Legal Open Carry Threatened by Cop

[westside01]

I keep reading about the term "Constructive Possession," why doesn't this apply to someone openly carrying an unloaded handgun on his hip with a loaded magazine or two on a seperate pouch? I'd hate to open carry and end up being part of some new case law.

[LowKey]

I keep reading about the term "Constructive Possession," why doesn't this apply to someone openly carrying an unloaded handgun on his hip with a loaded magazine or two on a seperate pouch? I'd hate to open carry and end up being part of some new case law.

Constructive possession regards being in possession (without the proper tax stamp) of parts that if/when assembled would create a NFA firearms.

[Kevin108]

Sorry, just not buying it. I've never met anyone that just walks around recording themselves all the time just in case they get harassed by the cops. I understand the knee jerk reaction to side with the guy lawfully carrying and being harassed by the cops but as my dad said. If you go looking fir trouble, chances are you're gonna find it.

Spend some time reading on OpenCarry.org Recording is common practice.

[SeerSavant]

Sorry, just not buying it. I've never met anyone that just walks around recording themselves all the time just in case they get harassed by the cops. I understand the knee jerk reaction to side with the guy lawfully carrying and being harassed by the cops but as my dad said. If you go looking fir trouble, chances are you're gonna find it.

Spend some time reading on OpenCarry.org Recording is common practice.

It won't take but a few threads on how quickly you can find yourself in a world of trouble for simply carrying a firearm... If your gonna open carry, you have to protect yourself in more ways than just self defense....
Norfolk PD has gotten spanked for going after this one guy who had done nothing except wear a gun in "their" city... I remember a thread about him an another guy who were targeted after they complained...
I think one of them now wears a hat that says "black man with a gun" because it's why he's usually harassed...

Norfolk PD doesn't have the greatest track record when it comes to open carry...

Carrying a recorder isn't just common practice for posting on youtube and whatnot, it's the only thing that keeps some of them out of jail...
Aside from those who use recording devices to dig up "dirt"... It really does level the playing field when your being told by a cop that you are breaking the law when you clearly aren't... It allows you to pursue a line that ends up with the local pd better educated, (hell until something like this happens, most PD dept's simply don't have time to do this) and hopefully the public as well.

I don't like the idea of carrying for a political statement, I carry for self defense, but I can't deny that these guys have really changed the area around here so that open carry is pretty much accepted as fairly normal nowadays, and I think they deserve credit for that...

Boy I rambled a bit... But the Open Carry guys do deserve a lot of credit...

[Jeriah]

My thoughts on this in brief:

People who can lawfully open carry, and choose to do so, should expect ill-informed members of the public to see their firearm, and because it is not something they often see, freak out due to fear of the unknown, and call the cops.

They should then expect the cops to respond to the call, because they have to.

They should then be prepared to explain that they are exercising their lawful right to open carry, that it is NOT a political protest, and whatever yadda yadda is legally smart in their area.

And then, that they should CONTINUE to open carry, every day, until the end of fucking time, by which point hopefully their local populace will have unfucked themselves, and realized that a dude open carrying isn't a problem that they need to call the cops about. OR, that is becomes so common that the cops hear a "dude is open carrying" call like "Dude is wearing pants in public, repeat, DUDE IS WEARING PANTS."

That is to say, open carry only scares people because it's rare.

Do you think that Israelis call the cops when someone's open carrying? No, no they do not. Because it's commonplace there (in military service, admittedly). Make it common here, and we'll stop being hassled. But we have to put up with being hassled a bunch before that happens.

And then, on that glorious day, some cuntfart can't shoot up an IHOP, because half the people in there are open carrying sidearms, and dude would be put down the second he brandished.

/soapbox

[SeerSavant]

My thoughts on this in brief:

People who can lawfully open carry, and choose to do so, should expect ill-informed members of the public to see their firearm, and because it is not something they often see, freak out due to fear of the unknown, and call the cops.

They should then expect the cops to respond to the call, because they have to.

They should then be prepared to explain that they are exercising their lawful right to open carry, that it is NOT a political protest, and whatever yadda yadda is legally smart in their area.

And then, that they should CONTINUE to open carry, every day, until the end of fucking time, by which point hopefully their local populace will have unfucked themselves, and realized that a dude open carrying isn't a problem that they need to call the cops about. OR, that is becomes so common that the cops hear a "dude is open carrying" call like "Dude is wearing pants in public, repeat, DUDE IS WEARING PANTS."

That is to say, open carry only scares people because it's rare.

Do you think that Israelis call the cops when someone's open carrying? No, no they do not. Because it's commonplace there (in military service, admittedly). Make it common here, and we'll stop being hassled. But we have to put up with being hassled a bunch before that happens.

And then, on that glorious day, some cuntfart can't shoot up an IHOP, because half the people in there are open carrying sidearms, and dude would be put down the second he brandished.

/soapbox

F U C K I N G..... A M E N

[Kevin108]

Sorry, just not buying it. I've never met anyone that just walks around recording themselves all the time just in case they get harassed by the cops. I understand the knee jerk reaction to side with the guy lawfully carrying and being harassed by the cops but as my dad said. If you go looking fir trouble, chances are you're gonna find it.

Spend some time reading on OpenCarry.org Recording is common practice.

It won't take but a few threads on how quickly you can find yourself in a world of trouble for simply carrying a firearm... If your gonna open carry, you have to protect yourself in more ways than just self defense....
Norfolk PD has gotten spanked for going after this one guy who had done nothing except wear a gun in "their" city... I remember a thread about him an another guy who were targeted after they complained...
I think one of them now wears a hat that says "black man with a gun" because it's why he's usually harassed...

Norfolk PD doesn't have the greatest track record when it comes to open carry...

Carrying a recorder isn't just common practice for posting on youtube and whatnot, it's the only thing that keeps some of them out of jail...
Aside from those who use recording devices to dig up "dirt"... It really does level the playing field when your being told by a cop that you are breaking the law when you clearly aren't... It allows you to pursue a line that ends up with the local pd better educated, (hell until something like this happens, most PD dept's simply don't have time to do this) and hopefully the public as well.

I don't like the idea of carrying for a political statement, I carry for self defense, but I can't deny that these guys have really changed the area around here so that open carry is pretty much accepted as fairly normal nowadays, and I think they deserve credit for that...

Boy I rambled a bit... But the Open Carry guys do deserve a lot of credit...

You're talking about Chet Szymecki and Dan Moore, or maybe more recently Skidmark, whose real name I can't recall off the top of my head.

I've been to Norfolk City Council meetings multiple times concerning the first two with the Virginia Citizens Defense League and the OpenCarry.org contingent. (For the most part, the two groups are the same.) The last time we went, I counted 110 people wearing the VCDL's bright orange GUNS SAVE LIVES stickers.

Dan and Chet have both won some reasonable settlements from Norfolk. The stubborn city council proved over and over that their attention could only be gained by hitting the city in the coffers.

Norfolk management and police are now very well aware of the law concerning open carry and individuals minding their own business while carrying openly.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

[strm_trpr]

I come from this as an LEO. I have never been on the threatened by a cop side because I have a badge, and I have also never been on the side of having to confront somebody who is open carrying. If I did and it was legal I would simply run a quick check to make sure he is not a felon (there for in violation of the federal firearms control act) If his check came back clear I would send him on his way. I feel like i could appropriately explain the situation to the individual and still figure out what he is up to..


The practical upshot of this is know your local rules about open carry and also know that doing so will probably attract attention.

[squinty]

I come from this as an LEO. I have never been on the threatened by a cop side because I have a badge, and I have also never been on the side of having to confront somebody who is open carrying. If I did and it was legal I would simply run a quick check to make sure he is not a felon (there for in violation of the federal firearms control act) If his check came back clear I would send him on his way. I feel like i could appropriately explain the situation to the individual and still figure out what he is up to..


The practical upshot of this is know your local rules about open carry and also know that doing so will probably attract attention.

That ^ sounds very prudent and responsible, and as a carrier I wouldn't have a problem with it - esp. in places like Philly where OC is only allowed by permit.

But it is inconsistent with other activities. Most police don't randomly pull drivers over to check licenses or randomly give breathalyzers, nor do they randomly pat down pedestrians or demand their IDs to check for warrants or felony records, absent some probable cause for investigation. (Speeding, etc.) Yet any driver might be unlicensed, any pedestrian might have outstanding warrants, just as any OCer might be illegally in possession of a gun (though that's especially unlikely in the case of open carry. Certainly an armed felon would want to conceal his weapon?)

So, is legal open carry in and of itself still unusual enough to be considered probable cause, absent any other suspicious behavior? Or are guns so uniquely dangerous that fourth amendment protections don't apply to the gun carrier? I don't think so. Only the stink raised by gun shy members of the public separates legal OC from driving down the street or walking down the sidewalk.

[LowKey]

I come from this as an LEO. I have never been on the threatened by a cop side because I have a badge, and I have also never been on the side of having to confront somebody who is open carrying. If I did and it was legal I would simply run a quick check to make sure he is not a felon (there for in violation of the federal firearms control act) If his check came back clear I would send him on his way. I feel like i could appropriately explain the situation to the individual and still figure out what he is up to..


The practical upshot of this is know your local rules about open carry and also know that doing so will probably attract attention.

That ^ sounds very prudent and responsible, and as a carrier I wouldn't have a problem with it - esp. in places like Philly where OC is only allowed by permit.

<snip>

So, is legal open carry in and of itself still unusual enough to be considered probable cause, absent any other suspicious behavior? Or are guns so uniquely dangerous that fourth amendment protections don't apply to the gun carrier? I don't think so. Only the stink raised by gun shy members of the public separates legal OC from driving down the street or walking down the sidewalk.

The phrase "use it or loose it" comes to mind.

We, as in we the firearms owning members of the general public, have not "used it" for so long that we've almost effectively lost it.
Just like most other things that the "use it or loose it" phrase apply to the only way to get "it" back is to start using it again, much like you start an exercise routine to regain physical conditioning. In this case you need to regain the mental conditioning of the general public and the only way thats going to happen is by OCing in a very calm, polite, responsible fashion until the lions share of people in your city/town/county see OC or a firearm as a normal daily practice that doesn't warrant any more attention that is normally given to noticing what style of clothing someone is wearing.
Just like starting an exercise routine, the hard part is probably going to be getting started and sticking with it in spite of the discomfort and inconvenience.

There are lots of very good arguments against OCing on a tactical basis. IMHO, OCing isn't about tactics. It's about taking a stand in defense of an individual right through a combination of desensitizing LE and members of the general public to the sight of firearms peacefully, lawfully, and responsibly carried by a "regular Joe/Jane" while they go about their mundane routines.
People seem to want to focus on getting the LEO's in an area on board with the idea, and while that isn't bad I think it misses the most important group to get on your side.....the rest of the local population.

If the majority of the local population is accepting of OC, it's less likely that one of them will make the dreaded "man with a gun" call. If a large number of people in your area actively OC on a regular basis them not only with the general public be desensitized to the sight of a firearm being OC'ed, so will local LE.


If OC is legal in your area, and you are OCing lawfully (and having intelligently placed legal council on retainer) then don't worry about LE. Expect that some will be pricks, some will be skeptical. Comply with their instructions, and make the attempt to inform them of the legality of your actions. If you aren't released on the spot after a reasonable period (now that the officer has been able to verify that your actions are legal), or if the officer releases you but threatens to harass you if you are seen OCing again, ect then turn it over to your attorney. Make it cost the hiring authority (and the individual officer in question) a fortune. That is what they deserve if they knowingly violate or abuse the law.




Sorry for the rambling.

[SeerSavant]

I come from this as an LEO. I have never been on the threatened by a cop side because I have a badge, and I have also never been on the side of having to confront somebody who is open carrying. If I did and it was legal I would simply run a quick check to make sure he is not a felon (there for in violation of the federal firearms control act) If his check came back clear I would send him on his way. I feel like i could appropriately explain the situation to the individual and still figure out what he is up to..


The practical upshot of this is know your local rules about open carry and also know that doing so will probably attract attention.

That ^ sounds very prudent and responsible, and as a carrier I wouldn't have a problem with it - esp. in places like Philly where OC is only allowed by permit.

But it is inconsistent with other activities. Most police don't randomly pull drivers over to check licenses or randomly give breathalyzers, nor do they randomly pat down pedestrians or demand their IDs to check for warrants or felony records, absent some probable cause for investigation. (Speeding, etc.) Yet any driver might be unlicensed, any pedestrian might have outstanding warrants, just as any OCer might be illegally in possession of a gun (though that's especially unlikely in the case of open carry. Certainly an armed felon would want to conceal his weapon?)

So, is legal open carry in and of itself still unusual enough to be considered probable cause, absent any other suspicious behavior? Or are guns so uniquely dangerous that fourth amendment protections don't apply to the gun carrier? I don't think so. Only the stink raised by gun shy members of the public separates legal OC from driving down the street or walking down the sidewalk.

In a word... NO. It's been gone over time and again, and never has the act of carrying a firearm been considered grounds for a stop that I'm aware of...

If the LEO doesn't have reasonable suspicion of a crime (aside from simply carrying a gun..) then the stop has no merit, and is nothing more than a fishing expedtion..
In certain areas, where a permit is required for open carry, or where certain conditions apply (california, where the gun cannot be loaded...) then checks under the guise of safety might be warranted. But that's a slippery slope.
Without reasonable suspicion then the stop is voluntary, the person carrying can ask to leave or if their being detained... Any answer but no should be followed by "have a nice day." and walking.
If your detained, then the officer has a lot to explain, but probably won't. And you do not have to say a thing...

By no means to I recommend your be a jerk, impolite or a I know ma riiights kind of douchebag.. But be very wary...

And yeah, carry a digital recorder...

If it's a reply to "man with a gun" then the officer should simply say so, and the person being detained should for his part; have patience and be quiet, allowing the officer to do his job and be done with it...

If no call has been made and the officer pulls a terry stop, then simply endure it, be polite, etc... The officer may not know that this is a violation, or that he had no grounds..

We cannot look at this as an us versus them deal on either side of the fence, but we should also be smart and patient... LEOs should be given the benefit of a doubt, you simply cannot assume they know every law there is... But don't try and "Teach" them the law, and be very careful what you say...

As a LEO running a quick check without probable cause is a dangerous habit, depending on where you work... Being polite and educating yourself on the law is paramount.
Also, a lot of departments have SOPs that may or may not be in concert with current laws...


In the end, behave yourselves... No matter which end of the stop you are on..


My chief bitch would be that being stopped without a reasonable suspicion is a violation of an individuals rights, and is a waste of everyone's time. In VA, being a concealed carry permit holder means that I'm required to show a valid id and my permit on demand, open carry or concealed... But before that, I had not requirement other than to prove who I was... I'm okay with it, and while some places have not requirement to prove who you are, refusing is simply well, suspicious.
But was there reasonable suspicion to begin with or is it a fishing trip?

However, don't expect LEOs to be "pricks", I personally expect them to be polite and respectful to me as I would absolutely be to them. When they don't behave like that, then shut up and bear it, In other words, I don't comply, but I won't resist... Let a lawyer figure it out instead of digging a hole.
Police (from my albeit limited experience) tend to treat you with respect, based a great deal on how your behave.

Be nice and polite, and they will most often return the favor...

[phractal]

I've had similar situations to the OP happen to me on occasion. I understand that weapons make cops jumpy and I don't have a problem with that. Comes with the territory. I get a little worried when they point guns at me, but I figure If anyone was gonna do it, I'd rather it be someone with training.

I comply with their demands. If I have a problem with the treatment, I take it up later in court.

I did have a cop try to confiscate the SOG Seal Pup that was hanging off the strap of my bag once. I asked him where he was going with it and why, and he told me it was a concealed weapon. I said, "No. It's visible on the outside of my bag. put it back or give me your badge #." He complied.

[ODA 226]

You're talking about Chet Szymecki and Dan Moore, or maybe more recently Skidmark, whose real name I can't recall off the top of my head.

His real name is Paul.

[ODA 226]

In VA, being a concealed carry permit holder means that I'm required to show a valid id and my permit on demand, open carry or concealed... But before that, I had not requirement other than to prove who I was...

Seer,
If you are a CHP holder in Virginia, you are only required to show valid ID if you are carrying concealed. If you are OC, no ID is required.

If OC, there is no requirement to "prove" who you are either. Giving your name and address will suffice if detained.

Although it's not required to notify an officer that you are armed in Virginia, I will, out of professional courtesy (I am a former Va. Deputy Sheriff) let the officer know I'm armed and have a CHP.

226

[squinty]

In various contexts other than OC encounters, I have had local PD ask me if my guns are "registered" or if I have the "paperwork" for them.

When my 10/22 was recovered, the guy who tried to pawn it told the property crimes detective that when he bought the rifle, he though it was a legit transaction because the seller "showed him the paperwork." The detective then asked me if the rifle had been stored with any sort of relevant paperwork, that might have been stolen along with it. The only thing I could think of was the receiot, which was still in my possession. To get the gun returned to me, I had to contact the local Victim's Advocate (works for the DA) to file a petition for the rifle's return. I was asked if the gun was properly registered, or if it was "one of the kind that needed to be registered." Did they mean NFA? They couldn't clarify what they meant.

An officer responding to my call about a burglary noticed my handgun - I'd cleared it and locked the slide open, and put it on the bookshelf before opening the door for him - said two things to me about the handgun. "OK just don't touch it while I'm here, please" and "you've got the proper paperwork for that right?"

In that context, I guess he was asking if I was a prohibited person, or just more generally if it was ok for me to have the gun. I've always been stymied by such questions because while I can usually figure out what the questioner means, they always grope for the right vocabulary and come up wit "registration" or "Paperwork." My state has no firearms registry whatsoever, nor does it require any sort of licensure or "paperwork" to simply possess a gun. There is a purchase permit required for handguns if you don't have a concealed carry license, but the seller keeps these (and files them with the state somewhere, I guess) though I guess it would be smart for the buyer .to keep a photocopy.

No such confusion regarding CCW permits they're all pretty well versed about CCW. The local BLET programs all require participants to purchase a handgun and qualify with it at some point in their training, unless I'm mistaken, so leos from my state at least should all have had the experience of buying at least one gun as private citizens.

These have all been pleasant and drama free interactions but I could well imagine the stuttering difficulty I'd have explaining to an angry or apprehensive leo that the gun I was OCing didn't need to be - in fact, couldn't be - "registered."

[SeerSavant]

ODA 226 is correct, there is no reason ID is required for Open Carry, but I tend to think more as a concealed carry guy in my responses, because I rarely open carry unless it's too damned hot, or the weather changes rapidly, and I take of a layer so that I can keep comfy.

In the end, I try and be as respectful as possible to an officer during any type of stop. As far as notifying the officer that I'm carrying, that's just a matter of courtesy in my mind, and frankly if the officer sees me printing, I don't want him to over react.
In my rare interactions with LEOs and with people in general, I try and stay on my best behavior, simply because as a gun owner and carrier, I reflect gun owners in general.
It only takes one douchebag asshole to make us all look like shit.


Squinty, I've heard a lot of references to police asking for "registration" or "paperwork"... I wonder what the hell is being taught to LEOs that that kind of terminology gets put in.

I also have a LOT of people asking (as my work you see more than a few people open carrying from time to time) probably because they are down here for vacation from up north or in areas where guns are something you saw on television, and not in real life
The common response is, "don't you need a permit for that?"
No.
"You mean you can just carry a gun... in the open... with no permit?"
Welcome to the south.

[ODA 226]

Seer,
Are you a VCDL member by any chance?
226

[SeerSavant]

Nope, I barely have enough time to visit this site, but I do appreciate what they do...

[ODA 226]

BTW and for the record, Virginia Common Law ONLY REQUIRES one to identify oneself to a POLICE OFFICER during the hours of darkness.

There is no requirement to identify yourself during daylight, but if you do, you CANNOT lie about your true identity.

[Czechnology]

My thoughts on this in brief:

People who can lawfully open carry, and choose to do so, should expect ill-informed members of the public to see their firearm, and because it is not something they often see, freak out due to fear of the unknown, and call the cops.

They should then expect the cops to respond to the call, because they have to.

They should then be prepared to explain that they are exercising their lawful right to open carry, that it is NOT a political protest, and whatever yadda yadda is legally smart in their area.

And then, that they should CONTINUE to open carry, every day, until the end of fucking time, by which point hopefully their local populace will have unfucked themselves, and realized that a dude open carrying isn't a problem that they need to call the cops about. OR, that is becomes so common that the cops hear a "dude is open carrying" call like "Dude is wearing pants in public, repeat, DUDE IS WEARING PANTS."

That is to say, open carry only scares people because it's rare.

Do you think that Israelis call the cops when someone's open carrying? No, no they do not. Because it's commonplace there (in military service, admittedly). Make it common here, and we'll stop being hassled. But we have to put up with being hassled a bunch before that happens.

And then, on that glorious day, some cuntfart can't shoot up an IHOP, because half the people in there are open carrying sidearms, and dude would be put down the second he brandished.

/soapbox

F U C K I N G..... A M E N

If a Kilt-wearing, ginger Art Professor can figure this out, what's everyone else's excuse?

BTW and for the record, Virginia Common Law ONLY REQUIRES one to identify oneself to a POLICE OFFICER during the hours of darkness.

There is no requirement to identify yourself during daylight, but if you do, you CANNOT lie about your true identity.

Everyone who lives in the Commonwealth should join VCDL regardless of political orientation. They take great care to avoid pandering to either side of the aisle and provide excellent information. If the NRA was run by ZS, it would be the VCDL. It was one of the biggest things I regretted losing when I moved away from VA.

[ODA 226]

My thoughts on this in brief:

People who can lawfully open carry, and choose to do so, should expect ill-informed members of the public to see their firearm, and because it is not something they often see, freak out due to fear of the unknown, and call the cops.

They should then expect the cops to respond to the call, because they have to.

Police are NOT required to respond to a call that does not involve an illegal act.
They should then be prepared to explain that they are exercising their lawful right to open carry, that it is NOT a political protest, and whatever yadda yadda is legally smart in their area.

You are NOT required to "explain" yourself to ANYONE if you are legally going about your business.

And then, that they should CONTINUE to open carry, every day, until the end of fucking time, by which point hopefully their local populace will have unfucked themselves, and realized that a dude open carrying isn't a problem that they need to call the cops about. OR, that is becomes so common that the cops hear a "dude is open carrying" call like "Dude is wearing pants in public, repeat, DUDE IS WEARING PANTS."

That is EXACTLY what we do on OCDO. I OC on a regular basis even though I have a CHP.

That is to say, open carry only scares people because it's rare.

It's not rare at all in Virginia!

Do you think that Israelis call the cops when someone's open carrying? No, no they do not. Because it's commonplace there (in military service, admittedly). Make it common here, and we'll stop being hassled.

It is already common in Virginia due to the efforts of the VCDL and OCDO.

But we have to put up with being hassled a bunch before that happens.

NOPE! We DON'T have to put up with being hassled. KNOW YOUR RIGHTS. STAND YOUR GROUND. BECOME ACTIVE LOCALLY!

And then, on that glorious day, some cuntfart can't shoot up an IHOP, because half the people in there are open carrying sidearms, and dude would be put down the second he brandished.

Richmond OCDO has a breakfast every Saturday morning at a Richmond IHOP sometimes with over 30 legally armed citizens. It's a sight to see!
/soapbox

[ODA 226]

The Philly and Oceanside police viloated these citizens rights just by approaching them without just cause. Since open carrry is legal in these cities, there's no reason to stop anyone who's carrying openly. If the LEO's presummed that these citizens are innocent, then there's no need to approach these citizens unless they're engageed in an unlawful act.

The law I was shown reads, (and you would have read it to if you read the previous posts) so if its the law what right was "viloated" ?

4. AN OFFICER ENCOUNTERING A PERSON CARRYING A FIREARM OPENLY IN PHILADELPHIA SHOULD FOR THE SAFETY OF PUBLIC INVESTIGATE AS A POSSIBLE VUFA VIOLATION.
A. SINCE A SEPARATE LICENSE IS REQUIRED IN PHILADELPHIA AND IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY OFFICER TO KNOW WHO DOES AND DOES NOT HAVE A VALID CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE, IT IS ENTIRELY REASONABLE FOR OFFICERS TO TEMPORARILY DETAIN AND INVESTIGATE ANY INDIVIDUAL CARRYING A FIREARM EXPOSED TO DETERMINE IF THE PERSON IS OPERATING WITH THE LAW.

This is a police "DIRECTIVE" to department officers and IS NOT A LAW.

[DannusMaximus]

My thoughts on this in brief:

People who can lawfully open carry, and choose to do so, should expect ill-informed members of the public to see their firearm, and because it is not something they often see, freak out due to fear of the unknown, and call the cops.

They should then expect the cops to respond to the call, because they have to.

Police are NOT required to respond to a call that does not involve an illegal act.

ODA, I believe you've mentioned before that you're prior LE (might be wrong on that, but I seem to remember a post saying that). If so, you know you're oversimpifying this. If a police officer simply decides to not respond to a 911 call because it doesn't sound to them like anything illegal is happening, they're in deep shit.

Dispatch: "Squad 142, respond to a report of a man with a gun at the local 711. Caller advises a man with a handgun just walked into the store, no other details are available."

Officer: "Central, he's probably not doing anything illegal, just exercising his right ot open carry. Show me available, no service."

Sound like a conversation you want your local LE officers to be having? The point is the officer doesn't KNOW the person isn't doing anything illegal until he/she goes to check it out. It's perfectly reasonable for an officer to check out a 'man with a gun' call to make sure nothing untoward is happening, just like my job (FD) would require me to check out a report of a man slumped over in a park covered in blood. Sure, the guy might just be sleeping, and decided to cover himself with fake stage blood prior to taking his nap. But I would be pretty damn negligent if I just decided on my own to not check out a report like this because it didn't seem like a real emergency.

I doubt if you were given the option of not performing SF missions because you decided personally that particular mission wasn't necessary or essential. I imagine people with more shit on their collar were the guys making those decisions. Same with street level patrol officers.

[ODA 226]

Dan,
It is the responsibility of the DISPATCHER to determine if a crime is currently being committed and if there is a JUSTIFIABLE CAUSE to send a Deputy to the caller's location. If a crime is NOT in progress, the dispatcher has the RESPONSIBILITY NOT to send a Deputy to that call.

Example (In a life long ago and far away) in a galaxy called Williamsburg, I heard the following call:

Dispatch: "911, what's your emergency?"
Woman from New Jersey: " I'd like to report a man with a gun on Duke of Gloucester Street."
Dispatch: "Thank you Ma'am. What is the man doing? Is he threatening anyone?"
Woman from New Jersey: "No."
Dispatch: "What is he doing Ma'am?"
Woman from New Jersey: "He's sitting at XXXX- Cafe' reading the newspaper."
Dispatch: "Ma'am, is he doing anything else?"
Woman from New Jersey: " Yes! He's drinking a cup of coffee!"
Dispatch: "Ma'am, the open carry of firearms is legal in the Commonwealth of Virginia and you could be subject to arrest for the inappropriate use of 911. Do you understand this Ma'am?"
Woman from New Jersey: "Well, uh, not really, but ok."
Dispatch: "Thank you for your concern Ma'am and have a pleasant stay in our beautiful city."

End of call.