Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Civil Rights?

  1. #1
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    Here's a topic on the Sig Forums that clearly show how some police officers don't have a clue what a Terry stop is, or what their legal limits are.

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran Right Wing Wacko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    645

    Post imported post

    I don't have an account on that board and have no desire to sign up. They will not allow my gmail address.

    Using their logic:

    We have had a number of cases recently of people impersonating an officer. Perhaps now everytime one sees a cop, they should detain them and verify that indeed they are a REAL cop and not violating the law by pretending to be one.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bellingham, ,
    Posts
    608

    Post imported post

    i like it main... always fun to have a "what if" that was really a "hey this happened"

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bellevue, Washington, USA
    Posts
    245

    Post imported post

    I am very thankful that I do not live in comifornia. How incredible that this officer thinks he can get away with this!

    By his logic, he can stop EVERY car to determine if the driver has a license. By his logic, it is per se illegal to drive without a license, so, therefore, he can perform a terry stop to investigate if the driver has a license. While doing this, he can remove you from the car, after all, you could drive away and/or use it as a weapon while he checks on this.

    His logic is flawed, at least here in WA where no special circumstances are needed to get a CPL. Maybe in California a court would decide that, because getting a license is rare (in most of California), that it is per se illegal to have a gun on your person, and therefore, you are likely violating the law and knowledge or belief that you have a weapon is reason for a terry stop to investigate if you have the license.

    Here in WA, it is certainly illegal to detain someone for possessing an openly carried gun, as it is legal to do so.

    I wonder though, thinking back to my stop with the police a month or so ago, if the logic he used to justify the terry stop was the same as the California logic that a permit is required, thus it may be illegal... I was in a car, so a permit was required, and he then performed a seizure of me and my vehicle why he searched for legal items. It was clearly wrong, I chose not to push it for various reasons, especially since it was more of a CCW issue than an Open Carry issue, but none-the-less...

    I do wonder though, at what point CAN an officer disarm you for officer safety. Cleary in any legal terry stop this would be logical, but what about a traffic stop. It seems to me that because I informed the officer of one legal gun, he used the fact that I had one to justify a complete search of my vehicle AFTER he had verified my permit. At that point, it certainly became illegal to search my vehicle. However, before verifying my permit, might hehave been reasonable in searching my body and/or the area within my reach?

    I wish there was more case law on what an officer can do for safety during a traffic stop. All of the cases wind up being about drugs, and what an officer can see/smell. I find very little about searching incident to learning of a lawful item that a person has informed an officer about. I would love to find a great case that talks a lot about "officer safety" and the authority to search/detain/etc. when they know of nothing illegal. In my opinion, me informing an officer I have a gun and a CPL is no different than me not doing so. In either case I may have another one, or not. I would also think that informing an officer about a weapon would actually lower the PC or RS to search--it seems likely a criminal with an illegal gun would not mention it, but, in reality, how often does a criminal, while pulled over illegally carrying a gun, inform the officer of a concealed weapon... that would seem mighty stupid! It is FAR more likelier that an officer will find an illegal weapon on a random search than on a search where they are informed of a weapon (I would have to assume that logic would work like this... no stats to back up that claim, sorry).

    Anyway, those are my thoughts, and I know I rambled a bit, but please comment/expand as you see fit. I wish I had more time to edit/make the thoughts clearer, but I am in the middle of law school exams right now and need to get back to studying.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    573

    Post imported post

    2. Open carry enthusiast. No big deal (depending on your region of course. Try this in Seattle proper and there have been news stories and posts on this forum about what happened).
    Haha. I nearly laughed my ass off when I saw that. Has he never been to our site? Wow.

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    What is it with people thinking Seattle is so horrible for OC? Honestly, I have found it to be the "best" place to OC so far. Cops in Oly keep suggesting I "try this" in Seattle and see what happens. They don't like the answers I give them...:P

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    , New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    192

    Post imported post

    Mainsail, you KICKED @SS!!!!!!!!! I got a kick out of you "slapping" them with actual case law and all they could do was come back with "well, uh, um, but, er, oof, etc, ect. good job!!!!







    Jersey





Posting Permissions

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