What about my rights to shop or walk in Birmingham without feeling scared or threatened. There is no way of knowing if a person carrying a loaded weapon is angry, enraged, looking for retaliation or mentally ill. This teenager way overstepped his rights and trampled all over mine. If he likes guns so much, try the recruiter next.

Definitely arguable. No question. Me? I'd go with the Twinkie defense. Absolutely.

Well all this 'empowering' and making our kids 'independent' has really paid off.

If you feel scared or threatened, that is your problem, not his. He did not break a law and was fully within his rights.

I think the police did the right thing in stopping him and talking to him, but they shouldn't have arrested him. I don't think the charges will stand, nor do I think they ought to for this nice young gentleman.

Wow, just compare the present picture to the mugshot from the arrest. Makes a huge difference towards establishing this young man's credibility.

It also makes a case for the police having good reason to stop him suspecting he was under 18. He looks about 15 in the above picture and his resisting showing an ID makes it perfectly reasonable to me that they would make an arrest on obstruction at the very least. If I'm on the jury, case closed.

If nothing else, this kid is an immature attention-seeker who used a loaded deadly weapon to make some sort of point. Who among the "responsible" NRA members out there think this little stunt was positive PR for young gun enthusiasts in a time when Columbine, Virginia Tech, etc. are a top-most fear for parents sending their kids to schools? The legal arguments will be settled in court, not here. But if you're for gun rights, a crazy-looking kid with a gun does not help your cause.

Well it always concerns me when people equate not talking to police as resisting them. If you are walking down the street with a weed wacker, should the police stop you, then arrest and jail you for doing nothing other than carry a tool that others do not like? After all you could possibly kill hundreds before you ran out of line correct?

Not wanting to be entered in a database for abiding by the law seems smart to me. When the police can control, your movements, speech, rights, etc.... that's called a POLICE STATE. Sad that the city will waste funds on a bad case, which will in the end cost them dearly in Federal court.

A weed whacker? Really. A police state? Please. If someone called the police and said, hey, there's a kid with a dopey, crazy grin (see his mugshot picture) holding a loaded gun in the middle of town (he admitted he had it off his shoulder and had been showing it to curious teens), the police would have no choice but to respond.

Why won't you defenders of this kid go to common-sense land? It was a stupid thing to do, and now he's getting the attention he craved. It makes all gun owners who defend him look like nuts. I ask it again, is this the image responsible gun owners want portrayed to the general public who views gun-carrying teens with deep fear and suspicion? I hope someone is trying to talk some sense into this young man--go shoot your rifle where it's safe if you want to use it, but don't try to elevate your sense of self-worth by carrying it around like a pretend soldier in a town with one of the lowest crime rates in the country.

Thank you to the alert Birmingham police who did not risk the safety of the people they are sworn to protect, when faced with a young man who has not acquired common sense.

I hope a parent or someone else has explained to Sean how openly carrying a weapon put his own and his girlfriend's safety and well-being in danger.

Surely he could find thrills and notoriety by using his weapon responsibly, for instance, to win prizes or honors which will awe others, rather than by using his weapon to intimidate or scare others.

Technically, he was legally allowed to do what he did, but still doesn't negate how stupid it is. An 18 year old walking around Birmingham with a loaded rifle and a round in the chamber?!?!

I'm glad he got arrested before something really bad happened. Even if the charges are thrown out (which I would be fine with), his parents should take the rifle back for acting like an idiot. This case is not what "open carry" and "right to bear arms" laws are meant for. Use some sense kid.

@ wiley. Please cite a link to any reports, documents etc... where Mr. Combs admitted he was handling the rifle in public. Thanks in advance.

http://i.word.com/idictionary/brandishing

What you have described doe not meet the legal definition of brandishing anyway. So again he did something you do not like. Sorry that is not a crime, thankfully . Do I think carrying a rifle should be against the law. No in fact for him it was the easiest option due to our laws in MI anyone between of 18 & 20 cannot buy a pistol from a FFL. Yet we send them off to war? Kind of a mixed up logic there? These young folks also cannot carry concealed because one under 21 cannot get a CPL, so that is not an option for them as the law is written today. Most the posters here seem to have issue with seeing a firearm, so why not change the law to allow them to conceal?

100% with you free thinker.

I wonder how much money the 18 year old (going on 10) won from the bet I'm he had with his friend(s). Again, no one is arguing his right to carry his loaded weapon in public. We are questioning his lack of judgment. He knew exactly what he was doing to gain his "15 minutes of fame." Sad to say, I'm sure his parents were quite proud of his "stunt."

Free Thinker: this is the article I was thinking of--http://troy.patch.com/articles/witness-troy-teen-arrested-for-carrying-rifle-was-in-his-legal-right. I was mistaken on his admitting he had it off his shoulder--apologies. However, my assumption is he handled it while talking to the "curious kids." Let's see what actual witnesses say in court.

Not necessarily, anvil dropper. We'll see what the kids who were there say if they're called to testify to his actions prior to the police showing up.

Doesn't ultimately matter if the obstruction of justice charges stick. Do believe it's the felony, is it not?

Wiley.........you are obliviously not a US citizen. You have no idea about our Constitutional rights or our Amendments. Therefore, I recommend that you educate yourself before you type another word.

A comment has been removed for violating Patch's terms of service. Refrain from attacking other commenters or your comments will be deleted and you will be banned from commenting on Patch. We encourage respectful dialogue, and will not tolerate disrespect of other commenters.

People should really stand back and let the courts do their job (hopefully). We should try to take emotion out of it.

According to the law, the B'ham police were in the wrong and they may very well face legal action.

Here is what the law says:

Officers are reminded that the Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. Carrying a nonconcealed firearm is generally legal. Officers may engage in a consensual encounter with a person carrying a non-concealed pistol; however, in order to stop a citizen, officers are required to have reasonable suspicion that crime is afoot. For example, officers may not stop a person on the mere possibility the person may
be carrying an unregistered pistol. Officers must possess facts rising to the level of reasonable suspicion to believe the person is carrying an unregistered pistol.

Officers are also reminded there is no general duty for a citizen to identify himself or herself to a police officer unless the citizen is being stopped for a Michigan Vehicle Code violation.

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._86_2_336854_7.pdf

I predict that Birmingham's insurance carrier will be paying a claim after the city, police chief, and the individual officers are sued in federal court. I also predict that the city of Birmingham will settle without a trial. This is the standard operating procedure for suits like this. Grand Haven, Warren, and Southgate all settled without a trial.

Yo, White Puffy: Take your 2nd Amendment act back to your homey-town without a downtown if you want to make a statement. Da Troy Po-Po would be on your pale behind like white on rice. Grow up, punk! I hope you're already registered for the draft.

Not sure who "babz" is referring to, but we definitely don't need this kind of racial thuggery in our conversation. I flagged her comment as inappropriate.

The funnier headline would have been " Wimpy teen gets robbed of rifle by man with a pistol. Now that would have been funny.

A big rally by gunowners in support of this guy is planned for the June 11th Birmingham Council Meeting. Gun totting supportes from all over the metro detroit area are planning on converging in Birmingham carrying rifles just like this young man did. Let's see if the Birmingham police are preparred to violate the civil rights of all these people. Come show your support with an openly and lawfully carried gun. Here's a link for more information:

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?102450-OC-dinner-city-council-meeting-in-Birmingham-on-June-11th

Yes, the kid has his rights, but.....because there are soooo many "NUTS" running around, I think the police should have the right to check anyone out that is sporting a gun/riffle. It sounds to me the trouble began when the kid got cocky!! That's where he should have been more respectful of the police if he wanted to prove a point or win a bet! Whatever .... Sounds more like a smart aleck kid!

Last time I looked being cocky or a smart aleck was not against the law.

in michigan you do not have to talk to a police officer. you can walk away at anytime unless you are being detained as well you do not have to show them your id. yes just showing your id saves a bunch of time and bs but it is your right to refuse. weapons being openly carried or concealed carried should make u feel safe. for instance in the CO movie theatre shooting. if one person would have been carrying alot less people would have been hurt or killed