Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29

Thread: Wright Park 2 Aug 08

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

    Post imported post

    Today I rode my bike down along the Thea Foss and up Shuster Parkway to Ruston. I then rode up the hill towards my house and decided to do a few laps around Wright Park to up the mileage. I rode a few laps around and through the park and noticed there were two police cars in the park. They had some guy in cuffs down in the middle of the park, probably for drinking or warrants or something. I was riding the path around the periphery of the park and I suppose the police were through with the guy they had cuffed, when I noticed one of the police cars turning to head me off. He beeped his siren so I stopped the bike.

    The officer got out of the car and said he just wanted to ID me in case they got a call. I asked if I was being detained as he was pulling out his pad and pen, he said no but he just wanted to get my name. I declined to provide it. He asked, “You don’t want to provide your name?” in a puzzled tone, I said no. He warned me that if I came in contact with anyone in the park it may generate a priority call. I told him about my son getting smacked in the head by an adult last week and how the police took three hours to respond and that nothing had been done about it. He expressed nothing but disinterest. I don’t think he understood the point I was trying to make.

    The stop was only two or three minutes and I wasn’t detained. One officer spoke and two stood by. He recognized that open carry was legal and mentioned that as an open carrier I probably knew more about the laws than the people in the park.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    He was out of line asking for you ID info. If he had phrased it as a request I would feel different about it as that would have shown he was asking for your cooperation rather than the way it came across as a sort of demand.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    It was phrased as a request as near as I could tell. I declined. His having my name wouldn't do anything whatsoever if a call came in to TPD about a man with a gun; they will investigate(or not) regardless. My name on a pad in his pocket does nothing.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Gene Beasley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    426

    Post imported post

    Mainsail wrote:
    It was phrased as a request as near as I could tell. I declined. His having my name wouldn't do anything whatsoever if a call came in to TPD about a man with a gun; they will investigate (or not) regardless. My name on a pad in his pocket does nothing.
    You are right on spot on that. I think your response was completely appropriate.

  5. #5
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241

    Post imported post

    Mainsail wrote:
    I told him about my son getting smacked in the head by an adult last week and how the police took three hours to respond and that nothing had been done about it.
    Was your point that it would take three hours for them to respondand by then you would be long gone? If so, nice job.
    Im proudly straight. I'm free to not support Legalization, GLBT, Illegal Aliens, or the Islamization of America.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    jbone wrote:
    Mainsail wrote:
    I told him about my son getting smacked in the head by an adult last week and how the police took three hours to respond and that nothing had been done about it.
    Was your point that it would take three hours for them to respondand by then you would be long gone? If so, nice job.
    No, not quite. My point was that it’s absurd that my ‘contact’ with anyone in the park, perfectly lawful, could generate a response that the thug’s unlawful contact could not.

  7. #7
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241

    Post imported post

    Mainsail wrote:
    jbone wrote:
    Mainsail wrote:
    I told him about my son getting smacked in the head by an adult last week and how the police took three hours to respond and that nothing had been done about it.
    Was your point that it would take three hours for them to respondand by then you would be long gone? If so, nice job.
    No, not quite. My point was that it’s absurd that my ‘contact’ with anyone in the park, perfectly lawful, could generate a response that the thug’s unlawful contact could not.
    Roger! I'm a little slow today, well maybe everday, age thing.
    Im proudly straight. I'm free to not support Legalization, GLBT, Illegal Aliens, or the Islamization of America.

  8. #8
    Regular Member gsx1138's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington, United States
    Posts
    884

    Post imported post

    A friend of my wife was nearly beat to death down on Ruston. The police arrived in time to make sure she got to the hospital well after the three girls that jumped her had left.

    At the very least your post makes me want to get my fat ass back on the mountain bike and do some riding. And I hope I have enough gumption o refuse my ID or name with a LEO.
    "Think lightly of yourself and deeply of the world." ~ Musashi

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    The cops, per a court decision, have no obligation to do anything for you. Protect and serve means nothing anymore. Lawyers and judges tearing this country down on step at a time.

  10. #10
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    And the purpose of putting your name is his little black book???

    Three weeks now and I still have not had a detective call me about my stolen stuff. The number I was given rings off the hook and no one answers. I'm just waiting for them to come to me with questions, WHEN that gun is found to be used in a crime.

  11. #11
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Mebbe the crime reporter for The News Tribune would enjoy writing a story on how TPD will not follow up on stolen gun reports when there are identfiable suspects. I had a gun stolen in Seattle, and SPD was johnny on the spot to take a complaint, follow up, etc... Took care of it all in a couple of hours after discovering the loss. The officers were pretty decent fellows too.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Skok Rez, Washington, USA
    Posts
    143

    Post imported post

    Mainsail wrote:
    The officer got out of the car and said he just wanted to ID me in case they got a call. I asked if I was being detained as he was pulling out his pad and pen, he said no but he just wanted to get my name. I declined to provide it.
    I was not there so I do not know but it sounds like he was looking to cover your rear. So that if he did get an OC call he could say oh thats Mainsail I talked to him he is OK. Saving both you and him time and energy. Leaving him to respond quicker to the kid getting his head bashed in, rather than being stuck getting your info because some purple haired gender confused pansy commie piddled his panties because he saw your gun. I could be all the way off base, even in the wrong ball park. But was it a chance to establish some positive understanding with a local PD? Maybe he was being a dickwad I dunno. My guess is he has you pegged as one now. Not criticizing you at all nothing wrong with the way you handled it. You asserted your rights and put him in his place Just asking if it was possible to have left that encounter with an ally rather than a defeated opponent. Or does it even matter

  13. #13
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    LongRider wrote:
    Mainsail wrote:
    The officer got out of the car and said he just wanted to ID me in case they got a call. I asked if I was being detained as he was pulling out his pad and pen, he said no but he just wanted to get my name. I declined to provide it.
    I was not there so I do not know but it sounds like he was looking to cover your rear. So that if he did get an OC call he could say oh thats Mainsail I talked to him he is OK. Saving both you and him time and energy. Leaving him to respond quicker to the kid getting his head bashed in, rather than being stuck getting your info because some purple haired gender confused pansy commie piddled his panties because he saw your gun. I could be all the way off base, even in the wrong ball park. But was it a chance to establish some positive understanding with a local PD? Maybe he was being a dickwad I dunno. My guess is he has you pegged as one now. Not criticizing you at all nothing wrong with the way you handled it. You asserted your rights and put him in his place Just asking if it was possible to have left that encounter with an ally rather than a defeated opponent. Or does it even matter
    I think the problem is you are coming in a little late to know the history of TPD with Mainsail......there is a history of continued harassment by TPD against Mainsail, and he is well within the right to exercise his right to refuse to show ID to an officer that has no RAS or probable cause for the detainment. People seem to be so hung up on "politeness" and "political correctness", and while it's true that we should put on the best face possible when around the public and OCing, nothing in the Bill of Rights says "only applicable when you are a nice guy".......my rights are my rights.....no matter how much of an ******* you are. And in this instance, dealing with an official of the state attempting to subvert your rights, it is important to be firm when declining the "offer" to be illegally detained.......if that means one is "rude" or a "dickwad", so be it.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Gene Beasley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    426

    Post imported post

    So that if he did get an OC call he could say oh thats Mainsail I talked to him he is OK. Saving both you and him time and energy. Leaving him to respond quicker to the kid getting his head bashed in, [snippage]
    The reality of it is that with the name and DOB, he would run Mainsail. Name only, he would check local records for a contact, come up with the DOB and run him. There would be no time and energy savings for anyone beyond the contact already made. If another call came in regarding such-n-such description MWAG in that area, assuming that officer heard the dispatch, all he needs to say is that he's already made contact and it's a legal open-carry. If the other unit wants to do a drive-by, that's the most that would be needed (barring a 911 caller embellishing on what was being done).

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    Gene Beasley wrote:
    So that if he did get an OC call he could say oh thats Mainsail I talked to him he is OK. Saving both you and him time and energy. Leaving him to respond quicker to the kid getting his head bashed in, [snippage]
    The reality of it is that with the name and DOB, he would run Mainsail. Name only, he would check local records for a contact, come up with the DOB and run him. There would be no time and energy savings for anyone beyond the contact already made. If another call came in regarding such-n-such description MWAG in that area, assuming that officer heard the dispatch, all he needs to say is that he's already made contact and it's a legal open-carry. If the other unit wants to do a drive-by, that's the most that would be needed (barring a 911 caller embellishing on what was being done).
    This sounds exactly like what would happen. Except, I think, that if someone later calls 911 to report a MWAG they would respond anyway and harass Mainsail. Could you imagine the ignorant citizen that does not know it is legal to OC calling 911 and the police never show up. I am sure the news would be all over it and spin it into a negative twist that is not in our favor.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  16. #16
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    LongRider wrote:
    Mainsail wrote:
    The officer got out of the car and said he just wanted to ID me in case they got a call. I asked if I was being detained as he was pulling out his pad and pen, he said no but he just wanted to get my name. I declined to provide it.
    I was not there so I do not know but it sounds like he was looking to cover your rear. So that if he did get an OC call he could say oh thats Mainsail I talked to him he is OK. Saving both you and him time and energy. Leaving him to respond quicker to the kid getting his head bashed in, rather than being stuck getting your info because some purple haired gender confused pansy commie piddled his panties because he saw your gun. I could be all the way off base, even in the wrong ball park. But was it a chance to establish some positive understanding with a local PD? Maybe he was being a dickwad I dunno. My guess is he has you pegged as one now. Not criticizing you at all nothing wrong with the way you handled it. You asserted your rights and put him in his place Just asking if it was possible to have left that encounter with an ally rather than a defeated opponent. Or does it even matter
    I have been in the park before while OC and the police were called; they never came. On that morning I heard the woman describing me to the dispatcher and emphasizing that my gun was ‘exposed’. There was no police response and judging from the woman’s demeanor and hissing into her cell phone, they were probably telling her they were not going to come.

    So why do they want to write my (or anyone’s) name down for lawful open carry? I can think of a few reasons although it’s pure speculation.

    1. The officer genuinely believes he can use my name to advise another officer responding to a future call. “Yeah, I saw him in the park earlier.” Does that info actually help an officer responding? Maybe, maybe not. Probably not. The information could be used for a future call about some illegal carry or brandishing. Even if the description doesn’t match, they could well show up at my door to question me about it since I was in the park before and I was armed. This doesn’t help me as much as it helps the officers.

    2. Eye-wash. In case anyone (like the person who complained) is watching, they’d see me pull out my wallet and show the officer something, or at least see the officer questioning me and writing in his pad. This is much more impressive than walking up to me, having a <1 minute conversation, and then me riding away.

    3. Somewhere they’re compiling names of people who OC. I doubt it’s for anything nefarious, just making a list and observing who does what and where.

    4. The officer felt he should probably do something.

    5. A combination of two or more of the above.

    In my case, there were already several officers in the park. I think they were doing some sort of emphasis patrol in the park or I just happened to get there while they were arresting someone for something. Whichever, there were three officers and two cars inside the park. It’s likely that someone saw me and wandered over to where they were and let them know what they saw. Since they left immediately afterwards, I suspect they decided to contact me on their way out of the park. I do not have any problem with cooperating with the police despite some really poor performance from them during previous encounters, but I can see no reasonable purpose for stopping me. It was a minor incident and relatively nonintrusive, so I’m not complaining about that. The officer who spoke was polite and professional and recognized that I was behaving lawfully. If he had walked up and told me they were in the park due to another’s unlawful firearms carry or use, I’d do everything I could to cooperate and help them get on their way. In this case I didn’t see any reason they needed my name.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    I would suspect the office did not have any neferious plans other than he could say he contacted you and all was good. By writing the info in his book, he would have proof they could verify. The reason I think this is that even though you refuse to give the info requested, they just let you go with out further comment or action. Compared to some of the LEO contacts it wasn't bad at all.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Johnny Law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Puget Sound, ,
    Posts
    462

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    I would suspect the office did not have any neferious plans other than he could say he contacted you and all was good. By writing the info in his book, he would have proof they could verify. The reason I think this is that even though you refuse to give the info requested, they just let you go with out further comment or action. Compared to some of the LEO contacts it wasn't bad at all.
    I have to agree with you Bear. Although Mainsail was perfectly within his rights to not divulge his name, there is one reason that it may have benefitted him to do so. The Officer would likely have ran the name, found that Mainsail was an upstanding person, and then if someone in the park (or elsewhere) had called in amwag call, the Officer could ward off/cancel a unit being dispatched to check on him. An Officer able to verify mainsail as a "good guy" may well save him from the next contact by an Officer who does not know him, and is starting from ground zero. Just another side of the coin to think about.
    If you have to fight, do not fear death. We will all die one day, so fight skillfully and bravely! And if it is to be that you die, then at least go to God proudly. Meet him as the proud warrior that you are, and not as a sniveling coward. Nobody lives forever.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    Johnny Law wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    I would suspect the office did not have any neferious plans other than he could say he contacted you and all was good. By writing the info in his book, he would have proof they could verify. The reason I think this is that even though you refuse to give the info requested, they just let you go with out further comment or action. Compared to some of the LEO contacts it wasn't bad at all.
    I have to agree with you Bear. Although Mainsail was perfectly within his rights to not divulge his name, there is one reason that it may have benefitted him to do so. The Officer would likely have ran the name, found that Mainsail was an upstanding person, and then if someone in the park (or elsewhere) had called in amwag call, the Officer could ward off/cancel a unit being dispatched to check on him. An Officer able to verify mainsail as a "good guy" may well save him from the next contact by an Officer who does not know him, and is starting from ground zero. Just another side of the coin to think about.
    Doesn't that just flip the world on end.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    Johnny Law wrote:
    The Officer would likely have ran the name, found that Mainsail was an upstanding person, and then if someone in the park (or elsewhere) had called in amwag call, the Officer could ward off/cancel a unit being dispatched to check on him.
    I guessing that you didn’t read my entire post and I apologize for its verbosity. I have had the police called before in that very park only a few weeks before and they didn’t come. If a call came in after I had (or hadn’t) given the officer my name it’s unlikely they would come – unless – the caller reported something that would have made the MWAG call criminal, in which case they would come whether they had my name or not. So in the end it doesn’t make much of a difference.

    Additionally, if the call was just an innocuous MWAG call, the caller wouldn’t know my name so the officer wouldn’t have anything to compare the name in his notebook to. I asked if I was being detained, he said no. Except for his cryptic warning, that was the end of the encounter. I was pleased with the officer’s attitude and demeanor, but very disappointed at the lack of concern for my son when I told him about that incident. He acted as though I was taking him off track.

    Now, the way he worded the warning made me wonder. He said that if I had contact with someone in the park it could generate a priority response. What the hell does that mean? I was riding my bike, not handing out pamphlets, what kind of ‘contact’ was he referring to?

    I don’t feel any obligation whatsoever to provide my name to the police when they don’t really need it. I know that some here would happily give them a name or show CPL or DL, but it’s not required or useful in my opinion.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Skok Rez, Washington, USA
    Posts
    143

    Post imported post

    Mainsail wrote:
    A combination of two or more of the above.
    Thats probably the answer. Not at all saying you did anything off at all, well within your rights. I've known TPD to be umm less than professional but this instance did not seem like that sitting here at the computer. Sounded like a social call ie checking you out see who you are about and what you are about. Not like Wright park is the nicest area in Tacky town a chance to get one on your (our) side but as I said I could be off base. I know there are a couple of PD that the sight of increases my blood presure others I ride with. I prefer the latter.


    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    I would suspect the office did not have any neferious plans other than he could say he contacted you and all was good. By writing the info in his book, he would have proof they could verify. The reason I think this is that even though you refuse to give the info requested, they just let you go with out further comment or action. Compared to some of the LEO contacts it wasn't bad at all.
    That was my take but it is hard to tell having not been there.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,761

    Post imported post

    The Officer would likely have ran the name, found that Mainsail was an upstanding person
    Running a name in a field contact situation doesn't go very far in establishing "upstanding." Status of driver's license, presence of any no-contact/protection orders, presence of outstanding arrest warrants, and status of Department of Corrections supervision is what an officer in a field contact situation gets.

    There could be plenty of criminal history that is not reported in this situation.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Johnny Law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Puget Sound, ,
    Posts
    462

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    The Officer would likely have ran the name, found that Mainsail was an upstanding person
    Running a name in a field contact situation doesn't go very far in establishing "upstanding." Status of driver's license, presence of any no-contact/protection orders, presence of outstanding arrest warrants, and status of Department of Corrections supervision is what an officer in a field contact situation gets.

    There could be plenty of criminal history that is not reported in this situation.
    True, but there aremultipleother systems that can be checked by simply placing a name into it. I use these other systems every day, and if there were any criminal history,that and a plethora of other info will show up.

    Oh yeah, you forgot convicted felon status.
    If you have to fight, do not fear death. We will all die one day, so fight skillfully and bravely! And if it is to be that you die, then at least go to God proudly. Meet him as the proud warrior that you are, and not as a sniveling coward. Nobody lives forever.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    Mainsail wrote:
    Johnny Law wrote:
    The Officer would likely have ran the name, found that Mainsail was an upstanding person, and then if someone in the park (or elsewhere) had called in amwag call, the Officer could ward off/cancel a unit being dispatched to check on him.
    I guessing that you didn’t read my entire post and I apologize for its verbosity. I have had the police called before in that very park only a few weeks before and they didn’t come. If a call came in after I had (or hadn’t) given the officer my name it’s unlikely they would come – unless – the caller reported something that would have made the MWAG call criminal, in which case they would come whether they had my name or not. So in the end it doesn’t make much of a difference.

    Additionally, if the call was just an innocuous MWAG call, the caller wouldn’t know my name so the officer wouldn’t have anything to compare the name in his notebook to. I asked if I was being detained, he said no. Except for his cryptic warning, that was the end of the encounter. I was pleased with the officer’s attitude and demeanor, but very disappointed at the lack of concern for my son when I told him about that incident. He acted as though I was taking him off track.

    Now, the way he worded the warning made me wonder. He said that if I had contact with someone in the park it could generate a priority response. What the hell does that mean? I was riding my bike, not handing out pamphlets, what kind of ‘contact’ was he referring to?

    I don’t feel any obligation whatsoever to provide my name to the police when they don’t really need it. I know that some here would happily give them a name or show CPL or DL, but it’s not required or useful in my opinion.
    But you attitude is the issue. Just because one cop didn't do his job, respond to you son's assault, doesn't mean another isn't and cooperating with those "good cops" that are doing their job correctly is in our favor and makes us friends. Snub them enough times and they are like anyone else, they start looking for ways to screw around with you. OC people need to be friendly, cooperative and show that we have nothing to hide. That's with cops and the general public.

  25. #25
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    But you attitude is the issue. Just because one cop didn't do his job, respond to you son's assault, doesn't mean another isn't and cooperating with those "good cops" that are doing their job correctly is in our favor and makes us friends. Snub them enough times and they are like anyone else, they start looking for ways to screw around with you. OC people need to be friendly, cooperative and show that we have nothing to hide. That's with cops and the general public.
    +1

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
  •