dave ridley harassed for open carry

[penguins4me]

Interestingly, the Manchester officer believed that this was some sort of protest that everyone had gathered for prior to Dave being stopped as he told them the rules of the use of the sidewalk for protest - no ore than three across the sidewalk, have to keep moving, etc.

Freedom of assembly?  Nah!

On a sidewalk you have to continue to move otherwise you are infringing on the rights of other individuals to use of the common right of way that is contained within the sidewalk.

As noted on the video, a tremendous number of other folks had their 'right of way' rights infringed upon by the demonstration/protest/informational gathering performed by Mr. Ridley and friends. :O~

[Dave Ridley]

I don't agree with the name calling going on here against cops.   They didn't try to humiliate me, and we shouldn't try to humiliate them.

[EthanAllen]

Interestingly, the Manchester officer believed that this was some sort of protest that everyone had gathered for prior to Dave being stopped as he told them the rules of the use of the sidewalk for protest - no ore than three across the sidewalk, have to keep moving, etc.

Freedom of assembly?  Nah!

On a sidewalk you have to continue to move otherwise you are infringing on the rights of other individuals to use of the common right of way that is contained within the sidewalk.

That is one of the most ridiculous things you've ever said, bill. Who decides that you have to keep moving in order to let someone use the right of way. I am fully capable of standing in one location for hours on end ... and then, if someone shows up and I am in their way, I am capable of politely moving to the side to let them pass.  How can  you be guilty of obstructing someone's ability to use the common right of way on the sidewalk when THERE IS NOBODY ELSE TRYING TO GET THROUGH!

Ridiculous or not, I believe it's an accurate statement of the law—it's why you always see protesters, especially union picketers, walking around in circles. Laws like this are only carted out, of course, selectively: You'd never see a cop try to arrest someone for stopping to light a cigarette, or have a conversation with a passer-by, but the law is there, and it's very useful to arbitrarily enforce when trying to stop things like protests.

The Manchester police officer who arrived late and diffused the situation by setting the DMV state police officer straight wrongly assumed that the folks standing around were protesters and told them they had to keep moving if they were protesting.

If Caleb were standing on the sidewalk carrying a protest sign, I believe he would still be required to keep moving even though there was no one else on the sidewalk. But hey, what do I know - why don't you try it?

[Kat Kanning]

What was wrong is them stopping Dave in the first place.

After this,  nothing they did could be described as responsible. They were reacting to a situation they created.

The state police stopped him - the Manchester police were likely called as support.....so "they" were wrong to me would mean that the state police officer was wrong....the Manchester cops were just doing their job after being dispatched to do so.

Yay, another government apologist.

[Tom Sawyer]

I was over at the http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1877338/posts thread that Dada posted.

Seems to have made a splash... lots of conversation.

However, just as counter point to this 'the cops are just doing their jobs' vs. 'making fun of them'. I notice a scary kind of "logic" that commonly runs in the "law and order" conservative circles...

Here is an extreme version

...Stripe shirt guy is a true liability. One day, he will do like the Libs, which is create an incident to whine about, in order to prove his point. That idiot will get somebody killed one day.

The arm waving in front of the one cop proved it. I would have loved to see the cop grab his arm, twist it behind his back, and snap it at the elbow...

I don't think making fun of the cops is even in the same league as hoping to do someone physical harm. When my wife and I watched the little arm wave we laughted... when the "law and order" crowd watches they become enraged. We are using comic relief to release years of tension from being afraid of these "friendly" public servants.

A "friendly" question the officier asks you at the pullover... "You don't have any drugs, weapons, or large sums of currency in your vehicle do you..." "Well then you wouldn't mind if I search the vehicle then?" The next thing they bring in two more cruisers and a K-9 unit and ransack your vehicle. Or the time one of DC's finest menaced and came close to perhaps raping my wife as she waited outside the studio I worked at 2 am and the only thing that stopped him was me coming to the window to look outside.

It's not a "friendly" situation dealing with polite sounding authorities because of the lopsided balance of power.

[Russell Kanning]

It is amazing that someone would think that I was the problem and that I should be hurt.

The cops were saying that we were having a normal conversation .... I wanted to point out that this "friendly" interaction was very unnatural, onesided, and uncomfortable.

Many of our friends were afraid to step too close to the cops .... and it wasn't because they didn't wish to talk to Dave.

[Kat Kanning]

Stills from Roger

[Russell Kanning]

as expected .... this is the gestapo ... or homeland security for nh. It seemed likely that a homeland security funded employee would pull over and hassle Dave that way.

http://www.nh.gov/safety/index.html

The multi-faceted mission of the Department of Safety encompasses protection of the lives and safety and preservation of the quality of life of New Hampshire citizens and visitors to our state on the highways, on the waterways, and in their homes and businesses. We enforce motor vehicle and highway safety laws, criminal laws, commercial vehicle regulations, fire safety, building and equipment safety laws and regulations, and boating safety laws and rules. We also provide enhanced 911 emergency communications statewide, and are responsible for homeland safety and emergency management activities.

[Russell Kanning]

State Trooper Copponi?

the more I look at the video ... the more it made sense how I interacted with the cops. They said they were having a conversation ... and I pointed out that this was not a normal way for people to interact... then he shut down and tried to ignore me.

Manchester cop J. Kelly?

looks like more homeland security activity at its finest

[Rochelle]

"Dave Ridley Involved in an Amicable Conversation With Responsible, Friendly Peace Officers Who are Just Doing Their Job and Protecting the Safety of their Beautiful City"

I'm sorry, but I object to Manchester being called "beautiful." That is just plain WRONG.

[dalebert]

I'm sorry, but I object to Manchester being called "beautiful." That is just plain WRONG.

Hey now! Beauty is only skin-deep... but ugly goes all the way to the bone.

[Russell Kanning]

Dave could have saved himself a lot of time if he already had that realID chip implanted.


nice summary
http://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/bem/HomelandSecurity/index.html

[Lloyd Danforth]

I'm sorry, but I object to Manchester being called "beautiful." That is just plain WRONG.

Hey now! Beauty is only skin-deep... but ugly goes all the way to the bone.

all the way down to the infrastructure

[Russell Kanning]

I have emailed the nh homeland security guys and the MPD to get their comments.

Looks like the MPD has a Lt. Kelly there. I couldn't find the NHDS guy. I might not have the right department either. We shall soon see.

[lildog]

As Tammy posted, RSA 159, but you won't find anything saying that it's legal to carry openly. The law says you have to have a license to carry concealed, and is silent on open carry. Since it's not prohibited, it's legal.

Thanks Tammy and KB.



So if the cops (or Department of Safety) stop you for any reason, you must identify yourself (name and place of residence)?  Or if they stop you for breaking a law you must identify yourself?  If you're in the grocery store buying toilet paper and a uniformed officer comes up to you, are you required by law to give him your name?

If Dave had committed no crime (it appears he hasn't) then he shouldn't even have to identify himself, should he?

Back up one step even further... I'm not as much troubled that they asked for ID after stopping him as much as the fact that they stopped him without any true reason for doing so.  There was no search being conducted in the area that I'm aware of for someone fitting his description, he was not acting suspiciously...  There was NO reason for them to stop in to begin with.  THAT is the real troubling issue here.  Not what happened after they stopped him.