Former Moderator

[longwatch]

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

There is a key difference between nitrovic and S357, however.

S357 will not narc out your website to the FBI, as nitrovic says he did.

Nor will you ever have to worry about having to meet S357 in a traffic stop and be subject to his objectionable personality under color of law.

Do we really know anybody? I mean we've met in person but as stories about cultivated government agent provocateurs arise one could end up with an unplanned visit from the G for talking to loosely.

ETA: posted while wearing a tinfoil hat in my undisclosed location.

 

[Tomahawk]

imported post

AK_Amerine wrote:

Tomahawk wrote:

There is a key difference between nitrovic and S357, however.

S357 will not narc out your website to the FBI, as nitrovic says he did.

Nor will you ever have to worry about having to meet S357 in a traffic stop and be subject to his objectionable personality under color of law.

Do we really know anybody? I mean we've met in person but as stories about cultivated government agent provocateurs arise one could end up with an unplanned visit from the G for talking to loosely.

ETA: posted while wearing a tinfoil hat in my undisclosed location.

This is true.

And pretty sad that we have to accept visits from the thought police as a real possibility.

But, hey, if you're not doing anything wrong, what are you worried about?

 

[longwatch]

imported post

A simple conversation about MGs could be twisted into conspiracy to manufacture them. Of course, they really don't want you, just wear this wire...

 

[D_Weezy]

imported post

HankT wrote:

D_Weezy wrote:

I might not agree with what 357 said, but is this necessary?

09-05-2009, 02:05 PM #10 OperatorEX vbmenu_register("postmenu_1969929", true); Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: USA Posts: 352 I'm not going to read the OC thread, but ...

"Might?"

Why not take a position on what S357 said?

What's your considered opinion about that, D_Weezy?

Or do you prefer to not express it?

He had a good point, we do have freedom of speech. The Police on that site should not have started talking about having the Fed's shut down this site. On the other hand, he has some really radical views. Some of the things that those Officers said were just as ignorant to me, as some of the things that he said. Like the thing that I quoted from the Officer about:

"Perhaps Karma will come around and the author of that post will see the front end of a DUI coming thru his window. Defend that"

I believe that was uncalled for. Are they not supposed to be better than that. I am just saying, maybe they should weed their own garden before they start worrying about someone elses. None of this really matters now though, because he has been banned.

 

[HankT]

imported post

D_Weezy wrote:

HankT wrote:

D_Weezy wrote:

I might not agree with what 357 said, but is this necessary?

"Might?"

Why not take a position on what S357 said?

What's your considered opinion about that, D_Weezy?

Or do you prefer to not express it?

He had a good point, we do have freedom of speech. The Police on that site should not have started talking about having the Fed's shut down this site. On the other hand, he has some really radical views. Some of the things that those Officers said were just as ignorant to me, as some of the things that he said. Like the thing that I quoted from the Officer about:

"Perhaps Karma will come around and the author of that post will see the front end of a DUI coming thru his window. Defend that"

I believe that was uncalled for. Are they not supposed to be better than that. I am just saying, maybe they should weed their own garden before they start worrying about someone elses. None of this really matters now though, because he has been banned.

Nah, I meant what smoking 357 said:

WheelGun wrote:

No one has to talk to the police. The pastor was not under arrest. He was not a suspect. A clergyman does not have to talkaboutany counseling he has done, unless the suspect is dangerous.

WHAT THE F#&* IS GOING ON WITH OUR POLICE ?!!??!!??!!??

It's time, people.

Know the three rules:

1. Police are an army whose enemy is the People.

2. Police are the greatest enemy America has ever faced.

3. America would be better off without the police.

When we see a car pulled over, we need to realize that there is a citizen at risk. We need to start defending each other.

It's time we all remembered what open carry is all about, and it ain't protection against burglars.

It's time.

 

[IanB]

imported post

For those of you lurking on this thread from officer.com, I'd like to take this moment to inform you a bit more about "niTROLLvic", why he hasissues with OCDO, and why he now uses officer.com to foster anti open carry sentiment among sworn officers.

1: Nitrovic joined OCDO under the guise of an EXsworn LEO friendly to open carry.

2: Nitrovic played nice for a few weeks on OCDO and then decided to antagonize anyone who disagreed with the absolute authority of a LEO to stop someone minus probable cause. He then accused several forum members who had had a recent uncomfortable run-in with Manassas VA police of being liars, basing his statements on "some friends" familiar with the incident.

3: As you can imagine, this authoritarian concept held by nitrovic caused problems among the membership at OCDO. We want to be left alone as long as we are not breaking any laws. If open carry is legal then cops should not be molesting us on the streets absent PC.

4: Nitrovic subsequently went back and edited his posts or outright deleted the offensive ones after he startedhis @#$%storms.

5: Because of all the problems Nitrovic was causing, a forum moderator googled his username, "nitrovic". I hardly call performing a simple google search "E-Stalking" as nitrovic has described it on officer.com

6: The google search revealed:

a: Nitrovic's real name.

b: Nitrovic's personal email address.

c: The fact that he is a current, not EX LEO. (he likes to lie)

d: Subsequent googling using his personal email name as a search term turned up two interesting facts: on two different forums he is giving directions to known drug buy areas that are within his LEO jusridiction (patrol area) and admitting that he himself has bought drugs at those locations.

7: The forum moderator who did the google searches also saved all the inflammatory posts made by nitrovic here on OCDObeforenitrovicedited/ deleted them. The postsserved no purpose but to foster bad relations between cops and open carriers.

8: Nitrovic has taken it upon himself to post two derogatory comments on two of my Youtube videos degrading those who open carry. Nitrovic talks a good game about not being "anti-open carry" or not being anti "citizens with gun". But his own words show he hates citizen open carry and thinks we are all "wanabe cop security guard cry babies". See http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=27020&forum_id=54 for an example of one of them.

9: Now, nitrovic has taken roost on officer.com, a place where only LEO's are allowed to post and he can say anything he wants and nobody from OCDO will be there to contradict him. How convenient! How many times will nitrovic post a "OCDO is anti-cop" thread on officer.com before you guys figure out his motives?

10: It is my opinion that this is all the result of Nitrovic not liking open carry, being personally close to the Manassas officers who recieved a reprimand for abusive, unprofessional behavior during the Tony's 7 incident in Manassas, and because someone was able to google-fu his personal info with such ease that a 5th grader could do it.

11: So, officer.com lurkers... believe what you will. On one hand you have one officer.com forum member, nitrovic who claims we (OCDO) are all anti-cop. He would like nothing more than to see relations between cops and OC'ers go sour. He'd love to see each and every one of you officers prone an OC'er out on the pavement every time you meet one of us. On the other hand you have OCDO, a group of liberty and freedom minded individuals who just want to be left the eff alone and not detained for law-abiding conduct. This isn't about "baiting" police, it's about being able to conduct your affairs without being molested by cops for legal activity.

12: While your officer.com forum does not welcome "us" to join and comment, if you the officer.com "lurker" desires to join the discussion here we welcome you and do not discriminate.

 

[IanB]

imported post

By the way, if one of you officer.com lurkers wants to repost my comments over on your forum, feel free but I'm not looking to start a flamewar debate between two forums that should be working together instead of talking smack on each other.

 

[Sheriff]

imported post

I still think he's the one who injured his back off duty. Then he reported to work and claimed the gunbelt was causing his problems. Or some foolishness like that.



edit:

Maybe this is why I have the above thought.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=4612723

 

[Sheriff]

imported post

This guy is a trip. In the below YouTube link, in the "remarks" section, he calls the OC members..."This group is a bunch of wannabe cops and fired security guards. They are a HORRIBLE group of people." :lol:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoU7ZpD8OC8

 

[Sheriff]

imported post

nakedshoplifter wrote:

9: Now, nitrovic has taken roost on officer.com, a place where only LEO's are allowed to post and he can say anything he wants and nobody from OCDO will be there to contradict him. How convenient!

Incorrect. Anybody can sign up on officer.com and participate.

You can even pretend to be a cop and post in the "officer only" section. There is no verification process on officer.com , not that it matters of course. I can tell you firsthand the verification processes on other cop forums are easily defeated.

Ya know, speaking of Google, anybody can determine where this guy works just by reading this subject. He shouldn't really post this stuff in public, IMHO!

http://www.city-data.com/forum/northern-virginia/298413-old-bridge-estates-good-bad.html

 

[Carnivore]

imported post

He missed me by a long shot, I'm a 2A supporter and a factory worker..I enjoy conversation with LE, Cattlemen/women,ditch diggers,tree trimmers,hunters and fishermen/women, I'm just the regular joe that always has an opinion be it right or wrong, it's mine and nobody can take it from me..:celebrate

 

[IanB]

imported post

Sheriff wrote:

Incorrect. Anybody can sign up on officer.com and participate.

Thanks, I knew that (based on Huffman having an acct there) but I was trying to play dumb. I don't desire to be "that guy" who registers on the opposing forum just to start a flame war between the two. In fact, the only person who really wants to see this discussion continue is niTROLLvic, who's missionis to drive a wedge between good LEO's and OC'ers.

 

[IanB]

imported post

Sheriff wrote:

Ya know, speaking of Google, anybody can determine where this guy works just by reading this subject. He shouldn't really post this stuff in public, IMHO!

http://www.city-data.com/forum/northern-virginia/298413-old-bridge-estates-good-bad.html

Agreed. You shouldn't post things like that. Or this:

http://www.city-data.com/forum/northern-virginia/185362-gang-issues-discussion.html

http://www.city-data.com/forum/northern-virginia/185362-gang-issues-discussion.html

"I used to buy drugs all the time in Fairfax (along Rt.1 just north or Prince William). Freedom High School and Potomac High School have had large problems with gangs as has Gar-Field."

Or this (post #9):

http://www.marijuana.com/places-people/60704-tristate-area-maryland-virginia-dc.html

 

[nova]

imported post

after reading the officer.com thread in the OP, I must point out something.

There may be certain people on this site that give OCers a bad name, but reading that thread I certainly saw some bad examples of LEOs. I won't judge all LEOs by the actions of a certain few, you all shouldn't judge all OCers by the actions of a certain few either.

We're all on the same side here, we all respect the law and despise criminals, and want to protect ourselves from said criminals. We (the majority of OCers) don't do it for attention, to look cool, or because we're wannabe LEOs or security guards (we're not). We do it because it offers certain advantages (just as CCW does in other ways) and in some cases, is the only legal way to be armed.

I've not had many actual interactions with LEOs while OCing, most see that I'm carrying, and do nothing more. These officers range from police and sheriff deputies from a few local counties, state police, and even local university police (off campus but within their jurisdiction). The ones that did do something (two from county police) only came over to see if I was from OCDO, as he had met another OCer from the site a few years prior. The two officers were very professional and at no time did I feel uncomfortable or threatened. Ended up having a nice conversation about how knowledge of OC has come along over the years and if there have been any more "incidents".

 

[Sheriff]

imported post

I checked the thread just now for the latest replies in the last page. I see somebody mentioned people wearing cop t-shirts and hats so as to take on the appearance of being a cop. I have to agree with this. I know a building and grounds security guard in DC that would not be caught dead in public without a police orientated t-shirt or hat on in public. He wants so badly for people to think he's a real crime fighting balls to the wall cop. And he openly carries a firearm everywhere he goes off duty. And the funny thing about it, I bet Nitrovic knows who I am talking aboutsince he used to hang on Crown Victoria forums a few years back.

So, having said the above, do we have any member here on OC who wears a police orientated t-shirt or hat while openly carrying a firearm? Please tell me it ain't so.

edited for typo: typed t-shirt wrong and it got censored!!!! :lol:

 

[IanB]

imported post

Where is this building and grounds security guard oc'ing...VA? Hopefully NOT in DC.

 

[DKSuddeth]

imported post

I lurk on officer.com forums to see general attitudes. There are some really good police officers on that site, and then there are some real morons. It's those morons that help foster the us v. them mentality. The problem that they don't see is that they are public SERVANTS, not public overseers. To read some cali cops plain statement that anyone they see open carrying is someone they prone out, who cares no law is being broken, well it just puts them all to shame until that officer is straightened out by their brothers and sisters in blue.

you gotta give respect to get respect. wearing a badge doesn't give you automatic respect.

 

[Sheriff]

imported post

nakedshoplifter wrote:

Where is this building and grounds security guard oc'ing...VA? Hopefully NOT in DC.

He is sworn and can carry in DC. I guess I should have said "glorified buildings and grounds security guard".He lives and plays in Maryland. So I guess he can wear as much cop orientated clothing as he likes there while openly carrying.

 

[HankT]

imported post

DKSuddeth wrote:

I lurk on officer.com forums to see general attitudes. There are some really good police officers on that site, and then there are some real morons. It's those morons that help foster the us v. them mentality.

We have members at OCDO that also energetically espouse the us v. them mentality...just as there are at most gun/2A forums...

Pity. Makes it hard to have a meeting of minds. Even, obviously, when it would do both sides some good.




DKSuddeth wrote:

you gotta give respect to get respect. wearing a badge doesn't give you automatic respect.

Agreed.

 

[McX]

imported post