• 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.

Was drawn on and disarmed in Federal Way(was ok)

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
imported post

Sounds to me like you were arrested. Are you a reasonable person? Did you feel free to leave at any point? (He pointed a gun at you and gave you orders, right?)

If you are a reasonable person, and you felt that you were not free to leave at any point, you were arrested.
 

Citizen

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

Bear 45/70 wrote:
SNIP So are...sayingit's OK that the cop violated the law, because you understand why he did it?
Unfortunately we do see a good bit of this.

Understandability getssubstituted for "well, what does the law say?" or "does that violate what's left of anybody's rights?"
 

irfner

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Messages
434
Location
SeaTac, Washington, USA
imported post

quentusrex wrote:
We talked about the legality of OC'ing. He knows it's legal, but he hadn't met but one person who OC'd before. I was only disarmed for maybe a minute, and after that he had no problem with my wife and I standing there armed.

Soundslike the officermade a mistake and corrected it. He didn't disarm the wife. He returned the weapon and continued the conversation from there. Quentusrex apparently felt comfortable with the conversation after the initial incident. Good job Quentusrex sounds like one more LE is now at ease with OC. Hopefully he will do better with his next encounter.





edit for spelling
 

MetalChris

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Messages
1,215
Location
SW Ohio
imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote:
MetalChris wrote:
Bear 45/70 wrote:
MetalChris wrote:
quentusrex wrote:
I did notify him ahead of time, and I informed him that I did have my CPL license on me. I was informing him just before and while I was getting out of my car.

To his credit as soon as he realized I wasn't a threat(only a moment after disarming me), he gave me back my items and I was allowed to rearm.

While my rights might have been violated by being disarmed, I am more upset(even now months later) about being turned away from watching the July 4th fireworks at Gasworks park.
I think that speaks volumes. Given the circumstances (officer killed the day before) I don't blame him for being a little jumpy.

Now had he arrested you and your wife confiscated your property and taken you both to the station for an inter..um I mean interview, that would be a different story.
I wasn't aware that the Constitution and the rest of the laws are suspended when someone gets killed, cop or not. By your thinking the cops are justified in violating a persons rights pretty much anytime they want. Fortunately that isn't the way it works. It isn't even legal for a cop to stop you at all for having an OC'd weapon on you here in Washington.
I guess I should've said "I understand why the cop was jumpy." By saying I don't blame him I'm saying I think it's coo, which I don't.

So anyhoo, for the record I can understand, given today's LEO mentality of "us vs. them", why he over-reacted.

At least he didn't arrest the OP and confiscate his property. I've read of much worse things happening to folks than what did to the OP.

Does that pass muster w/ you Bear, or are you still going to find something to jump on me for? ;)
So are you sayingit's OK that the cop violated the law, because you understand why he did it? And it makes it better because he didn't arrest the op? That just doesn't work for me at all. If you break the law, especially when you are suppose to be enforcing the law,just doesn't get the job done for me, regardlessof the cop's reason. Anymore than he would be understanding if I robbed a bank because I was broke and needed to feed my family.
That is how the wording of my original post sounded, but I corrected it with the most recent post that you quoted. So NO I DO NOT think what the cop did was OK, but I think I UNDERSTAND why he did it.

So you think it would've been better had the OP been arrested and his property confiscated?
 

BlaineG

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2008
Messages
149
Location
, ,
imported post

:p Sometimes, cops will let ya off a speeding ticket, or whatever. Cops have bad days too.
 

CC27

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
136
Location
, Washington, USA
imported post

I don't think I will ever be ok with, or understand why someone who is supposed to protect meis putting my life in danger by pointing a gun at me.
 

David.Car

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
1,264
Location
Spokane, Washington, USA
imported post

Nothing about this interaction can be classified as "was ok".

A police officer drew a firearm on you, he treated you like a criminal, having you kneel on the ground. He than illegally seized your property and searched you before finally allowing you to have a discussion with him.

This officer was way off track and should be reprimanded and taught that he does not have any more rights than every other citizen does. Just because he is a cop does not give him any power to violate your rights to try and make himself feel more comfortable.

I am apalled at the people in this thread that think it was no big deal.
 

Alwayspacking

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
599
Location
Lakewood, Washington, USA
imported post

If I saw a guy OCing I would not try to disarm him or citizen's safety. I have respect for their job and what they do but ifheso paranoid of everyone he encounters with a sidearmthen he need to get out of the LE business
 

Wheelgunner

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Messages
426
Location
Kingston, Washington, USA
imported post

This is not OK. The officer was wrong in so many ways and action should be taken. You probably could have prevented his over reaction with advising him up front that you had a sidearm, rather than use the surprise factor. But it doesn't excuse his over reaction.

Honestly, I really think that Bear and others here have really hit the nail on the head. It is not OK for an officer to point a gun at you, pat you down, take you gun or do any of the other trash that was done to you.

Again, as has been said many times in these posts, if the behavior of the Officer "Goes South", simply ask if you are being detained; if not then say nothing besides " I'm leaving and if you wish to speak further, here is the number of my Lawyer". Don't try to argue with him or "win him over". If his weapon is drawn, file complaints with Internal Affairs and sue his ass.

So far we have been lucky, no dead or shot people on our side. But all these "getting the gun pointed at you" events are ASKING for an accident. (We all remember Rule One, right?) Who here wants to lose a limb or part of their body because a nervous officer was a little too heavy on his Glock trigger? And how much do you want to bet that the officer will say "Well I thought he was going for his gun!", or "He was twitching like a heroin addict", or the famous, "He lunged at me!"

Don't believe me? Look at the posts where there has been a gun point arrest that turns into an unarrest or trespass. The filed paperwork in several of these cases contains just such cover phrases. A move to voice recorders has been recommended on this blog for EXACTLY that reason, falsified paperwork.

May I recommend that we develop a simple procedure and hold a teaching class at a future BBQ where we practice dealing with officers, both reasonable and unreasonable, drawn gun and not drawn, to help prevent accidents. Massad Ayoob, developed the famous phrase "Officer, I am licensed to carry a concealed weapon and am doing so at this time, how would you like to handle it?" while gripping "Mr. Friendly" (The steering wheel) for a similar issue (traffic stops).

Pamphlets are not bulletproof.
 

Ajetpilot

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2007
Messages
1,416
Location
Olalla, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
imported post

You were hassled only because you were openly carrying your firearm. You would not have been hassled if you were concealing the firearm, yet the degree of safety of the officer was precisely the same.

You were hassled for exercisingyour perfectly legal methodof carrying the tools required to defend your God given right to life. If we let LEOs hassle us without consequences for exercising this right, we can expect them to eventually extend their intimidation tactics to our other rights.

How would you have felt if he pointed his weapon at you and forced you to your knees for exercising your right to free speech, or your right to pray while standing in his presence, or your right to attend a political rally?

No, the encounter wasnot "OK". The line must be drawn as to how far citizens will allow government law enforcement to encroach upon their rights.


This is an extension of the "Stockholm Syndrome"*. Once you came toterms with your captor, you defended his actions. That is not a criticism, but a natural human tendency to identify with a captor. Understand it, and guard against it.

* Stockholm syndrome is a psychological response sometimes seen in an abducted hostage, in which the hostage shows signs of loyalty to the hostage-taker, regardless of the danger (or at least risk) in which they have been placed.
 

quentusrex

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
113
Location
Tacoma, Washington, USA
imported post

The reason I'm not upset is because I started looking at this one situation from his perspective. He's in a bad area, found a stolen car. And an armed man gets out of a car that just pulled up behind him blocking him in. So, all these things put together influenced my conclusions on the matter.

Now, if the situation were different in nearly any way I would feel very strongly that the officer reacted improperly. If I was minding my own business and he drove up and disarmed me I'd be calling a lawyer right now. If he had pulled out the handcuffs I'd be on the phone as well. But I look at this as a lesson learned for a young officer.
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

MetalChris wrote:
Bear 45/70 wrote:
MetalChris wrote:
Bear 45/70 wrote:
MetalChris wrote:
quentusrex wrote:
I did notify him ahead of time, and I informed him that I did have my CPL license on me. I was informing him just before and while I was getting out of my car.

To his credit as soon as he realized I wasn't a threat(only a moment after disarming me), he gave me back my items and I was allowed to rearm.

While my rights might have been violated by being disarmed, I am more upset(even now months later) about being turned away from watching the July 4th fireworks at Gasworks park.
I think that speaks volumes. Given the circumstances (officer killed the day before) I don't blame him for being a little jumpy.

Now had he arrested you and your wife confiscated your property and taken you both to the station for an inter..um I mean interview, that would be a different story.
I wasn't aware that the Constitution and the rest of the laws are suspended when someone gets killed, cop or not. By your thinking the cops are justified in violating a persons rights pretty much anytime they want. Fortunately that isn't the way it works. It isn't even legal for a cop to stop you at all for having an OC'd weapon on you here in Washington.
I guess I should've said "I understand why the cop was jumpy." By saying I don't blame him I'm saying I think it's coo, which I don't.

So anyhoo, for the record I can understand, given today's LEO mentality of "us vs. them", why he over-reacted.

At least he didn't arrest the OP and confiscate his property. I've read of much worse things happening to folks than what did to the OP.

Does that pass muster w/ you Bear, or are you still going to find something to jump on me for? ;)
So are you sayingit's OK that the cop violated the law, because you understand why he did it? And it makes it better because he didn't arrest the op? That just doesn't work for me at all. If you break the law, especially when you are suppose to be enforcing the law,just doesn't get the job done for me, regardlessof the cop's reason. Anymore than he would be understanding if I robbed a bank because I was broke and needed to feed my family.
That is how the wording of my original post sounded, but I corrected it with the most recent post that you quoted. So NO I DO NOT think what the cop did was OK, but I think I UNDERSTAND why he did it.

So you think it would've been better had the OP been arrested and his property confiscated?
Proper and legal cop response should have not involvedthe cop'sgun or stealing the op's sidearm. An arrest would have been absolutely illegal under any laws in this state.
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

quentusrex wrote:
The reason I'm not upset is because I started looking at this one situation from his perspective. He's in a bad area, found a stolen car. And an armed man gets out of a car that just pulled up behind him blocking him in. So, all these things put together influenced my conclusions on the matter.

Now, if the situation were different in nearly any way I would feel very strongly that the officer reacted improperly. If I was minding my own business and he drove up and disarmed me I'd be calling a lawyer right now. If he had pulled out the handcuffs I'd be on the phone as well. But I look at this as a lesson learned for a young officer.
There is nolegal means for the officer to violate the law and anyone's rights because his prespective is skewed because of events having nothing to do with you and your actions. He was wrong on so many counts that he real needs to lose his job over this. As a law enforcement officer he stinks.
 

j2l3

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
871
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
imported post

just_a_car wrote:
CC27 wrote:
This is bull@#$%. I have know idea why you are so OK with this. It was very wrong for this officer to disarm you.
It may have been "wrong" but he was well within his legal right to disarm him. As described by the OP, the officer has reasonable suspicion that they might have been involved in the crime that was committed and the OP opened himself up to the Terry stop by making contact.

An unfortunate side effect and the officer should have just asked questions in conversation to determine the OP wasn't a bad-guy. A POLITE email to the training officer will likely get this resolved for any future encounters. Federal Way has a training bulletin and is well-aware of OC legality.
What crime would that be? I have read nothing that mentions a crime.
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

just_a_car wrote:
It may have been "wrong" but he was well within his legal right to disarm him. As described by the OP, the officer has reasonable suspicion that they might have been involved in the crime that was committed and the OP opened himself up to the Terry stop by making contact.

An unfortunate side effect and the officer should have just asked questions in conversation to determine the OP wasn't a bad-guy. A POLITE email to the training officer will likely get this resolved for any future encounters. Federal Way has a training bulletin and is well-aware of OC legality.
What reasonable suspicion? None, NADA, nothing is suspicious about a guy with a sidearm openly displayed and annouces in advance that he has said firearm. The cop's phobia does not give him the right to draw down on anyone he so chooses because he has fear issues.

The Bill of Rights gives me the power to NOT have to apologize for someone else's "gun phobia."

The abovealso includes not having the cop's gun pointed at you just because he's gun phobia makes him afraid. If he is afraid, he needs to change jobs to something that doesn't scare him.
 

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

j2l3 wrote:
just_a_car wrote:
CC27 wrote:
This is bull@#$%. I have know idea why you are so OK with this. It was very wrong for this officer to disarm you.
It may have been "wrong" but he was well within his legal right to disarm him. As described by the OP, the officer has reasonable suspicion that they might have been involved in the crime that was committed and the OP opened himself up to the Terry stop by making contact.

An unfortunate side effect and the officer should have just asked questions in conversation to determine the OP wasn't a bad-guy. A POLITE email to the training officer will likely get this resolved for any future encounters. Federal Way has a training bulletin and is well-aware of OC legality.
What crime would that be? I have read nothing that mentions a crime.
+1

I did not see a crime either. Unless he is referencing the retrieving an abandoned vehicle, which is not a crime.
 

just_a_car

Regular Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
2,558
Location
Auburn, Washington, USA
imported post

joeroket wrote:
j2l3 wrote:
just_a_car wrote:
It may have been "wrong" but he was well within his legal right to disarm him. As described by the OP, the officer has reasonable suspicion that they might have been involved in the crime that was committed and the OP opened himself up to the Terry stop by making contact.

An unfortunate side effect and the officer should have just asked questions in conversation to determine the OP wasn't a bad-guy. A POLITE email to the training officer will likely get this resolved for any future encounters. Federal Way has a training bulletin and is well-aware of OC legality.
What crime would that be? I have read nothing that mentions a crime.
+1

I did not see a crime either. Unless he is referencing the retrieving an abandoned vehicle, which is not a crime.
Well, it is a crime if he's the one that dumped it there, now isn't it? You all need to reread the OP and look at the reason given as to "reasonable suspicion". I don't like it, but it's legal.
 

Bear 45/70

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
3,256
Location
Union, Washington, USA
imported post

just_a_car wrote:
joeroket wrote:
j2l3 wrote:
just_a_car wrote:
It may have been "wrong" but he was well within his legal right to disarm him. As described by the OP, the officer has reasonable suspicion that they might have been involved in the crime that was committed and the OP opened himself up to the Terry stop by making contact.

An unfortunate side effect and the officer should have just asked questions in conversation to determine the OP wasn't a bad-guy. A POLITE email to the training officer will likely get this resolved for any future encounters. Federal Way has a training bulletin and is well-aware of OC legality.
What crime would that be? I have read nothing that mentions a crime.
+1

I did not see a crime either. Unless he is referencing the retrieving an abandoned vehicle, which is not a crime.
Well, it is a crime if he's the one that dumped it there, now isn't it? You all need to reread the OP and look at the reason given as to "reasonable suspicion". I don't like it, but it's legal.
I just reread the op twice and there is nothing in there that would give anyone reasonable anything to draw down on anyone at anytime, ever. The cop had nothing that would lead to pointing his firearm at anyone. Last time I check abandoning are car doesn't qualify as a felony and you don't point guns at people over a frickin' misdemeanor.
 
Top