Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: OC Video: Have you guys seen this? OMG what a violation of this guy's rights!

  1. #1
    Regular Member Ron_O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    109

    OC Video: Have you guys seen this? OMG what a violation of this guy's rights!

    911 operator takes a MWAG call and assures the caller that it's perfectly legal to OC. LEO's are dispatched and man is held on the ground at gunpoint, disarmed, and ultimately released.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLmrTENZwDA

    Last edited by Ron_O; 09-14-2014 at 01:54 PM.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    16,172
    I would give him more than 600,000 ....

  3. #3
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    1,923
    I don't even want to watch it. Reading the complaint transcript. Unbelievable. I hope he bankrupts the city over this.
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  4. #4
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    830
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Officer William Moe drew his service pistol and aimed it at Deffert as he approached, the lawsuit said. Moe ordered Deffert to the ground, on his stomach, and handcuffed him behind his back. The officer then removed Deffert’s gun from the holster.
    Well thats making threats to kill followed by theft. I'd be asking the MI self defence statutes. That behavior is totally unacceptable and Deberry v US is clear. The officer had no business even stopping him on the sole account of him bearing arms. I'm hoping the officer in question was fired at the very least and hopefully in jail for his threats to kill.
    "Which part of shall not be infringed is so difficult to understand"?

    "Any and all restrictions on the bearing of arms in public places are nullified as per the Second Amendment"

    Conservative Broadcast || Google Plus profile

  5. #5
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    11,727
    Nothing in the call indicated a suspicious person, the dispatcher should be fired also.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  6. #6
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    1,923
    If this happened to any of you guys, would you not demand that the officer lower his weapon? I would not be inclined to flat out submit. I'd definitely keep my hands up and would not make any sudden moves, and I'm sure I'd be taken down, but where is the fine line between submitting to proper authority and having a right to defend yourself against lethal force?

    It's been case-law backed that in an OC state you cannot be detained legally unless there is reasonable and articulable suspicion that a crime is being committed or will be committed.

    http://www.fedagent.com/case-law-upd...ard-of-seizure
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,395
    Quote Originally Posted by The Truth View Post
    If this happened to any of you guys, would you not demand that the officer lower his weapon? I would not be inclined to flat out submit. I'd definitely keep my hands up and would not make any sudden moves, and I'm sure I'd be taken down, but where is the fine line between submitting to proper authority and having a right to defend yourself against lethal force?

    It's been case-law backed that in an OC state you cannot be detained legally unless there is reasonable and articulable suspicion that a crime is being committed or will be committed.

    http://www.fedagent.com/case-law-upd...ard-of-seizure
    Uh, no. Comply. Win in court.

  8. #8
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    1,923
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    That's 4CA (in NC, SC, VA, MD, WV) moot in Nevada and in Michigan the incident jurisdiction.

    One does not argue PC/RAS on the street or at the point of a gun. Cops lie.
    Gotcha... currently searching for applicable case law then.

    Sorry for the false claim.

    As for arguing RAS, couldn't it be argued on site in 4CA?
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    3,939
    Quote Originally Posted by The Truth View Post
    Gotcha... currently searching for applicable case law then.

    Sorry for the false claim.

    As for arguing RAS, couldn't it be argued on site in 4CA?
    Argue to what extent? The officer doesn't even have to tell you anything at that point.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  10. #10
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    11,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    Argue to what extent? The officer doesn't even have to tell you anything at that point.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    Depends on the state. But he does have to explain it to a judge and jury. Hopefully creepy rectal crevices like this eventually end up in jail playing pick up the soap. I have no tolerance for law breakers whether they wear a badge or not. FILTH is what they are.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  11. #11
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    1,923
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick9 View Post
    Uh, no. Comply. Win in court.
    Doesn't it suck just a little bit that it has to be this way? Comply, give up all your rights and liberty, probably have your gun confiscated, spend inordinate amounts of cash to retain a lawyer, and hope for the best. 'Murcuh! What about poor people?

    I'm just asking my somewhat ignorant questions to get some dialogue going. I shall sacrifice my ego for the cause of edumacashun.

    Upon doing a little more research,

    "See Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 22 (1968); People v. Jenkins, 691 N.W.2d 759, 764 (Mich. 2005); People v. Custer, 630 N.W.2d 870, 876 (Mich. 2001).

    Note that in Michigan, the Michigan State Police have issued a legal update that clearly states that the open carry of a firearm is not a crime. Michigan also does not have a stop and ID law, meaning that the officer cannot stop someone and demand identification without reasonable suspicion for a crime."

    cite: http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com...-open-carrier/
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  12. #12
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    11,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Will you provide citations to exemplar jurisdictions pro and con, please?
    When I worked in Illinois we were required by every dept I worked in to notify the person why they were stopped or arrested. This was also taught at the ISP academy, they never referenced law or case law, just do it.

    Other states I do not know, but the whole meaning of the word articulate would imply that a officer would be able to articulate.

    Let's not forget Indiana where people can legally resist a unlawful arrest, which would indicate a person had to know why they were being arrested or stopped.

    It just makes sense and it is poor police work to hassle people without explaining why.
    Last edited by WalkingWolf; 09-14-2014 at 04:49 PM.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    16,172
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    When I worked in Illinois we were required by every dept I worked in to notify the person why they were stopped or arrested. This was also taught at the ISP academy, they never referenced law or case law, just do it.

    Other states I do not know, but the whole meaning of the word articulate would imply that a officer would be able to articulate.

    Let's not forget Indiana where people can legally resist a unlawful arrest, which would indicate a person had to know why they were being arrested or stopped.

    It just makes sense and it is poor police work to hassle people without explaining why.
    Technically, a cop does not have to articulate his reason on the spot. But I would never hand my gun over when I know I've done nothing wrong - even asking for it implies that they want an advantage & possibly a desire to shoot. The 2nd amendment means nothing if they can take your gun away.

    I had 1 cop ask for my gun. I said no. Oddly enough, he did not go crazy but, since I was violating any law, just left.

  14. #14
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    11,727
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Technically, a cop does not have to articulate his reason on the spot. But I would never hand my gun over when I know I've done nothing wrong - even asking for it implies that they want an advantage & possibly a desire to shoot. The 2nd amendment means nothing if they can take your gun away.

    I had 1 cop ask for my gun. I said no. Oddly enough, he did not go crazy but, since I was violating any law, just left.
    He has to have articulate suspicion on the spot or the stop is not legal. It can argued later whether he did or not, but he must have it. IMO if a officer cannot articulate it when asked he does not have it. In Indiana at least resisting would be legal.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  15. #15
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    1,923
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Thank you for the captions. I looked at the linked blog but saw no URL to 'Custer' or 'Jenkins', where did you read the cases, please?
    In my opinion, People vs. Jenkins is weak, but again I'm not a lawyer.

    http://www.leagle.com/decision/20051...20v.%20JENKINS

    People vs. Custer is maybe less relevant, but stronger in my opinion.

    http://www.leagle.com/decision/20011...%20v.%20CUSTER

    I still need to double and triple-read these again to fully understand though, but here are the links.
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  16. #16
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,326
    Disgusting. I wish he would have tried to defend himself as he was being kidnapped and humiliated by that thug.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,450
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    He has to have articulate suspicion on the spot or the stop is not legal. It can argued later whether he did or not, but he must have it. IMO if a officer cannot articulate it when asked he does not have it. In Indiana at least resisting would be legal.
    It behooves the officer to be able to articulate in court the RAS he claims to have had at the time he detained/arrested the plaintiff. I am not aware of any court ruling that mandates that he articulate the RAS on the spot at the time he effects the detention/arrest. There may be policy within a specific LEA for the officer to state his RAS at the time he effects a detention/arrest, athough I am more of the opinion that the requirement is to state in general terms the violation you are being detained/arrested for. ("You are under arrest for grand larceny, auto" does nothing to articulate the reassonable suspicion the officer had that you had in fact stolen an automobile.) See WalkingWolf's post on that - he never said he was required to state the RAS. It's technical/legalistic language all about what the meaning of "is" is.

    IOW, the officer can use the time between when he detains/arrests you and when he writes out his first report to come up with RAS. It is nice to believe that it is only a few cops that need that time to come up with RAS.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  18. #18
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    11,727
    Pretty much, Terry V Ohio they must have RAS, the ruling does not spell out whether they articulate it at the time, never the less they still must have it. If they find RAS later and they are caught they may blow their case a it may cost them some bucks. A illegal arrest is a illegal arrest.

    Clearly in this case the police do not have RAS, the dispatcher admits to the caller that there is no RAS, yet the dispatcher inserts the RAS. The officers did not observe and acted solely on a second hand claim, which can be fatal. Primus seems to think in this case that a officer can pretend to have RAS making it legal. Hopefully his dept has a huge amount of funds to cover him.

    The officers exceeded their authority and the dispatcher lied. At the very least all should be fired, if it had resulted in a fatality or injury all should be prosecuted. I do not advocate jail house rape, but then it is out of my control. I do think it is a fitting end to the butt of a situation such as this. Pun intended.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  19. #19
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    3,939
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    Pretty much, Terry V Ohio they must have RAS, the ruling does not spell out whether they articulate it at the time, never the less they still must have it. If they find RAS later and they are caught they may blow their case a it may cost them some bucks. A illegal arrest is a illegal arrest.

    Clearly in this case the police do not have RAS, the dispatcher admits to the caller that there is no RAS, yet the dispatcher inserts the RAS. The officers did not observe and acted solely on a second hand claim, which can be fatal. Primus seems to think in this case that a officer can pretend to have RAS making it legal. Hopefully his dept has a huge amount of funds to cover him.

    The officers exceeded their authority and the dispatcher lied. At the very least all should be fired, if it had resulted in a fatality or injury all should be prosecuted. I do not advocate jail house rape, but then it is out of my control. I do think it is a fitting end to the butt of a situation such as this. Pun intended.
    Your fascination with jail house rape is kind if disturbing... But each to his own. It is a free country.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  20. #20
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    11,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    Your fascination with jail house rape is kind if disturbing... But each to his own. It is a free country.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    I think people who screw with people deserve the same treatment in return. I find rouge police officers a embarrassment and take their actions as a personal insult to decent honest police officers. I believe anybody who makes excuses for illegal behavior, let alone government agents are just as bad as the rouge agents.

    An eye for and eye.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  21. #21
    Regular Member Ron_O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    109

    'Good Guys Carry Guns' Video Stockpile

    I've seen so many of these videos over the past couple of months while doing my research for the GGCG film that it's driving me nuts. I've set up a page where I'm stockpiling this and other videos and info before we do an official rollout of the GGCG project. These videos are not just open carry, they're to show the general public how guns save lives and that good guys and gals should be carrying daily.

    The focus of the project is to work toward nationwide Constitutional Freedom to Carry.

    The screened and selected video stockpile is on Facebook here: https://www.facebook.com/GoodGuysCarryGuns

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,233
    I try not to Monday morning quarterback, but this is begging for it.

    The OCer in question was the victim of a violation of use of force! The force was absent any 1st hand knowledge of a crime, and even if there was a crime, was escalated beyond the obvious need. Had the officer rolled up, dropped his window, and asked a few questions... He would have been OK.

    After flattening out, the OC'er consented to search, and (its a stretch,) but arguably the seizure as well. He also offered his version of the facts, and told the officers about the law, Even the null conflicting law to which they paid the most attn.

    My takeaway is the display of an appetite for unbridled violence, from the dispatcher throughout the department. The cops admitted they were aware it was his right to carry, yet did everything in their power to attempt to dissuade him from doing it in the future. Their Oath means nothing, I saw unthinking drones violently carrying out their masters (politicians) wishes. Sad.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Ron_O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    109

    This video is equally as disturbing...

    Check out this guy in Florida. Going fishing, legally OC'ing, detained, cuffed, searched, weapon seized, released.


  24. #24
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    11,101
    Quote Originally Posted by DON`T TREAD ON ME View Post
    I try not to Monday morning quarterback, but this is begging for it.

    The OCer in question was the victim of a violation of use of force! The force was absent any 1st hand knowledge of a crime, and even if there was a crime, was escalated beyond the obvious need. Had the officer rolled up, dropped his window, and asked a few questions... He would have been OK.

    After flattening out, the OC'er consented to search, and (its a stretch,) but arguably the seizure as well. He also offered his version of the facts, and told the officers about the law, Even the null conflicting law to which they paid the most attn.

    My takeaway is the display of an appetite for unbridled violence, from the dispatcher throughout the department. The cops admitted they were aware it was his right to carry, yet did everything in their power to attempt to dissuade him from doing it in the future. Their Oath means nothing, I saw unthinking drones violently carrying out their masters (politicians) wishes. Sad.
    Consent at gun point...hmm.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  25. #25
    Regular Member waskel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Neskowin, OR
    Posts
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron_O View Post
    Check out this guy in Florida. Going fishing, legally OC'ing, detained, cuffed, searched, weapon seized, released.

    Holy crap.
    09:50 - "I'm a firm believer of ownership of firearms, your first amendment rights... are the cuffs too tight?"

    10:00 - "I'm a firm believer of the first amendment and would try always never to do anything to cut into your rights on that..."

    I must say I admire the young man's verbal restraint in the face of such arrogance and ignorance.
    Han shot first.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •