So the White House is upset that Netanyahu backed away from previous agreements? Is this not what the Republicans are trying to prevent in their letter to Iran? If Obama agrees to a deal, but then the next president doesn’t want to follow, he can back out just as easily as Netanyahu has. Now, if congress approves the deal and signs off, then the next president cannot back off without going through congress as well. You can’t have it both ways. Then again, it doesn’t surprise me how hypocritical this administration is.
[-1] March 15, 2015 at 11:08am
I’m sorry you live in such a paranoid world. Am I missing something? or should I be wearing body mounted camera when I use my credit card at the grocery store to document it, just in case my identity is stolen? I mean, when I use it, they ask for ID, isn’t that harassment? I’m not doing anything illegal.
100% Nothing illegal. 100% No harassment. 100% this guy is a jerk.
[-1] March 13, 2015 at 12:57pm
I would love to see one post where I have not shown my support for open carry. I support it 100%. I have friends that open carry. I don’t know what posts you have been reading. I agree with you 100% that this guy did nothing illegal.
Now read carefully: I do not agree that this man was harassed by the cops. We can disagree on this and still agree on the right to open carry. What I disagree with as well is that this guy is a punk. But we can still agree on the right to open carry. Our last exchange was when the gentleman entered the police station with cameras rolling and looking for a confrontation. This guy is doing the same thing. I would feel totally different if the guy had been walking along with out a body mounted camera and as things unfolded, he pulled out his phone and recorded them. The body mounted camera while out for a “stroll” is a little hard to believe he was not hoping for a confrontation, which he initiated in the school parking lot because he didn’t get the fireworks when the first cop stopped.
March 12, 2015 at 4:08pm
I never said someone’s right to feel safe trumped anyone’s right to own a gun. You are right, some people feel unsafe with a mouse in a cage. I get that. But some laws do protect feelings. If I feel my life is in danger, I have the right to protect it. I get that the man did nothing illegal. We agree on those points. Were the issue seems to be is that as a citizen of the community, I have the right to ask myself “why is he walking toward a school with a rifle?” I also have the right to feel that a man walking toward a school, where my kid is, with a rifle might not be a good idea. As legal as it is for the man to do this, I still have the right to feel this way. I have the right to call my local police department and say “hey look, there is a man walking toward the school with a rifle. I don’t know if he is up to no good or not, but you may want to check it out”. The police have the right to investigate and make sure everything is good. The man has the right to carry his gun. The man has the right to walk along the street if he desires. The man has the right to decline answering the officers. The officers have the right to monitor the man. You see everyone has rights, not just this man. No ones rights have been violated in this video. The man and you may think the cops were harassing him, that is your right to think that. I don’t think they were, that is my right to believe that. But just because you think that, does not mean you are right.
March 12, 2015 at 11:28am
I agree that you enter a contract when you buy a ticket to a movie, that is my point. When you purchase a gun, you also enter into an unwritten contract. That contract is that you will use wisdom and common sense while owning this gun in order to protect the safety of those around you. People fail to understand that just because you have the RIGHT to do something (own a gun), does not mean it doesn’t come with responsibility. If one of your rights infringes on one of my rights, who wins? You have the right to say what you want, but I also have the right to not be slandered. You see sometimes rights have to compromise. Your right to own a gun and my right to feel safe in the streets. You act responsibly with your gun, I feel safe.
[-3] March 12, 2015 at 11:19am
Your attitude seems to be “I can do whatever I want, because I have the right to do whatever I want whenever I want”. And I’m the progressive? President Obama thinks like you do. Conservatives respect others rights. I have the right to own and carry a gun. I also understand the right you have to feel safe. If a cop approaches me about my gun because someone else’s right to feel safe is taken away because of the presence of my gun. I now understand that two peoples rights are now in conflict. I don’t get defensive and force the other person to have to abandon their right to feel safe. No, you engage in a dialogue. As you COMMUNICATE, the other person’s fear subsides and their rights are no longer violated. And I still maintain my right to carry my gun. You see both people can maintain their rights. You just can’t be a jerk, you live in a society where you are not the only one, you have to be civil. That is what a conservative would do!!!
[-2] March 12, 2015 at 11:11am
First of all, you cannot extend my defense of the officers to anyone, because my plumber down the street has not been given the same training nor authority the police officers have. Similarly, I would not hire the police officers to come fix my toilet.
If I was a cop or a citizen and was in a location that anyone put their hand on a fire arm, I would have every right to heighten my awareness that danger may be approaching. Anyone well trained in firearms would be foolish to think otherwise, however, they are also less likely to initiate the drawing and firing of the weapon. As you noticed, the cop had his hand on his gun. Did he ever undo the clip? NO. Did he remove it? NO. Was he ready if need be? YES. Did he have a right to be ready to protect himself? YES. Did the guy with the rifle and yourself make many ASSUMPTIONS about getting shot if he did it? YES. Does he have the right to do that? Sure. The cop did, that’s why he had his hand ready if needed. We all make assumptions every day.
I say “cop hating” because there is no better term to explain why someone would be so offended that an officer would have the nerve to ask what the guy was up to. If you did not hate cops and their authority, you would have no reason to not engage in a friendly conversation.
[-3] March 11, 2015 at 8:56pm
Here’s a short one:
Wow, someone sure is getting testy!
[-1] March 11, 2015 at 11:32am
Zorro: As for “nice deflection”, I answered the question you asked. You asked what he did wrong and I listed many things I felt he did wrong. How is that deflecting? Is it because I did not give you the answer you wanted?
If you own a gun and have a carry permit, you obviously went to some trouble to get it, why is it so hard to pull out a piece of paper and say “here officer, I’m legal, thank you for your concern”?
March 11, 2015 at 11:13am
Big Government is the last thing we need. Individual responsibility is what the world needs.
Yes, “wrong” is a subjective term. Just as you think I am “wrong” in my thinking, you have used your opinion to determine that I am “wrong”. I try to base my beliefs on what is right and wrong from my understanding of God and what he has said is right and wrong, what our elected lawmakers have determines as right “legal” and wrong “illegal”, as well as how society has overwhelmingly accepted to be right or wrong. Do some of these contradict from time to time? Yes. That’s when you have to make your own call.
So, just because you think I am wrong, does not mean I am really wrong. You have expressed your subjective opinion, just as I have. And I respect your opinion, I am just trying to let you know why my opinion is the way it is. That’s how discussions and debates work. You don’t have to resort to name calling when someone disagrees with you.
March 11, 2015 at 11:02am
How has my position morphed? If it satisfies your needs, rather than my yard, have it a public park that backs up to my yard.
I guess I have to repeat it again, as it appears some have missed it before “The guy did nothing illegal, neither did the officers!!!!!” Just because you don’t like the fact that the officers responded to this call and tried to find out if this guy was a threat, does not justify harassment by the officers. Other than the initial contact by the 1st officer that asked to speak to him, no one detained him, no one else approached him. He did the initiating after that. He sought out the officers parked in a parking lot to confront them. So the one officer was an idiot and backed up too fast into oncoming traffic, that is not harassing this guy.
As for the court cases, has the public outcry ever cared about case law when a tragedy happens? NO. Whether or not the officers or police department would win a lawsuit if this guy ended up shooting up a school and they didn’t investigate the call, the public will not care. They will roast the police, lose trust in the police and you can bet officers would lose their jobs and their livelihood.
It’s too bad people continue to spread the cop hating attitude when a few bad ones seem to be held up as the representative of the rest. That is what I fear will happen with this guy, he will be held up as the poster child of the 2nd Amendment debate.
PS, I’m not in politics and post things in hopes of getting a lot of likes.
[-1] March 10, 2015 at 10:22pm
as for Castle Rock v. Gonzales, that sucks. I would have thrown the book at the police department that did not respond, however, there appears to be laws in Colorado that said otherwise. I guess Colorado should look at changing some laws as a result of this.
 March 10, 2015 at 10:16pm
ToGodBeTheGlory: You have proven my point. In Warren v. District of Columbia, the police officers did respond to the call, they made an effort to investigate. However, when no one answered the door and no suspicious activity was seen, they left. In this case, the police officers were sued because they did not protect the victim, however, the court ruled that they attempted to as best they could given their circumstances. That is what I have stated here. The police have the duty to respond to a call. Had the officers not investigated, they would have lost the case. These cops had a duty to investigate the call. When they deemed him to not be an immediate threat, they backed off and monitored. Neither party did anything illegal, the guy was just looking for confrontation and would not let the situation die after the officers backed off.
[-2] March 10, 2015 at 8:06pm
No ones rights were interfered with.
March 10, 2015 at 8:04pm
I guess I should have read further down the comments to understand why you are sticking up for this guy. The only people that would stick up for this guy are police haters, people who have a hard time not being in charge or who like to bully those around them in an attempt to show their alpha male prominence.
 March 10, 2015 at 7:59pm
Zorro, you are stuck on the “legality” of what he did. No one is saying he did anything “illegal”. We simply think he is an idiot and acted like a moron.
If I purchased a ticket online to go see a movie and went to enter the theater, what happens? The ticket taker asks to see my ticket. Now if I tell the ticket taker that I don’t have to talk to him, what will happen? The theater security will come and request to see the ticket. Why do I have to show the ticket, I know I purchased one? Why are these people harassing me? I can make a big scene about my right to see the movie as I am a legal ticket holder, or I can simply pull out the ticket in my pocket and show it to the ticket taker when asked. This guy opted to keep the ticket in his pocket in hopes of getting the fireworks.
This has nothing to do with him standing up for the 2nd Amendment.
 March 10, 2015 at 7:49pm
Can I ask why an officer pulling over and asking the gentleman if he can talk for a minute is so offensive to people?
Officer: Can I talk to you for a minute?
Officer: I just got a call about a man walking the streets with a gun. I’m just doing my job and making sure everything is OK. Do you have a permit for that?
Officer: Thanks. You headed anywhere in particular?
Man: No, just out for a walk.
Officer: OK. Be safe, it’s slippery out here.
Man: Thank you officer.
That’s how it would likely have gone if the man was not seeking attention from a viral video.
 March 10, 2015 at 7:43pm
Zorro, you are fooling yourself if you do not think the families of the dead children and the community would not accuse the police department of not doing their job to protect the city. Sorry it took me so long to respond, but I finally got my chin up off the floor after reading your answer to that question.
 March 10, 2015 at 7:40pm
Zorro, are you watching the same video I am. The officers did not harass this guy. He did the harassing.
-The initial officer pulls up and asks “can I talk to you for a minute”. Is that harassment?
-You notice that it is not for another block or so that other officers start to show up. Is this harassment?
-Do the officers have a right to assume a man carrying a gun toward a school and does not want to talk is possibly up to no good? Is that train of thought harassment?
-After initially blocking traffic for safety reasons, you notice that the officers end up pulling back and finding places to park and monitor. Is this harassment?
-After the initial request to talk for a minute, the officers never engaged this guy. Is that harassment?
I fail to see the harassment in this video and this is the guys video, not one edited by the police.
As a father, I would hope the officers in my city would do the exact same thing if my kid was in that school. No ones rights were taken away. No one was harassed, unless you count the stereotype tirade the guy went on about accusing cops of being killers across the nation.
Just as this guy has the right to open carry, the officers have the right to make sure the city is safe. These two things are not mutually exclusive.
 March 10, 2015 at 7:28pm
Zorro, When you ask “what did he do wrong?” You are probably wanting the word “wrong” to mean “illegal”. If so, the guy did nothing illegal. I give you that. By the same reasoning, the officers also did nothing “illegal”.
Now if by “wrong” you mean “dumb or stupid”, you have a whole video of things he did “wrong” as he tried to make a statement about the 2nd Amendment. I’ll list some of them:
1- Didn’t take a minute to talk to the 1st officer that asked if he could talk to him.
2- Approached the officer on the school grounds and initiated a confrontation.
3- Displayed a “holier than thou” attitude as he told the officers that they actually work for him as he pays their salary.
4- Incorrectly states his rights to enter school property anytime he wants, simply because it is “public” property.
5- Acts as if the officers are trying to lock him out of the police station, because they don’t want to deal with him. (He was the one that suggested they talk at the station, not the officers).
6- Act as if the officers had no right to be following him or monitoring his movements.
7- Did I mention his arrogant attitude?
8- Accused the officers of shooting people all across the nation.
9- Continued to argue with officers that were simply monitoring the situation and appeared to have no desire to engage in his banter. (until the Sargent rightfully called him out on his little charade to get attention).
10- Do you really need me to go on?