Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: What would an LEO need to LEGALLY disarm someone who is...

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Southern, Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    ...OCing in MS.

    We all know they can pretty much do anything they want (to a certain extent) during a terry stop and just let the courts decide,but lets say I am atwalmart, gas station or whateverand get stopped by a LEO, what are my rights?

    If they want to dis-arm me, do I have the right to refuse? Make them get a warrant?

    It wouldn't bother me to dis-arm myself and lock the handgun in my vehicle while the LEO are present and then re-arm when they leave, but unless they have the right, then I am not going to give it to them.

    And BTW, I am not interested in hearing about the argument that there is no such thing as OC in MS, you are preaching to the choir on that argument.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    Mississippian wrote:
    ...OCing in MS.

    We all know they can pretty much do anything they want (to a certain extent) during a terry stop and just let the courts decide,but lets say I am atwalmart, gas station or whateverand get stopped by a LEO, what are my rights?

    If they want to dis-arm me, do I have the right to refuse? Make them get a warrant?

    It wouldn't bother me to dis-arm myself and lock the handgun in my vehicle while the LEO are present and then re-arm when they leave, but unless they have the right, then I am not going to give it to them.

    And BTW, I am not interested in hearing about the argument that there is no such thing as OC in MS, you are preaching to the choir on that argument.
    From what we are learning in my academy,an officer has a right during a terry stop to pat you down. If they can discern you are armed, then they can disarm you, run the serial number, ask for your permit, and unload the weapon. It falls under "Officers safety". Keep in mind, that the officer doesn't know you from Adam. You may be the most upstanding, law-abiding person in the state of MS, but how is the LEO to know that?

    It would also depend on the setting. If you are at your hunting camp or on your property, it would go a lot differently that if a LEO ran into you "Open Carrying" at Wal-mart. Keep in mind that someone could call 911 and report "suspicious activity" or "man with a gun" or that someone is brandishing a weapon. All of that would have to be taken into consideration by both you and the LEO.

    As far as I am concerned, If I saw you carrying a firearm on your hip, I would ask for your MS Firearms Permit and DL. If both are valid and match, I wouldn't ask any other questions or detain you further. If someone had called in a suspicous behaviour or man brandishing a weapon, I would ask a few more questions to find out what was going on and go from there.

    As to your question about refusing and getting a warrant, it would depend on why you were stopped. There are valid reasons for a "warrantless" search. Assuming that the officer stopped you for a "valid" reason, you can be searched and separated from your firearm for different reasons, including "officer's safety" as I stated before.

    Sorry to make this so long, but I have been through safety check points several times since I've had my permit. I always give my Driver's License and Fire Arms Permit. Not once have I been asked about my weapon, had it taken or its serial number verified. If you are courteous, you will receive courteousy. If you are a "*******" you will be treated as such. Again, it depends on the setting, why your were stopped, what has been called in, and your actions. The number one rule for an officer, is officer's safety not to harass the citizenry.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    55

    Post imported post

    problem

  4. #4
    Regular Member rscottie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ashland, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    613

    Post imported post

    whoflungdo wrote:
    Mississippian wrote:
    ...OCing in MS.

    We all know they can pretty much do anything they want (to a certain extent) during a terry stop and just let the courts decide,but lets say I am atwalmart, gas station or whateverand get stopped by a LEO, what are my rights?

    If they want to dis-arm me, do I have the right to refuse? Make them get a warrant?

    It wouldn't bother me to dis-arm myself and lock the handgun in my vehicle while the LEO are present and then re-arm when they leave, but unless they have the right, then I am not going to give it to them.

    And BTW, I am not interested in hearing about the argument that there is no such thing as OC in MS, you are preaching to the choir on that argument.
    From what we are learning in my academy,an officer has a right during a terry stop to pat you down. If they can discern you are armed, then they can disarm you, run the serial number, ask for your permit, and unload the weapon. It falls under "Officers safety". Keep in mind, that the officer doesn't know you from Adam. You may be the most upstanding, law-abiding person in the state of MS, but how is the LEO to know that?

    It would also depend on the setting. If you are at your hunting camp or on your property, it would go a lot differently that if a LEO ran into you "Open Carrying" at Wal-mart. Keep in mind that someone could call 911 and report "suspicious activity" or "man with a gun" or that someone is brandishing a weapon. All of that would have to be taken into consideration by both you and the LEO.

    As far as I am concerned, If I saw you carrying a firearm on your hip, I would ask for your MS Firearms Permit and DL. If both are valid and match, I wouldn't ask any other questions or detain you further. If someone had called in a suspicous behaviour or man brandishing a weapon, I would ask a few more questions to find out what was going on and go from there.

    As to your question about refusing and getting a warrant, it would depend on why you were stopped. There are valid reasons for a "warrantless" search. Assuming that the officer stopped you for a "valid" reason, you can be searched and separated from your firearm for different reasons, including "officer's safety" as I stated before.

    Sorry to make this so long, but I have been through safety check points several times since I've had my permit. I always give my Driver's License and Fire Arms Permit. Not once have I been asked about my weapon, had it taken or its serial number verified. If you are courteous, you will receive courteousy. If you are a "*******" you will be treated as such. Again, it depends on the setting, why your were stopped, what has been called in, and your actions. The number one rule for an officer, is officer's safety not to harass the citizenry.

    Merely SEEING someone openly carrying would cause you to stop them? Would you first need RAS of a crime being committed? If not, why not?

    So, using what you've said, that you would stop a person open carrying and check their permit and DL, will you do the same for others that are also doing other things lawfully? Are you planning on stopping every vehicle that you see and checking the driver to ensure they are legal?

    You seem to be singling out only one group of law abiding actions for further scrutiny and that is not right.

    Open carriers should be left alone unless they are acting suspiciously or are obviously committing a crime.

    From some of your statements it appears that perhaps you are in training to be a law enforcement officer. I can only hope that they are teaching you better.


  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Southern, Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    If you are a "*******" you will be treated as such.
    Define "*******".

    What I am wanting to know is, lets say I am at walmart and a LEO just happens to see me there OCing, no-one called in, I don't wear 'hoodies', my pants are not below my waist, my underwear isn't hanging out etc, etc.

    I am always dressed decent, usually a black ballcap &buttondown shirt with my company name embroidered on each, jeans and workboots.

    I have short hair, mustache and a short goatee, IMO I am better dressed than the average joe.

    Now, am I going to be considered a ******* when the officer wants to run the serial number on my handgun and I tell him to get a warrant?

    I am not the type to break the law, heck I won't even speed as my livelyhood comes from having a clean MVR, but I also am not one to just roll-over like a dog and pee on myself because a LEO is on a power trip and wants to violate my rights.

    I hear all the time that ignorance of the law is no excuse, well it must be an excellent excuse for someLEO personnel.


    *edit in red.

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Mississippian wrote:
    SNIP If they want to dis-arm me, do I have the right to refuse? Make them get a warrant?

    It wouldn't bother me to dis-arm myself and lock the handgun in my vehicle while the LEO are present and then re-arm when they leave, but unless they have the right, then I am not going to give it to them.

    And BTW, I am not interested in hearing about the argument that there is no such thing as OC in MS, you are preaching to the choir on that argument.
    Don't touch the gun when being confronted by LEO's.

    "If they want to disarm me, do I have the right to refuse?" There is a lot that goes into this. A fair amount to learn.

    Your 4th Amendment rights may be modified a little by state law. For example, if state law requires a license to carry a gun OC and/or CC and state law allows an LEOto just up and demand to see your license and you are required to show it, then it would follow that you have to comply with the statute.

    Until you learn all the legal angles, I would suggest complying with all orders and demands, while verbally refusing consent.

    "I do not consent to the seizure of my gun, but I will not resist." Or, "Officer, I know you are just doing your job, but I do not consent to any searches or seizures." Or some such statement delivered politely.

    The time to fight with an LEO is after a negativeencounter. During the encounter, your mission is to preserve your legal position.

    A good introduction can be found at these two sites:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqMjMPlXzdA

    http://www.regent.edu/admin/media/schlaw/LawPreview/


    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Southern, Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    The time to fight with an LEO is after a negativeencounter. During the encounter, your mission is to preserve your legal position.
    Got-it. Thanks citizen.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,508

    Post imported post

    whoflungdo wrote:
    From what we are learning in my academy,an officer has a right during a terry stop to pat you down.
    I really hope they cover Terry v. Ohio more in-depth before you graduate and are set loose on the streets, because that is not correct.

    Terry holds that a police officer, based on his experience and a reasonable articulable suspicion, may conduct an investigatory stop on a person when he reasonably believes (see "RAS", above) that crime is afoot.

    Meaning, he can articulate a specific reason that the subject has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime, based on the immediate circumstances and his experience.

    Then, once those criteria are met, during the course of the investigation the officer may conduct a limited search by patting down the subject's exterior clothing in order to assure himself that no weapon is present that could be a danger to the officer or the subject.

    No reaching into pockets or waistbands, "foul!" for feeling a small crinkly plastic bag which could not possibly contain a weapon, then extracting it as legal fruit of the search, etc., etc.


  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Yazoo, Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    21

    Post imported post

    whoflungdo wrote:
    Mississippian wrote:
    From what we are learning in my academy,an officer has a right during a terry stop to pat you down. If they can discern you are armed, then they can disarm you, run the serial number, ask for your permit, and unload the weapon. It falls under "Officers safety". Keep in mind, that the officer doesn't know you from Adam. You may be the most upstanding, law-abiding person in the state of MS, but how is the LEO to know that?

    What is the purpose for running the serial numbers? I know the standard response,

    "officer safety, checking to see if it is stolen, etc." How does running the number make an officer "safer"? I don't see cops checking the serial numbers on the guns I have at the range when cops are there. I don't see them checking the numbers on 4 wheelers in the back of a truck or a boat in tow. So, why guns? The real reason please.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Southern, Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    whoflungdo wrote:
    Mississippian wrote:
    From what we are learning in my academy,an officer has a right during a terry stop to pat you down. If they can discern you are armed, then they can disarm you, run the serial number, ask for your permit, and unload the weapon. It falls under "Officers safety". Keep in mind, that the officer doesn't know you from Adam. You may be the most upstanding, law-abiding person in the state of MS, but how is the LEO to know that?
    Just for the record, Mississippian did not write that, it was whoflungdo.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    From what we are learning in my academy,an officer has a right during a terry stop to pat you down. If they can discern you are armed, then they can disarm you, run the serial number, ask for your permit, and unload the weapon. It falls under "Officers safety". Keep in mind, that the officer doesn't know you from Adam. You may be the most upstanding, law-abiding person in the state of MS, but how is the LEO to know that?

    It would also depend on the setting. If you are at your hunting camp or on your property, it would go a lot differently that if a LEO ran into you "Open Carrying" at Wal-mart. Keep in mind that someone could call 911 and report "suspicious activity" or "man with a gun" or that someone is brandishing a weapon. All of that would have to be taken into consideration by both you and the LEO.

    As far as I am concerned, If I saw you carrying a firearm on your hip, I would ask for your MS Firearms Permit and DL. If both are valid and match, I wouldn't ask any other questions or detain you further. If someone had called in a suspicous behaviour or man brandishing a weapon, I would ask a few more questions to find out what was going on and go from there.

    As to your question about refusing and getting a warrant, it would depend on why you were stopped. There are valid reasons for a "warrantless" search. Assuming that the officer stopped you for a "valid" reason, you can be searched and separated from your firearm for different reasons, including "officer's safety" as I stated before.

    Sorry to make this so long, but I have been through safety check points several times since I've had my permit. I always give my Driver's License and Fire Arms Permit. Not once have I been asked about my weapon, had it taken or its serial number verified. If you are courteous, you will receive courteousy. If you are a "*******" you will be treated as such. Again, it depends on the setting, why your were stopped, what has been called in, and your actions. The number one rule for an officer, is officer's safety not to harass the citizenry.

    Merely SEEING someone openly carrying would cause you to stop them? Would you first need RAS of a crime being committed? If not, why not?

    So, using what you've said, that you would stop a person open carrying and check their permit and DL, will you do the same for others that are also doing other things lawfully? Are you planning on stopping every vehicle that you see and checking the driver to ensure they are legal?

    You seem to be singling out only one group of law abiding actions for further scrutiny and that is not right.

    Open carriers should be left alone unless they are acting suspiciously or are obviously committing a crime.

    From some of your statements it appears that perhaps you are in training to be a law enforcement officer. I can only hope that they are teaching you better.
    I was replying to the hypothetical question about if someone was stopped. There is no "open carry" law in MS. If you are carrying a pistol or revolver concealed in whole or in part, and are not at your residence, your place of work, or in a motor vehicle, you MUST have a Firearms Permit in MS. The only other legally permitted way for you to carry a pistol or revolver without a permit is, "
    Section 97-37-1, Mississippi Code of 1972
    (2) It shall not be a violation of this section for any person over the age of eighteen (18) years to carry a firearm or deadly weapon concealed in whole or in part within the confines of his own home or his place of business, or any real property associated with his home or business or within any motor vehicle.
    (3) It shall not be a violation of this section for any person to carry a firearm or deadly weapon concealed in whole or in part if the possessor of the weapon is then engaged in a legitimate weapon-related sports activity or is going to or returning from such activity. For purposes of this subsection, "legitimate weapon-related sports activity" means hunting, fishing, target shooting or any other legal sports activity which normally involves the use of a firearm or other weapon. "
    So, if I ran into you at Wal-Mart, you did not have a name tag on, or didn't appear to be employed by Wal-Mart, and were "openly carrying" you must have Firearms Permit. According to: "ยง 45-9-101. License to carry stun gun, concealed pistol or revolver.

    (1) (a) The Department of Public Safety is authorized to issue licenses to carry stun guns, concealed pistols or revolvers to persons qualified as provided in this section. Such licenses shall be valid throughout the state for a period of five (5) years from the date of issuance. Any person possessing a valid license issued pursuant to this section may carry a stun gun, concealed pistol or concealed revolver.

    (b) The licensee must carry the license, together with valid identification, at all times in which the licensee is carrying a stun gun, concealed pistol or revolver and must display both the license and proper identification upon demand by a law enforcement officer. A violation of the provisions of this paragraph (b) shall constitute a noncriminal violation with a penalty of Twenty-five Dollars ($25.00) and shall be enforceable by summons.



  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    1911Hammer wrote:
    whoflungdo wrote:
    Mississippian wrote:
    From what we are learning in my academy,an officer has a right during a terry stop to pat you down. If they can discern you are armed, then they can disarm you, run the serial number, ask for your permit, and unload the weapon. It falls under "Officers safety". Keep in mind, that the officer doesn't know you from Adam. You may be the most upstanding, law-abiding person in the state of MS, but how is the LEO to know that?

    What is the purpose for running the serial numbers? I know the standard response,

    "officer safety, checking to see if it is stolen, etc." How does running the number make an officer "safer"? I don't see cops checking the serial numbers on the guns I have at the range when cops are there. I don't see them checking the numbers on 4 wheelers in the back of a truck or a boat in tow. So, why guns? The real reason please.
    I don't think I said anything contrary to what you posted. In MS, if you have a permit, you must provide it upon demand by a LEO. Seeing someone "openly carrying" in MS would require said permit as described in my previous post. A LEO, would be withing his rights to ask the OP for his DL and Permit. I didn't say I would run the serial number to the OP. Running the S/N would depend on the situation and how the individual was acting.

    The "real reason" you ask for for running the S/N is to see if it has been stolen.

    You are correct in running the Serial Number is not considered making an officer safe. My point was if a weapon was found on a person during a terry stop, it could be separated from the individual and cleared. Once it was, the officer could run the serial number and that would depend on the situation and the individual.

    I'm not going to turn this into an us versus them post. I was responding to the OP with what I would do. I'm not trying to give legal advice and it shouldn't be taken as such. You may wish to handle it differently, please feel free to do so.

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    whoflungdo wrote:
    From what we are learning in my academy,an officer has a right during a terry stop to pat you down.
    I really hope they cover Terry v. Ohio more in-depth before you graduate and are set loose on the streets, because that is not correct.

    Terry holds that a police officer, based on his experience and a reasonable articulable suspicion, may conduct an investigatory stop on a person when he reasonably believes (see "RAS", above) that crime is afoot.

    Meaning, he can articulate a specific reason that the subject has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime, based on the immediate circumstances and his experience.

    Then, once those criteria are met, during the course of the investigation the officer may conduct a limited search by patting down the subject's exterior clothing in order to assure himself that no weapon is present that could be a danger to the officer or the subject.

    No reaching into pockets or waistbands, "foul!" for feeling a small crinkly plastic bag which could not possibly contain a weapon, then extracting it as legal fruit of the search, etc., etc.
    Perhaps "Who" was paraphrasing.

    In any event, the red-highlighted information still falls short.

    The reference is Terry vs Ohio. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...2_0001_ZO.html

    Read the opinion carefully and you will see there are multiple prongs.

    One is the criteria needed for an involuntary stop to occur.

    Next is the criteria for a pat down.

    A Terry Stop and a Terry Patdown are not the same thing.

    There are specific criteria before a Terry Patdown may occur. They include whether the officer has reasonto suspect the citizen is armed.

    There are other, later opinions refining this. Including applying it to traffic stops.

    Best for all to read up and become at least a little familiar.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    whoflungdo wrote:
    From what we are learning in my academy,an officer has a right during a terry stop to pat you down.
    I really hope they cover Terry v. Ohio more in-depth before you graduate and are set loose on the streets, because that is not correct.

    Terry holds that a police officer, based on his experience and a reasonable articulable suspicion, may conduct an investigatory stop on a person when he reasonably believes (see "RAS", above) that crime is afoot.

    Meaning, he can articulate a specific reason that the subject has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime, based on the immediate circumstances and his experience.

    Then, once those criteria are met, during the course of the investigation the officer may conduct a limited search by patting down the subject's exterior clothing in order to assure himself that no weapon is present that could be a danger to the officer or the subject.

    No reaching into pockets or waistbands, "foul!" for feeling a small crinkly plastic bag which could not possibly contain a weapon, then extracting it as legal fruit of the search, etc., etc.
    What did I say that contradicts anything in your post? The OP brought up the terry pat down. Terry wouldn't come into play with the Wal-Mart scenario as I implied in my previous post. To carry a firearm in MS concealed in whole or in part would require a firearms permit. The section of the code for the firearms permit as I posted above requires that the permit holder carry both the permit and ID and present them upon demand to a LEO.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    Mississippian wrote:
    whoflungdo wrote:
    Mississippian wrote:
    From what we are learning in my academy,an officer has a right during a terry stop to pat you down. If they can discern you are armed, then they can disarm you, run the serial number, ask for your permit, and unload the weapon. It falls under "Officers safety". Keep in mind, that the officer doesn't know you from Adam. You may be the most upstanding, law-abiding person in the state of MS, but how is the LEO to know that?
    Just for the record, Mississippian did not write that, it was whoflungdo.
    Yes, sorry, Didn't mean to imply that you did. I'm still gettting used to the way this forums quotes work in trying to keep the replies short..



  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    Mississippian wrote:
    If you are a "*******" you will be treated as such.
    Define "*******".

    What I am wanting to know is, lets say I am at walmart and a LEO just happens to see me there OCing, no-one called in, I don't wear 'hoodies', my pants are not below my waist, my underwear isn't hanging out etc, etc.

    I am always dressed decent, usually a black ballcap &buttondown shirt with my company name embroidered on each, jeans and workboots.

    I have short hair, mustache and a short goatee, IMO I am better dressed than the average joe.

    Now, am I going to be considered a ******* when the officer wants to run the serial number on my handgun and I tell him to get a warrant?

    I am not the type to break the law, heck I won't even speed as my livelyhood comes from having a clean MVR, but I also am not one to just roll-over like a dog and pee on myself because a LEO is on a power trip and wants to violate my rights.

    I hear all the time that ignorance of the law is no excuse, well it must be an excellent excuse for someLEO personnel.


    *edit in red.
    Again, I can only answer as to what I would do and I still have a lot to learn. I would ask you for your permit and your DL while keeping an eye on you and your hands. If you complained that I had no right to ask for that, I would reference the law I sent in my previous post. If you said you didn't have to have a permit, I would again reference the law. If you still refused or became belligerent, that's where I think it would start to go downhill and would be turning into ******* territory.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Southern, Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    Again, I can only answer as to what I would do and I still have a lot to learn. I would ask you for your permit and your DL while keeping an eye on you and your hands. If you complained that I had no right to ask for that, I would reference the law I sent in my previous post. If you said you didn't have to have a permit, I would again reference the law. If you still refused or became belligerent, that's where I think it would start to go downhill and would be turning into ******* territory.
    Ok, I wouldn't have any problem producing those two items for you. The only time I would object is if you wanted to dis-arm me, now I know like you said before, you don't know me from adam and it is inthe interest of the officers safety, but still that is when I would object, but like others have said, I should not resistand thereforeI wouldn't.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    Mississippian wrote:
    Ok, I wouldn't have any problem producing those two items for you. The only time I would object is if you wanted to dis-arm me, now I know like you said before, you don't know me from adam and it is inthe interest of the officers safety, but still that is when I would object, but like others have said, I should not resistand thereforeI wouldn't.
    Speaking hypothetically here, the Wal-mart scenario with a person with a Firearms Permit probably would not result in that person being disarmed. However, if you are pulled over for a traffic incident, it would be more likely. It would be even more likely in the event you were asked to exit the vehicle.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Moss Point, Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    19

    Post imported post

    whoflungdo wrote:
    Mississippian wrote:
    Ok, I wouldn't have any problem producing those two items for you. The only time I would object is if you wanted to dis-arm me, now I know like you said before, you don't know me from adam and it is inthe interest of the officers safety, but still that is when I would object, but like others have said, I should not resistand thereforeI wouldn't.
    Speaking hypothetically here, the Wal-mart scenario with a person with a Firearms Permit probably would not result in that person being disarmed. However, if you are pulled over for a traffic incident, it would be more likely. It would be even more likely in the event you were asked to exit the vehicle.
    to me though (and probably to any good civil rights attorney), the problem is that the person you just (theoretically) carded in wal-mart was doing nothing in particular to make you believe a crime was being commited, therefore asking for his permit is not justified. you really sound anti-gun to me,,,,or just anti-gun if it's in the hands of regular citizenry. (AND,,,,i don't have to give you my driver license when i am ON FOOT, it's completely irrelevant to the situation)

    so anytime you see anyone driving a car LEGALLY, obeying all traffic laws, you will stop them just to see their driver's license? SAME thing.

    just saying,,,,HOPEFULLY you won't be such a JBT when you do finish the academy.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    I don'tknow if I am understanding you question completely, but, based on how I read it:



    Personally, I would not disarm an individual during a normal interaction. In addition to having no apparenty reason to do so, it also creates unnecessary risks. A firearm that was safe and secure in a holster is now being passed around and handled. Why create a safety problem where on did not exist before? I prefer it stay right where it is. I know it is there and I have factored it into my responses. If you suddenly make a drawing motion for no apparent reason, then I will react accordingly. On the other hand, if I direct you to start handling the pistol, I have placed myself is a tactically unsound position. It ensures that your weapon will be in your hand while mine is most likely in my holster. If you have some intent to do me harm, that puts you in a pretty good position to do it. But understand that my tactical considerations are secondary...if we are simply having a peaceful interaction (even if it is official in nature), there is no reason for me to relieve you of your weapon. If I have a reasonable belief that you are a threat to me, then the situation changes. But that reasonable belief has to be based on circumstances that I can later articulate in court, in need be. The simple fact that you are armed does not make you an imminent threat to my safety. So why disarm you? I hope that answers your question, at least from my perspective.

    Gonzo

Posting Permissions

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