• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

BMWAG ARRESTED!!!

danbus

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
495
Location
Hampton, Virginia, USA
imported post

So, while I was getting on the HRT bus to Suffolk, the bus driver pulled back into the parking lot, step out for a minute, asked the previous bus driver to step out, and then I noticed the HPD.

They asked me to step of the bus so they could ask me some questions.They started by disarming me (for officer safety). Of course, I told them I didn't allow the seizure of my firearm, butwas told "it's forofficer safety". First question always is, "why do you have a gun?".

I replied "It is allowed to be open carried".

Another officer asked me my name, and I refused to answer his question. Then came the long period of time of jabbering about why I need to ID myself, and the reasons why I don't have to.

One officer said that I had to be 21 or older to carry a firearm. Which I interrupted him and told him 18, however 21 to buy from a FFL. That pissed him off and he began spouting that I know the law a little bit and he was telling me the correct law.

Even a Lt. came out to play. He asked me a general question, if I was over 21, why I replied yes.

However more time passed and the Lt. was on the phone with a city attorney. After speaking to them, he came back and one of the officers stated that there was precedent and that if I didn't provide ID, they would arrest me.

"Do what you have to do" - BMWAG

So they charged me with Obstruction of justice (what justice were they looking for?) and released me on summons.

That was yesterday..........





Today I went to see the Chief of Police, however he wasn't in. I spoke to a Sgt who said he would look into the problem. Another Sgt who is in Internal Affairs said she would look into it.

But before that, they were telling me that there was a case law stating that ONLY LEO could carry with 1 in the chamber, but of course he didn't know the exact code, but he said he would get back to me.

They also said that "man with a gun" is enough "reasonable suspicion" to preform a Terry stop. I advised them other wise. We debated for a few mins, and we agreed to disagree, however I know my shit, so it's all good. :)



And before you say it, I know that instead of being detained (illegally) for an hour, I could have provided my ID and taken the 5 mins to run my name, but WHY?

I shouldn't be forced to hand over my papers just because they want to knowwho I am, especially when I'm not doing anything illegal. I am not a slave.

I paraphrased the story.

Please post OPINIONS and/or thoughts on the situation.

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------------------

Oh yeah, just wanted to add that while I was shopping for a new digital recorder in MacArthur Mall, I saw 2 people.

Person 1 was a black male with double mag pouch. I asked him about it and got the 411 that he carrys a Taurus PT92. However he came off as a ass, so I didn't speak with him much. I told him about VCDL and OCDO.

Person 2 (who nameis also Dan) - was OCING a .380 High Point. Good response from him though. He knew about OCDO, and about the laws of OC. I advised him of MacArthur being "gun free" and he replied with a happy tone of "I didn't see any signs". Luckily he was just paying a cell phone bill and leaving, so not too many soccer moms would see him.
 

taurusfan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
307
Location
Richmond, ,
imported post

You left out a lot of details. Did they take you somewhere? Did they give you the gun back?
 

Dutch Uncle

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
1,715
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

Dan and I discussed this at some length last night. First, the officers told Dan they knew OC was legal (some progress here!) but then went on for an HOUR questioning him about this and that, asking for his social security number, etc., etc. They had his gun for "officer safety", but put it on the grass median strip while questioning him. (!) Ultimately they charged him with obstruction of justice, I guess because he chose not to cooperate with their line of questioning. IANAL, but since he was never charged with any crime otherwise, and they knew OC was legal, I can't see how he can be charged with "obstruction of justice". They seem to think this term is synonomous with not cooperating with their fishing expidition. His pistol was returned to him, and he was not taken downtown. (Actually, this happened downtown, in front of the Court House!).

18.2-460

http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/opncavtx/2802972.txt
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

WOW!!

Another brush with the law..... I am thinking you could have avoided the charge had you cooperated. But that was your decision to refuse.

I will be interested to see how things go in court.

When is your court date? ;)
 

longwatch

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
4,327
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

I'd say this was a false arrest and start preparing a lawsuit. Here is the first thing I found concerning obstruction of justice and refusal to ID oneself, a Virginia AG opinion saying that the police may detain to determine identity but not arrest for obstruction.
http://www.oag.state.va.us/Opinions/2002opns/02-082.pdf

"Virginia courts have set a high threshold for a conviction under § 18.2-460(A). Given this precedent, I am compelled to conclude that a law-enforcement officer, even when armed with reasonable suspicion that criminal activity may be occurring, may not arrest a suspect for obstruction of justice on the basis that the suspect refuses to identify himself."

"Conclusion
Accordingly, it is my opinion, under the specific facts you have presented, that a law-enforcement officer conducting a lawful investigative stop may not arrest a suspect for obstruction of justice under § 18.2-460(A), when the suspect refuses to identify himself to the officer. Depending on the circumstances, however, there may be justification to detain a suspect for the purpose of determining his identity."
 

Pa. Patriot

State Researcher
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
1,441
Location
Just a "wannabe" in Mtn. Top, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
I am thinking you could have avoided the charge had you cooperated. But that was your decision to refuse.



And it could have been avoided if the police did not harrass him or overstep their authority, or summons him for a bogus charge, or ....

If nothing else we can always count on you to support the wrong doers.
 

longwatch

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
4,327
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

Question Danbus, not that it matters in light of the AG opinion but did you ever verbally ID yourself? I just ask wondering what the summons said if you didn't.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

These jerkclowns had to have known. They can't have missed what happened in Norfolk. Also, I seem to recall that one of the FOIA documents released in the Tony's incident included a Manassas Lt. or Capt. e-mailing his contacts in police departments around the state, including one in Hampton.

Harassment, plain and simple.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
SNIP ...FOIA documents released in the Tony's incident included a Manassas Lt. or Capt. e-mailing his contacts in police departments around the state, including one in Hampton.

Yep. An "rdavis at hampton dot gov." See page 21 of the .pdf of the FOIAresponse at http://tinyurl.com/2ke8un.
 

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

longwatch wrote:
Question Danbus, not that it matters in light of the AG opinion but did you ever verbally ID yourself? I just ask wondering what the summons said if you didn't.

That's a good question. I think LEO229 said would arrest ya.;)

Longwatch, your cite is what I was thinking of. Wish we had this stuff on video, Danbus would make a great training film...
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

longwatch wrote:
Question Danbus, not that it matters in light of the AG opinion but did you ever verbally ID yourself? I just ask wondering what the summons said if you didn't.

A quick quote and link to the AG opinion would help us OC'ers.

Heh, heh, heh. And the police who monitor the forum. :)
 

danbus

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
495
Location
Hampton, Virginia, USA
imported post

After being arrested, they searched me and found my ID.

But to answer your question, no I did not.
I'd say this was a false arrest and start preparing a lawsuit. Here is the first thing I found concerning obstruction of justice and refusal to ID oneself, a Virginia AG opinion saying that the police may detain to determine identity but not arrest for obstruction.
http://www.oag.state.va.us/Opinions/2002opns/02-082.pdf

"Virginia courts have set a high threshold for a conviction under § 18.2-460(A). Given this precedent, I am compelled to conclude that a law-enforcement officer, even when armed with reasonable suspicion that criminal activity may be occurring, may not arrest a suspect for obstruction of justice on the basis that the suspect refuses to identify himself."

"Conclusion
Accordingly, it is my opinion, under the specific facts you have presented, that a law-enforcement officer conducting a lawful investigative stop may not arrest a suspect for obstruction of justice under § 18.2-460(A), when the suspect refuses to identify himself to the officer. Depending on the circumstances, however, there may be justification to detain a suspect for the purpose of determining his identity."



The thing is, there wasn't even justification for the stop. There wasn't reasonable suspicion. They claimed that I could be underage, have warrants, or be a felon as their articulable facts. Also, they stated that they could say that me being armed on a public bus is cause for concern of public safety.

I repeated to the officers that articulate facts = reasonable suspicion = terry stop (ie detainment, investigatory stop).
 

longwatch

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
4,327
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

Yeah or at least get the audio. Anyone want to pitch in on at least a voice recorder for Danbus, I think hes earned it, and really needs it.
 

danbus

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
495
Location
Hampton, Virginia, USA
imported post

longwatch wrote:
Yeah or at least get the audio. Anyone want to pitch in on at least a voice recorder for Danbus, I think hes earned it, and really needs it.

Just bought one today. Yay me! It has the niffty feature of transferring recordings to computer.

Heh heh, alright!
 

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

longwatch wrote:
Yeah or at least get the audio. Anyone want to pitch in on at least a voice recorder for Danbus, I think hes earned it, and really needs it.
Considering he has had more time at the business end of the lawmen than most of us combined, including being a finger's twitch from the graveyard, I'd say so as well!
 

longwatch

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
4,327
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

danbus wrote:
After being arrested, they searched me and found my ID.

But to answer your question, no I did not.

The thing is, there wasn't even justification for the stop. There wasn't reasonable suspicion. They claimed that I could be underage, have warrants, or be a felon as their articulable facts. Also, they stated that they could say that me being armed on a public bus is cause for concern of public safety.

I repeated to the officers that articulate facts = reasonable suspicion = terry stop (ie detainment, investigatory stop).
Ugh the plot sickens.

I absolutely agree with you on the second part.
 
Top