Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 54

Thread: There Is More Than One Approach

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oakland County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    662

    Post imported post

    If some off you are sensing a tang of annoyance in my words lately, then your spidey sense is tingling properly. I'll be honest that it's starting to annoy me every time I offer personal experience in a matter, or someone else comes along with a story about a negative LEO encounter, that someone else seems to put them down somehow. It doesn't just happen with me... I see it happen to others when they post a story and people jump their case. So truth be told, it would seem that those doing the jumping are the ones eliciting impressions of "unmatched prowess". I'm merely offering a differing perspective, and likewise different opinion, based on my own experiences. My objectives are simple and pure: To create and inspire positive change in the world. Being that this is an OC site, most of what I'll discuss will pertain only to the issue of OC... but it should be known that my passions, and experiences, stem beyond this issue alone. I'm sure it's the same for many of you. But I'm beginning to discover a common denominator... the issue of inspiring change around here seems to take a backseat to plugging MOC Inc. Not amongst everyone... just among a few. I'm not naming names.

    With all the strong opinions that people are giving concerning LEO interactions, I'd like to assume that they have real experience in the matter. However, experiences can differ... for some, their experience is in marching with strength in numbers... for others, their experience is in sending emails to government officials... for others, their experience is putting themselves in REAL WORLD situations where they know their chances of being detained, arrested, and charged with a crime are very high. I am that last person. I'm not saying others are wrong... I'm just saying this is how I sometimes choose to do things.

    When facing detention, arrest, or being charged... the "standard" approach may not work for everyone in every situation. No doubt, some of my approaches or ways of handling things are different than others here. But in that same token, I refuse to accept the stated opinions that accuse my way of handling things as the kind that will result in criminal convictions. It's obvious that my methods have NOT resulted in convictions... I still have a clean record, afterall. More so than this, my methods have created and inspired positive change. I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but the incident in Detroit bears isolating:

    I had an encounter with an off duty LEO who told me that open carry was not allowed in Detroit. I tried to explain the law to the LEO, but when he flat out refused to listen or to verify it with his union attorney, I agreed (based on his recommendation) that PROVING it would be more effective. So we set up a time and date for the next day he worked... I was to show up outside of his building and simply walk down the street.
    This resulted in a negative LEO encounter right in front of the DPD headquarters.

    I was clear in explaining my purpose for going there, as well as my expectations. Nonetheless, several people jumped my case, calling me things like "dumbass", "idiot", and "moron", because I did not adhere to THEIR agenda or THEIR methods. Something that kind of surprised me is how quickly some of you were quick to call eachother and share your opinions about how "stupid" I was... and yet most of you were not very quick about getting down there to put your own butt on the line. Let's recount some simple facts:

    1)
    The people with such "strong opinions" weren't there when it all went down. A couple people showed up AFTER I was released... but not a single person that has expressed strong opinions opposing my methods was there. Period. If they want to do things their way, fine... nobody is stopping them. In fact, I'd love to see them do it... to walk alone, openly carrying, in a major city (like Detroit) and rely only on their personal knowledge to keep them out of potential trouble. That's a real world scenario... that's what I think we should be striving to improve. But the general concesus that I heard from their mouths was that they'd never risk doing it alone... they think the idea is "stupid" and that the best way to do it is to publicize the event with MOC, Inc material and blast it to all the media agencies. To which I beg the question, "How confident are you in your methods when you're afraid to put them to use on your own?" Some of you people live in complete fear... afraid to go places alone... afraid to talk to LEO's. That's not freedom, people... that's paranoia.

    2)
    I was released with no charges... not even so much as a citation. All of my property was returned to me and I wasn't even asked to leave the area. Immediately after my release, despite walking into other areas several blocks away, not a single officer tried to stop me for questioning. But hey, according to some, I did things all wrong. I am convinced that there is not a single person here who could've chartered a more positive outcome.

    3) I chose to exercise a right in front of the DPD headquarters for my own reasons. The primary reason was to ensure that DPD officers are properly trained and would properly react in a REAL WORLD SITUATION. This did not require others getting involved... it didn't require an open carry march... it didn't require video cameras... it didn't require attorneys... it didn't require emailing the "powers that be" in advance of my arrival. My personal feeling is that people tried to turn a personal civil rights exercize into a full blown MOC, Inc event... as if we are not strong enough, on our own, to do things without MOC, Inc. It has caused me to rethink posting details about events that I personally engage in. It's my sincere belief that some of the methods employed by those with the strongest opinions may actually hinder the issue of OC. You catch more bees with honey than you do with vinegar. Police are people too... you can follow protocol to bring up your concerns. The best answer is not always to organize a demonstration or threaten lawsuit. The lawyer card is dropped on the table around here more than anything else, it seems. When you talk about lawyers that much, you really only demonstrate your dependence on them to be free. And I'd really love to see someone put their money where their mouth is and shell out $3,500 to a lawyer to sue for something that you'll get nothing out of. My guess is that not a single person here has done that yet. Am I different? You bet. I don't threaten with lawyers... I follow through with actions. And despite the scare tactics some of you try to employ, I'm still a free man with no criminal convictions. Yes... it's true. Fancy that. And for the record, this incident in Detroit is NOT the first jam I've been in. It is my first OC issue, yes... but I truly do have a decent amount of experience in handling myself in LEO and court encounters. It's not that I'm some criminal, law breaker, or troublemaker... let's just say that I sometimes push the envelope on things in order to prove points or assert personal freedoms. Like some of you, I may also write an occassional letter or fire off an email every now and again... but I also do more than that when I feel the need.

    4)
    I didn't sit on the idea for 6 weeks talking about... I didn't seek a big PR event... I didn't look for protection in numbers... I simply set a task with a goal, armed with the knowledge in my head and the courage in my heart, and took a stroll in front of the DPD headquarters. Some of the people who had the most to say to me about it have had ample opportunity to put their money where their mouth is, but have not answered the call. In other words, they armchaired my experiences instead of experiencing it for themselves. Yes... this is a direct shot at those of you who are the most outspoken: Rather than TELL people how to handle a situation, why don't you put yourself in one and DEMONSTRATE it? And I'm not talking about getting together with 10 or 15 of your buddies and walking around... I heard Belle Isle mentioned as a host of an OC event sometime about a year ago as one of the things that may have "softened" Detroit up. I'll be the jerk and ask the tough question: What exactly did that event accomplish in Detroit? It would seem that with all this "two years of road paving before I walked in front of the HQ", a lot of road was left unfinished... because the DPD was still very much unaware of OC laws. Bringing me to my next point...

    5)
    Less than a week after the initial issue, the objective I set was complete. A city attorney authored a memo and sent it to all stations instructing them on the proper OC laws. It overwrote the previous department policy. Accomplishing this didn't require a lawyer... it didn't require an argument with any administrative body... it didn't require mobilization of open carriers downtown. It only required me putting myself in a position to PROVE the law by PERSONALLY DEMONSTRATING it. Then I just walked in to the Office of the Chief Investigator to follow up. Which, by the way, I also did by myself. I even managed to exit the situation on super good terms with the DPD... even being encouraged to apply to their department because the man in charge seemed to think my methodologies were something the DPD could use. I respectfully declined... I believe I belong on this side of the fence at this point in my life.

    On the subject of talking with LEO's, some of you are quick to lambaste people who do that. I may choose to talk with an LEO... I may not. I gauge the situation on a case by case basis... and it's largely based on the officer's opening sequence. Some of you here would sooner hang me for admitting cooperation with an LEO than to admit that not all officers are after your freedom. Even with "nice" officers, I still assert my rights... but I may not go out of my way to be obstinate. I reserve my obstinance for officers who cross the line with me... not for the ones who are legitimately seeking to uphold proper law. Example: When I made my complaint at the DPD OCI last week, the Seargent asked for my ID and CPL when he saw that I was carrying. I was polite and told him "I'll volunteer this information to you because I don't see how it can be used against me here." He smiled and said thank you... then returned them to me promptly. I could've been obstinate and said, "No." But why? As I saw it, THEY were the ones facing trouble, not me. Some of you, however, would jump all over this and say things like "Blah blah blah I'd NEVER show my ID blah blah blah you shouldn't have done that blah blah blah". In reality, I see many examples where people SAY one thing, but DO another. Example: The Boston Market Incident that some folks here were involved in... the FOIA document indicates that 4 out of 5 you volunteered your ID's with no problem. Nearly every negative LEO story that I've seen posted admits that the detainee volunteered their ID and/or consented to a search. I'll admit that there are instances in which I'll volunteer things, and then there are those that I don't. If I say that I will or won't respond a certain way in a certain situation, I stand firm on that when the situation presents itself. You can take that to the bank.

    It's an impression I'm beginning to develop about people here that there is only way to go about doing things. I'm merely offering differing perspectives. And I'm basing it on experience... I'm not armchairing. My personal experience is that, in a real encounter, you've got to think on your feet. Zipping lips can make your problems worse when you're dealing with a poorly informed LEO. You can bet that if I didn't verbally assert my rights in Detroit, that I would've probably found myself being booked at the local jail. I said just enough, but not too much, to plant the seed of doubt in the officers mind that maybe, just MAYBE, he should do a little more due dilligence before he took me in. Unfortunately, in his case it would seem that it pissed him off..l but at least I didn't end up with black ink all over my hands and having to go before the prosecuter to have the case dropped. Perhaps the one MOC'er who witnessed my recent situation would care to chime in and attest to my demeanor and manner of speech during my interaction with the DPD? He was on a lunch break from work (so he was unarmed), but he did happen to witness the entire event from start to finish. If I'm at all embellishing or otherwise fibbing about it, let him come forth and call me out on it. And I'd be interested in hearing his perspective about what would've happened had I just kept my mouth shut and not said a word. MY belief is that I would've been hauled off to jail... being left to plead my case before the prosecutor.

    My desire is not to create media frenzies and lawsuits... my desire is to inspire and create positive change. Sometimes standing firm in front of an LEO, rather than softly zipping my lips or sending them information via email, encourages them to think a little more. That's my goal. That's why I do what I do. And if it aint for you, then I'd kindly request you get off my butt about it. And while I'm requesting things, before anyone jumps someone elses butt for their response in an LEO interaction, how about you post some stories of your own interactions so that we can all see how much real world experience you have. Just a suggestion.


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    detroit, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    149

    Post imported post

    Very well said.

  3. #3
    Regular Member dougwg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MOC Charter Member Westland, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,445

    Post imported post

    holy cow.... I'll read that later when I have more time

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Arizona, ,
    Posts
    431

    Post imported post

    Wow, great story. Its good to hear someone actually acting on their beliefs! Any chance you got a copy of the DPD memo? That would be a good read!
    Freedom isn't free, but this is America! We will find a way to outsource it and save some money - Jeremy

  5. #5
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    Veritas wrote:
    If some off you are sensing a tang of annoyance in my words lately, then your spidey sense is tingling properly. I'll be honest that it's starting to annoy me every time I offer personal experience in a matter, or someone else comes along with a story about a negative LEO encounter, that someone else seems to put them down somehow. It doesn't just happen with me... I see it happen to others when they post a story and people jump their case. So truth be told, it would seem that those doing the jumping are the ones eliciting impressions of "unmatched prowess". I'm merely offering a differing perspective, and likewise different opinion, based on my own experiences. My objectives are simple and pure: To create and inspire positive change in the world. Being that this is an OC site, most of what I'll discuss will pertain only to the issue of OC... but it should be known that my passions, and experiences, stem beyond this issue alone. I'm sure it's the same for many of you. But I'm beginning to discover a common denominator... the issue of inspiring change around here seems to take a backseat to plugging MOC Inc. Not amongst everyone... just among a few. I'm not naming names.

    With all the strong opinions that people are giving concerning LEO interactions, I'd like to assume that they have real experience in the matter. However, experiences can differ... for some, their experience is in marching with strength in numbers... for others, their experience is in sending emails to government officials... for others, their experience is putting themselves in REAL WORLD situations where they know their chances of being detained, arrested, and charged with a crime are very high. I am that last person. I'm not saying others are wrong... I'm just saying this is how I sometimes choose to do things.

    When facing detention, arrest, or being charged... the "standard" approach may not work for everyone in every situation. No doubt, some of my approaches or ways of handling things are different than others here. But in that same token, I refuse to accept the stated opinions that accuse my way of handling things as the kind that will result in criminal convictions. It's obvious that my methods have NOT resulted in convictions... I still have a clean record, afterall. More so than this, my methods have created and inspired positive change. I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but the incident in Detroit bears isolating:

    I had an encounter with an off duty LEO who told me that open carry was not allowed in Detroit. I tried to explain the law to the LEO, but when he flat out refused to listen or to verify it with his union attorney, I agreed (based on his recommendation) that PROVING it would be more effective. So we set up a time and date for the next day he worked... I was to show up outside of his building and simply walk down the street.
    This resulted in a negative LEO encounter right in front of the DPD headquarters.

    I was clear in explaining my purpose for going there, as well as my expectations. Nonetheless, several people jumped my case, calling me things like "dumbass", "idiot", and "moron", because I did not adhere to THEIR agenda or THEIR methods. Something that kind of surprised me is how quickly some of you were quick to call eachother and share your opinions about how "stupid" I was... and yet most of you were not very quick about getting down there to put your own butt on the line. Let's recount some simple facts:

    1)
    The people with such "strong opinions" weren't there when it all went down. A couple people showed up AFTER I was released... but not a single person that has expressed strong opinions opposing my methods was there. Period. If they want to do things their way, fine... nobody is stopping them. In fact, I'd love to see them do it... to walk alone, openly carrying, in a major city (like Detroit) and rely only on their personal knowledge to keep them out of potential trouble. That's a real world scenario... that's what I think we should be striving to improve. But the general concesus that I heard from their mouths was that they'd never risk doing it alone... they think the idea is "stupid" and that the best way to do it is to publicize the event with MOC, Inc material and blast it to all the media agencies. To which I beg the question, "How confident are you in your methods when you're afraid to put them to use on your own?" Some of you people live in complete fear... afraid to go places alone... afraid to talk to LEO's. That's not freedom, people... that's paranoia.

    2)
    I was released with no charges... not even so much as a citation. All of my property was returned to me and I wasn't even asked to leave the area. Immediately after my release, despite walking into other areas several blocks away, not a single officer tried to stop me for questioning. But hey, according to some, I did things all wrong. I am convinced that there is not a single person here who could've chartered a more positive outcome.

    3) I chose to exercise a right in front of the DPD headquarters for my own reasons. The primary reason was to ensure that DPD officers are properly trained and would properly react in a REAL WORLD SITUATION. This did not require others getting involved... it didn't require an open carry march... it didn't require video cameras... it didn't require attorneys... it didn't require emailing the "powers that be" in advance of my arrival. My personal feeling is that people tried to turn a personal civil rights exercize into a full blown MOC, Inc event... as if we are not strong enough, on our own, to do things without MOC, Inc. It has caused me to rethink posting details about events that I personally engage in. It's my sincere belief that some of the methods employed by those with the strongest opinions may actually hinder the issue of OC. You catch more bees with honey than you do with vinegar. Police are people too... you can follow protocol to bring up your concerns. The best answer is not always to organize a demonstration or threaten lawsuit. The lawyer card is dropped on the table around here more than anything else, it seems. When you talk about lawyers that much, you really only demonstrate your dependence on them to be free. And I'd really love to see someone put their money where their mouth is and shell out $3,500 to a lawyer to sue for something that you'll get nothing out of. My guess is that not a single person here has done that yet. Am I different? You bet. I don't threaten with lawyers... I follow through with actions. And despite the scare tactics some of you try to employ, I'm still a free man with no criminal convictions. Yes... it's true. Fancy that. And for the record, this incident in Detroit is NOT the first jam I've been in. It is my first OC issue, yes... but I truly do have a decent amount of experience in handling myself in LEO and court encounters. It's not that I'm some criminal, law breaker, or troublemaker... let's just say that I sometimes push the envelope on things in order to prove points or assert personal freedoms. Like some of you, I may also write an occassional letter or fire off an email every now and again... but I also do more than that when I feel the need.

    4)
    I didn't sit on the idea for 6 weeks talking about... I didn't seek a big PR event... I didn't look for protection in numbers... I simply set a task with a goal, armed with the knowledge in my head and the courage in my heart, and took a stroll in front of the DPD headquarters. Some of the people who had the most to say to me about it have had ample opportunity to put their money where their mouth is, but have not answered the call. In other words, they armchaired my experiences instead of experiencing it for themselves. Yes... this is a direct shot at those of you who are the most outspoken: Rather than TELL people how to handle a situation, why don't you put yourself in one and DEMONSTRATE it? And I'm not talking about getting together with 10 or 15 of your buddies and walking around... I heard Belle Isle mentioned as a host of an OC event sometime about a year ago as one of the things that may have "softened" Detroit up. I'll be the jerk and ask the tough question: What exactly did that event accomplish in Detroit? It would seem that with all this "two years of road paving before I walked in front of the HQ", a lot of road was left unfinished... because the DPD was still very much unaware of OC laws. Bringing me to my next point...

    5)
    Less than a week after the initial issue, the objective I set was complete. A city attorney authored a memo and sent it to all stations instructing them on the proper OC laws. It overwrote the previous department policy. Accomplishing this didn't require a lawyer... it didn't require an argument with any administrative body... it didn't require mobilization of open carriers downtown. It only required me putting myself in a position to PROVE the law by PERSONALLY DEMONSTRATING it. Then I just walked in to the Office of the Chief Investigator to follow up. Which, by the way, I also did by myself. I even managed to exit the situation on super good terms with the DPD... even being encouraged to apply to their department because the man in charge seemed to think my methodologies were something the DPD could use. I respectfully declined... I believe I belong on this side of the fence at this point in my life.

    On the subject of talking with LEO's, some of you are quick to lambaste people who do that. I may choose to talk with an LEO... I may not. I gauge the situation on a case by case basis... and it's largely based on the officer's opening sequence. Some of you here would sooner hang me for admitting cooperation with an LEO than to admit that not all officers are after your freedom. Even with "nice" officers, I still assert my rights... but I may not go out of my way to be obstinate. I reserve my obstinance for officers who cross the line with me... not for the ones who are legitimately seeking to uphold proper law. Example: When I made my complaint at the DPD OCI last week, the Seargent asked for my ID and CPL when he saw that I was carrying. I was polite and told him "I'll volunteer this information to you because I don't see how it can be used against me here." He smiled and said thank you... then returned them to me promptly. I could've been obstinate and said, "No." But why? As I saw it, THEY were the ones facing trouble, not me. Some of you, however, would jump all over this and say things like "Blah blah blah I'd NEVER show my ID blah blah blah you shouldn't have done that blah blah blah". In reality, I see many examples where people SAY one thing, but DO another. Example: The Boston Market Incident that some folks here were involved in... the FOIA document indicates that 4 out of 5 you volunteered your ID's with no problem. Nearly every negative LEO story that I've seen posted admits that the detainee volunteered their ID and/or consented to a search. I'll admit that there are instances in which I'll volunteer things, and then there are those that I don't. If I say that I will or won't respond a certain way in a certain situation, I stand firm on that when the situation presents itself. You can take that to the bank.

    It's an impression I'm beginning to develop about people here that there is only way to go about doing things. I'm merely offering differing perspectives. And I'm basing it on experience... I'm not armchairing. My personal experience is that, in a real encounter, you've got to think on your feet. Zipping lips can make your problems worse when you're dealing with a poorly informed LEO. You can bet that if I didn't verbally assert my rights in Detroit, that I would've probably found myself being booked at the local jail. I said just enough, but not too much, to plant the seed of doubt in the officers mind that maybe, just MAYBE, he should do a little more due dilligence before he took me in. Unfortunately, in his case it would seem that it pissed him off..l but at least I didn't end up with black ink all over my hands and having to go before the prosecuter to have the case dropped. Perhaps the one MOC'er who witnessed my recent situation would care to chime in and attest to my demeanor and manner of speech during my interaction with the DPD? He was on a lunch break from work (so he was unarmed), but he did happen to witness the entire event from start to finish. If I'm at all embellishing or otherwise fibbing about it, let him come forth and call me out on it. And I'd be interested in hearing his perspective about what would've happened had I just kept my mouth shut and not said a word. MY belief is that I would've been hauled off to jail... being left to plead my case before the prosecutor.

    My desire is not to create media frenzies and lawsuits... my desire is to inspire and create positive change. Sometimes standing firm in front of an LEO, rather than softly zipping my lips or sending them information via email, encourages them to think a little more. That's my goal. That's why I do what I do. And if it aint for you, then I'd kindly request you get off my butt about it. And while I'm requesting things, before anyone jumps someone elses butt for their response in an LEO interaction, how about you post some stories of your own interactions so that we can all see how much real world experience you have. Just a suggestion.

    Haven't you read any of the many interactions that have been printed before on this site?

    Why don't you print the names,dates of those who called you names and ask for an apology? I'm sure they might ablige you.

    Did your encounter educate any MI citizens by way of front page news or tv news cast as has the MI OC group,who's main purpose is to educate all of the citizens in this state?

    Are you the only one who is capable of the educating of leo's?

    What has your non-arrest achieved compared to those who have been arrested and are in the process of suing the agencies that denied their civil rights in federal court?

    Did your incident educate all police agencies in the state?

    What's your point? Are you in this for yourself?
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  6. #6
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887

    Post imported post

    Veritas wrote:
    If some off you are sensing a tang of annoyance in my words lately, then your spidey sense is tingling properly...
    I can't bring myself to respond to all of your points - I disagree with some (in the sense that "Hey, this is the internet!") and agree with others.

    One thought I will post is this - did you ever think that you might be educating more than the police with your posts here, and vice versa?

    I salute you for your efforts, and willingness to "put it on the line".

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oakland County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    662

    Post imported post

    jeremy05 wrote:
    Wow, great story. Its good to hear someone actually acting on their beliefs! Any chance you got a copy of the DPD memo? That would be a good read!
    Unfortunately, no. It was shown to me in confidence and I was not permitted to take it with me. Having seen it with my own two eyes, and having seen various emails tossed around the DPD seeking clarification, was enough for me to believe that the issue has been taken seriously.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oakland County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    662

    Post imported post

    hamaneggs wrote:

    Haven't you read any of the many interactions that have been printed before on this site? I've read many, yes. Very few of them result in arrest or detainment.

    Why don't you print the names,dates of those who called you names and ask for an apology? I'm sure they might ablige you. Because they know who they are and publicly calling them out is not necessary.

    Did your encounter educate any MI citizens by way of front page news or tv news cast as has the MI OC group,who's main purpose is to educate all of the citizens in this state? Educating citizens is fine... but when a citizen is afraid to use that education out of fear of harassment or legal repercussions, it becomes counterproductive. I think a proper strategy is to first ensure that the LEO's are aware, and accepting of the law... and then to compel citizens to exercise their rights if they so choose. Let me put this another way: I'll suggest that nearly every member of this site probably knows that OC is legal... right? Even so, why hadn't any of them, in all the years they've been aware, taken it upon themselves to take a casual stroll down Beaubien alone? My contention is that even though they KNEW it was legal, they still feared the repurcussions. Dispelling fear is more important than knowledge.

    Are you the only one who is capable of the educating of leo's? I never said I was.

    What has your non-arrest achieved compared to those who have been arrested and are in the process of suing the agencies that denied their civil rights in federal court? First of all, whether or not I was arrested is a point of debate... but a moot point. Secondly, the achievement was that the entire Detroit Police Department was made aware of the proper law. Higher ranking DPD officers have begun to engage eachother with questions seeking clarification... some of them had no idea OC was legal until their policy was re-written and blasted out to every station.

    Did your incident educate all police agencies in the state? Doubtful... but it certainly educated one of the largest. Is this somehow a bad thing? Can you name any single OC event that educated every police department in the State?

    What's your point? Are you in this for yourself? Most certainly not. If I were, then perhaps I would have let someone else take that walk Downtown... and then try to capitalize on it later by using their experiences to contact the media and try to turn it into a PR stunt. I haven't yet commented on this, but I wasn't too happy with people sharing information about me with the media in attempt to gain recognition for MOC. Fortunately, the media hasn't run with anything... presumably because I have not commented to them personally. I did what I did for the exact reasons I stated... I did not do it for publicity or attention.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oakland County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    662

    Post imported post

    BB62 wrote:
    I can't bring myself to respond to all of your points - I disagree with some (in the sense that "Hey, this is the internet!") and agree with others. Disagree away... you won't hear any complaints from me. :-P

    One thought I will post is this - did you ever think that you might be educating more than the police with your posts here, and vice versa? I did think this, yes. That's why I posted my experiences here afterwards. The point of posting about it was to let other people know my experiences, as well as how they were handled. I guess it's important to separate "real world action" and "online posting". The real world action is something I would've done regardless... the online posting was just a way for me to share the experience with folks here who might've been interested; given the subject matter of the site. In other words, I didn't go to Detroit with the purpose of coming here to talk about it. The two are mutually exclusive.

    I salute you for your efforts, and willingness to "put it on the line". Thanks :-P

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Secretary MOC, Inc. Frankenmuth, , USA
    Posts
    894

    Post imported post

    Because publicity for MOC won't help educate other agencies and citizens?

  11. #11
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    Veritas wrote:
    hamaneggs wrote:

    Haven't you read any of the many interactions that have been printed before on this site? I've read many, yes. Very few of them result in arrest or detainment.

    Why don't you print the names,dates of those who called you names and ask for an apology? I'm sure they might ablige you. Because they know who they are and publicly calling them out is not necessary.

    Did your encounter educate any MI citizens by way of front page news or tv news cast as has the MI OC group,who's main purpose is to educate all of the citizens in this state? Educating citizens is fine... but when a citizen is afraid to use that education out of fear of harassment or legal repercussions, it becomes counterproductive. I think a proper strategy is to first ensure that the LEO's are aware, and accepting of the law... and then to compel citizens to exercise their rights if they so choose. Let me put this another way: I'll suggest that nearly every member of this site probably knows that OC is legal... right? Even so, why hadn't any of them, in all the years they've been aware, taken it upon themselves to take a casual stroll down Beaubien alone? My contention is that even though they KNEW it was legal, they still feared the repurcussions. Dispelling fear is more important than knowledge.
    Why should LEO's be accepting of the laws?
    Are you the only one who is capable of the educating of leo's? I never said I was. Reread your statement.

    What has your non-arrest achieved compared to those who have been arrested and are in the process of suing the agencies that denied their civil rights in federal court? First of all, whether or not I was arrested is a point of debate... but a moot point. Secondly, the achievement was that the entire Detroit Police Department was made aware of the proper law. Higher ranking DPD officers have begun to engage eachother with questions seeking clarification... some of them had no idea OC was legal until their policy was re-written and blasted out to every station. And you know this how?

    Did your incident educate all police agencies in the state? Doubtful... but it certainly educated one of the largest. Is this somehow a bad thing? Can you name any single OC event that educated every police department in the State? Are you sure they didn't see channel 4 news 6pm 8/16/08?

    What's your point? Are you in this for yourself? Most certainly not. If I were, then perhaps I would have let someone else take that walk Downtown... and then try to capitalize on it later by using their experiences to contact the media and try to turn it into a PR stunt. I haven't yet commented on this, but I wasn't too happy with people sharing information about me with the media in attempt to gain recognition for MOC. Fortunately, the media hasn't run with anything... presumably because I have not commented to them personally. I did what I did for the exact reasons I stated... I did not do it for publicity or attention.So you did it for yourself!
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oakland County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    662

    Post imported post

    SQLtables wrote:
    Because publicity for MOC won't help educate other agencies and citizens?
    Education means nothing when people are afraid to apply what they've learned. Publicity may educate, sure. But some of the publicity that MOC seeks to gain are images, video, and recordings of citizens being arrested and harrassed. How is that going to ease people's fears?

    I say again, there probably isn't a single member on this site who doesn't know that OC is legal in Detroit. And yet when faced with the situation of walking down the street, they said that going alone was "stupid" because of all the "bad things" that could happen. That's fear at it's finest. "I know it's legal, but I'm afraid to do it because I think I'll still end up in trouble."

    All I'm saying is toss fear aside... be a man/woman and do what you think in your heart is right. Crack some eggs... make an omellette... THEN feed the world your knowledge once they see that it's not scary afterall.



  13. #13
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    Veritas wrote:
    SQLtables wrote:
    Because publicity for MOC won't help educate other agencies and citizens?
    Education means nothing when people are afraid to apply what they've learned. Publicity may educate, sure. But some of the publicity that MOC seeks to gain are images, video, and recordings of citizens being arrested and harrassed. How is that going to ease people's fears?

    I say again, there probably isn't a single member on this site who doesn't know that OC is legal in Detroit. And yet when faced with the situation of walking down the street, they said that going alone was "stupid" because of all the "bad things" that could happen. That's fear at it's finest. "I know it's legal, but I'm afraid to do it because I think I'll still end up in trouble."

    All I'm saying is toss fear aside... be a man/woman and do what you think in your heart is right. Crack some eggs... make an omellette... THEN feed the world your knowledge once they see that it's not scary afterall.

    So you think the educating of thousands that MOC does on a regular basis would not encourage those who are afraid to OC eventualy? I OC in detroit and the surrounding suburbs without any problems and there are many more here who do the same. We in this area know how corrupt LEO's can be,whether they know the law or not. I have been falsely arrested,and after spending a couple grand, had the charges dropped and am still trying to find a lawyer to sue for my civil rights. I believe those who you say fear may not have the money to go through what I have, let alone spend any time in jail. Would you be willing to spend 20 days in jail,pay bond,lawyer fee's and pay $500 for forty days on a tether? Some folks would naturaly fear those circumstances let alone being handcuffed and put in a squad car.Don't you think?
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oakland County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    662

    Post imported post

    hamaneggs wrote:
    So you think the educating of thousands that MOC does on a regular basis would not encourage those who are afraid to OC eventualy? Not sure I'm understanding the question, so I'll refrain from answering it.

    I OC in detroit and the surrounding suburbs without any problems and there are many more here who do the same. As do I. It's a very rare occassion that I do not have my pistol with me... and especially in warmer weather, I usually OC. My first, and only (so far), OC issue was in Detroit.

    We in this area know how corrupt LEO's can be,whether they know the law or not. Some, not all. I personally believe the majority of officers are on the straight and narrow, but that a minority group of them who violate civil liberties tend to be the ones we focus most of our attention.

    I have been falsely arrested,and after spending a couple grand, had the charges dropped and am still trying to find a lawyer to sue for my civil rights. I believe those who you say fear may not have the money to go through what I have, let alone spend any time in jail. I've been arrested a few times. In at least one instance, I faced a felony charge. Thankfully, to date, I've not had to hire an attorney to defend myself in court yet... but by arguing my own case, I've been able to have miscellaneous charges and citations dropped. I think it's a very popular misconception that you need to spend thousands to defend oneself in many court cases. I've never had to, and I personally know at least two others who are like me in this regard.

    Would you be willing to spend 20 days in jail,pay bond,lawyer fee's and pay $500 for forty days on a tether? Some folks would naturaly fear those circumstances let alone being handcuffed and put in a squad car.Don't you think? Sure... that sounds lke something most rational people would try to avoid. You don't have to share it with me, but I'm really curious about what it is that you DIDN'T do that earned you 20 days in jail and 40 days on a tether.

  15. #15
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    Veritas wrote:
    hamaneggs wrote:
    So you think the educating of thousands that MOC does on a regular basis would not encourage those who are afraid to OC eventualy? Not sure I'm understanding the question, so I'll refrain from answering it.

    I OC in detroit and the surrounding suburbs without any problems and there are many more here who do the same. As do I. It's a very rare occassion that I do not have my pistol with me... and especially in warmer weather, I usually OC. My first, and only (so far), OC issue was in Detroit.

    We in this area know how corrupt LEO's can be,whether they know the law or not. Some, not all. I personally believe the majority of officers are on the straight and narrow, but that a minority group of them who violate civil liberties tend to be the ones we focus most of our attention.

    I have been falsely arrested,and after spending a couple grand, had the charges dropped and am still trying to find a lawyer to sue for my civil rights. I believe those who you say fear may not have the money to go through what I have, let alone spend any time in jail. I've been arrested a few times. In at least one instance, I faced a felony charge. Thankfully, to date, I've not had to hire an attorney to defend myself in court yet... but by arguing my own case, I've been able to have miscellaneous charges and citations dropped. I think it's a very popular misconception that you need to spend thousands to defend oneself in many court cases. I've never had to, and I personally know at least two others who are like me in this regard.

    Would you be willing to spend 20 days in jail,pay bond,lawyer fee's and pay $500 for forty days on a tether? Some folks would naturaly fear those circumstances let alone being handcuffed and put in a squad car.Don't you think? Sure... that sounds lke something most rational people would try to avoid. You don't have to share it with me, but I'm really curious about what it is that you DIDN'T do that earned you 20 days in jail and 40 days on a tether.
    As long as you explain the felony charges and miscellaneous misdemeanors,sure!
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Houghton, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    55

    Post imported post

    It is true there are many ways to deal with educating people on OC. It especially bothers me when someone insinuates that talking to the police while stopped for OC indicates that one is brain-dead, then adds that they personally do not OC. There is a time for lawyers in our litigous society, but they should be a last resort in my opinion.

    I have also seen some "do as I say not as I do" situations with OCers. More than once I have seen someone stopped that said they would never provide ID to the police simply cower and hand it over without protest. I am in your boat, the one time I was stopped the officer simply said "May I please see your CCW". I told him I was not required to provide my CPL, but since he asked nicely I would oblige. What if I hadn't? I think that would have been a form of escalation. When we talk about self defense situations we always harp on de-escalation and conflict resolution, but when it comes to a polite request from a cop we need to be a dick to prove a point?

    While I am proud to be a grass-roots OCer in MI, I am still waiting to see how MOC, Inc. fits in the picture.

    -Rob

  17. #17
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    Rob Washeleski wrote:
    It is true there are many ways to deal with educating people on OC. It especially bothers me when someone insinuates that talking to the police while stopped for OC indicates that one is brain-dead, then adds that they personally do not OC. There is a time for lawyers in our litigous society, but they should be a last resort in my opinion.

    I have also seen some "do as I say not as I do" situations with OCers. More than once I have seen someone stopped that said they would never provide ID to the police simply cower and hand it over without protest. I am in your boat, the one time I was stopped the officer simply said "May I please see your CCW". I told him I was not required to provide my CPL, but since he asked nicely I would oblige. What if I hadn't? I think that would have been a form of escalation. When we talk about self defense situations we always harp on de-escalation and conflict resolution, but when it comes to a polite request from a cop we need to be a dick to prove a point?

    While I am proud to be a grass-roots OCer in MI, I am still waiting to see how MOC, Inc. fits in the picture.

    -Rob
    Rob, you are a supporting member. MOC Inc. is grass roots,grass roots with a name now. We're all members of the whole OC educational grass roots movement.
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oakland County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    662

    Post imported post

    hamaneggs wrote:
    As long as you explain the felony charges and miscellaneous misdemeanors,sure!
    To put things in perspective, I can recount (off the top of my head) 9 negative LEO encounters/court interactions in the past 18 months. They range in severity from my issue in Detroit a few weeks ago to smaller things like improper traffic stops and citations. I'm not always cited, though... sometimes a simple discussion with the LEO results in no further action. And even though I do sometimes walk away from an LEO ecounter holding a ticket in my hand, I haven't been found responsible for paying one since 2005. Before that, I cannot remember the last one.

    Trying to recount all of the issues I've run into over the last 10 years... I would probably lose track of a few. Despite any accusations, I have been found innocent of them without the use of any attorney's. I think my highest capital expense was in overriding a local PD's bogus accusation of something that affected my ability to acquire a permit for something. It cost me about $130 or $180 (I don't recall). My highest bond amount for an actual arrest was $1,000... which was the result of a charge against me that was later dropped.

    As I've aged though, I've learned better how to interact with LEO's to avert the potential escalation of issues. This means that I pick and choose battles, as well as my words, carefully. All this being said, I've already disclosed enough on miscellaneous threads and I don't much care to rehash details surrounding all of my negative LEO and court encounters.

    I was just curious how an innocent person, such as yourself, managed to spend thousands of dollars, 20 days in jail, 40 days on a tether, and is having a hard time finding an attorney who see's enough merit in his case to seek damages. I couldn't imagine letting that happen to me if I were innocent.

  19. #19
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887

    Post imported post

    Veritas, I'm not sure what or whom to quote, with all the red text flying around here.

    My head hurts!!

    A point,made to whom I'm not sure...One reason that some people are not willing to"put it on the line" (and I bear them no ill-will) is that recompense for arrests, for instance, absent extenuating circumstances, is hard or impossible to come by.

    Many people don't have the pocketbook to sustain the costs associated with an "inducing panic", "disorderly conduct" or similar charge, only to have the charges dropped or found not guilty - and then have no real recourse.

    Maybe we are talking about two different things, but a fellow who lives fairly close to me was a victim of just such a charge. To the best of my knowledge, his ability to recovereven attorney fees (at minimum) is limited. Do you have a suggestion?

    If instead you are talking about a dearth of observers, then I possibly see where you are coming from, but if you're talking about one's unwillingness to "take it for the team" then that's a different matter entirely.

  20. #20
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    Veritas wrote:
    hamaneggs wrote:
    As long as you explain the felony charges and miscellaneous misdemeanors,sure!
    To put things in perspective, I can recount (off the top of my head) 9 negative LEO encounters/court interactions in the past 18 months. They range in severity from my issue in Detroit a few weeks ago to smaller things like improper traffic stops and citations. I'm not always cited, though... sometimes a simple discussion with the LEO results in no further action. And even though I do sometimes walk away from an LEO ecounter holding a ticket in my hand, I haven't been found responsible for paying one since 2005. Before that, I cannot remember the last one.

    Trying to recount all of the issues I've run into over the last 10 years... I would probably lose track of a few. Despite any accusations, I have been found innocent of them without the use of any attorney's. I think my highest capital expense was in overriding a local PD's bogus accusation of something that affected my ability to acquire a permit for something. It cost me about $130 or $180 (I don't recall). My highest bond amount for an actual arrest was $1,000... which was the result of a charge against me that was later dropped.

    As I've aged though, I've learned better how to interact with LEO's to avert the potential escalation of issues. This means that I pick and choose battles, as well as my words, carefully. All this being said, I've already disclosed enough on miscellaneous threads and I don't much care to rehash details surrounding all of my negative LEO and court encounters.

    I was just curious how an innocent person, such as yourself, managed to spend thousands of dollars, 20 days in jail, 40 days on a tether, and is having a hard time finding an attorney who see's enough merit in his case to seek damages. I couldn't imagine letting that happen to me if I were innocent.
    Ok, you explain where my guilt was and why Feigers office and one civil rights lawyer wouldn't take the case. 9/11/06 I was parked legaly on a residential street. While parked I consumed 1.5 pints of vodka for pain relief. No keys in ignition. Passed out. Two hours later a woman called LEO's. LEO's unlocked car, put me in ambulance to the hospital. Woke up 8am in emergency room with open intoxicant ticket. 9/19/06 officers come to house,arrest me for drunk driving. Judge gives me $7500 cash bond. 20 days later Judge lowers bond to $2500. Bondsman takes $150 to get me out only if I can wear $350 a month tether. 20 days later Judge adjourns until prosecutor can talk to the woman who called police in first place. Police write in their report the car was running, woman says the car was not running when she called or when they arrived. 20 days later all charges dropped except the open intoxicant( 2 empty bottles) ticket. Feigers office said the fact I accepted the open intoxicant ticket would make it hard to convince a jury. It didn't matter the main witness would testify the police report was an obvious lie to the Judge who provided the warrant because " police may have made a mistake in not knowing the difference between a running car or a car that is not running" . Remember that next time you see a Fieger commercial. After being guilty of offenses and being convicted,sentenced to jail in 6 counties for a total of up to 11 months altogether, I haven't run into crooked cops until I moved to this area. Im still looking and may have to go to the ACLU. But that would be my last resort. Many of my friends are LEO's, but I can emagine those who have never had to deal with the threat of arrest or jail having fear of exercizing their rights with egomaniacal Leo's like the ones you said you ran into. It 's easy to put people down if you do not know them or walk in their shoe's. Now what was your felony arrest? You can't remember?
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oakland County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    662

    Post imported post

    BB62 wrote:
    Maybe we are talking about two different things, but a fellow who lives fairly close to me was a victim of just such a charge. To the best of my knowledge, his ability to recovereven attorney fees (at minimum) is limited. Do you have a suggestion?
    My suggestion: Skip the attorney, learn the law, and represent himself.

    One of the major problems with our system today is that attorneys charge WAY too much. They make it nearly impossible for average folks to fight back. This practice continues because people automatically assume they need an attorney anytime the word "court" is mentioned... this gives attorneys a green light to charge basically whatever they want. I'm all for someone earning a living... but $3,500 for 60 minutes in court is a little much, if you ask me. Especially when most attorney's already have the case material put together because they generally take many of the same types of cases.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oakland County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    662

    Post imported post

    hamaneggs wrote
    Ok, you explain where my guilt was and why Feigers office and one civil rights lawyer wouldn't take the case. 9/11/06 I was parked legaly on a residential street. While parked I consumed 1.5 pints of vodka for pain relief. No keys in ignition. Keys in ignition does not matter. If you have care, custody, and control of the vehicle, you can be considered DUI.

    As for drinking 1.5 pints of Vodka for "pain relief" while sitting in your vehicle... that probably wouldn't sound kosher to a judge or jury. 1.5 pints is a lot to drink, as evidenced by you passing out and being transported to a hospital.

    Passed out. Two hours later a woman called LEO's. LEO's unlocked car, put me in ambulance to the hospital. Woke up 8am in emergency room with open intoxicant ticket. Based on what you've written so far, I would say you'd have a real hard time fighting an open intoxicant ticket because it sounds like were drinking IN your vehicle... that's an obvious open intoxicant.

    9/19/06 officers come to house,arrest me for drunk driving. As previously mentioned, you can be found guilty of DUI just by sitting in your vehicle... whether or not the keys are in the ignition. I'm not saying I agree with the law... but that's the way things are at this moment.

    20 days later Judge adjourns until prosecutor can talk to the woman who called police in first place. Prosecutor probably wanted to hear what the woman had to say and whether or not she would cooperate with the prosecution in bringing other charges against you.

    Police write in their report the car was running, woman says the car was not running when she called or when they arrived. 20 days later all charges dropped except the open intoxicant( 2 empty bottles) ticket. Prosecutor might have dropped the DUI charges because the woman contridicted the officer's report. An attorney worth their salt would pounce all over that in court. It doesn't mean that they couldn't have pursued the charges... but they probably figured that no harm was done and they already had you on another charge anyway. You have no real defense to fight the open intoxicant but you did stand a chance to fight the DUI... it sounds like the prosecutor took the path of least resistance.

    Feigers office said the fact I accepted the open intoxicant ticket would make it hard to convince a jury. Sounds about right. Once a jury hears that you passed out in your car after consuming so much alcohol... and that you basically admitted guilt by accepting the open intoxicant charge... it probably wouldn't be far fetched for them to believe that you were DUI.

    It didn't matter the main witness would testify the police report was an obvious lie to the Judge who provided the warrant because " police may have made a mistake in not knowing the difference between a running car or a car that is not running" . I'll agree that this sounds like a line of BS. But at the end of the day, you should be thankful that the officers DID screw up... it is very likely the only thing that saved you from being brought up on charges of DUI. Just sitting in your vehicle while drunk is enough to charge you. If the officer's hadn't lied in their report (saying the engine was running, a direct contradiction of the lady who called them), you probably would've been charged for that as well. This is an example where an inaccurate police report can cost the prosecution a "layup" conviction.

    Now what was your felony arrest? You can't remember? I do remember. I was arrested and charged with Interferring with Police. In a nutshell, officers responded to a call about someone I was with while on private property. The subject was an acquaintence of mine (at the time), but I had no involvement in whatever he was doing or trying to do. In fact, when police arrived on the scene, I was initially cooperative... I volunteered my ID and volunteered my new address (I had just moved that week) in case the officers needed to follow up with me later. My volunteering of this information resulted in a $100-something citation for "failure to change address on ID". This citation, combined with one of the officers berrating me with unprofessional language, caused me to decide that I was done talking to them. When I no longer wished to cooperate, I was ordered to leave the premises. However I was on private property, had business there, and the owner/operator of the premises hadn't asked me to leave. I explained this to the officer... he was unamused. He continued to berrate me and threatened to arrest me if I didn't leave the premises. More specifically, he told me to "Get the f**k back to my own city" because he said I wasn't welcome in HIS town. At this, I told the officer to either charge me with something or to leave me alone... and that I was not going anywhere until my business was done or the owner/operator asked me to leave. His response was to arrest me for "interferring with police". Needless to say, the charge didn't stick.

    This happened some years ago... it was one of my first highly negative LEO encounters and my very first arrest. Before this, I had minor issues here resulting in being detained... but I had never actually been arrested and charged with anything. After this incident, I was so disgusted that I sought to learn as much as I could about my responsibilities during an LEO encounter to avert situations like this again in the future. I get along with LEO's just fine... but every now and then, I run into a real ballbuster... one that seems to let their ego run in overdrive and who tries to talk/walk all over people. That doesn't fly with me. Most of the time, other officers end up getting involved and the incidents do not progress to anything more than "threat of arrest". Sometimes they result in detainment... sometimes arrest. Admittadly, shooting my mouth off back to officers who berrate me has been the source of some of these problems. But over the years, I've learned to pick my battles. These days, it takes a real special officer to coax me into firing off at the mouth. I believe the last time I did this was last summer when two officers pulled over my friend (I was riding passenger). We had a girl in the backseat (a girl I was kind of "seeing" at the time) and one of the officers asked me if we were heading home to "gangbang" her. As God as my witness, that's what he asked me. I ripped that guy a new butthole. We were promptly released and freed to go... no ticket for my buddy even though he was driving with no seatbelt and headlights.

  23. #23
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    Veritas wrote:
    hamaneggs wrote
    Ok, you explain where my guilt was and why Feigers office and one civil rights lawyer wouldn't take the case. 9/11/06 I was parked legaly on a residential street. While parked I consumed 1.5 pints of vodka for pain relief. No keys in ignition. Keys in ignition does not matter. If you have care, custody, and control of the vehicle, you can be considered DUI.
    Thats BS. In People v. Wood, 450 Mich. 399:538 N.W.2nd 351 (1995), overuled the holding of both People v. Pomeroy (on rehearing) and People v. Fulcher (on rehearing) 419 Mich. 441: 335 N.W.2nd 98 (1984), as to the definition of operating a motor vehicle. Pursuant to Wood, " a person sleeping in a motionless car cannot be held to be presently operating a vehicle while sleeping." Wood, supra at 405. In Wood, the defendant was found passed out at a McDonalds drive thru with the vehicle in gear and the drivers foot on the brake. The Supreme Court now holds that: " operating" should be defined in terms of the danger the statute seeks to prevent:the collision of a vehicle being operated by a person under the influence of intoxicating liquor with other persons or property.Once a person using a motor vehicle as a motor vehicle has put the vehicle in motion,or in a position posing a significant risk of causing a collision,such a person continues to operate it until the vehicle is returned to a position posing no risk. Wood supra at 404-405. HERE'S ANOTHER ONE YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT! In People v. Burton, 252 Mich.App. 130; 651 N.W.2nd 143(2002), the Court of Appeals applied the Wood standard and found that an intoxicated defendant[BAC of 0.17 or 0.18], behind the wheel with his seatbelt fastened, the engine of the vehicle running, the transmition in stationary position, either park or neutral, in a golf course parking lot, with two empty beer bottles in his truck was not "operating". The Burton Court concluded there was not enough evidence that the defendant intended to operate the vehicle within the meaning of Wood because there was no evidence the truck was in motion or that the truck was in a position posing a significant risk of causing a collision. Burton supra at 144, 151. I RECOMEND YOU LEARN THE LAW BEFORE YOU GIVE OUT ANY INFORMATION BECAUSE YOU KNOW NOT WHAT YOU SPEAK OF UP ON YOUR SOAP BOX! I'm still waiting to hear how you got out of the felony you spoke of!
    As for drinking 1.5 pints of Vodka for "pain relief" while sitting in your vehicle... that probably wouldn't sound kosher to a judge or jury. 1.5 pints is a lot to drink, as evidenced by you passing out and being transported to a hospital.

    Passed out. Two hours later a woman called LEO's. LEO's unlocked car, put me in ambulance to the hospital. Woke up 8am in emergency room with open intoxicant ticket. Based on what you've written so far, I would say you'd have a real hard time fighting an open intoxicant ticket because it sounds like were drinking IN your vehicle... that's an obvious open intoxicant.
    I was told by Feigers office that if I would have plead not guilty of the open intox too they would have been able to help me!!!!!!!!!
    9/19/06 officers come to house,arrest me for drunk driving. As previously mentioned, you can be found guilty of DUI just by sitting in your vehicle... whether or not the keys are in the ignition. I'm not saying I agree with the law... but that's the way things are at this moment.
    READ ABOVE SUPREME COURT DETERMINATION!!!
    20 days later Judge adjourns until prosecutor can talk to the woman who called police in first place. Prosecutor probably wanted to hear what the woman had to say and whether or not she would cooperate with the prosecution in bringing other charges against you.
    YEAH RIGHT!!!!!!!
    Police write in their report the car was running, woman says the car was not running when she called or when they arrived. 20 days later all charges dropped except the open intoxicant( 2 empty bottles) ticket. Prosecutor might have dropped the DUI charges because the woman contridicted the officer's report. An attorney worth their salt would pounce all over that in court. It doesn't mean that they couldn't have pursued the charges... but they probably figured that no harm was done and they already had you on another charge anyway. You have no real defense to fight the open intoxicant but you did stand a chance to fight the DUI... it sounds like the prosecutor took the path of least resistance.
    FEIGERS OFFICE SAID THEY HAD NO CASE ON OPEN INTOX!!!!
    Feigers office said the fact I accepted the open intoxicant ticket would make it hard to convince a jury. Sounds about right. Once a jury hears that you passed out in your car after consuming so much alcohol... and that you basically admitted guilt by accepting the open intoxicant charge... it probably wouldn't be far fetched for them to believe that you were DUI.
    WHERE"S THE PROOF!!!!!!
    It didn't matter the main witness would testify the police report was an obvious lie to the Judge who provided the warrant because " police may have made a mistake in not knowing the difference between a running car or a car that is not running" . I'll agree that this sounds like a line of BS. But at the end of the day, you should be thankful that the officers DID screw up... it is very likely the only thing that saved you from being brought up on charges of DUI. Just sitting in your vehicle while drunk is enough to charge you. If the officer's hadn't lied in their report (saying the engine was running, a direct contradiction of the lady who called them), you probably would've been charged for that as well. This is an example where an inaccurate police report can cost the prosecution a "layup" conviction.
    OFFICERS COMMITED A CRIME! LYING TO A JUDGE!!!!
    Now what was your felony arrest? You can't remember? I do remember. I was arrested and charged with Interferring with Police. In a nutshell, officers responded to a call about someone I was with while on private property. The subject was an acquaintence of mine (at the time), but I had no involvement in whatever he was doing or trying to do. In fact, when police arrived on the scene, I was initially cooperative... I volunteered my ID and volunteered my new address (I had just moved that week) in case the officers needed to follow up with me later. My volunteering of this information resulted in a $100-something citation for "failure to change address on ID". This citation, combined with one of the officers berrating me with unprofessional language, caused me to decide that I was done talking to them. When I no longer wished to cooperate, I was ordered to leave the premises. However I was on private property, had business there, and the owner/operator of the premises hadn't asked me to leave. I explained this to the officer... he was unamused. He continued to berrate me and threatened to arrest me if I didn't leave the premises. More specifically, he told me to "Get the f**k back to my own city" because he said I wasn't welcome in HIS town. At this, I told the officer to either charge me with something or to leave me alone... and that I was not going anywhere until my business was done or the owner/operator asked me to leave. His response was to arrest me for "interferring with police". Needless to say, the charge didn't stick.
    HOW LONG DID YOU SPEND IN JAIL AND WHAT WAS YOUR BOND FOR THIS FELONY? IF IN FACT IT WAS A FELONY?
    This happened some years ago... it was one of my first highly negative LEO encounters and my very first arrest. Before this, I had minor issues here resulting in being detained... but I had never actually been arrested and charged with anything. After this incident, I was so disgusted that I sought to learn as much as I could about my responsibilities during an LEO encounter to avert situations like this again in the future. I get along with LEO's just fine... but every now and then, I run into a real ballbuster... one that seems to let their ego run in overdrive and who tries to talk/walk all over people. That doesn't fly with me. Most of the time, other officers end up getting involved and the incidents do not progress to anything more than "threat of arrest". Sometimes they result in detainment... sometimes arrest. Admittadly, shooting my mouth off back to officers who berrate me has been the source of some of these problems. But over the years, I've learned to pick my battles. These days, it takes a real special officer to coax me into firing off at the mouth. I believe the last time I did this was last summer when two officers pulled over my friend (I was riding passenger). We had a girl in the backseat (a girl I was kind of "seeing" at the time) and one of the officers asked me if we were heading home to "gangbang" her. As God as my witness, that's what he asked me. I ripped that guy a new butthole. We were promptly released and freed to go... no ticket for my buddy even though he was driving with no seatbelt and headlights.
    So after the Detroit police illegaly searched you and violated your civil rights you let them go to teach em a lesson? What did you accomplish by letting them go so they can do it to another citizen? Talk is cheap!
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oakland County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    662

    Post imported post

    hamaneggs wrote:
    Veritas wrote:
    hamaneggs wrote
    Thats BS. In People v. Wood, 450 Mich. 399:538 N.W.2nd 351 (1995), overuled the holding of both People v. Pomeroy (on rehearing) and People v. Fulcher (on rehearing) 419 Mich. 441: 335 N.W.2nd 98 (1984), as to the definition of operating a motor vehicle. Pursuant to Wood, " a person sleeping in a motionless car cannot be held to be presently operating a vehicle while sleeping." Wood, supra at 405. In Wood, the defendant was found passed out at a McDonalds drive thru with the vehicle in gear and the drivers foot on the brake. The Supreme Court now holds that: " operating" should be defined in terms of the danger the statute seeks to prevent:the collision of a vehicle being operated by a person under the influence of intoxicating liquor with other persons or property.Once a person using a motor vehicle as a motor vehicle has put the vehicle in motion,or in a position posing a significant risk of causing a collision,such a person continues to operate it until the vehicle is returned to a position posing no risk. Wood supra at 404-405. HERE'S ANOTHER ONE YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT! In People v. Burton, 252 Mich.App. 130; 651 N.W.2nd 143(2002), the Court of Appeals applied the Wood standard and found that an intoxicated defendant[BAC of 0.17 or 0.18], behind the wheel with his seatbelt fastened, the engine of the vehicle running, the transmition in stationary position, either park or neutral, in a golf course parking lot, with two empty beer bottles in his truck was not "operating". The Burton Court concluded there was not enough evidence that the defendant intended to operate the vehicle within the meaning of Wood because there was no evidence the truck was in motion or that the truck was in a position posing a significant risk of causing a collision. Burton supra at 144, 151. I'll take your word for it. I'll admit that I have not researched DUI law personally... my information cames from third party sources. Personally, I don't anticipate having to worry about defending myself in a matter like this since I don't drive while under the influence. Nor do I guzzle down 1.5 pints of Vodka while sitting in a parked car because I'm "in pain". lol

    Give yourself a big hand... your expertise in drunk driving laws has finally paid off. And it only took 20 days in jail to motivate you into researching it. My hat is off to you, sir.

    I RECOMEND YOU LEARN THE LAW BEFORE YOU GIVE OUT ANY INFORMATION BECAUSE YOU KNOW NOT WHAT YOU SPEAK OF UP ON YOUR SOAP BOX! I guess that's why you spent 20 days in jail and 40 days on a tether and I didn't. Let's be real honest with eachother for a moment: You know the law because you are researching it AFTER the fact. Had you been just a little more aware of your rights BEFORE the fact, you probably wouldn't have pled guilty to possessing an open intoxicant. So once again, my hat is off to you for learning what you should've known BEFORE you did something foolish. If I ever plan to drink myself into a stupor while sitting in my car at the side of the road, you can bet I'd research the law BEFORE I did it. But then again, I have more sense than to do something like that.

    I'm still waiting to hear how you got out of the felony you spoke of! At this point, who cares what I did or how I did it? The fact is that my record is clean.

    I was told by Feigers office that if I would have plead not guilty of the open intox too they would have been able to help me!!!!!!!!! Woulda coulda shoulda.


    FEIGERS OFFICE SAID THEY HAD NO CASE ON OPEN INTOX!!!! Whatever Fiegers office says doesn't matter because you pled guilty to it.
    So after the Detroit police illegaly searched you and violated your civil rights you let them go to teach em a lesson? What did you accomplish by letting them go so they can do it to another citizen? Talk is cheap! I followed the proper channels to file a fomal complaint that's currently being investigated. I don't know the outcome yet... but I can tell you that I am not seeking to have anyone terminated. What would you do? Spend $8,000 to sue them and get nothing out of it? You couldn't even keep yourself out of jail nor find an attorney to take your case... how would you ever muster the resources to find one to take a case in which no damages are likely to be awarded?

    Nonetheless, it's my business how I choose to proceed with it. My primary goals have been attained... I've said that all along. While we're on the subject, what purpose did drinking 1.5 pints of Vodka while parked on the side of the road serve? What did YOU accomplish? You talking to me about accomplishments in this matter doesn't make any damn sense. It would seem to me that you did something foolish (for no useful purpose) and got smacked around as a result. When you get your big $1.5 million settlement (lol), let me know.

  25. #25
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    Veritas wrote:
    hamaneggs wrote:
    Veritas wrote:
    hamaneggs wrote
    Thats BS. In People v. Wood, 450 Mich. 399:538 N.W.2nd 351 (1995), overuled the holding of both People v. Pomeroy (on rehearing) and People v. Fulcher (on rehearing) 419 Mich. 441: 335 N.W.2nd 98 (1984), as to the definition of operating a motor vehicle. Pursuant to Wood, " a person sleeping in a motionless car cannot be held to be presently operating a vehicle while sleeping." Wood, supra at 405. In Wood, the defendant was found passed out at a McDonalds drive thru with the vehicle in gear and the drivers foot on the brake. The Supreme Court now holds that: " operating" should be defined in terms of the danger the statute seeks to prevent:the collision of a vehicle being operated by a person under the influence of intoxicating liquor with other persons or property.Once a person using a motor vehicle as a motor vehicle has put the vehicle in motion,or in a position posing a significant risk of causing a collision,such a person continues to operate it until the vehicle is returned to a position posing no risk. Wood supra at 404-405. HERE'S ANOTHER ONE YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT! In People v. Burton, 252 Mich.App. 130; 651 N.W.2nd 143(2002), the Court of Appeals applied the Wood standard and found that an intoxicated defendant[BAC of 0.17 or 0.18], behind the wheel with his seatbelt fastened, the engine of the vehicle running, the transmition in stationary position, either park or neutral, in a golf course parking lot, with two empty beer bottles in his truck was not "operating". The Burton Court concluded there was not enough evidence that the defendant intended to operate the vehicle within the meaning of Wood because there was no evidence the truck was in motion or that the truck was in a position posing a significant risk of causing a collision. Burton supra at 144, 151. I'll take your word for it. I'll admit that I have not researched DUI law personally... my information cames from third party sources. Personally, I don't anticipate having to worry about defending myself in a matter like this since I don't drive while under the influence. Nor do I guzzle down 1.5 pints of Vodka while sitting in a parked car because I'm "in pain". lol

    Give yourself a big hand... your expertise in drunk driving laws has finally paid off. And it only took 20 days in jail to motivate you into researching it. My hat is off to you, sir.

    I RECOMEND YOU LEARN THE LAW BEFORE YOU GIVE OUT ANY INFORMATION BECAUSE YOU KNOW NOT WHAT YOU SPEAK OF UP ON YOUR SOAP BOX! I guess that's why you spent 20 days in jail and 40 days on a tether and I didn't. Let's be real honest with eachother for a moment: You know the law because you are researching it AFTER the fact. Had you been just a little more aware of your rights BEFORE the fact, you probably wouldn't have pled guilty to possessing an open intoxicant. So once again, my hat is off to you for learning what you should've known BEFORE you did something foolish. If I ever plan to drink myself into a stupor while sitting in my car at the side of the road, you can bet I'd research the law BEFORE I did it. But then again, I have more sense than to do something like that.

    I'm still waiting to hear how you got out of the felony you spoke of! At this point, who cares what I did or how I did it? The fact is that my record is clean.

    I was told by Feigers office that if I would have plead not guilty of the open intox too they would have been able to help me!!!!!!!!! Woulda coulda shoulda.


    FEIGERS OFFICE SAID THEY HAD NO CASE ON OPEN INTOX!!!! Whatever Fiegers office says doesn't matter because you pled guilty to it.
    So after the Detroit police illegaly searched you and violated your civil rights you let them go to teach em a lesson? What did you accomplish by letting them go so they can do it to another citizen? Talk is cheap! I followed the proper channels to file a fomal complaint that's currently being investigated. I don't know the outcome yet... but I can tell you that I am not seeking to have anyone terminated. What would you do? Spend $8,000 to sue them and get nothing out of it? You couldn't even keep yourself out of jail nor find an attorney to take your case... how would you ever muster the resources to find one to take a case in which no damages are likely to be awarded?

    Nonetheless, it's my business how I choose to proceed with it. My primary goals have been attained... I've said that all along. While we're on the subject, what purpose did drinking 1.5 pints of Vodka while parked on the side of the road serve? What did YOU accomplish? You talking to me about accomplishments in this matter doesn't make any damn sense. It would seem to me that you did something foolish (for no useful purpose) and got smacked around as a result. When you get your big $1.5 million settlement (lol), let me know.
    Do you have proof that you accomplished anything with the secret memo you were shown. You stated it was circulated throughout the department.Where is your proof for that! It isn't a matter of what I drank 2 years ago. It's a matter of your claims and what are accomplished at the Detroit PD. I have made no such claims of accomplishments at the Detroit PD. Looking forward to the results! Of course your understanding of drunk driving law is lacking so take your own advice and learn the law!And civil rights law too!
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •