TexasCHLforum.com

The dude (Mark Fiorino) in Philly said yesterday (Monday) the reason he had the tape recorder going 'was that he was trying to lay a trap for police, but instead saying he regularly carries a recorder with him in case he ever has to use his gun and then offer proof of what happened.'

How do ya'll feel that would play out in court if a shooting did occur? Surely the proof (audio) would be there - but wouldn't there be some misdirection going on in court about the possibility of the shooter actually searching out a situation in which to use a gun? Heck - if you want to get into a gunfight there are lots of places you can go, give a few cornerboys the look, and Voilà - action found.

I suppose anything is possible in court, but I think the prosecutors (especially in Philly) are more likely to point to the fact that you were carrying a gun as evidence that you were looking for trouble than that you were carrying a recorder. Virtually all patrol officers carry recorders now--recorders have gotten very easy to carry, and it's an good way to back up your story.

hirundo82 wrote:I suppose anything is possible in court, but I think the prosecutors (especially in Philly) are more likely to point to the fact that you were carrying a gun as evidence that you were looking for trouble than that you were carrying a recorder. Virtually all patrol officers carry recorders now--recorders have gotten very easy to carry, and it's an good way to back up your story.

If you're carrying LEGALLY, why are you "looking for trouble"? There's all kinds of holes in that.

Mark Fiorino on the Michael Smerconish Program
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEQmYHgXBAs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...he has had several encounters before with officers not obeying the law about open carry...he clearly carried it for his own protection and a witness to what really happened...

http://m.philly.com/phillycom/db_/conte ... &full=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I understand and agree that it is his right to carrey, but when he keeps have problems with it.... Just cover it up, problem solved

If you have time to switch on a recorder in the middle of a fight, that's impressive. I've get in fights a good bit and can rarely get mine on.

stealthfightrf17 wrote:I understand and agree that it is his right to carrey, but when he keeps have problems with it.... Just cover it up, problem solved

So your solution to someone doing something perfectly legal is to "just cover it up"? That's ridiculous. The real solution is to educate the LEOs in what is and is not legal. And I'm sorry, but regardless of the provocation (and by all accounts there was none here) there is no excuse for retaliatory charges being filed. If I were a betting man I'd wager that the charges will be dropped or, if it goes to trial, he will be acquitted of all charges.

And to those who say he should obeyed the LEOs, the officers were giving conflicting orders. "Get on your knees" and "If you move I'll [REDACTED]* shoot you" are completely contradictory. You can't do both.

gigag04 wrote:If you have time to switch on a recorder in the middle of a fight, that's impressive. I've get in fights a good bit and can rarely get mine on.

I don't know what recorder he was carrying, but you can get some digital recorders that are voice activated. Also, some digital recorders have such huge solid state drives that they can run for hours before reaching the end of the "tape".

*EDITED to comply with Forum rules.

stealthfightrf17 wrote:I understand and agree that it is his right to carrey, but when he keeps have problems with it.... Just cover it up, problem solved

...if the law OKs open carry...and in Pa. it does...there is no reason not to walk within the law just because some LEOs(on more than one occasion) have chosen to behave ignorantly and weren't professional...this is not a police state, it is the USA...unless we knuckle under to their desires, as you suggest...I won't do it...evidently, according to the city's attorney, the officers have been re-educated about their limitations and what the law allows...time will tell...

gigag04 wrote:If you have time to switch on a recorder in the middle of a fight, that's impressive. I've get in fights a good bit and can rarely get mine on.

From what I've read, a lot of the open carry people carry voice-activated recorders. They're continuously recording, and as long as you stop it soon enough after an incident you have what you need. With the size of memory now, you can record for several days without writing over anything.

gigag04 wrote:If you have time to switch on a recorder in the middle of a fight, that's impressive. I've get in fights a good bit and can rarely get mine on.

He turned it on when he left the house. Leaves it running all the time while he's out.