Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 46

Thread: My complaint to the Pueblo Colorado Sheriff.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    62

    My complaint to the Pueblo Colorado Sheriff.

    To the Pueblo County Sheriff Department RE: complaint

    [Personal info redacted]

    Invoved employees: Deputy [redacted] and three other officers.

    Date of incident: 01-20-15

    Time of incident 10:00 AM

    Details of allegation:

    I was waiting for my fiancée while she was [redacted] at the [location redacted] near Purcell and Hwy 50 in Pueblo West. I decided to take a walk while I was waiting. I was openly carrying a handgun as is my custom. I walked toward Purcell but was getting cold, so I returned to the car to put on an additional layer of clothing. I then walked over to the Loaf and Jug on Purcell when I heard a voice behind me saying "Hold it right there, put up your hands." which I did and then turned around.

    I was soon surrounded by four deputies and contacted by deputy [redacted.] Deputy [redacted] asked me if he could remove my handgun from its holster to check and see if it was loaded. I told him that no, I didn't want him to do that, and that it was indeed loaded. He did not push the issue. I asked Deputy [redacted] if I was suspected of being involved in some sort of crime, and he said "No." I calmly and politely asked if I was being detained and he said that I was not, so I said "I would like to be on my way." Deputy redacted] told me that I may not leave. I will say that he was polite and calm throughout the entire encounter, and I appreciate that. Deputy [redacted] asked me for ID, and I politely said that I am not required to show ID if I am not suspected of a crime and again asked to be on my way. I told the deputies what I was doing, and why I was out walking around. They insisted that I provide ID to "Be sure that I wasn't a felon." I eventually relented and provided my driver's license and concealed handgun permit.

    After they checked me for warrants and criminal history they allowed me to leave.

    I will say that they never acted rude or hostile to me, and I do appreciate that, however, I would ask you to make your deputies aware that merely carrying a handgun is not grounds to detain someone and intimidate them into showing ID. If Deputy [redacted] had a reasonable suspicion that I had, was committing, or was about to commit a crime he would have lawful authority to detain and ID me.

    I was happy to tell them why I was out walking around, but the conversation became non-consensual when I twice asked if I could be on my way, and they did not allow me to leave.

    Thank you for your consideration of this complaint. I am not asking that anyone be disciplined, but that deputies be made aware that they must have RAS in order to detain and ID someone against their will.

    I will add that I have been openly carrying a handgun regularly for almost three years, mostly in Colorado Springs, and at times in other areas of Colorado and Kansas, and have never had any police question me. I have on rare occasions had an officer drive by and look me over, but in each case I smiled and waved at them and they waved back.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Jefferson County, CO
    Posts
    260
    I am curious to any response, as I visit Pueblo twice a year, typically.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,507
    Why not call for a sergeant to come to the scene? Generally they will back off from non-legal demands. Did you run a recorder? If not, do so in the future. You were unlawfully held for one thing. If they say you're not being detained they should not be telling you 'don't leave'. Glad you weren't shot.

  4. #4
    Regular Member fjpro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    300

    Keep up the good work

    I applaud everything you did. In my opinion, you handled it perfectly from beginning to end. A lot of responses will probably be - you should have done more, - you should have done less, - you should have done this or that sooner, - you should have done this or that later, - etc, etc.

    Thank you for your consideration of this complaint. I am not asking that anyone be disciplined, but that deputies be made aware that they must have RAS in order to detain and ID someone against their will
    .

    To me, this is a statement from a "classy" open carrier. It shows levelheadedness. You were not asking that the officers be disciplined in the normal way we think of the word, but rather that they be made aware of what they were doing.

    Excellent!!

    Let us know if you receive a response. That response will tell a lot.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by gutshot View Post
    What do you think the response would have been if you had not caved and maintained your refusal to give your ID to them?
    I was at a public bldg just yesterday and a cop demanded ID. I refused telling him to shove his request where the sun don't shine.

    He was ready to sit there and puff out his chest when another just informed him "Don't waste your time, it's THAT guy" .. and I continued on with my business w/o showing ID.

    So it only took about 5 contacts with this group of guys before it started to click that they cannot intimidate me into doing things that I cannot be required to do.

    One can be nice and just say "no thanks" but I don't think that offers any incentive for them to discontinue the process...me? I shoot of a host of obscenities and cursing.

    Imagine a cop who wishes to ask folks for ID , people just walking down a public street.
    Scenario A has people politely saying no.
    Scenario B has people cursing them out for five minutes for even asking.
    Which scenario would more likely result in the cop's discontinuance of asking for ID.
    I think scenario B.

    Scenario B works for me, from my experience.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 01-24-2015 at 12:44 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881
    Quote Originally Posted by Hamans-gallows View Post
    I was soon surrounded by four deputies and contacted by deputy [redacted.] Deputy [redacted] asked me if he could remove my handgun from its holster to check and see if it was loaded. I told him that no, I didn't want him to do that, and that it was indeed loaded. He did not push the issue.
    That much is good. The officer had at least some sense

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamans-gallows View Post
    I asked Deputy [redacted] if I was suspected of being involved in some sort of crime, and he said "No." I calmly and politely asked if I was being detained and he said that I was not, so I said "I would like to be on my way." Deputy redacted] told me that I may not leave.
    Yes you could. He said you were not being detained, yet refusing to let you go is indeed detainment. Especially as he also said you were not suspected of a crime

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamans-gallows View Post
    I will say that he was polite and calm throughout the entire encounter, and I appreciate that. Deputy [redacted] asked me for ID, and I politely said that I am not required to show ID if I am not suspected of a crime and again asked to be on my way. I told the deputies what I was doing, and why I was out walking around. They insisted that I provide ID to "Be sure that I wasn't a felon." I eventually relented and provided my driver's license and concealed handgun permit.After they checked me for warrants and criminal history they allowed me to leave.
    innocent until proven guilty. Now you may well have to show them your permit under CO law and a resident of that state will be able to confirm that, but certainly not your ID

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamans-gallows View Post
    I am not asking that anyone be disciplined, but that deputies be made aware that they must have RAS in order to detain and ID someone against their will.
    Whyever not? he committed a crime against you. I'd post his name and badge number right here as well as on post to the PDs FB page. Name and shame.
    "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

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Tomahawk and Abbotsford, Wi.
    Posts
    561
    Surrounded by four LEO, told to put up your hands, told you're not detained but can't leave. Sounds detained to me.

    While carrying concealed after a short open carry walk.

    Way too much fail here.

    I know each state is somewhat different. We have to show ID if asked when concealed, but not if you are open, as no permit/license for that. So, a gray area how do they know to ask for license if you are concealed. When he said you are not detained, stop talking and start walking.

    You state may be, and probably is, different. Therein lies a huge part of the probem.

    I don't swear but politely, adamant, concisely, and consistently refuse to participate.

  8. #8
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Wstar425 View Post
    Surrounded by four LEO, told to put up your hands, told you're not detained but can't leave. Sounds detained to me.
    SCOTUS has ruled that the cops do not have to say "You are detained"; by shear force of numbers, surrounded by 4 deputies is enough for a reasonable person to believe they are detained, therefore you are detained. These deputies were playing the "I didn't SAY you are detained therefore this is a voluntary contact and you have no constitutional protections" game, I have no doubt this is taught in cop school. OK class this is how you defeat that pesky Constitution thingy.......

    Plus you are in Colorado Article II of the state constitution is the bill of rights...

    Section 13. Right to bear arms. The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons.

    I do believe those fine deputies were in no doubt questioning your right to bear arms; on the old Colorado Open Carry board there were a couple members who got $10,000+ settlements for just slightly more than what you went through. Each person makes their own decisions, but I would have NEVER relented and shown ID and when first told I was not being detained would have just gone about my business with no further questions.
    Last edited by F350; 01-24-2015 at 03:33 PM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by fjpro2a View Post
    I applaud everything you did. In my opinion, you handled it perfectly from beginning to end. A lot of responses will probably be - you should have done more, - you should have done less, - you should have done this or that sooner, - you should have done this or that later, - etc, etc.

    Thank you for your consideration of this complaint. I am not asking that anyone be disciplined, but that deputies be made aware that they must have RAS in order to detain and ID someone against their will
    .

    To me, this is a statement from a "classy" open carrier. It shows levelheadedness. You were not asking that the officers be disciplined in the normal way we think of the word, but rather that they be made aware of what they were doing.

    Excellent!!

    Let us know if you receive a response. That response will tell a lot.
    +1
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  10. #10
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Section 13. Right to bear arms. The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons.
    *blinks* how long has that unconstitutional so-called law been on the books?
    "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

  11. #11
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Section 13. Right to bear arms. The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons.
    Quote Originally Posted by rightwinglibertarian View Post
    *blinks* how long has that unconstitutional so-called law been on the books?
    Since 1876 when the state constitution was adopted. A time when honest men carried their sidearms in the open and concealed carry was reserved for the card sharp, pimp and back alley thug.

  12. #12
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by gutshot View Post

    No, no! It doesn't show class. It shows weak and obsequious compliance to unlawful authority. It encourages the overreaching tyrants to continue this type of behavior on the next guy. Those that are the target of their tyranny don't even want them punished!?!? Without, at least an audio recording, its his word against theirs that this even happened. This was just a lost opportunity to educate a few arrogant bullies about the law and their limitations under it. In a situation like this, compliance equals approval. If you disagree with me, answer one question. What good did his knowledge of the law do him? Would he have been any worse off if the was as ignorant of the law as a schoolboy?
    I concur; the only things missing in this encounter were the black leather trench coat, black fedora and the proper accent "PAPERS!! You vill show your identity papers".

  13. #13
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Suggestion to the OP:

    Upon being told ONCE that you were not being detained, state--- "Since I am NOT BEING DETAINED I will be on my way." Then turn away and leave!
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  14. #14
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Quote Originally Posted by gutshot View Post
    no, no! It doesn't show class. It shows weak and obsequious compliance to unlawful authority. It encourages the overreaching tyrants to continue this type of behavior on the next guy. Those that are the target of their tyranny don't even want them punished!?!? Without, at least an audio recording, its his word against theirs that this even happened. This was just a lost opportunity to educate a few arrogant bullies about the law and their limitations under it. In a situation like this, compliance equals approval...
    Agree, agree, agree.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by gutshot View Post

    No, no! It doesn't show class. It shows weak and obsequious compliance to unlawful authority. It encourages the overreaching tyrants to continue this type of behavior on the next guy. Those that are the target of their tyranny don't even want them punished!?!? Without, at least an audio recording, its his word against theirs that this even happened. This was just a lost opportunity to educate a few arrogant bullies about the law and their limitations under it. In a situation like this, compliance equals approval. If you disagree with me, answer one question. What good did his knowledge of the law do him? Would he have been any worse off if the was as ignorant of the law as a schoolboy?
    OP is free to write another letter if he wishes; he was just being "overly civil". It does come off as a slave asking for his master not to whip him so much.

  16. #16
    Regular Member rightwinglibertarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Posts
    881
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Since 1876 when the state constitution was adopted. A time when honest men carried their sidearms in the open and concealed carry was reserved for the card sharp, pimp and back alley thug.
    While it is a violation of the second Amendment, I can see the reason behind it. Plus I wouldnt CC anyway. Either open or not at all
    "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

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    OP is free to write another letter if he wishes; he was just being "overly civil". It does come off as a slave asking for his master not to whip him so much.
    I cannot comment on that right now. Lets see how this plays out. I will update.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Hamans-gallows View Post
    I cannot comment on that right now. Lets see how this plays out. I will update.
    Okie-dokie !

  19. #19
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Quote Originally Posted by rightwinglibertarian View Post
    While it is a violation of the second Amendment, I can see the reason behind it. Plus I wouldnt CC anyway. Either open or not at all
    I OCed the 4 years we lived in Colorado, can't tell you the number of people that thanked me for open carrying, every day folks, cops, the manager at our bank, shop owners......

    We were out sight seeing in the mountains and stopped in a little town for lunch. While we were eating a guy rode up on a horse in full cowboy outfit (hat, vest, chaps, boots and high riding 6 gun rig) tied the horse to a parking meter, dropped a coin and went inside for lunch. From the dust on the horse's legs and the worn condition of his "rig" he had to be a real working cowboy. It was memorable.
    Last edited by F350; 01-26-2015 at 05:58 PM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member teddyearp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pinetop, AZ
    Posts
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Imagine a cop who wishes to ask folks for ID , people just walking down a public street.
    Scenario A has people politely saying no.
    Scenario B has people cursing them out for five minutes for even asking.
    Which scenario would more likely result in the cop's discontinuance of asking for ID.
    I think scenario B.

    Scenario B works for me, from my experience.
    I hope you're kidding.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by rightwinglibertarian View Post
    While it is a violation of the second Amendment, I can see the reason behind it. Plus I wouldnt CC anyway. Either open or not at all
    You get any guns yet? Pics are always a plus
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by teddyearp View Post
    I hope you're kidding.
    Oh no...not kidding. I don't like to be bothered by gov't officials. If they got not reason to come over to me (ie arrest me~which they never do) then why would I want to talk to them at all?

  23. #23
    Regular Member teddyearp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pinetop, AZ
    Posts
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Oh no...not kidding. I don't like to be bothered by gov't officials. If they got not reason to come over to me (ie arrest me~which they never do) then why would I want to talk to them at all?
    I get that part, but throwing a string of cuss words at them just doesn't strike me as the professional way to go about things. But to each their own.

  24. #24
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    The allegation is without merit. There seems to be four LEO who will corroborate that the accounts, as indicated in the "complaint", are not a factual representation of the events described.

    Or, no recording, video or audio, no validity to the complaint. If the OP has irrefutable evidence that shows that the cops did exactly as he alleges then a law suit is in order...right up to the point he complied with their polite request, offered during a consensual encounter.

    Anyway, let us know when those LEOs have been properly retrained.
    "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
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    The allegation is without merit. There seems to be four LEO who will corroborate that the accounts, as indicated in the "complaint", are not a factual representation of the events described.

    Or, no recording, video or audio, no validity to the complaint. If the OP has irrefutable evidence that shows that the cops did exactly as he alleges then a law suit is in order...right up to the point he complied with their polite request, offered during a consensual encounter.

    Anyway, let us know when those LEOs have been properly retrained.
    "There seems to be four LEO who will corroborate that the accounts, as indicated in the "complaint", are not a factual representation of the events described."

    At least two dashcam videos exist. Hope they don't get mysteriously lost or erased.

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
  •