twoskinsonemanns
Regular Member
With the seemly growing popularity of OC in the country I have been determined to know the laws and my rights concerning it. I have a CPL but have rarely OC'd save for my own property. With the growing videos surfacing of LEOs detaining OCers I wish to be saturated with the correct facts of my rights and the laws.
The main questions I have asked myself (without feeling 100% about the answers) are these:
#1) Can I be lawfully detained by an LEO responding to a "man spotted with a gun" call?
#2) Do I have a legal obligation to identify myself to an LEO responding to the same?
As far as the first question I cannot find any WV laws/case laws pertaining to it. I understand the Wheeling suit may shed light on this but is there any previous action that would provide a reasonable assurance?
The second question involves refusing an order to identify myself. I am not anti LEO by any means but as a LAC who happens to be OCing I would feel violated to have to identify myself and sit through waiting for the LEO to check and see if I'm a bad guy by running my information.
Again I couldn't find any WV laws explaining this but I did find a case (STATE v. SRNSKY http://caselaw.findlaw.com/wv-supreme-court-of-appeals/1482046.html) where the Supreme Court of Appeals overturned a conviction of Obstruction (among other irrelevant charges) where the conviction of Obstruction was gained because of the defendants refusal to identify himself to LEO. Here a snip from the reversal:
"Consequently, we hold that refusal to identify oneself to a law enforcement officer does not, standing alone, form the basis for a charge of obstructing a law enforcement officer in performing official duties. However, the charge of obstructing an officer may be substantiated when a citizen does not supply identification when required to do so by express statutory direction or when the refusal occurs after a law enforcement officer has communicated the reason why the citizen's name is being sought in relation to the officer's official duties."
So here's my biggest question. Is an LEO responding to a call of "man with a gun" related to the officer's official duties?
I can see scenarios where this might play out.
LEO: Sir! What are you doing with a gun.
Me: Nothing specific, just window shopping.
LEO: Do you have an ID?
Me: Sir, why are you seeking my identification?
LEO: Because you are carrying a gun and making people nervous!
Me: I refuse to identify myself.
Obviously this is not the most probable way the conversation might go but am I obstructing? He DID give me a reason why but since I am not involved any criminal activity did he give me a reason "sought in relation to the officer's official duties."
Of course the question will come up why didn't I first ask if I was being detained?
Is it relevant? Only if it IS trully unlawful to detain an OCer when responding to such a cal. If I AM detained do I now have an obligation to identify myself?
Anyway I am not asking legal advice just trying to open a discussion.
Thanks
The main questions I have asked myself (without feeling 100% about the answers) are these:
#1) Can I be lawfully detained by an LEO responding to a "man spotted with a gun" call?
#2) Do I have a legal obligation to identify myself to an LEO responding to the same?
As far as the first question I cannot find any WV laws/case laws pertaining to it. I understand the Wheeling suit may shed light on this but is there any previous action that would provide a reasonable assurance?
The second question involves refusing an order to identify myself. I am not anti LEO by any means but as a LAC who happens to be OCing I would feel violated to have to identify myself and sit through waiting for the LEO to check and see if I'm a bad guy by running my information.
Again I couldn't find any WV laws explaining this but I did find a case (STATE v. SRNSKY http://caselaw.findlaw.com/wv-supreme-court-of-appeals/1482046.html) where the Supreme Court of Appeals overturned a conviction of Obstruction (among other irrelevant charges) where the conviction of Obstruction was gained because of the defendants refusal to identify himself to LEO. Here a snip from the reversal:
"Consequently, we hold that refusal to identify oneself to a law enforcement officer does not, standing alone, form the basis for a charge of obstructing a law enforcement officer in performing official duties. However, the charge of obstructing an officer may be substantiated when a citizen does not supply identification when required to do so by express statutory direction or when the refusal occurs after a law enforcement officer has communicated the reason why the citizen's name is being sought in relation to the officer's official duties."
So here's my biggest question. Is an LEO responding to a call of "man with a gun" related to the officer's official duties?
I can see scenarios where this might play out.
LEO: Sir! What are you doing with a gun.
Me: Nothing specific, just window shopping.
LEO: Do you have an ID?
Me: Sir, why are you seeking my identification?
LEO: Because you are carrying a gun and making people nervous!
Me: I refuse to identify myself.
Obviously this is not the most probable way the conversation might go but am I obstructing? He DID give me a reason why but since I am not involved any criminal activity did he give me a reason "sought in relation to the officer's official duties."
Of course the question will come up why didn't I first ask if I was being detained?
Is it relevant? Only if it IS trully unlawful to detain an OCer when responding to such a cal. If I AM detained do I now have an obligation to identify myself?
Anyway I am not asking legal advice just trying to open a discussion.
Thanks