyone his intention since it wouldn't mean ****--evidence is required to prove intention

[illTRON]

betas gonn' beta

[Nobleneckbeard]

betas gonn' beta

5'6", strong

[TJx]

i suk fukin cawk

Abused? OP you're dumb as ****.

I am sure you'd call the police if you seen someone carrying a weapon as he was.


Or if you're ****ing retarded you wouldn't. Why the hell would someone not call the police with all the mass shootings n ****?

[illTRON]

5'6", strong

age:18
username: nobleneckbeard (.......m'lady)
avi: NONE (surprise!)



woodburyOfficerHernandez/10

[Durg]

The reason is implicit in his actions: he's exercising his 2nd Amendment right

So I suppose if he began a fire fight with those cops when they just simply asked what he was doing he would also be exercising that right? Or what if he began shooting other people, would that also be exercising that right?

These are police officers he's speaking too, and as I stated above obviously level headed ones -not the kind that we usually hear of in the States (aside from the short lady who was over compensating). If they were chit cops they would have probably rolled in there guns blazing. They simply wanted to know why he was walking around with a firearm. They can see damn well he's exercising the said right, but what's too say he wasn't looking to cause harm.

He's armed and arguing with armed cops, that's not the kind of behaviour displayed by an innocent person.

[AndreiT]

I'm totally okay with shooting this moron. Your rights are your rights but walking around with an ar15 for no good reason is just asking for it because yes like he said "I didn't know we were in nazi germany". You're not in nazi germany so your need to walk around with a rifle is not exactly the best use of your rights.

[Nobleneckbeard]

age:18
username: nobleneckbeard (.......m'lady)
avi: NONE (surprise!)





woodburyOfficerHernandez/10

age:none
join date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1273
Surprise!! Youre a *******
O and location: Canada, so I guess that explains everything

[GonHx]

That's precisely what I'm saying, they're good cops for not shooting him when he was armed and not making his intent clear.



No it's not. A reason would be "I'm heading to X Y Z place where it's all cool to have firearms. You're welcome to accompany me so I can show you I'm not lying". Whereas "But I'm allowed to carry this weapon and do whatever da fukk I want with it" is not a valid reason.

Just because there's laws making acquiring firearms difficult here, doesn't mean we're anti gun. I support those Ameribrahs who still want to keep their firearms, I don't support people being idiots.

1) since when does a cop refraining from doing an illegal crime, make him a "good cop"? what planet are you from, that you think its reasonable for a cop to murder a person LEGALLY openly carrying a firearm?


2) people can do whatever the hell they want, so long as it is LEGAL. PERIOD. since when do we need reasons to justify LEGAL things/activities/etc.?

3) you are an idiot, i hope you are true to your word and stop supporting yourself.

[Nobleneckbeard]

So I suppose if he began a fire fight with those cops when they just simply asked what he was doing he would also be exercising that right? Or what if he began shooting other people, would that also be exercising that right?

These are police officers he's speaking too, and as I stated above obviously level headed ones -not the kind that we usually hear of in the States (aside from the short lady who was over compensating). If they were chit cops they would have probably rolled in there guns blazing. They simply wanted to know why he was walking around with a firearm. They can see damn well he's exercising the said right, but what's too say he wasn't looking to cause harm.

He's armed and arguing with armed cops, that's not the kind of behaviour displayed by an innocent person.

You think someone with the intent to do harm is going to tell the officers his intent? strong logic
Just because they're cops do not justify anything
And just wtf at youre logic in first sentences, of course not

[illTRON]

this clown is even asking for donations to fund his legal battle for the arrest

[Nobleneckbeard]

I'm totally okay with shooting this moron. Your rights are your rights but walking around with an ar15 for no good reason is just asking for it because yes like he said "I didn't know we were in nazi germany". You're not in nazi germany so your need to walk around with a rifle is not exactly the best use of your rights.

"I'm totally okay with shooting this moron"
How can you even subjectively decide what the best use of his objective rights are. Society would benefit if you were shot, strong retard logic

[p7nk]

Questions for the LEO's. couldn't you attempt and charge him with attempting to incite a riot?

[Nobleneckbeard]

this clown is even asking for donations to fund his legal battle for the arrest

So what; I donated some of my money--mad?

[raciallyaware]

this clown is even asking for donations to fund his legal battle for the arrest

Beyond pathetic.

[Durg]

You think someone with the intent to do harm is going to tell the officers his intent? strong logic
Just because they're cops do not justify anything
And just wtf at youre logic in first sentences, of course not

EXACTLY!

An innocent person will state what they're doing, someone who isn't acting in a legal manner will sit there and argue with police.

[jackamo2887]

age:18
username: nobleneckbeard (.......m'lady)
avi: NONE (surprise!)



woodburyOfficerHernandez/10

She looks wound a wee bit too tight.

[Nobleneckbeard]

EXACTLY!

An innocent person will state what they're doing, someone who isn't acting in a legal manner will sit there and argue with police.

But he's not required to state anything

[raciallyaware]

Based on the beta nature of the man and the fact that mentions he is a "medically retired veteran" at every fcking turn while seeming to be just fine...

I was more than a little amused to discover his military branch of choice:

US Air Force.

lol. Naturally.

[Gringo12]

No hate intended with this comment but is it really necessary for american citizens to have access to these sort of weapons? Could you not protect yourselves/family with a handgun or something?

[danimal81]

but, but my freedomz!

[johnnyboi123]

age:18
username: nobleneckbeard (.......m'lady)
avi: NONE (surprise!)



woodburyOfficerHernandez/10

when did the Dark Lord Spaniard become a cop?

[jackamo2887]

The fact that the cops trolled him to get him arrested is just ****ed up.

The cops in this video scare me more then the other people do. If you're wound up this tightly, eventually you're gonna shoot someone or beat your spouse or something..badge or no badge.

[raciallyaware]

No hate intended with this comment but is it really necessary for american citizens to have access to these sort of weapons? Could you not protect yourselves/family with a handgun or something?

Founders wanted a well-armed militia in order to fight back against the govt if they got too out of control.

Half the people who own serious weaponry in the US are Republicans who adore the police state though, so it's sort of self-caricature situation.

[FoamyNips]

thats entrapment. placing the nonoffender away from his vehicle and asking him to leave, and not letting him get into his vehicle.

i would sue the department for harassment and wrongful arrest

[Durg]

But he's not required to state anything

A representative of an authoritative body asked him a question, he's required to give a valid answer.

[FunkDaddy]

woodburyOfficerHernandez/10

[Nobleneckbeard]

A representative of an authoritative body asked him a question, he's required to give a valid answer.

Under what law

[Durg]

Under what law

Provide me legislation from both Federal United States law as well as the state of Washington with regards to the powers of police and I'll find you an answer. I'll also need a background on the separations of powers between the Federal government and the State government as well.

As stated above, an innocent person complies with police. Arguing or dodging questions sets off warning alarms that this person has something to hide.

[danimal81]

Founders wanted a well-armed militia in order to fight back against the govt if they got too out of control.

Half the people who own serious weaponry in the US are Republicans who adore the police state though, so it's sort of self-caricature situation.

The funny thing is, in the 19th Century back in the Wild West Days. If you were to ride into a new town you were ordered to surrender your gun to the sherrifs office.

The way I feel about this is that, yes its legal to open carry in some states, and if you feel like you want to make a statement by open carrying in public in this day and age of rampant mass shootings you should be prepared to show ID. I have no idea why these kinds of people don't realize that their behavior is taboo, and the cops are not encroaching on their freedomz when they ask for ID