Pittsburgh Police and Open Carry

[BUZZINHALFDOZZEN]

is that tyra banks?

I think so.

I don't get this picture, they're protesting bras, but they're wearing bras? Women are confusing

[Deadman 94 xj]

Women are confusing

Understatement of the year! lol

[Bird_Flu]

I heard there was canle light, soft music and you 2 drove off in a Suby station wagon at the end of the night.

Pffft, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

[abrzrkr]

I grew up in a state that doesn't have OC or CC.

What state is that?

[tjblair]

Illinois

[abrzrkr]

I thought OC was a constitutional thing and only the right to conceal was regulated at the state level?

[Bill]

Each state enacts additional regulations as it sees fit. There are several states out there that prohibit OC.

[Bellyup0389]

The only part that everyone missed here is....

Yes you can audio record police while they work, but and this is big....

You can not record public or it's a felony. So one citizen says hi to a buddie passing by and don't know you just recorded him. Felony with a gun..... Five years min.

[notmYJ]

The only part that everyone missed here is....

Yes you can audio record police while they work, but and this is big....

You can not record public or it's a felony. So one citizen says hi to a buddie passing by and don't know you just recorded him. Felony with a gun..... Five years min.

IIRC, The courts have determined that there is no expectation of privacy in a public place, such as a street, concert, mall or other public venue. It is with this comment that I implore you to find case law and/or statute to back up your statement.

I listened to the audio. I really found no problem with what happened. He had an interaction with the police (as he should have expected), some officers learned something, he didnt get a ticket and walked away with his gun.

As for people refering to other states laws, who gives a damn. The topic at hand happened in PA. PA laws are all that matter for this topic. As to OC, yeah I do it. I tuck my shirt behind the holster, if I coat on, its concealed. If its warm it out in the open. Its a comfort thing, I dont like sweating against leather on my hip and I find IWB holsers un comfortable. I know the possibilities of being questioned, but I also know my rights. I think that is the biggest difference between people who dont carry or even people who ONLY carry concealed and people who OC. Generally, the OC people know their rights better than many attorneys, police, and DA's.

I have had a few encounters with police while OC. Most recently was in Castle Shannon, around midnight in my jeep. I was stopped by their DOT guy aka "Commercial Vehicle Enforcement" because my tires stick out (no flares on the front and factory flares on the rear). I was OC and knew he would see it when I went to get my registration out of the glove box, so I informed him when he walked up to the window that I had it, and handed him my LTCF (Its a License To Carry a Firearm. NOT a Concealed carry license, CWP, CCW, etc). He said, "OK, I'll make you a deal, you don't show me yours, and I won't show you mine". I laughed and said, "Deal". I didnt get a ticket, but he did see the humor in that I didn't even try to cover the tires, he mentioned that usually people are just a bit past legal, butI had over half the tire un covered in the front. He asked me to cover them, or keep it in the woods. We had a laugh, he gave my stuff back and that was the end.

I have OCing for a while and have found that 99% of the people don't even notice and many of the police dont care. At getgo in bethel park at midnight, I can walk in OCing an XD40, get a sandwich and a drink, walk past 4 cops twice, BS with the employee for a min and walk out and nobody says a thing. Talked to a WashCo Sherrif in my front yard last week while OCing and he didn't say a word or even give it a second look. I have walked the south side while OC, and the cultural district downtown and never had a single problem.

Agree with it or not, everyone can make your own choices and do as YOU see fit. As long as YOU are comfortable with YOUR choices, then I am happy for you. Just don't try to make ME live the way YOU think I should. Even GOD himself can't mess with freewill. So long as what you are doing is within the limits of the laws, I could give a damn less what anyone here does. In fact, I would like to see more people in this country take responsibility for themselves and make their own damn decisions, and quit trying to control everyone else because "they know better". **** that. Do what you want, and worry about you and your own. You see a guy with a gun pointing it at people or raping someone, drop him by any means necessary and move on with your life. If your doing something legal and someone else doesnt like it, to bad. There is no right to feel warm and fuzzy inside when you leave the house. You want to be warm and fuzzy inside, take some Ecstasy.

/rant

Guess which person in this pic is me...

[joshs1ofakindxj]

^hear, hear!

[Deadman 94 xj]

IIRC, The courts have determined that there is no expectation of privacy in a public place, such as a street, concert, mall or other public venue. It is with this comment that I implore you to find case law and/or statute to back up your statement.

I listened to the audio. I really found no problem with what happened. He had an interaction with the police (as he should have expected), some officers learned something, he didnt get a ticket and walked away with his gun.

As for people refering to other states laws, who gives a damn. The topic at hand happened in PA. PA laws are all that matter for this topic. As to OC, yeah I do it. I tuck my shirt behind the holster, if I coat on, its concealed. If its warm it out in the open. Its a comfort thing, I dont like sweating against leather on my hip and I find IWB holsers un comfortable. I know the possibilities of being questioned, but I also know my rights. I think that is the biggest difference between people who dont carry or even people who ONLY carry concealed and people who OC. Generally, the OC people know their rights better than many attorneys, police, and DA's.

I have had a few encounters with police while OC. Most recently was in Castle Shannon, around midnight in my jeep. I was stopped by their DOT guy aka "Commercial Vehicle Enforcement" because my tires stick out (no flares on the front and factory flares on the rear). I was OC and knew he would see it when I went to get my registration out of the glove box, so I informed him when he walked up to the window that I had it, and handed him my LTCF (Its a License To Carry a Firearm. NOT a Concealed carry license, CWP, CCW, etc). He said, "OK, I'll make you a deal, you don't show me yours, and I won't show you mine". I laughed and said, "Deal". I didnt get a ticket, but he did see the humor in that I didn't even try to cover the tires, he mentioned that usually people are just a bit past legal, butI had over half the tire un covered in the front. He asked me to cover them, or keep it in the woods. We had a laugh, he gave my stuff back and that was the end.

I have OCing for a while and have found that 99% of the people don't even notice and many of the police dont care. At getgo in bethel park at midnight, I can walk in OCing an XD40, get a sandwich and a drink, walk past 4 cops twice, BS with the employee for a min and walk out and nobody says a thing. Talked to a WashCo Sherrif in my front yard last week while OCing and he didn't say a word or even give it a second look. I have walked the south side while OC, and the cultural district downtown and never had a single problem.

Agree with it or not, everyone can make your own choices and do as YOU see fit. As long as YOU are comfortable with YOUR choices, then I am happy for you. Just don't try to make ME live the way YOU think I should. Even GOD himself can't mess with freewill. So long as what you are doing is within the limits of the laws, I could give a damn less what anyone here does. In fact, I would like to see more people in this country take responsibility for themselves and make their own damn decisions, and quit trying to control everyone else because "they know better". **** that. Do what you want, and worry about you and your own. You see a guy with a gun pointing it at people or raping someone, drop him by any means necessary and move on with your life. If your doing something legal and someone else doesnt like it, to bad. There is no right to feel warm and fuzzy inside when you leave the house. You want to be warm and fuzzy inside, take some Ecstasy.

/rant

Fair enough. The Oprah show is over.

[Bellyup0389]

I will look it up, and get back to ya.

Thanks for "making me work". Without gettn paid , yet again.

fYI. I only post gun stuff when I Know. I am right, no guessing here.

I can't look it up on my I pad, it's on my work computer.

[Doty152]

I will look it up, and get back to ya.

Thanks for "making me work". Without gettn paid , yet again.

fYI. I only post gun stuff when I Know. I am right, no guessing here.

I can't look it up on my I pad, it's on my work computer.

Cue long post:

§ 5703. Interception, disclosure or use of wire, electronic
or oral communications.

Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, a person is
guilty of a felony of the third degree if he:

(1) intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept,
or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to
intercept any wire, electronic or oral communication;

(2) intentionally discloses or endeavors to disclose
to any other person the contents of any wire, electronic or
oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, knowing
or having reason to know that the information was obtained
through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral
communication; or

(3) intentionally uses or endeavors to use the contents
of any wire, electronic or oral communication, or evidence
derived therefrom, knowing or having reason to know, that
the information was obtained through the interception of a
wire, electronic or oral communication.
(Oct. 21, 1988, P.L.1000, No.115, eff. imd.)

§ 5704. Exceptions to prohibition of interception and
disclosure of communications.

It shall not be unlawful and no prior court approval shall
be required under this chapter for:

(1) An operator of a switchboard, or an officer, agent
or employee of a provider of wire or electronic communication
service, whose facilities are used in the transmission of a
wire communication, to intercept, disclose or use that
communication in the normal course of his employment while
engaged in any activity which is a necessary incident to the
rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights
or property of the provider of wire or electronic
communication service. However, no provider of wire or
electronic communication service shall utilize service
observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or
service quality control checks.

(2) Any investigative or law enforcement officer or any
person acting at the direction or request of an investigative
or law enforcement officer to intercept a wire, electronic
or oral communication involving suspected criminal
activities, including, but not limited to, the crimes
enumerated in section 5708 (relating to order authorizing
interception of wire, electronic or oral communications),
where:

(i) (Deleted by amendment).

(ii) one of the parties to the communication has
given prior consent to such interception. However, no
interception under this paragraph shall be made unless
the Attorney General or a deputy attorney general
designated in writing by the Attorney General, or the
district attorney, or an assistant district attorney
designated in writing by the district attorney, of the
county wherein the interception is to be made, has
reviewed the facts and is satisfied that the consent is
voluntary and has given prior approval for the
interception; however, such interception shall be subject
to the recording and record keeping requirements of
section 5714(a) (relating to recording of intercepted
communications) and that the Attorney General, deputy
attorney general, district attorney or assistant district
attorney authorizing the interception shall be the
custodian of recorded evidence obtained therefrom;
(iii) the investigative or law enforcement officer
meets in person with a suspected felon and wears a
concealed electronic or mechanical device capable of
intercepting or recording oral communications. However,
no interception under this subparagraph may be used in
any criminal prosecution except for a prosecution
involving harm done to the investigative or law
enforcement officer. This subparagraph shall not be
construed to limit the interception and disclosure
authority provided for in this subchapter; or
(iv) the requirements of this subparagraph are met.
If an oral interception otherwise authorized under this
paragraph will take place in the home of a nonconsenting
party, then, in addition to the requirements of
subparagraph (ii), the interception shall not be
conducted until an order is first obtained from the
president judge, or his designee who shall also be a
judge, of a court of common pleas, authorizing such
in-home interception, based upon an affidavit by an
investigative or law enforcement officer that establishes
probable cause for the issuance of such an order. No
such order or affidavit shall be required where probable
cause and exigent circumstances exist. For the purposes
of this paragraph, an oral interception shall be deemed
to take place in the home of a nonconsenting party only
if both the consenting and nonconsenting parties are
physically present in the home at the time of the
interception.
(3) Police and emergency communications systems to
record telephone communications coming into and going out
of the communications system of the Pennsylvania Emergency
Management Agency or a police department, fire department
or county emergency center, if:
(i) the telephones thereof are limited to the
exclusive use of the communication system for
administrative purposes and provided the communication
system employs a periodic warning which indicates to the
parties to the conversation that the call is being
recorded;
(ii) all recordings made pursuant to this clause,
all notes made therefrom, and all transcriptions thereof
may be destroyed at any time, unless required with regard
to a pending matter; and
(iii) at least one nonrecorded telephone line is
made available for public use at the Pennsylvania
Emergency Management Agency and at each police
department, fire department or county emergency center.
(4) A person, to intercept a wire, electronic or oral
communication, where all parties to the communication have
given prior consent to such interception.
(5) Any investigative or law enforcement officer, or
communication common carrier acting at the direction of an
investigative or law enforcement officer or in the normal
course of its business, to use a pen register, trap and trace
device or telecommunication identification interception
device as provided in Subchapter E (relating to pen
registers, trap and trace devices and telecommunication
identification interception devices).
(6) Personnel of any public utility to record telephone
conversations with utility customers or the general public
relating to receiving and dispatching of emergency and
service calls provided there is, during such recording, a
periodic warning which indicates to the parties to the
conversation that the call is being recorded.
(7) A user, or any officer, employee or agent of such
user, to record telephone communications between himself and
a contractor or designer, or any officer, employee or agent
of such contractor or designer, pertaining to excavation or
demolition work or other related matters, if the user or its
agent indicates to the parties to the conversation that the
call will be or is being recorded. As used in this paragraph,
the terms "user," "contractor," "demolition work," "designer"
and "excavation work" shall have the meanings given to them
in the act of December 10, 1974 (P.L.852, No.287), referred
to as the Underground Utility Line Protection Law; and a one
call system shall be considered for this purpose to be an
agent of any user which is a member thereof.
(8) A provider of electronic communication service to
record the fact that a wire or electronic communication was
initiated or completed in order to protect the provider,
another provider furnishing service toward the completion
of the wire or electronic communication, or a user of that
service, from fraudulent, unlawful or abusive use of the
service.
(9) A person or entity providing electronic
communication service to the public to divulge the contents
of any such communication:
(i) as otherwise authorized in this section or
section 5717 (relating to investigative disclosure or
use of contents of wire, electronic or oral
communications or derivative evidence);
(ii) with the lawful consent of the originator or
any addressee or intended recipient of the communication;
(iii) to a person employed or authorized, or whose
facilities are used, to forward the communication to its
destination; or
(iv) which were inadvertently obtained by the
service provider and which appear to pertain to the
commission of a crime, if such divulgence is made to a
law enforcement agency.
A person or entity providing electronic communication service
to the public shall not intentionally divulge the contents
of any communication (other than one directed to the person
or entity, or an agent thereof) while in transmission of
that service to any person or entity other than an addressee
or intended recipient of the communication or an agent of
the addressee or intended recipient.
(10) Any person:
(i) to intercept or access an electronic
communication made through an electronic communication
system configured so that the electronic communication
is readily accessible to the general public;
(ii) to intercept any radio communication which is
transmitted:
(A) by a station for the use of the general
public, or which relates to ships, aircraft, vehicles
or persons in distress;
(B) by any governmental, law enforcement, civil
defense, private land mobile or public safety
communication system, including police and fire
systems, readily accessible to the general public;
(C) by a station operating on an authorized
frequency within the bands allocated to the amateur,
citizens band or general mobile radio services; or
(D) by any marine or aeronautical communication
system;
(iii) to engage in any conduct which:
(A) is prohibited by section 633 of the
Communications Act of 1934 (48 Stat. 1105, 47 U.S.C.
§ 553); or
(B) is excepted from the application of section
705(a) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.
§ 605(a)) by section 705(b) of that act (47 U.S.C.
§ 605(b)); or
(iv) to intercept any wire or electronic
communication the transmission of which is causing
harmful interference to any lawfully operating station,
to the extent necessary to identify the source of the
interference.
(11) Other users of the same frequency to intercept any
radio communication made through a system which utilizes
frequencies monitored by individuals engaged in the
provisions or use of the system, if the communication is not
scrambled or encrypted.
(12) Any investigative or law enforcement officer or
any person acting at the direction or request of an
investigative or law enforcement officer to intercept a wire
or oral communication involving suspected criminal activities
where the officer or the person is a party to the
communication and there is reasonable cause to believe that:
(i) the other party to the communication is either:
(A) holding a hostage; or
(B) has barricaded himself and taken a position
of confinement to avoid apprehension; and
(ii) that party:
(A) will resist with the use of weapons; or
(B) is threatening suicide or harm to others.
(13) An investigative officer, a law enforcement officer
or employees of the Department of Corrections for State
correctional facilities to intercept, record, monitor or
divulge any telephone calls from or to an inmate in a
facility under the following conditions:
(i) The Department of Corrections shall adhere to
the following procedures and restrictions when
intercepting, recording, monitoring or divulging any
telephone calls from or to an inmate in a State
correctional facility as provided for by this paragraph:
(A) Before the implementation of this paragraph,
all inmates of the facility shall be notified in
writing that, as of the effective date of this
paragraph, their telephone conversations may be
intercepted, recorded, monitored or divulged.
(B) Unless otherwise provided for in this
paragraph, after intercepting or recording a
telephone conversation, only the superintendent,
warden or a designee of the superintendent or warden
or other chief administrative official or his or her
designee shall have access to that recording.
(C) The contents of an intercepted and recorded
telephone conversation shall be divulged only as is
necessary to safeguard the orderly operation of the
facility, in response to a court order or in the
prosecution or investigation of any crime.
(ii) So as to safeguard the attorney-client
privilege, the Department of Corrections shall not
intercept, record, monitor or divulge any conversation
between an inmate and an attorney.
(iii) Persons who are calling in to a facility to
speak to an inmate shall be notified that the call may
be recorded or monitored.
(iv) The Department of Corrections shall promulgate
guidelines to implement the provisions of this paragraph
for State correctional facilities.
(14) An investigative officer, a law enforcement officer
or employees of a county correctional facility to intercept,
record, monitor or divulge any telephone calls from or to
an inmate in a facility under the following conditions:
(i) The county correctional facility shall adhere
to the following procedures and restrictions when
intercepting, recording, monitoring or divulging any
telephone calls from or to an inmate in a county
correctional facility as provided for by this paragraph:
(A) Before the implementation of this paragraph,
all inmates of the facility shall be notified in
writing that, as of the effective date of this
paragraph, their telephone conversations may be
intercepted, recorded, monitored or divulged.
(B) Unless otherwise provided for in this
paragraph, after intercepting or recording a
telephone conversation, only the superintendent,
warden or a designee of the superintendent or warden
or other chief administrative official or his or her
designee shall have access to that recording.
(C) The contents of an intercepted and recorded
telephone conversation shall be divulged only as is
necessary to safeguard the orderly operation of the
facility, in response to a court order or in the
prosecution or investigation of any crime.
(ii) So as to safeguard the attorney-client
privilege, the county correctional facility shall not
intercept, record, monitor or divulge any conversation
between an inmate and an attorney.
(iii) Persons who are calling into a facility to
speak to an inmate shall be notified that the call may
be recorded or monitored.
(iv) The superintendent, warden or a designee of
the superintendent or warden or other chief
administrative official of the county correctional system
shall promulgate guidelines to implement the provisions
of this paragraph for county correctional facilities.
(15) The personnel of a business engaged in telephone
marketing or telephone customer service by means of wire,
oral or electronic communication to intercept such marketing
or customer service communications where such interception
is made for the sole purpose of training, quality control
or monitoring by the business, provided that one party
involved in the communications has consented to such
intercept. Any communications recorded pursuant to this
paragraph may only be used by the business for the purpose
of training or quality control. Unless otherwise required
by Federal or State law, communications recorded pursuant
to this paragraph shall be destroyed within one year from
the date of recording.
(16) A law enforcement officer, whether or not certified
under section 5724 (relating to training), acting in the
performance of his official duties to intercept and record
an oral communication between individuals in accordance with
the following:
(i) At the time of the interception, the oral
communication does not occur inside the residence of any
of the individuals.
(ii) At the time of the interception, the law
enforcement officer:
(A) is operating the visual or audible warning
system of the law enforcement officer's vehicle
authorized by 75 Pa.C.S. § 4571 (relating to visual
and audible signals on emergency vehicles) or is
clearly identifiable as a law enforcement officer;
(B) is in close proximity to the individuals'
oral communication;
(C) is using an electronic, mechanical or other
device which has been approved under section
5706(b)(4) (relating to exceptions to prohibitions
in possession, sale, distribution, manufacture or
advertisement of electronic, mechanical or other
devices) to intercept the oral communication, the
recorder of which is mounted in the law enforcement
officer's vehicle; and
(D) informs, as soon as reasonably practicable,
the individuals identifiably present that he has
intercepted and recorded the oral communication.
(iii) As used in this paragraph, the following words
and phrases shall have the meanings given to them in
this subparagraph:
"Law enforcement officer." A member of the
Pennsylvania State Police or an individual employed as
a police officer who holds a current certificate under
53 Pa.C.S. Ch. 21 Subch. D (relating to municipal police
education and training).
"Recorder." An electronic, mechanical or other
device used to store an oral communication on tape or
on some other comparable medium.
(July 10, 1981, P.L.227, No.72, eff. 60 days; Dec. 23, 1981,
P.L.593, No.175, eff. 60 days; Oct. 21, 1988, P.L.1000, No.115,
eff. imd.; Sept. 26, 1995, 1st Sp.Sess., P.L.1056, No.20, eff.
60 days; Dec. 19, 1996, P.L.1458, No.186, eff. 60 days; Feb.
18, 1998, P.L.102, No.19, eff. imd.; June 11, 2002, P.L.367,
No.52, eff. imd.)
2002 Amendment. Act 52 added par. (16). 1998 Amendment. Act 19 amended the intro. par. and pars.
(2), (5) and (9) and added par. (15). 1996 Amendment. Act 186 amended par. (2) and added par.
(14). 1995 Amendment. Act 20, 1st Sp.Sess., added par. (13). Cross References. Section 5704 is referred to in sections
5702, 5706, 5720, 5721.1, 5742, 5747, 5749, 5782 of this title.

Source

I will state that I did not read this word for word. From my reading, it looks like Bellyup is right. However, (and I couldn't find it above) I did read on a couple other pages that it is acceptable to record when there is no expectation of privacy, such as outside of a Pens game.

[Ronin152]

Even more significantly, almost ten years before Agnew, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that secretly recording a police officer in the performance of his duties did not violate the Wiretap Act. See Commonwealth v. Henlen, 522 Pa. 514, 564 A.2d 905, 906 (1989).

In 1998, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court explained the elements of a Wiretap Act violation as follows:

[I]n order to establish a prima facie case under the Wiretap Act for interception of an oral communication, a claimant must demonstrate: (1) that he engaged in a communication; (2) that he possessed an expectation that the communication would not be intercepted; (3) that his expectation was justifiable under the circumstances; and (4) that the defendant attempted to, or successfully intercepted the communication, or encouraged another to do so.

[DixieJeeper]

Bellyup039 Ha-- I know you usually don't work anyhow... just like me.

I think we have about covered it:

OC is legal and it is debatable if it promotes the gun enthusiast hobby and the the 2nd admendment awarness.
Field Interviews (FI) arent arrests
Dependant on the FI reason and the events leading up to the FI it may be better to smooth the situation over by identifiing yourself even if you are not required to provid such information
There are benifts to OC vs. CC

I think we default to those who have experence in the matter regarding the elements of the crime of wiretapping. Much like photos the recording/wiretap laws reall rely heavily on the expectation of privacy. When you are walking around the consol arena you have no reasonable expectation of privacy to yoru conversations being made on a public thoughfare. Therfore, photo/recording is permitted. There is another matter if the material may be resued or used in court.. again there really is SO much more to all of that I say we let that dog lay on the floor. It is pretty pasionate about our positions.

scott out.

[Bellyup0389]

Woof! You mean i dont have to look up all that jaz.

Sleep. dog, sleep.

Personally, I like it when others open carry. I know who to watch when the Sh... Hits the fan. Cause if they aren't smart enough to have "the element of suprise" on their side. It's on my side.

[joshs1ofakindxj]

I don't think I like what you're implying.

[pittim]

I don't think I like what you're implying.

It sounds like he's implying that people that OC are all stupid criminals.

Either that or that he himself is a criminal and knows who to draw down on first.

[Wrecker]

He means what I feel also. When you open carry, you are the first to be a target for the bad guys. They are going to go after the person they know has the gun first. While the guy who is concealed, has the element of time. I wont be forced to act till I feel the time is right for me.

[ridgerunner97]

^ Agreed. There is a time and a place. 99% of the time I have a firearm and guess what nobody knows but me, and I like it that way.

I'm not getting into Mere encounter, Investigative detention etc. I just had a whole semester of investigation.

[Deadman 94 xj]

Agreed again. That has always been the basis of my point whenever I jump into these discussions. *I* wouldn't OC because *I* don't like the attention. There ARE times when the attention can benefit a situation and OC'ing will bring a certain level of authority to an otherwise civil situation. In other words, OC'ing in an environment where shit has not hit the fan just yet, can prevent shit from flying in the first place.... great.

I grew up around firearms but I actually learned to respect a fire arm in the military. When I say respect, I mean fear, because respect and fear are one and the same in my book. I have alll kinds of experience firing different types of fire arms. I qualified expert on the SAW Loved that machine. I only mention that to give a little background.

Because of that respect, I will admit that when I see a civilian OC'ing or one of my friends, my first instinct is to punch them in the face. No I don't say anything and no I don't cause a scene or anything, its just something personal I feel. I know that sounds harsh but its because I feel threatened. Its a normal reaction I think but then some will say that somehow makes me a liberal...lol. My point is, I'd imagine the bad guys probably feel the same way. I live in Braddock, work and down pittsburgh, and lived in the Northside before this...I've never felt the need to OC and I don't usually carry. That's my choice though, not anybody elses. I'd imagine if I OC'd on a daily basis I'd have a lot more stories to tell.

In my opinion, CC'ing gets the job done. OC'ing creates headaches, unless you're in a combat situation of course.

[Wrecker]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
LIBERAL! LIBERAL! LIBERAL!

GET HIM..........








I kid.

[Super Scout]

^You bleeding heart liberal pinky commie !!!!!!!

Always knew you liked dudes.

[Deadman 94 xj]

Jerks...

I try to be serious for once!

I forgot the


Seriously though, it all goes back to the boobs. Think about it.

[Super Scout]

These kind ?


Or these kind ?