KSL OPEN CARRY

What are your thoughts on this? Should a person be allowed to pack an assault rifle over his shoulder outside a mall? Would you call police if you saw this?

"The impetus for Ray's bill stems from an incident outside University Mall in Orem last January in which a 51-year-old man was walking on the sidewalk with an assault rifle slung over his shoulder and carrying a handgun. The man was handcuffed and detained for a few minutes, while officers determined the guns were unloaded. Police called his actions reckless and cited him with disorderly conduct." KSL
 
LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-12 AT 01:39PM (MST)[p]Absolutley he should, no I would not call the police. My question to you is why wouldnt that be allowed? you would feel safe with him carrying a pistol but not a rifle? Both can kill you with one shot. I also do not think the guy was useing his head, BUT he was legal. He should not have been charged with a one size fits all charge. Next thing you know some anti hunting LEO will be charging people for carrying their hunting rifles into sportsmans.
 
Maybe the guy just bought his rifle and was carrying it home? I don't blame the police for investigating but if no crime was committed why was the man charged? There are a lot of cops ignorant of our gun laws, hopefully this bill will pass and help educate everyone on what is legal.
 
Somehow along the road, our nation became "guilty until proven innocent". Unfortunately, a lot of law enforcement now subscribes to this thinking. "innocent until proven guilty" just wasn't paying enough of the bills I guess.


smiley-violent064.gif
 
I believe the assault rifle outside of a mall was irresponsible.

If I saw that guy, I wouldn't be able to judge if he was a law abiding citizen, or man about to go on a killing spree. How could any of us tell..? If I am going to err, I will err on the side of safety and at least report a man with an assault rifle. Once the police find he is carrying legally, he should be allowed to continue on his way, no charges.

Can you imagine if you saw the guy, and an hour later you see on the news about a massacre at the mall..?? I'd feel alot worse about that, than putting a law abiding citizen through a few moments of questioning by police.

I sure hope the bill passes, I got my CFP in order to carry my weapon loaded, and frankly, without having to deal with any sort of stupidity on the part of John Q. Public reporting me. I would also not carry an assault rifle openly near any public or private venue where a large number of people congregate, solely to avoid misinterpretation.


"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24
 
Its amazing to me here in st george utah how many people see me open carry my 1911 45, and ask is that legal , i answer yes,
i did not know that they most often reply, so i always ask does this make u feel unsafe, 90% of the time there reply is the same,no its the guns i cant see that make me feel uneasy, the problem is the public is informed just enough for them to know conceal carry is legal with a permit but have no idea that open carry is a right and is verry much legal, and practiced even if we have a concealed carry permit. so they call johnny law

[email protected]
[email protected]


'IT AINT EASY BEING ME'
 
Using this logic, If I see a dark Arabic looking individual with his head wrapped in a towel outside a mall, how do I know if they are about to detonate a suicide bomb?

Yes, that statement is offensive. It is equally offensive to suggest seeing someone carrying a gun is frightening. Grow up!
Our nanny state wants us to believe that "governement" will keep us safe. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is the responsible actions of responsible citizens that assure our safety. Someone openly carrying in a safe and legal manner is no threat.

I also understand the individual in question was in front of the mall to intentionally create a confrontation with police. This is NOT responsible. But the arrest on disorderly conduct was equally irresponsible when the officers knew he was not breaking any laws or potentially violent.

Bill
 
This guy carrying a assault rifle at a mall is an idiot. IMO he probably was purposely carrying the rifle to be noticed and come in contact with an LEO. He was most likely looking for a law suit with the city and maybe the Officer.

There is two components regarding this particular incident. First the letter of the law:
Is it legal to open carry an unloaded firearm in a public place?
Of course; our right to bear arms.
Secondly, the spirit of the law:
Whether any of us like it or not times have changed. If any of our wives and kids were at a mall, movie theater, or public place. Somebody carrying an assault rife would invoke fear. Police would surely get called.

Now this is where it goes in a different direction. After law enforcement arrives and questions the subject, it is found this person KNEW HE WOULD CAUSE A SCENE and had no reasonable justification for carrying the rifle. Other laws on the books come into play. I feel in some cases charges are warranted.
This guy is just the reason our gun rights are challenged.

Come on guys, none of you can tell me you would carry an assault rifle in a public place (walking through a shopping center) without it being in a case and out of sight.
And if you are one of those guys, look in the mirror when of gun rights are further restricted.

David
 
Llamapacker- your statement makes no sense... He wasn't "profiled" like your statement is insinuating... He was carrying 2 weapons. If the "dark Arabic looking individual" in your statement was carrying a bomb, yeah, I would call him in... Because of the weapons, not the color of his skin or head wrap...


"Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!" 2 Ne. 28: 24
 
That mall idiot down in Orem is just that, an idiot. His whole stunt was very carefully calculated to cause alarm for the sole purpose of pushing the envelope. A bunch of them miss the boat when it comes to responsible practice. That sort of attention is almost as helpful to the cause as old superdale and some of his past antics.

You can get on the open carry forums and see a bunch of these jokers passing stories back and forth about the 'best way' to antagonize the public and police to deliberately get noticed. Then in the next breath they act completely shocked, outraged, and disturbed that anyone could have been alarmed by their actions.

At a certain point, legislation will respond one direction or another. Looking at the last century I think we can anticipate whether it will lean on the side of increased or decreased rights. It would behoove them to pick their battles wisely as it will effect all of us in the long run.


4abc76ff29b26fc1.jpg
 
Two issues that come to mind, which are completely separate but are being handled by their respective supporters in a very similar manner.

Are firearms and breastfeeding. Even though it should be legal to opening expose either.

I support breastfeeding of babies, but it can be done in a way that doesn't make people uncomfortable. Mothers staging a public nursing event at Walmart are no different than this guy walking into a mall with a rifle. They are trying to bring attention to themselves and their cause, nothing more.

I completely support our right to carry firearms, but would never put my right to carry in front of another persons right to feel comfortable and secure. Even if it should be completely legal to open carry a firearm, is it the right thing to do, or are they just trying to bring attention to themselves. Can we not accomplish everything we want to accomplish by carrying a firearm without causing anyone concern.

At least from my perspective, both issues should be covered up with a shirt.
 
what I think we have to realize in this case is that my RIGHTS never superceed the RIGHTS of another person.

I do not have the right to run into the airport and scream bomb, even though the 1st amendment says I can.

I have the right to openly carry a weapon, but if my intent is to do anything other than "CARRY", I have superceeded the rights that you have to feel and be safe in your surroundings/environment.

If I carry for the purpose of self defense and the protection of others, if the situation presented itself then I'm in the right.

anytime I hear Dispatch say 10-88 I take the call very serious. I can't distinguish someone's intent until I have detained and questioned the individual.

I have mixed feelings on this issue. Thats why I originally posted it.






It was a big bodied 2 point. (this is my signature)
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-01-12 AT 05:32PM (MST)[p]76-9-102 : Disorderly conduct
(b) intending to cause public inconvenience , annoyance , or alarm , or recklessly creating a risk thereof .

It's very sad that which ever prosucting agency in Utah County didn't have the nutz to follow up and seek a conviction on the nut job at the mall . Then again I'm not surprised with Utah County after they failed to seek the death penalty when Officer Adams was killed in the line of duty .

I have no issue with people that choose to carry in a manner that doesn't create a alarm or a scene , but in cases similar to the mall deal , charges should be persued . For me the question should be what would a resonable person do ?

The guy thats at McDonalds with his open carry hog leg will probably get checked out by the local authorites , and after every thing is found to be on the up and up , no charges should be sought . On the flip side if a mental midget wants to strap on a few assault rifles and stand around outside a mall or on the sidewalk of your kids school , he should be charged since its outside of what a normal and resonable person would do .

In the mean time I hope all these extreme , push it to the limit folks , like having several other guns pointed out them by uniformed officers , then getting proned out on the hot or wet ground , and then having a little knee pressure on the back while they are getting handcuffed until every thing can be checked out .

Because bottom line the folks in uniform are not going to take any chances , and they are going to go home every night . There is a obligation for police to check out any and all of the complaints that make the rest of the society feel unsafe .

I'm a strong supporter of the 2 nd amendment , however I feel there is a time and a place for every thing , and carryin my AR around the mall is not one of those times .
 
There is no such thing as the "spirit of the law" the law is law. it is black and white yes he was irresponsible but he was NOT breaking the law. As far as the open carry forum comment. I have been to it a few times and I have not seen posts encouraging the antagonizeing of the public. In fact it was the complete opposite.
 
Also I want to point out that the focus of this law is not to make it so that I can march around the mall with and AR. The intent of this law is to make is so some LEO wanting to display his dominance cannot just charge me with something stupid for responsibly carrying my firearm when done so in a legal fasion. There is for some reason or another some kind of conflict from some concealed permit guys who think that there way of carrying is the only responsible way. This law will affect you to. If you carry concealed in wal-mart, you are against store policy and can be asked to leave. Ive personally spoken to several managers and filed a complaint to their corporate office because they refuse to post it. So concealed carry guys, Id be damn sure that your weapon is very concealed when you enter the store, unless you want to be asked to leave. It may not happen everytime but eventually one bonehead manager will approach you. That is the reason for this bill, so that when they do approach you its not with some LEO looking to charge you with something because some anti gun idiot freaked out.
 
The intent of the law may not be to allow an open carried AR in the mall, but if I read the bill correctly. If it passes that will be legal. And, since the line with some (a few), not most open carry folks is if it is legal then all others can just bite me. Then we have a problem.

I know that I would rather put the extra effort to conceal my weapon properly, and run the risk of being asked to leave, than be grouped up with the nut job who wants to open carry an AR in the mall.
 
If the intent is to not allow openly carrying an ar in the mall then the wording of the law should be changed to reflect that. My personal belief is that an ar is no more dangrous than a hand gun. I'm actually frightened to see opinions that an ar is somehow more dangrous than a glock. At what extent does it stop. Next thing will be high cap magazines. Just ask California
 
Of course an AR is more dangerous than my Glock 22. Your heart doesn't care if the hole in it was made by a .22, .380, .357, .40, 5.56/.233 or a .50 BMG. But what makes it more dangerous is the fact that I can accurately make that hole from a long distance. Distance=Time and Time=Living. If I can increase the distance and accuracy then YES my AR is more Dangerous than my .40...

I'm not looking to offend you timothymarks.



It was a big bodied 2 point. (this is my signature)
 
>There is no such thing as
>the "spirit of the law"
>the law is law. it
>is black and white yes
>he was irresponsible but he
>was NOT breaking the law.
> As far as the
>open carry forum comment.
>I have been to it
>a few times and I
>have not seen posts encouraging
>the antagonizeing of the public.
> In fact it was
>the complete opposite.


It's interesting that you say he was "NOT" breaking the law . I think the mall dorks whole intention was to cause annoyance or alarm . As a responsible gun owner I feel bad about for what ever people where subject to his poor decision .

The younger generation that watch the news and have columbine , Trolley Square shooting , the list goes on and on , to be subject to seeing a nut standing there with assault rifles .

Since the incident is in infraction or a class c it wouldnt go before a jury , but I would be interested to see what a jury of his peers would think .

Based on his actions and the circumstance my vote would be that he would be guilty .

If anybody else was sitting on the jury , what way would you vote ?
 
I can't believe how many so called hunters and gun owners are repeatedly calling black guns "assault" rifles. I own a Bushmaster M4 semi-automatic rifle. I own a Norinco Mac-90 semi-automatic rifle. I do not own any "assault" rifles as that would require a class III license, active military, or law enforcement. The word "assault" rifle has done more damage to our gun rights than any other word on the planet. Think before you call everything "assault".


smiley-violent064.gif
 
Nor I. Its not the gun that is dangrous. It is the person holding it. A glock is no more dangrous than an ar. The person behind it is the one to worry about.
 
A reasonable person would know that carrying a rifle into a mall would cause alarm... that WOULD be breaking the law!



It was a big bodied 2 point. (this is my signature)
 
what about into a sporting goods store? how do you differentiate between the 2? What about the gun range, what about on the mountain? Ya i can admit carrying an ar into a mall is irresponsible but he did not break the law. there was no panic incited.
 
How do you differentiate between the 2 ? hmmmm carrying a AR on the mountain or at a mall , good question . I mean they are so similar .

I'll admit defeat . You guys carry your AR's and other assault rifles where ever you want . The mall , the sidewalk in front of a school , in front of the temple , grocery store . I mean come on it is your GOD GIVEN RIGHT as a AMERICAN , and as a Utahn your rights go even further .

I just need to prepare my speach for folks I know walking out of the mall . To my frail little grandma walking out of JC Penny's who has to be subjected to the AR carrying person walking back and forth in front of the store . " now look Granny , you need to suck it up and just get used to the fact that people can carry AR's at the mall , I mean it is his right and you just never know when Al Qaeda or the boogey man is going to be at the mall ".

Oops realized I said assault rifle and might offend the sensitive politically correct or is it incorrect folks . What I meant to call a AR is a defensive rifle , small caliber sporting rifle , combat rifle , take your pick . This coming from a so called hunter and gun owner who would never own or allow some chinese rifle to come within 10 feet of my Colts .

I tip my hat to you , the concerned citizen who guards the mall with your AR's . You keep us safe and give me a warm fuzzy feeling . In the mean time who knows how long we will have the firearm freedom we enjoy with the push it to the extreme mentality .
 
foundation, you misunderstood my question. What I mean is how do you create a law to make it legal to arry a rifle into sportsmans, into the mountains, into other public places but barring it from malls? the wording would have to be pretty tricky. No one is justifying carrying a rifle into a mall just merely arguing that the guy did nothing illegal. Everyone has said the guy acted out of line.
 
I think everybody is in agreement that it is flat out retarded to pack an M4 in a mall. Don't see the argument there.

Pushing assault lingo never got gun rights anywhere, but feel free to use it as its one of your free rights to do so.

Sorry, I didn't realize you owned Colts. Somehow I doubt you live in a China free household. As far as reliability, I would stack that Chinese gun against anything you have.


smiley-violent064.gif
 
Timothymarks....

tricky wording???

Have you ever read the Utah State Code book???? Tricky wording is all they have!! LOL




It was a big bodied 2 point. (this is my signature)
 
Two words the code book uses throughout-"reasonable person".
Timothy, you are not. Its like trying to have a conversation with my thirteen year old son.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom