Recent Meeting with AACo. PD re: LGOC

[danb]

Oh, take a firearm you don't care about. If accusations fly, they take the firearm, might be a while, if at all, until you get it back.

Good luck.

 

[CypherPunk]

There are a lot of valid points for and against this type of action. You have already taken a good first step by discussing and debating it here.

I would suggest you study the unquestionably successful blueprint established and honed by vcdl.org before taking action.

Perhaps you might consider scheduling a family BBQ in a remote municipal park for your first event? Invite sympathetic public officials to speak to your diverse audience, which might include soccer moms, children and all manner of diverse backgrounds.

Issue orange guns save lives stickers to all participants. Invite the news media to cover the event, but control by unanimous consent the message by predetermining a spokesperson.

Now, you have accomplished the same task as you originally intended - educating the public and LEO's - but this way you have greater control and almost no chance of inflaming the populace or the police - you’ve educated them via their TV and radio instead.

Bold, baby steps.

 

[Mr H]

While a public park may be completely legal (depending on the park), I would recommend some very visible private property (business, large home on a busy thoroughfare), where every participant can have written permission from the owner, if only as an extra safeguard.

 

[Blacksmith101]

A couple of suggestions.

In your written material point out that the reason they have to see the "scary gun" is the state police will not approve applications for concealed carry.

You might want to consider dressing in some distinctive fashion (Revolutionary Solider for example) this may defuse some calls as it looks more like a demonstration also US Flag and Maryland Flag being flown. Give some thought to the overall "stage dressing" as the first you will set the trend and good staging that is easily repeatable will make it easier for others in the future. Creating a particular look to an open carry demonstrations will go a long way to easing tensions at future gatherings that look similar.

 

[Mr H]

A couple of suggestions.

In your written material point out that the reason they have to see the "scary gun" is the state police will not approve applications for concealed carry.

You might want to consider dressing in some distinctive fashion (Revolutionary Solider for example) this may defuse some calls as it looks more like a demonstration also US Flag and Maryland Flag being flown. Give some thought to the overall "stage dressing" as the first you will set the trend and good staging that is easily repeatable will make it easier for others in the future. Creating a particular look to an open carry demonstrations will go a long way to easing tensions at future gatherings that look similar.

Couple things come to mind (though I'll defer to mxrider for his POV)...

No one said LGOC had to be "scary guns". Bolt-action, plinkers, shottys... they all count for this. Many people, even those who might be 'frightened' by an EBR, will have a completely different response to wood and blued steel.

Dressing up IMO is contrary to the point. This should be as 'everyday' as possible, toward the ultimate goal of normalizing OC. Now, having a hat, or t-shirt specific to the goal may help, but getting all costumey would run contrary to the goal, I think.

 

[DC-W]

Normal guy on corner + gun = normal guy (eventually)

 

[SWO Daddy]

What about having an additional person as a "sign bearer"? Maybe with a sandwich sign indicating this is a legal activity, not to be alarmed, and why it is occurring. Warning the soccer moms et al might reduce their "the sky is falling" rhetoric.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isn'tth at the catch 22 in MD law? IE - you become a (un-permitted) demonstration when you have someone there recording or holding a sign.

 

[SWO Daddy]

Also - please don't use a "high capacity" magazine. That's not the attention we need.

 

[Mr H]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isn'tth at the catch 22 in MD law? IE - you become a (un-permitted) demonstration when you have someone there recording or holding a sign.

This is an important point.

The whole "protest" point is completely undefined. Or, at least, fuzzy.

This is the entire point behind coordinating with LLE, as well as ensuring the venue is appropriate to the event.

 

[Hakuna Matata]

I think it's a good idea, but go about it in a much more formal manner (as the other forum members have stated) than the yahoo's on youtube.

I would consider a formal rally rather than a single guy with a gopro and his rifle walking down the street. There should be banners, signs posted on the street long before anyone actually sees you, a makeshift information stand for anyone that wants to walk up and get a pamphlet, keep your march within certain boundaries (like no more that 75ft away from the info stand on either side), maybe one or two guys with rifles/no mags and a marked cop car or two in the background so no one craps themselves.

This might seem like a bit much but this IS Maryland and non-gun people usually associate firearms with crime. So since this would be the first open carry walk of it's kind I think it would be better to ease everyone into the idea of open carry.

 

[juan_galto]

First, (@ John from MD) I'm not "newer." I'm quiet, and there's a difference. I am neither a product of liberal influences, which is a pretty silly assertion when the only thing you know about me is that my opinion on this controversial topic (even among the 2A community) differs from yours.

Second, the legal right isn't my question. The public perception and how that perception is politically leveraged, is. Yes, what you're talking about is legal--but this will not educate people ignorant of the second amendment any more than the wesboro church educated people about the first. You will motivate people to want to limit rights because they won't like what they see.

Finally, if you consider this from a risk-reward position, how does this appear? Even if you educate a local handful, you may enflame many more because of the negative press.

 

[DaemonAssassin]

Don't have one unfortunately but feel this is too important to not stand up.

Even if you don't have one that could be there with you physically, at least have the phone number of one that would be willing to assist you if there were any legal issues that arose, while you were engaged in lawful LGOC. Cover your a$$ at all times bro.

This is the part that was brought up during our meeting that I didn't want to mention publicly and give others ideas of what could cause me trouble. A false accusation could lead to an arrest and let the courts decide the outcome. The video is essential in a defense where it is he said/she said.

Another thing to consider is that if the news is there to interview you, be sure to record them while they interview you. This way, they can't twist/edit your words and actions in a way that would cast a negative light on LGOC. If they can record you, then legally, you can record them in public to keep them honest in their reporting. Can you tell I don't trust newsies?

Hadn't thought of that, but will ask about this possibility. I have a long time friend that works out of this district as well that may be helpful to the cause.

This could be the difference between an arrest and going home at the end of the day. Even if you record everything that is happening, the officer is an independent 3rd party at the scene. Between the video and the officer, if anything comes up that you have to go to court for, you will come out of there with no issues and the other person will be nicked for filing a false police report of some other such thing.

This is my ultimate goal in the whole idea.

The one that takes the first step is always the loneliest. Depending on the day, I'll try to swing down and at least say hi, while wearing an MDS shirt. If I can get down, I'll keep you company and grab food/drinks for you, during the time you are engaged in LGOC.

 

[Mark75H]

I would consider a formal rally rather than a single guy with a gopro and his rifle walking down the street.

MD has a law against firearms in the presence of formal rallies. Thee may have thou rights, but thee may not mix them

 

[CypherPunk]

MD has a law against firearms in the presence of formal rallies. Thee may have thou rights, but thee may not mix them

I doubt it would apply in a friendly county, with a Sheriff in attendance, and/or on private property.

Plus, a police officer has to advise you first.

 

[JPG]

MD has a law against firearms in the presence of formal rallies. Thee may have thou rights, but thee may not mix them

What is a rally 2 people? 5? 10? Just wondering as just about every time this comes up people say can't have more than one as it is a rally. Does MD say what one is or is it "we know it when we see it"?

Definition of rally is:
Rally gathering: a large meeting or gathering of people, usually organized by a movement or political party and intended to inspire and generate enthusiasm among those present

 

[Clovis]

Maryland makes something like this particularly difficult because of the wording of the peculiar law prohibiting carrying of firearm within a certain distance of a demonstration.

I agree discussing this with the local police and law enforcement is the thing to do, but it could be argued that this is going through a defacto permitting process for a demonstration. And then we are back to not being able to carry a firearm within a certain distance of a demonstration.

I am not a lawyer, but this looks like a hell of a catch 22

 

[Mr H]

I spoke at length with mxrider last night, and I'm confident that if he decides to go forward with this, he will have a detailed plan and as many "safeties" in it as humanly possible.

As for the "protest" aspect... This is something that has concerned me for quite some time. As far as the [lack of] definitions are concerned, this is where involving LLE becomes critical. All it would take is for one officer on a mission to 'determine' that even one person was 'protesting', then it would be shut down. Yes, they are required to offer a warning for the participant(s) to disperse. My concern would be the length of time before the next step would kick in.

 

[jpo183]

Spend 5 minutes and read this article.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/21/b...-and-he-wouldnt-have-changed-anything-anyway/

I think its got a lot of good stuff and maybe we should take a page from the play book. And I do not mean "picking up trash with a t-shirt"

 

[BeoBill]

Another point nobody seems to have thought of is that MD is home to a veritable host of state and Federal agencies and agents who have arrest powers on and off duty. It would be wise to somehow get the word out to them to avoid an "unplanned excursion."

 

[daNattyFatty]

Another point nobody seems to have thought of is that MD is home to a veritable host of state and Federal agencies and agents who have arrest powers on and off duty. It would be wise to somehow get the word out to them to avoid an "unplanned excursion."

Generally, federal officers can only enforce federal laws. Though, there are exceptions. State laws violated while on federal property, State laws in tribal areas, acting in a joint investigation or task force with local jurisdictions, etc. Not arguing, just throwing it out there.

Though, this doesn't take into account a federal officer from using deadly force, thinking that he or she is preventing a person with a gun from wreaking havoc.