stopped x2 handcuffed seached gun and billfold taken threatened with DC/CCW revoked

Fuller Malarkey · Nov 4, 2012

ericb327;~SNIP~ I'm not saying he broke the law said:
It would have taken him about 15 seconds to show them his permit or answer a few simple investigatory questions that didn't violate his civil rights.[/COLOR]

Leaving my house legally engaged in a legal activity, I don't forfeit my rights to privacy and to travel freely. Nor do I surrender them to government agents on a fishing expedition. IF I am suspected of a crime, I fully expect to be formally detained, charged and dealt with accordingly. The encounter would begin with "you are under arrest". No fishing required.

For police to single me out to ascertain my identity so that a prosecution against me can be initiated based on my identity...not because of my activity does more than inconvenience me. The police encounter instills suspicion and apprehension in the minds of family, clients, and peers that can not be undone, once they see the encounter. Legal, acceptable behavior GENERALLY doesn't merit a multiple officer response, engaging in close to felony arrest procedures. Character damage is done, possibly at great expense to the target. Qualifying their actions with the catch-all phrase "officer safety", police do use and abuse this type of intimidation.

ericb327, you've voiced your disapproval of activists not only here, on other firearms forums:

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/open-carry-issues-discussions/148534-oc-baiter-hit-my-town.html

You have a right to your opinion. I can respect that you don't approve of baiting people not smart enough or of high enough moral standards to avoid the bait, and becoming victimized by their own actions. You are of the opinion the solution is to stop putting out bait. I contend the hiring standards of those being baited needs to be raised above height and weight requirements, and training must include more than maintaining dominance at any cost. I'd encourage you to stick around and realize many here have a social mission they are on. Imagine breaking a large, aggressive, bad mannered dog from jumping on us. YOU become the problem when you reinforce the behavior we are trying to break. From this viewpoint, determine if you are going to help with resolving the objectionable behavior. Few will argue that an unsafe dog is a liability we can not morally expose the public to. In many cases, the dog is destroyed, which is a shame, considering that the issue is the permissiveness of the handlers, not so much the dog.

ericb327 · Nov 4, 2012

Fuller Malarkey said:
Leaving my house legally engaged in a legal activity, I don't forfeit my rights to privacy and to travel freely. Nor do I surrender them to government agents on a fishing expedition. IF I am suspected of a crime, I fully expect to be formally detained, charged and dealt with accordingly. The encounter would begin with "you are under arrest". No fishing required.

For police to single me out to ascertain my identity so that a prosecution against me can be initiated based on my identity...not because of my activity does more than inconvenience me. The police encounter instills suspicion and apprehension in the minds of family, clients, and peers that can not be undone, once they see the encounter. Legal, acceptable behavior GENERALLY doesn't merit a multiple officer response, engaging in close to felony arrest procedures. Character damage is done, possibly at great expense to the target. Qualifying their actions with the catch-all phrase "officer safety", police do use and abuse this type of intimidation.

ericb327, you've voiced your disapproval of activists not only here, on other firearms forums:

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/open-carry-issues-discussions/148534-oc-baiter-hit-my-town.html

You have a right to your opinion. I can respect that you don't approve of baiting people not smart enough or of high enough moral standards to avoid the bait, and becoming victimized by their own actions. You are of the opinion the solution is to stop putting out bait. I contend the hiring standards of those being baited needs to be raised above height and weight requirements, and training must include more than maintaining dominance at any cost. I'd encourage you to stick around and realize many here have a social mission they are on. Imagine breaking a large, aggressive, bad mannered dog from jumping on us. YOU become the problem when you reinforce the behavior we are trying to break. From this viewpoint, determine if you are going to help with resolving the objectionable behavior. Few will argue that an unsafe dog is a liability we can not morally expose the public to. In many cases, the dog is destroyed, which is a shame, considering that the issue is the permissiveness of the handlers, not so much the dog.

I came here to respond to the OPs mention of me in this thread. I OC and I don't want my rights to be violated as much as the next guy. I'm just concerned with some methods and attitudes of some that OC to cram our right to carry down the throats of LE and the general public. Not the best policy in my opinion. I will not support the baiters. I will support even minded carriers that are harassed unlawfully by no fault of their own.

Fuller Malarkey · Nov 4, 2012

Maybe the problem is the frequency such a high number of police take the bait. Makes me wonder what's going on when the cameras aren't rolling. We need a thousand more "baiters" out there until the day comes the police respect our rights to self protection, privacy and travel. I consider it an effective means of stopping the dog from jumping on you. A combination of embarrassment, humiliation and money settlements will bring about wholesale compliance faster than turning a blind eye to the behavior. There seems to be some confusion among police who the "Alpha dog" is. While law abiding, I refuse to exist in a huddled mass of fear in my house at the whim of a pack of undisciplined, dangerous neighborhood dogs.

KYGlockster · Nov 4, 2012

ericb327 said:
I came here to respond to the OPs mention of me in this thread. I OC and I don't want my rights to be violated as much as the next guy. I'm just concerned with some methods and attitudes of some that OC to cram our right to carry down the throats of LE and the general public. Not the best policy in my opinion. I will not support the baiters. I will support even minded carriers that are harassed unlawfully by no fault of their own.

It sounds to me like you may be the LEO that deprived the man of his rights, no? An officer cannot base RAS on a hunch that criminal activity may be afoot, and walking down the street while armed does not give an officer RAS to conduct a Terry stop if that action is legal in the jurisdiction he is policing. You seem to believe that this man HAD to be doing something that would have given the LEO grounds to conduct a Terry stop -- so please, tell us what it was.

You say you are not willing to give up YOUR rights, but when someone else is in a situation where someone demands them to give up theirs they are supposed to do so just so the police feel better about a situation? I will have no part of this, and the others here that fight for everyone's rights in this state will refuse to give up theirs as well!

We have nothing but this video to base our opinion on, and unless you have other documentation then it is all we will ever have. Based on the evidence we do have [video] I would agree with the others that this officer was certainly -- and egregiously -- depriving this man of his rights because he wanted to, and for no other reason.

Does it matter if he was baiting the officer? Absolutely not! You seem to believe everyone that wears a badge is by the book, and that is far from reality. This man was doing NOTHING wrong, and therefore he should have been left alone. Could the officers ask him questions as he was walking around? Sure. Could they legally detain him? No! Once an officer asks you a question and demands an answer he is detaining you (according to the SCOTUS), and if he didn't have RAS to initiate the detainment then your rights have been violated!

It is OUR job to make sure ALL public servants follow the law and abide by the United States and Kentucky constitutions, and if we want to make sure they are doing so then we must have ways of doing it. I never leave my home without a recording device, and that is because too many people are harrassed and deprived of their rights on a daily basis! If one person's rights are trampled then that is one too many!

I am all for being courteous to police officers and everyone else in this World; but, when ANY individual tries to deprive me of my rights and freedoms I will let them know how I feel about the situation. You seem to justify the illegal detainment based on the man's actions AFTER THE FACT, but that argument wouldn't hold water in court! It was the ILLEGAL actions of the officer that made the man express his displeasure, and the First Amendment protects alot of things -- especially what this man did!

Your name is Eric Brown? You refer to the members of your local police department like they are your best-friends. You said that "our department" is getting recording devices, implying that you are a part of it. You have to be the officer in question.

KYGlockster · Nov 4, 2012

ericb327 said:
I am the person referred to in the quote. I am not a LEO but I live in Bellevue, KY and have been following this story. I have OCd in front of all the Bellevue police with zero incidents or MWAG calls for the last three years. To say that Bellevue is anti 2A is ridiculous. Captain Pointer is a CC firearms instructor and the department encourages citizens to CC and OC. I do feel that the OP was on a fishing expedition and baiting the cops during a very stressful event known as Riverfest. The police did take the bait to an extent. I have heard different sides to this story. Although legal, if you OC, I think your demeanor as well as actions should not be confrontational or erratic. I don't condone the handcuffing by the police but I do question the motives of the OP. In my opinion you have to work really hard to be targeted by NKY police for OC let alone twice in several hours. Keep in mind we only saw portions of the actual events. Bellevue and Newport are on separate dispatch channels so neither agency knew about the others encounters. So there was no conspiracy to harass the OP. Responsible carry is important so we do not send the wrong message. There is a point when we could start to hurt our cause. Just a thought, if you can site all pertinent cases verbatim while filming and saying you do not consent to search or seizure before the LEO can get a word out; you might be a baiter. The officers portrayal in these partial videos is not representative of what I have experienced in Bellevue or Newport. I wouldn't rush to judgement on Bellevue and Newport too quickly as we don't really know what brought the OP to their attention.

Eric Brown

Could you please cite sources that will prove the department you speak of actually "encourages citizens to OC?" Do they encourage the practice so they have people to harrass?

rscottie · Nov 4, 2012

ericb327 said:
Maybe it's the same confrontational condescending attitude your're giving me that got him detained and searched. If the OPs actions were that to cause RAS then the whole encounter was legal. But you say only the video taped part is relevant. That's a dangerous attitude in my opinion.

I do not think anyone is being "confrontational" with you.

We are just trying to make a point about rights.

If you can "bait" a cop in to violating someones rights, that cop needs retrained to say the least.

Unless this person was doing something that an officer observed to be illegal, they cannot just arrest him. Putting handcuffs on someone is an arrest. Any time an officer makes contact with a person and that person does not have the freedom to walk away, it is at bare minimum defined as being detained. Throw on the cuffs, and it is an arrest.

You cannot make an arrest without RAS and OC is not RAS.

rscottie · Nov 4, 2012

ericb327 said:
I came here to respond to the OPs mention of me in this thread. I OC and I don't want my rights to be violated as much as the next guy. I'm just concerned with some methods and attitudes of some that OC to cram our right to carry down the throats of LE and the general public. Not the best policy in my opinion. I will not support the baiters. I will support even minded carriers that are harassed unlawfully by no fault of their own.

How exactly does someone legally exercising their right to OC be "cram(ing) our right to carry down the throats of LE and the general public?"

Up until your post, I thought I was a part of the "general public".

Please explain what a "even minded carrier" is and how the person in this instance does not fit in to your idea of what that even is?

ericb327 · Nov 4, 2012

KYGlockster said:
It sounds to me like you may be the LEO that deprived the man of his rights, no? An officer cannot base RAS on a hunch that criminal activity may be afoot, and walking down the street while armed does not give an officer RAS to conduct a Terry stop if that action is legal in the jurisdiction he is policing. You seem to believe that this man HAD to be doing something that would have given the LEO grounds to conduct a Terry stop -- so please, tell us what it was.

You say you are not willing to give up YOUR rights, but when someone else is in a situation where they are demanded to give up theirs they are supposed to do so just so the police feel better about a situation? I will have no part of this, and the others here that fight for everyone's rights in this state will refuse to give up theirs as well!

We have nothing but this video to base our opinion on, and unless you have other documentation then it is all we will ever have. Based on the evidence we do have [video] I would agree with the others that this officer was certainly -- and egregiously -- depriving this man of his rights because he wanted too, and for no other reason.

Does it matter if he was baiting the officer? Absolutely not! You seem to believe everyone that wears a badge is by the book, and that is far from reality. This man was doing NOTHING wrong, and therefore he should have been left alone. Could the officer's ask him questions as he was walking around? Sure. Could they legally detain him? No! Once an officer asks you a question and demands an answer he is detaining you (according to the SCOTUS), and if he didn't have RAS to initiate the detainment then your rights have been violated!

It is OUR job to make sure ALL public servants follow the law and abide by the United States and Kentucky constitutions, and if we want to make sure they are doing so then we must have ways of doing it. I never leave my home without a recording device, and that is because too many people are harrassed and deprived of their rights on a daily basis! If one person's rights are trampled then that is one too many!

I am all for being courteous to police officers and everyone else in this World; but, when ANY individual tries to deprive me of my rights and freedoms I will let them know how I feel about the situation. You seem to justify the illegal detainment based on the man's actions AFTER THE FACT, but that argument wouldn't hold water in court! It was the ILLEGAL actions of the officer that made the man express his displeasure, and the First Amendment protects alot of things -- especially what this man did!

Your name is Eric Brown? You refer to the members of your local police department like they are your best-friends. You said that "our department" is getting recording devices, implying that you are a part of it. You have to be the officer in question.

I am not a LEO. I have lived in Bellevue, KY for six years. I have worked at the Party Source in Bellevue for Twelve years ending in 2010. I am currently unemployed. When I say our department it's because I'm a tax paying citizen. The officer as the OP stated is Mike Brown, no relation. No conspiracy! I do know most of the local LEOs, in fact they probably think I'm a pain in the ass because I call them so much for drug dealers, crackheads and suspicious activity. I'm acquainted with them, far from friends. I regularly post on another forum; Defensive Carry.

KYGlockster · Nov 4, 2012

ericb327 said:
I am not a LEO. I have lived in Bellevue, KY for six years. I have worked at the Party Source in Bellevue for Twelve years ending in 2010. I am currently unemployed. When I say our department it's because I'm a tax paying citizen. The officer as the OP stated is Mike Brown, no relation. No conspiracy! I do know most of the local LEOs, in fact they probably think I'm a pain in the ass because I call them so much for drug dealers, crackheads and suspicious activity. I'm acquainted with them, far from friends. I regularly post on another forum; Defensive Carry.

I never claimed it to be a "conspiracy." I would still like to see some proof to support your claim that the police department you speak of ecourages citizens to OC.

Grapeshot · Nov 4, 2012

KYGlockster said:
Could you please cite sources that will prove the department you speak of actually "encourages citizens to OC?"--snip--

I ask that same question earlier. It has yet to even be acknowledged.

self preservation · Nov 5, 2012

ericb327 said:
I regularly post on another forum; Defensive Carry.

That explains a lot. I'm all for other gun groups and don't mean anything bad, but some (most) of the post I see on Defensive Carry makes my blood run cold. IMHO the members of Defensive Carry and OCDO often share way different view points on gun rights or rights in general. Once again, I am not bashing Defensive Carry but I think I will stick with the good folks here at OCDO.

Grapeshot · Nov 5, 2012

self preservation said:
That explains a lot. I'm all for other gun groups and don't mean anything bad, but some (most) of the post I see on Defensive Carry makes my blood run cold. IMHO the members of Defensive Carry and OCDO often share way different view points on gun rights or rights in general. Once again, I am not bashing Defensive Carry but I think I will stick with the good folks here at OCDO.

It would appear that while the site is not specifically/pointedly anti OC, there is a proliferation of people there who have atttacked OC and spread inaccurate information. Many show less than informed tolerence. They seem to prefer emotional or allegorical responses, rather than sticking to the facts/truth.

Therefore there is no Rule 12 violation, but some of the posters......:banghead:

We must be patient and try to help them walk into the light.

BadgerX · Nov 5, 2012

Just wow....

Sent from my EVO 4G LTE using Tapatalk 2

MSG Laigaie · Nov 5, 2012

I Open Carry every day, like most of you. When dressing, I put my wallet in my pocket and my pistol in my holster. Now I go about my daily parade, walking dogs, shopping at the grocery store and just being generally happy about breathing. Am I "baiting"? No, I am living my normal law abiding life. Do LEOs think I am "baiting"? Some do. One was so unhappy with the fact that I was Open Carrying, he put a gun in my gut. In this case, he knew OC was legal and he was attempting to bully me. Was I "baiting" him? No. Did I get loud and rude? You betcha, the bozo had a gun in my gut. Other LEOs see me as a LAC. Now you can interpret this as "Law Abiding Citizen" or "Legally Armed Citizen". I was walking thru a small town in Washington the other day (Anacourtes) and the Chief of Police waved to us from her black and white as we walked down the street.
Do I wear a weapon to incite? No, I do not. Does it happen anyway? Of course it does. We would be lying to ourselves if we thought everyone is happy about us being armed. Too much TV in my opine. Grape said it best. It will be beneficial to us to Keep Calm and Carry On! Soon, not today, maybe not tomorrow, it will be considered normal again to see openly Armed Citizens. The Document is your Guide. Live the Constitution, and help them walk into the light.

Grapeshot said:
We must be patient and try to help them walk into the light.

ericb327 · Nov 5, 2012

Grapeshot said:
I ask that same question earlier. It has yet to even be acknowledged.

I should back up and say that I have been encouraged to open carry. I am not the only citizen to open carry in Bellevue. As far as I know the OP is the only person to have a negative experience. So I may have misspoke when I said they encourage citizens to OC. I will reaffirm that the Police encourage citizens to CC. The point I'm trying to argue is that although OC is legal and we have protected rights, some OCers (not all) are out there acting in ways to get attention and promote their own agenda. I understand that some here don't think it matters. I do! I honestly think some OCers out there cross the line with their behavior causing people to be uncomfortable and question their motives. Some behavior is cause for police to investigate. The OC of a firearm by itself does not constitute a reason to investigate. However, police do have to investigate MWAG calls. We should understand that with our interactions when this happens. We can cooperate without giving up any rights. If you choose not to that is your right. I do agree in many cases the police cross the line and violate our rights and this is unacceptable. However, I do believe there are cases when OCers actions give police cause to detain. Is this the case? I don't know if we will ever know because all we have is the short one sided video. I do not hate the police but I have had negative experiences with them. I prefer to work with them than against them.

Someone said here that it's not against the law to argue or be rude with someone while OC. See how that works out for you in court if it escalates into a defensive scenario where you use deadly physical force!

DocWalker · Nov 5, 2012

ericb327 said:
One good thing is our officers will be getting lapel cameras because of this incident, that way the other side of the story will be seen and heard in the future.

This makes me laugh, I'm pro police 99% of the time but was on a jury (Juror #1) last year with an little old lady being carged with assaulting a police officer.

He had a lapel camera that just happened to go off twice. Once when he was wrestling with her and once when he went out to call his supervisor on his personal cell phone (HE TURNED IT OFF SO IT WOULDN'T RECORD HIS CONVERSATION). Then he turned it back on and went back into the house. She was found Not-Guilty of all charges. The only bad cop in our county I have ever met as of today and I'm close freinds with most of them.

Lapel Camera's are only good for the officers if they are not doing anything wrong. My jury was pissed he wasn't the one on trial.....

self preservation · Nov 5, 2012

ericb327 said:
police do have to investigate MWAG calls.

No they don't. Look up the SCOTUS ruling on this.

self preservation · Nov 5, 2012

Someone said here that it's not against the law to argue or be rude with someone while OC. See how that works out for you in court if it escalates into a defensive scenario where you use deadly physical force!

A person does not have a duty to retreat if he is in a place that he has a right to be. So if I'm in a gas station and a guy comes in and we cuss each other out, then he pulls a gun on me but I shoot him first, I can't claim self defense because we had words first?

some OCers (not all) are out there acting in ways to get attention and promote their own agenda.

Are there jerk OC'ers? Sure. But as someone has already said, if the LEO can be baited for a legal activity them shame on them. Plus, I feel like you're blaming the victim. Under your theory if a lady wears a pretty dress and does her hair up all nice and is raped by some scumbag, it is her fault for "baiting" the rapist.

ericb327 · Nov 5, 2012

self preservation said:
A person does not have a duty to retreat if he is in a place that he has a right to be. So if I'm in a gas station and a guy comes in and we cuss each other out, then he pulls a gun on me but I shoot him first, I can't claim self defense because we had words first?

Are there jerk OC'ers? Sure. But as someone has already said, if the LEO can be baited for a legal activity them shame on them. Plus, I feel like you're blaming the victim. Under your theory if a lady wears a pretty dress and does her hair up all nice and is raped by some scumbag, it is her fault for "baiting" the rapist.

That is true in Kentucky but the law also says you cannot be original aggressor.

You're making up your own scenario, you could claim whatever you want but you better hope witnesses have the same view of what happened.

ericb327 · Nov 5, 2012

self preservation said:
No they don't. Look up the SCOTUS ruling on this.

Can you provide a case so I can look it up?

stopped x2 handcuffed seached gun and billfold taken threatened with DC/CCW revoked

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Activist Member

Activist Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Activist Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

New member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member