youtube

solus · Aug 10, 2014

sudden valley gunner said:
I think I get my head around IPSE's point a bit. He is not arguing the right or wrong of the situation. It appears more that the kid surrendered and asked for a ticket and got it.

This can and will be used against him in court and be made to look like an admission the kid is guilty of the crime. A great example of why not to engage in dialogue with cops in a detention which this clearly was.

I believe with a competent representation (hopefully this is the path the young man takes) he will beat the charges. Then if he so chooses can and may win (more than likely the city will settle) a lawsuit against the detainment that had no RAS, and the video shows the cop agreeing he had non RAS when the cop admits the kid was "legal".

To me there was no RAS, just a hunch or suspicion on the officer. This of course is assuming he had no idea who the young man was. Something I find unlikely if he has already had copfrontations.

I find the law that spells out it is obstruction even if the cop is doing something illegally atrocious to liberty, and to human rights, I would hope a court would strike that law down, yet have no faith in the statist courts.

unfortunately, as stated, the young man will walk into a small cubical, before a non lawyer magistrate who will only ask: ' how do you plead? ' & possibly listen to extenuating circumstances from the young man. if he pleads not guilty, the case will be sent to the judge for trial/adjudication ~ sometime in the future.

one hopes he fairs through the judicial system smoothly and doesn't pop off in an exuberant youth rant to the magistrate..tis not the time.

while the young man has a facebook page, i do not and searching the internet for denver area fails to retrieve a way to contact the individual, but i will contact some friends in the area and see what they can do to find a contact methodology so i can see how he fared after the 26th of this month.

SVG, i wholeheartedly agree the entire CRS cites is rift w/inconsistency especially when i saw the paragraph which basically stated ~ we don't care if the peace officer acted illegally or not... thought wow...

ipse

Dario · Aug 10, 2014

solus said:
as i have asked previously dario, have you read the cases listed or only the synopses of what someone dredged up from another thread on this forum and presented as viable in this thread?
have you provided your own interpertation of the case law cited and how it applied or just taking someone else's word for it?

jump off the band wagon dario and do your own critical thinking instead of pointing at me.

not according to me, but rather CRS and i notice with interest you do not refute the CRS cite provided about CO is a must show and tell id state?

and i know i missed how you would react to the same situation and the police dario.

ipse

Good grief you never quit. I've read the Terry decision several times. I've also memorized the 2nd and 4th amendments. That's all I need. The show ID statute includes reasonable suspicion of a crime and the officers admit there is no evidence of one in this case. The obstruction charge won't stick. You disagree. We'll just have to wait and see.

I haven't answered your question because it is irrelevant and belongs in a "what if" forum.

(are we supposed to sign our posts?)

cloudcroft · Aug 10, 2014

Truth,

PM sent...

ixtow · Aug 13, 2014

I can't believe there is even a discussion about this. The cops are clearly way out of line. They admitted multiple times to :not knowing" if he is old enough, not knowing if he is a felon... RAS and PC are things they DO know, so they admitted on film to having no reason to even talk to this guy, much less arrest him.

If he fights it, I don't even think he would need a lawyer, except for proceedural things... These cops crossed way over the line, let their dicks make their decisions, and they pretty much ****** themselves; and they deserve it for being the traitors that they very obviously are.

For a kid who just turned 18, he's one hell of a stand up guy. More mature and collected than half of the commenters in this thread.

I hope he gets what he deserves; a huge chunk of these degenerates' paychecks.

OC for ME · Aug 13, 2014

sudden valley gunner said:
I think I get my head around IPSE's point a bit. He is not arguing the right or wrong of the situation. It appears more that the kid surrendered and asked for a ticket and got it.

This can and will be used against him in court and be made to look like an admission the kid is guilty of the crime. A great example of why not to engage in dialogue with cops in a detention which this clearly was.

I believe with a competent representation (hopefully this is the path the young man takes) he will beat the charges. Then if he so chooses can and may win (more than likely the city will settle) a lawsuit against the detainment that had no RAS, and the video shows the cop agreeing he had non RAS when the cop admits the kid was "legal".

To me there was no RAS, just a hunch or suspicion on the officer. This of course is assuming he had no idea who the young man was. Something I find unlikely if he has already had copfrontations.

I find the law that spells out it is obstruction even if the cop is doing something illegally atrocious to liberty, and to human rights, I would hope a court would strike that law down, yet have no faith in the statist courts.

The kid surrendered nothing under the law. Unless, of course, Colorado has in their statutes a provision for a CO citizen to request to be cited for not breaking the law.

Poison & tree thing, right? How about this legal analogy...you see a cop at the doughnut shop and ask him to give you a speeding ticket for doing 33 in a 35. Or, better yet, how about asking that he cite you for obstruction because you may, in the future, obstruct some cop, in the future even though there will not be found any evidence that you actually obstructed.

The cop lost his authority under the law to issue a citation, even if requested to do so by the kid, when he is heard stating "ok, so you can legally carry one."

It is easy sometimes to see the "logic" in a post around here from time to time cuz a member sticks to his "guns." Do not be fooled, the cop got it wrong, he knew it, admitted to it and then issued a citation for a event that did not occur because he stayed around to engage the kid. It is likely that the cop had nothing better to do.

sudden valley gunner · Aug 13, 2014

OC for ME said:
The kid surrendered nothing under the law. Unless, of course, Colorado has in their statutes a provision for a CO citizen to request to be cited for not breaking the law.

Poison & tree thing, right? How about this legal analogy...you see a cop at the doughnut shop and ask him to give you a speeding ticket for doing 33 in a 35. Or, better yet, how about asking that he cite you for obstruction because you may, in the future, obstruct some cop, in the future even though there will not be found any evidence that you actually obstructed.

The cop lost his authority under the law to issue a citation, even if requested to do so by the kid, when he is heard stating "ok, so you can legally carry one."

It is easy sometimes to see the "logic" in a post around here from time to time cuz a member sticks to his "guns." Do not be fooled, the cop got it wrong, he knew it, admitted to it and then issued a citation for a event that did not occur because he stayed around to engage the kid. It is likely that the cop had nothing better to do.

I am not saying I agree it will work. I have been to court enough times and have watched how cops and prosecutors and even judges work in court. They may try to construe his words into admission. They don't have a case in my opinion.

The Truth · Aug 13, 2014

I shouldn't have deleted my posts.

DocWalker · Aug 13, 2014

It is hard to debate with two or three cops on this forum that will defend "any cop" even if they are wrong. The blue line doesn't recognize state lines or even basic human rights. It is all about defending the brotherhood and their percived authority; Remember that the badge is mightier than the truth.

(This is of course not true for all cops but I would summit the majority)

The Truth · Aug 13, 2014

*huge sigh of relief*

My lack of faith in this forum's non-bias will hopefully be rebuilt upon the foundation of our concurrence - that and the MULTITUDE of PMs I received in support throughout all of this.

WalkingWolf · Aug 13, 2014

DocWalker said:
It is hard to debate with two or three cops on this forum that will defend "any cop" even if they are wrong. The blue line doesn't recognize state lines or even basic human rights. It is all about defending the brotherhood and their percived authority; Remember that the badge is mightier than the truth.

(This is of course not true for all cops but I would summit the majority)

To keep or get public respect the police should be harder on themselves than the public at large. Unfortunately that is not the case~~units that once investigated police now spend their time covering up for them IMO. The only people keeping them honest or trying to anymore are those citizens who risk their own safety and freedom by recording them, but they cannot watch them enough to stop the corruption.

As a former LEO I am sick at the CYA that goes so far to cover up atrocities. Most of this is the federal governments fault by buying allegiance with monopoly money.

solus · Aug 13, 2014

OC for ME said:
The kid surrendered nothing under the law. Unless, of course, Colorado has in their statutes a provision for a CO citizen to request to be cited for not breaking the law.
Poison & tree thing, right? How about this legal analogy...you see a cop at the doughnut shop and ask him to give you a speeding ticket for doing 33 in a 35. Or, better yet, how about asking that he cite you for obstruction because you may, in the future, obstruct some cop, in the future even though there will not be found any evidence that you actually obstructed.
The cop lost his authority under the law to issue a citation, even if requested to do so by the kid, when he is heard stating "ok, so you can legally carry one."
It is easy sometimes to see the "logic" in a post around here from time to time cuz a member sticks to his "guns." Do not be fooled, the cop got it wrong, he knew it, admitted to it and then issued a citation for a event that did not occur because he stayed around to engage the kid. It is likely that the cop had nothing better to do.

OC4ME, et al., officer stops you for a traffic infraction, asks 'do you know how fast you were going?' you know you were speeding 15-20 over the limit, so you are going to mitigate your response is to say 'you know officer, maybe just under 10 miles over the limit' so you now received a citation for speeding 10 over the limit. end result is the same, you have a ticket!

'do you want a citation for obstruction?' 'sure!' was the young man's response on video i might add, so the young man now has a citation for obstruction!

ipse

The Truth · Aug 13, 2014

solus said:
OC4ME, et al., officer stops you for a traffic infraction, asks 'do you know how fast you were going?' you know you were speeding 15-20 over the limit, so you are going to mitigate your response is to say 'you know officer, maybe just under 10 miles over the limit' so you now received a citation for speeding 10 over the limit. end result is the same, you have a ticket!

'do you want a citation for obstruction?' 'sure!' was the young man's response on video i might add, so the young man now has a citation for obstruction!

ipse

Un-ignored on this thread only because I regret deleting my posts, and so that inexperienced readers coming here for education don't have to read your BS opinion as fact. I don't care if I get reprimanded for this, as a reprimand is of no consequence to me and it is worth it for me to make my next statement because you don't seem to respond to intelligent conversation or debate. You are an ignorant, ARROGANT, statist M*RON, and now I KNOW you're a statist cop. Only a statist cop would respond with such absolutely ignorant drivel as you have displayed in this thread. Your analogy with the speeding ticket is ASININE, and so off-the-mark that I have now been affirmed that you are only here as a politically correct counter balance to actual logic on this forum. If I'm going to be moderated on stupid crap, I'm damn sure gonna make sure it's worth it from now on. How's that for ad hominem? You're a d*lt. I am typing what countless others simply don't care to get in trouble for - The Truth.

What you 'hear' in the video:
"'do you want a citation for obstruction?' 'sure!' was the young man's response...[snip]"

What was actually said in the video:
"I'm going to give you one last chance to give me your last name....(inaudible)....or I'm going to cite you for obstruction."

"Cite me for obstruction then!"

To even suggest that this is an admission of guilt is not only ignorant, it's irresponsible. And if the only point you are proving is the fact that he was given a citation, well no sh*t. No one is arguing whether or not he received a citation.

Luckily in Virginia I can tell a cop to shove it and walk away if asked for ID for no reason whatsoever except committing lawful acts.

*Admin, don't delete this whole post. If you wish I will delete insults, but that's it. I'm not here to go along with this crap like a little sheep, and I respectfully refuse to do so*

Primus · Aug 13, 2014

The Truth said:
Un-ignored on this thread only because I regret deleting my posts, and so that inexperienced readers coming here for education don't have to read your BS opinion as fact. I don't care if I get reprimanded for this, as a reprimand is of no consequence to me and it is worth it for me to make my next statement because you don't seem to respond to intelligent conversation or debate. You are an ignorant, ARROGANT, statist MORON, and now I KNOW you're a statist cop. Only a statist cop would respond with such absolutely ignorant drivel as you have displayed in this thread. Your analogy with the speeding ticket is ASININE, and so off-the-mark that I have now been affirmed that you are only here as a politically correct counter balance to actual logic on this forum. If I'm going to be moderated on stupid crap, I'm damn sure gonna make sure it's worth it from now on. How's that for ad hominem? You're a dolt. I am typing what countless others simply don't care to get in trouble for - The Truth.

What you 'hear' in the video:
"'do you want a citation for obstruction?' 'sure!' was the young man's response...[snip]"

What was actually said in the video:
"I'm going to give you one last chance to give me your last name....(inaudible)....or I'm going to cite you for obstruction."

"Cite me for obstruction then!"

To even suggest that this is an admission of guilt is not only ignorant, it's irresponsible. And if the only point you are proving is the fact that he was given a citation, well no sh*t. No one is arguing whether or not he received a citation.

Luckily in Virginia I can tell a cop to shove it and walk away if asked for ID for no reason whatsoever except committing lawful acts.

*Admin, don't delete this whole post. If you wish I will delete insults, but that's it. I'm not here to go along with this crap like a little sheep, and I respectfully refuse to do so*

Lol

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Dario · Aug 13, 2014

DocWalker said:
It is hard to debate with two or three cops on this forum that will defend "any cop" even if they are wrong. The blue line doesn't recognize state lines or even basic human rights. It is all about defending the brotherhood and their percived authority; Remember that the badge is mightier than the truth.

(This is of course not true for all cops but I would summit the majority)

My father is a retired cop and our debates are frequent and heated, with the end result being the same every single time. He can't even agree to disagree! He actually brags about violating peoples rights and doesn't seem to have any shred of remorse. I will never understand that part of him.

:banghead:

Waiting on word if he qualified today for his 50 state CCW.

JoeSparky · Aug 13, 2014

Just gotta say this.

Officer's words asked a question, "Do you want a ticket for obstruction?" However, the officer was NOT asking a question he was threatening the young man with a ticket for the charge. YM called him on it and got the ticket the officer threatened him with and he was GOING to get no matter what as long as he continued to stand for his rights!

So, the officer was attempting to COERCE him to nullify his constitutionally protected/guaranteed rights under COLOR OF LAW.

Just my opinion!

lukaszu · Aug 13, 2014

full of bs...

solus said:
lukazsu, in hindsight, one further point on your last comment regarding your numerous encounters with LEs in the denver area...

I have over the last 20 years wandered, OC'g of course, throughout the colorado, wyoming, arizona, and the land time forgot regions and have never experienced an encounter with LE about my carrying a firearm. yet you profess multiple encounters and your comment seems to indicate in a reasonably short period of time.

if you ping the forum membership, i believe you will find the majority have had only 'limited' encounters w/LE who are concerned with OC'g activities.

have you ever given thought these encounters are not 'chance' and that you might be unintentionally encouraging these encounters ?

discerning what is generating these encounters could save yourself some grief as well as mitigate and relieve stress you are experiencing from having to constantly defend your 2A rights with the LEs who 'bother you'?

OC'g should be transparent within the community and not a hassle from constantly having to look over your shoulder if the LEs are going to 'talk' with you about your carrying.

ipse[/QUOT

I was gonna leave this alone but ....I think you OC'ing for 20 years with out an LEO encounter is horse poop. Unless you oc in your house or back yard. I don't know where you at now but here in my area simply going about your buisness OC'ing will attract LEO'S.

solus · Aug 13, 2014

the truth ~ why oh why do your constantly worry about the moderators censoring your posts?

oh ya i see now, immature impulsive behaviour when you post stuff like this against another member: quote: You are an ignorant, ARROGANT, statist MORON, and now I KNOW you're a statist cop. Only a statist cop would respond with such absolutely ignorant drivel as you have displayed in this thread. unquote.

oh ya, forgot this relative comment: the truth quote You're a dolt unquote.

yepper now i see why you're worried...

ipse

Primus · Aug 13, 2014

solus said:
the truth ~ why oh why do your constantly worry about the moderators censoring your posts?

oh ya i see now, immature impulsive behaviour when you post stuff like this against another member: quote: You are an ignorant, ARROGANT, statist MORON, and now I KNOW you're a statist cop. Only a statist cop would respond with such absolutely ignorant drivel as you have displayed in this thread. unquote.

oh ya, forgot this relative comment: the truth quote You're a dolt unquote.

yepper now i see why you're worried...

ipse

Solus.... This post is officially of topic. I request you to moderate yourself.

No wait they are going to moderate me.. Ahhhh....

Lol

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

solus · Aug 13, 2014

lukaszu, sorry why on earth do find my statement unbelievable, some of us have probably lived longer than you have walked the earth plus 20 years and during that time have had firearms with us constantly as i even carried all over your neck of the woods, fort luptin, brighton, up and down 85, west to boulder and up to FTC, down to black hawk and such, then WY, CO, SD NM, TX OH, now east VA, NC, WV, GA, MS, AL and the list goes on...

oh to find out where i am look right under the date under my avatar and you will see 'here NC'

ipse

OC for ME · Aug 14, 2014

solus said:
OC4ME, et al., officer stops you for a traffic infraction, asks 'do you know how fast you were going?' you know you were speeding 15-20 over the limit, so you are going to mitigate your response is to say 'you know officer, maybe just under 10 miles over the limit' so you now received a citation for speeding 10 over the limit. end result is the same, you have a ticket!

'do you want a citation for obstruction?' 'sure!' was the young man's response on video i might add, so the young man now has a citation for obstruction!

ipse

Deflection and obfuscation, and a intentional distortion of what is clearly heard on the video. Liberals always resort to this tactic when they are on the wrong side of a issue, and liberals are on the wrong side of every issue.

If a cop pulled me when I was not speeding and he is going to issue a ticket I will state, "Well, officer, why don't you go ahead and write the ticket and I'll see you in court." It is funny how some cops will provide proof of their unlawful acts.

RSMo 575.080

youtube

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Centurion

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member