Not being tongue in cheek at all. Basically, you have to submit to a search if you cross on the ferry. Unless there is some law that states you can't open or concealed carry on the ferry, or he was trying to hide something, then why not get out and let them look? It is a requirement, no different than going through the airport and being allowed to fly. I suspect the issue escalated because of attitudes and chest puffing about who was right and that neither side was willing to back down. Lots of wars start that way.steveincowtown wrote:Keith B wrote:You are just going on 'friends' statements at Open Carry. If I knew the guy, I might back him up too if I felt he was wronged, but I don't know him or his friends. And I don't take the word of 'friends' or Internet acquaintances as gospel. Remember, a fellow gang member will tell you another member of their gang is a 'stand up guy'. And, as they say, there are three sides to every story: His side, the other side , and the truth. The truth lies in the middle somewhere.McKnife wrote:You assume that Skidmark had an "attitude," but I can't find any time during this incident where Skidmark would have lost his professionalism. In fact, reading throughout the Open Carry forum and other members' description of Skidmark, he's a pretty stand-up guy. In your interpretation, merely having a civil disagreement with any authority figure (No, you can't see my drivers license, or No, you may not search my vehicle, or No, I was not speeding) can be viewed as arguing and lead to an arrest if a firearm is in sight. Ridiculous. Brandishing is unconstitutionally vague if it allows for the latter.
Was Skidmark within his rights to open carry and refuse searches? Yes. Did he violate the law? No. This is obviously a malicious charge against a man who stood up for his rights.
Instead of viewing this as a reason to not open carry, lets use this time to educate others on how our rights are constantly under attack.
As for his attitude, it was stated he was pointing fingers, and challenging the security person and supervisor. Physical finger pointing during a disagreement is generally interpreted as a threatening gesture by most people. Psychology will tell you that.
As for what he HAD to do, he HAD to submit to a search if he wanted to board the ferry. Their rules state you must consent to a search if requested. He HAD the option to refuse, turn around and leave. He didn't and went in to challenge the supervisor on the rules. And, apparently there was enough of an issue that they felt they had to call in the Sheriff's department to settle the issue. That would have happened if he had just been calmly discussing the rules with the supervisor. So, the guy was mad that he had to submit to a search or couldn't go on the ferry, argued with the attendant, supervisor and apparently the deputy about the rules. I call that an attitude. Was it bad enough to be arrested for it? Apprently, but that will come out in court.
Here is a picture of one of the signs and their FAQ's for a ferry in Virginia that is ran by the VDOT.
http://www.virginiadot.org/travel/ferry ... n-faqs.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I don't post alot, so I can't tell if Keith if is being "tongue in cheek" here. Just because someone post a sign does not make it consitutional, legal, moral, or even right. I do agree with the truth being someone in the middle. Not that I know the cop, or know Skidmark, but I lived 5 miles from that ferry for 15 years and OC'd over 7 of it without an incident in VA at anytime or anywhere. I suspect the truth lies in the middle as well.
And, like you said, you OC'd over 7 years with no incidents. That is great, but wonder where you carried and if it was frequently in areas with lots of others around (like a mall or Wal-mart)? And in a metropolitan area or a rural town sitting?
I would also be interested to know if you ever crossed the ferry, had to be checked and if they ever asked you to get out of the car or gave a hoot about your carry weapon.
