What about a flyer campaign?

imported post

How 'bout placing copies of training bulletins on the windshields of unoccupied police cars that are parked on public property?

imported post

Well, now,that's bold. I used to hand out flyers for part of my living. Even I wasn't that bold.

By all means. Check the legality, and if it is, GO FOR IT.

Catch 'em at the donut shop and 7-Eleven.

No cheating, though. No sneaking past the gate of their parking lot and flyering all the cars while they're in roll call.

imported post

Don't do it.

imported post

Lonnie Wilson wrote:

Don't do it.

Click to expand...

Any particular reason, Dad?

imported post

A flyer campaign could just annoy them and make us targets, not to mention the risk of being seen as a "man with gun messing with a police car." We really need to just convince the higher-ups in each PD to issue training bulletins. Cops generally really prefer internal training to external corrections.

That's just my opinion on it. As much as I'd like to educate LEOs on my rights, it just seems more effective to convince chiefs.

imported post

While I still like the idea of flyering police cars, I gotta admit Lonnie's and Drewesque's are the better way to go. (I know--Lonnie didn't give an alternative. He's pretty level-headed; so, I'm sure he was thinking of something along the lines of Drewesque orat least as responsible.)

imported post

If you have something important and correct to say why not just hand it to them in person?

imported post

Yeah, it seems to me like it would just come off as annoying, presumptuous, and a little bit hostile. We have to stick up for our rights, but we need to do it as respectfully as possible if we want to make progress.

imported post

Pa. Patriot wrote:

If you have something important and correct to say why not just hand it to them in person?

Click to expand...

Because they cannot say that they thought they were upholding the law and be immune from a lawsuit if it is given to them in a training bulliten from thier superiors.

imported post

joeroket wrote:

Pa. Patriot wrote:

If you have something important and correct to say why not just hand it to them in person?

Click to expand...

Because they cannot say that they thought they were upholding the law and be immune from a lawsuit if it is given to them in a training bulliten from thier superiors.

Click to expand...

??? say what?
They were talking about putting the bulletins under the wiper blades of empty police cars.
I say give it to them in person. Or send it to them

imported post

thebastidge wrote:

Lonnie Wilson wrote:

Don't do it.

Click to expand...

Any particular reason, Dad?

Click to expand...

Well, "son", I think several people have posted the very good reasons to not do it. Think about this for a moment:

I've had my car leafletted multiple times, usually some form of religious outreach or something in regards to a sales pitch. Even more cuter when they specifically target my car because I have something resembling a "Pride" sticker on it, with attempts at saying that I'm a sinner, or need reparative therapy, etc.

Regardless of the reason, I don't like the fact that someone touched my car, or got that close. Some cities also prohibit doing that.

And regardless of the law, you leaflet a police vehicle, and you get caught, you'll be spending time in the back of the same squad car, regardless of whether or not what you're doing is legal. Being hauled off in handcuffs for leafletting police cars as part of the open carry movement, great idea /sarcasm.

imported post

Pa. Patriot wrote:

joeroket wrote:

Pa. Patriot wrote:

If you have something important and correct to say why not just hand it to them in person?

Click to expand...

Because they cannot say that they thought they were upholding the law and be immune from a lawsuit if it is given to them in a training bulliten from thier superiors.

Click to expand...

??? say what?
They were talking about putting the bulletins under the wiper blades of empty police cars.
I say give it to them in person. Or send it to them

Click to expand...

I think it would be better to be reactive instead of proactive with the police. I think of it like bees, I don’t bother them and they don’t bother me (and vice-versa). That usually works. If they stop me for open carry, I’ll do my best to educate them, but I don’t think it’s a good idea to make ourselves a nuisance with flyers or parades or other preemptive attacks. The onus is on them to know the law.

imported post

Mainsail wrote:

Pa. Patriot wrote:

joeroket wrote:

Pa. Patriot wrote:

If you have something important and correct to say why not just hand it to them in person?

Click to expand...

Because they cannot say that they thought they were upholding the law and be immune from a lawsuit if it is given to them in a training bulliten from thier superiors.

Click to expand...

??? say what?
They were talking about putting the bulletins under the wiper blades of empty police cars.
I say give it to them in person. Or send it to them

Click to expand...

I think it would be better to be reactive instead of proactive with the police. I think of it like bees, I don’t bother them and they don’t bother me (and vice-versa). That usually works. If they stop me for open carry, I’ll do my best to educate them, but I don’t think it’s a good idea to make ourselves a nuisance with flyers or parades or other preemptive attacks. The onus is on them to know the law.

Click to expand...

Oh I agree 100%. Which was the basis for my comment and subsequent question to joeroket.
My sending of training memos is always re-active to an event or hearing misinformation from an LEO in that area. My cover letters always reflect this "reactive" reason for them receviing the memo.

imported post

Pa. Patriot wrote:

joeroket wrote:

Click to expand...

Pa. Patriot wrote:

If you have something important and correct to say why not just hand it to them in person?

Click to expand...

Because they cannot say that they thought they were upholding the law and be immune from a lawsuit if it is given to them in a training bulliten from thier superiors.

Click to expand...

??? say what?
They were talking about putting the bulletins under the wiper blades of empty police cars.
I say give it to them in person. Or send it to them

Click to expand...

My point is that the public giving them a piece of paper that says RCW blah blah says this and you cannot keep me from doing such and such carries no weight with them. The only way an officer can be held to the fire for something that he "thought" was correct is if he is trained otherwise by his superiors or through a certified training course.

In otherwords you giving them a piece of paper, especially from another department,doesn't mean squat. Training bulletins need to go through the attorney's and brass in order to carry any weight with the patrolman.

imported post

Pa. Patriot wrote:

Mainsail wrote:

Pa. Patriot wrote:

joeroket wrote:

Pa. Patriot wrote:

If you have something important and correct to say why not just hand it to them in person?

Click to expand...

Because they cannot say that they thought they were upholding the law and be immune from a lawsuit if it is given to them in a training bulliten from thier superiors.

Click to expand...

??? say what?
They were talking about putting the bulletins under the wiper blades of empty police cars.
I say give it to them in person. Or send it to them

Click to expand...

I think it would be better to be reactive instead of proactive with the police. I think of it like bees, I don’t bother them and they don’t bother me (and vice-versa). That usually works. If they stop me for open carry, I’ll do my best to educate them, but I don’t think it’s a good idea to make ourselves a nuisance with flyers or parades or other preemptive attacks. The onus is on them to know the law.

Click to expand...

Oh I agree 100%. Which was the basis for my comment and subsequent question to joeroket.
My sending of training memos is always re-active to an event or hearing misinformation from an LEO in that area. My cover letters always reflect this "reactive" reason for them receviing the memo.

Click to expand...

After reading this it is apparent to methat we are on the same track. I think there was some misunderstanding on my part.

imported post

joeroket wrote:

After reading this it is apparent to methat we are on the same track. I think there was some misunderstanding on my part.

Click to expand...

As well as on my part.
I have sent training memo's to Dept. heads
BUT
I would not be against giving a flyer (which is a watered down version of the training memo) to an LEO under certain circumstances.
I interact with a lot of LEO's. Sometimes the subject of carrying guns comes up. Or it is someone whom I think would appreciate the information. I will give them a flyer in those circumstances.

I think my original comment was too brief in looking back at it.
What I meant was that I don't agree with the flyer campaign either. For mostly the same reasons you all have pointed out. BUt I am not against a personal transfer of the information even through a flyer like the ones posted for PA and VA in the LAW section. But I agree 100% that some situations warrant a training memo be sent to the higher ups.
So I guess what I should have said was:
Use judgement people, if your going to try and give information to an LEO directly consider his reaction. If you anticipate it being anything less than favorable don't bother. Send the memo to the chief

imported post

Lonnie Wilson wrote:

Well, "son", I think several people have posted the very good reasons to not do it. Think about this for a moment:

Click to expand...

Sure, I thought about it before I posted. And I agree with the reasons others and yourself have given. Personally, I wouldn't put leaflets on anybody's car.

But this is the second time in the short period of time I have been on this board that I have seen youact somewhat authoritarian/dismissive, and I thought it would be nice to see you give reasons. That's what people usuallydo when giving advice rather than orders.

Now I have no particular claim on your time, but a one-phrase email dismissing my earlier suggestion as "flatly unconstitutional" doesn't make it so, nor does a flat "don't do it"inspire much confidence in you as a partner in advocacy.

Don't get me wrong- I see that you're active, and probably much more effective than most here. I applaud that.

My sarcasmseems to haveinspired more people to think about it in a serious fashion, and that is enough for me.

Edited to add:

And thank you.

-Larry

imported post

thebastidge wrote:

Sure, I thought about it before I posted. And I agree with the reasons others and yourself have given. Personally, I wouldn't put leaflets on anybody's car.

But this is the second time in the short period of time I have been on this board that I have seen youact somewhat authoritarian/dismissive, and I thought it would be nice to see you give reasons. That's what people usuallydo when giving advice rather than orders.

Now I have no particular claim on your time, but a one-phrase email dismissing my earlier suggestion as "flatly unconstitutional" doesn't make it so, nor does a flat "don't do it"inspire much confidence in you as a partner in advocacy.

Don't get me wrong- I see that you're active, and probably much more effective than most here. I applaud that.

My sarcasmseems to haveinspired more people to think about it in a serious fashion, and that is enough for me.

Edited to add:

And thank you.

-Larry

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, when I'm on my phone posting, my responses tend to be short and to the point. Working 11 hour days SUCKS, believe you me, and as soon as I get home, getting back on a computer is a taxing situation mentally. My apologies for not following up with an explanation or an edit, it's just that I try to post when I can.

As for the "flatly unconstitutional" thing that you were talking about, my reason for stating it so is because I do not believe that we should start exempting certain classes from people from paying fees. Personally, I think the idea of a CPL fee needs to go away, because in order to open carry in Washington in a car, you need a CPL.

imported post

"Unfortunately, when I'm on my phone posting, my responses tend to be short and to the point."

Understandable.Not to belabour the point too much, but"Please don't do that" or even "not a good idea, more later" might have been better.

"Working 11 hour days SUCKS, believe you me, and as soon as I get home, getting back on a computer is a taxing situation mentally."

Yeah, I know. I work 6x10, but it usually ends up being 6x12. I do have the (dubious)advantage that I am at a computer for most of that time. Of course, they're shooting at us too, so sleep isn't always in copious supply, or entirely restful.

"My apologies for not following up with an explanation or an edit, it's just that I try to post when I can."

Again, understandable. Apology accepted and thanks again.

"As for the "flatly unconstitutional" thing that you were talking about, my reason for stating it so is because I do not believe that we should start exempting certain classes from people from paying fees."

Understood, but I'm not sure that makes it unconstitutional. It's not a protected class under any legislation, it's not something that is inherent or unchangable. It's behaviour not a characteristic.It doesn't seem to meet any test ofunconstitutionality that I am aware of.I welcome your thoughts on it.

"Personally, I think the idea of a CPL fee needs to go away, because in order to open carry in Washington in a car, you need a CPL."

I agree. That was the point of my idea- to create a wedge issue. We could lobby from multiple directions- the prohibition on open carry of a loadedpistol in a car is nonsensical on its own, seperatemerits. We could attack that at the same time.