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

Thread: Your local beat cop sees you OC every day, today youre covered!

  1. #1
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    every day at 9am you OC to starbucks. every day your local beat cop comes infor his coffee too.

    he always sees you are OC, and gives a head nod to you, but since he knows your legal, he says nothing.

    today its cold and rainy, so youre wearing your over coat, it covers your gun completely.

    so now youre CC, with your CPL in your pocket.

    he is curious; does he have a right to demand your CPL? to ask if youre armed?

    do you have to display? do you have to answer?

    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
    every day at 9am you OC to starbucks. every day your local beat cop comes infor his coffee too.

    he always sees you are OC, and gives a head nod to you, but since he knows your legal, he says nothing.

    today its cold and rainy, so youre wearing your over coat, it covers your gun completely.

    so now youre CC, with your CPL in your pocket.

    he is curious; does he have a right to demand your CPL? to ask if youre armed?

    do you have to display? do you have to answer?
    I am not a lawyer.

    One thing to rememberabout the law is that there are lots of sets of circumstances that have never been to court. I'm betting this is one.

    I'm thinking it will just depend on the cop.

    In a perfect world, I would think that previous OC without something more, like a bulge, would not be enough to justify a Terry Stop.

    However, the cop can go fishing. I think most states requirea person to show their CCW permit if demanded by a cop. So, he just walks up and demands your CCW permit as a fishing trip. Even if he's got no idea whether you are CCing, you would have to exhibit the CCW if you are carrying, I should think.

    Also, some states require you to notify. So, as a fishing trip, he just comes over and starts talking to you. If you don't notify, he can just ask. Are you going to lie? What if he did see a bit of a bulge?What if he only thought he saw a bulge? What if you lie or refuse to answer, and he notices some slight apprehension in your eyes? I cannot recall the case, but I believe I have read a court case where the addition of nervousness contributed enough to be sufficient reasonable suspicion for a Terry Stop.

    What if he just lies about seeing a bulge? After he pats you down and finds the gun, its pretty much your word against his.

    I think it will depend on the cop.
    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.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Yakima County, ,
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    No. He has no RAS.
    Simply knowing that someone carries a gun and then seeing them without a gun is NOT RAS.

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    cynicist wrote:
    No. He has no RAS.
    Simply knowing that someone carries a gun and then seeing them without a gun is NOT RAS.
    Its a nice idea, but its not you and I who get to decide whether RAS exists. Its the courts, after the fact. Here is a quote from Terry vs Ohio that gives a hint in that direction:

    We need not develop at length in this case, however, the limitations which theFourth Amendmentplaces upon a protective seizure and search for weapons. These limitations will have to be developed in the concrete factual circumstances of individual cases.

    If a court has not already decided it, or something clearly applicable, its up for grabs.

    I'm betting there is no case law on this set of circumstances.
    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.

  5. #5
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:

    I am not a lawyer.
    that right you are not a lawyer! this is a technical question about washington state law!

    One thing to rememberabout the law is that there are lots of sets of circumstances that have never been to court. I'm betting this is one.

    I'm thinking it will just depend on the cop.
    the law doesnt depend on the cop, its not what the cop thinks, its what the law is!

    In a perfect world, I would think that previous OC without something more, like a bulge, would not be enough to justify a Terry Stop.
    what does a bulge, have to do with a terry stop? do you even know what terry says? do you even know what RAS is?

    However, the cop can go fishing. I think most states requirea person to show their CCW permit if demanded by a cop. So, he just walks up and demands your CCW permit as a fishing trip. Even if he's got no idea whether you are CCing, you would have to exhibit the CCW if you are carrying, I should think.
    i doesnt matter, what you should think!

    Also, some states require you to notify. So, as a fishing trip, he just comes over and starts talking to you. If you don't notify, he can just ask. Are you going to lie? What if he did see a bit of a bulge?What if he only thought he saw a bulge? What if you lie or refuse to answer, and he notices some slight apprehension in your eyes? I cannot recall the case, but I believe I have read a court case where the addition of nervousness contributed enough to be sufficient reasonable suspicion for a Terry Stop.
    we dont have a notify law, nor a stop and ID law in washington! we dont have to answer questions unless there is an investigation of a crime! the case youre referring to is state v averino. there was alot more than nervousness going on there!

    What if he just lies about seeing a bulge? After he pats you down and finds the gun, its pretty much your word against his.
    he wont be patting me down unless he has RAS of a crime, and reason to believe that i, am armed and presently dangerous!

    I think it will depend on the cop.
    its fun to read about the trials and tribbulations of the folks in other states, i read ca, or, nv ak, id and dc. but its insane for you to try to advise about specific state law, espessially if you havent studied up!

    but i do thank you for stopping by, take some time and concider this situation, and the implications to your 2,4,and 5 A right in your state
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  6. #6
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    cynicist wrote:
    No. He has no RAS.
    Simply knowing that someone carries a gun and then seeing them without a gun is NOT RAS.
    thank you! its short and sweet, and true!
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  7. #7
    Regular Member Johnny Law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Puget Sound, ,
    Posts
    462

    Post imported post

    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
    every day at 9am you OC to starbucks. every day your local beat cop comes infor his coffee too.

    he always sees you are OC, and gives a head nod to you, but since he knows your legal, he says nothing.

    today its cold and rainy, so youre wearing your over coat, it covers your gun completely.

    so now youre CC, with your CPL in your pocket.

    he is curious; does he have a right to demand your CPL? to ask if youre armed?

    do you have to display? do you have to answer?
    If he sees you/knows you carry, why in the world would he give a rip if you are cc?
    If you have to fight, do not fear death. We will all die one day, so fight skillfully and bravely! And if it is to be that you die, then at least go to God proudly. Meet him as the proud warrior that you are, and not as a sniveling coward. Nobody lives forever.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
    SNIP its fun to read about the trials and tribbulations of the folks in other states, i read ca, or, nv ak, id and dc. but its insane for you to try to advise about specific state law, espessially if you havent studied up!

    but i do thank you for stopping by, take some time and concider this situation, and the implications to your 2,4,and 5 A right in your state
    Why is it insane? You've got a point, to a point. But I wouldn't go so far as to say insane. Its kind of a pointless attack that tends to shut down sincere attempts to help.

    Actually, it shouldn't be all that hard for you to answer your own questions. I'm not criticizing you for not having done so. I'm suggesting the answers should be really easy to find.

    Does your CCW statute require you to notify? Does it require you to show your CCW if demanded?

    As to the question about having a right to ask you a question, the courts have long held that it is not a violation of the 4A for police to ask people consensual questions.
    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.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
    cynicist wrote:
    No. He has no RAS.
    Simply knowing that someone carries a gun and then seeing them without a gun is NOT RAS.
    thank you! its short and sweet, and true!
    It occurs to me that I earlier answered a question that wasn't asked. I went off into Terry Stops and detentions when that wasn't really what was asked.

    I'm betting that doing a CPL check is not a Terry Stop. I'm also betting that RAS has nothing to do with it.

    Detaining you,searching you for the concealed gun, would be. Terry vs Ohio and dependent case law would apply.

    I think it will all hinge on whether the CCW statute in your state requires you toshow upon demand and whether you are required to notify.
    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.

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Found it easy enough.

    (b) Every licensee shall have his or her concealed pistol license in his or her immediate possession at all times that he or she is required by this section to have a concealed pistol license and shall display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so.

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.050

    The statute does not require the LEO to first have RAS before demanding the CPL, like for example, a stop-and-identify statute might.

    Unless there is case law saying the LEO needs RAS to demand a CPL,I'm thinking it would be smart to exhibit it.
    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.

  11. #11
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    Found it easy enough.

    (b) Every licensee shall have his or her concealed pistol license in his or her immediate possession at all times that he or she is required by this section to have a concealed pistol license and shall display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so.

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.050

    The statute does not require the LEO to first have RAS before demanding the CPL, like for example, a stop-and-identify statute might.
    i told you before, we dont have "stop and identify"!
    i told you before, we dont have "notify".

    Unless there is case law saying the LEO needs RAS to demand a CPL,I'm thinking it would be smart to exhibit it.
    yea i knew that. see my thread about fishing for ID, CPL 4 and 5 A rights also see kolender v lawson and state v peters. these cases hold that without RAS for the stop, a license can not be demanded.

    its seem that my questions about our rights get alot of folks trying to justify LEO intrusion into our lives, instead of trying to justify our right to privacy, to just be left alone!
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  12. #12
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    Post imported post

    Again:

    "Officer, are you detaining me?"

    If NO: "Have a nice day officer."

    If YES: "For suspicion of what crime are you detaining me?"



  13. #13
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    Mainsail wrote:
    Again:

    "Officer, are you detaining me?"

    If NO: "Have a nice day officer."

    If YES: "For suspicion of what crime are you detaining me?"

    thank you! its short, and sweet, and true!

    being covered on the rainy day, and therfore CC, would be even less RAS than the OC, the cop was allready used to.
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
    Citizen wrote:
    Found it easy enough.

    (b) Every licensee shall have his or her concealed pistol license in his or her immediate possession at all times that he or she is required by this section to have a concealed pistol license and shall display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so.

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.050

    The statute does not require the LEO to first have RAS before demanding the CPL, like for example, a stop-and-identify statute might.
    i told you before, we dont have "stop and identify"!
    i told you before, we dont have "notify".

    Unless there is case law saying the LEO needs RAS to demand a CPL,I'm thinking it would be smart to exhibit it.
    yea i knew that. see my thread about fishing for ID, CPL 4 and 5 A rights also see kolender v lawson and state v peters. these cases hold that without RAS for the stop, a license can not be demanded.

    its seem that my questions about our rights get alot of folks trying to justify LEO intrusion into our lives, instead of trying to justify our right to privacy, to just be left alone!
    So, what is your point in this thread?

    Are you trying to gin up support for rights?

    Are you trying to figure out your own tactics?

    Just start an argument?

    While criticizing me for trying to help, you did not do the one thing you could have very easily done--look up whether you have to exhibit the CPL upon LEO demand?

    In fact you seem to have gone out of your way to criticize the points in my post that you could, without bothering to acknowledge the one point about exhibiting a CPL upon LEO demand and that the statute requires no RAS of the LEO.

    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.

  15. #15
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    its seem that my questions about our rights get alot of folks trying to justify LEO intrusion into our lives, instead of trying to justify our right to privacy, to just be left alone!

    So, what is your point in this thread?

    Are you trying to gin up support for rights?

    Are you trying to figure out your own tactics?

    Just start an argument?

    In fact you seem to have gone out of your way to criticize the points in my post that you could, without bothering to acknowledge the one point about exhibiting a CPL upon LEO demand and that the statute requires no RAS of the LEO.
    every one of my threads is designed to explore the limits of our right to resist unlawful intrusion of LEO into our rights under the constitution.

    knowing the specific RCWs, and the right case law can ward off capritious and unlawful actions by overzealous LEOs.

    its a fact, i already knew, the CPL says you must display! but in the america i live in, a cop cannot "demand"a license for anything without RAS!

    again i want to thank you for "trying to help", unfortunatly, you have failed! you are free to go.

    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
    SNIP...what does a bulge, have to do with a terry stop? do you even know what terry says? do you even know what RAS is?
    Not really, I guess. The 4th and 5th Amendments arejust my favorite sub-subject on the forum. I've only been reading on it for about two and a half years in the context of learning the fine points of limitations on police and rights of OCers with respect to OC-police encounters.

    But why dither around asking me questions that might lead to your embarrassment when it turns out I'm not stupid on the subject? Why not just post it for discussion:

    In order to assess the reasonableness of Officer McFadden's conduct as a general proposition, it is necessary "first to focus uponthe governmental interest which allegedly justifies official intrusion upon the constitutionally protected interests of the private citizen," for there is

    no ready test for determining reasonableness other than by balancing the need to search [or seize] against the invasion which the search [or seizure] entails.

    Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523, 534-535, 536-537 (1967). And, in justifying the particular intrusion, the police officer must be able to point to specific and articulable facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant that intrusion...

    ...And in determining whether the officer acted reasonably in such circumstances, due weight must be given not to his inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or "hunch," but to the specific reasonable inferences which he is entitled to draw from the facts in light of his experience. Cf. Brinegar v. United States supra... (Terry vs Ohio)
    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.

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
    SNIP its a fact, i already knew, the CPL says you must display! but in the america i live in, a cop cannot "demand"a license for anything without RAS!
    I have no such information. If true, it would be wonderful news, though.

    What I do have is that game wardens don't need RAS to ask to see your hunting or fishing license. And that police do not need RAS to set up a roadblock and check for drivers licenses.

    I'm starting to suspect you are conflating legal points without realizing there may be other legal points that fit in between.

    Bottom line, if you want to make strong assertions about the law, it is the most helpful to quote and cite your source, a legal authority like a statute or court opinion being the best. This way, others can evaluate it for themselves.

    If you have a court case that says an LEO needs RAS to demand a CPL, great. I genuinely would love to hear it.
    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.

  18. #18
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    1 does he have a right to demand your CPL? no not without RAS ofcriminal activity, orknowledge that you do in fact have a CCd gun!

    2 to ask if youre armed? yes, he can ask anything he wants you are not required to answer.

    3 do you have to display? i think not, unless he has RAS for the demand.


    there really are only 3 questions, they are not dithering. i wasnt "asking you"they are questions specific to my state law.

    you could be embarresed by your lack of knowledge of our state law, but you dont embarress me. i rarely offer legal opinion in other states, unless i know for surewhat that statelaw is. to type in a bunch of supposition is insane, rude and useless.

    i think terry v ohio is terrible law, but its what we got. the court ruled that the cop got RAS by watching the repeated reconicence trips, sure sign of a hold up in the works! there is no comparrison to my hypothetical situation.

    ill be thinking up a new situation to post soon, im sure youll chime in, its good for your post count!
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
    1 does he have a right to demand your CPL? no not without RAS ofcriminal activity, orknowledge that you do in fact have a CCd gun!

    2 to ask if youre armed? yes, he can ask anything he wants you are not required to answer.

    3 do you have to display? i think not, unless he has RAS for the demand.


    there really are only 3 questions, they are not dithering. i wasnt "asking you"they are questions specific to my state law.

    you could be embarresed by your lack of knowledge of our state law, but you dont embarress me. i rarely offer legal opinion in other states, unless i know for surewhat that statelaw is. to type in a bunch of supposition is insane, rude and useless.

    i think terry v ohio is terrible law, but its what we got. the court ruled that the cop got RAS by watching the repeated reconicence trips, sure sign of a hold up in the works! there is no comparrison to my hypothetical situation.

    ill be thinking up a new situation to post soon, im sure youll chime in, its good for your post count!
    Lets go back to the beginning and start over. Lets dispense with this useless antagonism. It contributes nothing to the discussion; in fact it detracts.

    1) What is it you are trying to accomplish with that first post? Just so I understand clearly.

    2) Where is it written that an LEO needs RAS in order to demand a CPL?
    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.

  20. #20
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolender_v._Lawson

    http://www.wisbar.org/res/capp/2008/2007ap002731.htm

    the first post is the hypothetical situation, i cannot make it any mor clear.

    the 2 links above site cases that show, ID cannot be demanded by LEO, without RAS.
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    Found it easy enough.

    (b) Every licensee shall have his or her concealed pistol license in his or her immediate possession at all times that he or she is required by this section to have a concealed pistol license and shall display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so.

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.050

    The statute does not require the LEO to first have RAS before demanding the CPL, like for example, a stop-and-identify statute might.

    Unless there is case law saying the LEO needs RAS to demand a CPL,I'm thinking it would be smart to exhibit it.
    While the statute at first read appears to require presentation of a CPL to a PO, or to any other person upon demand, there is still a qualifier that seems to have gotten ignored. "When and IF required by law."
    That statute didn't make it a law to present a CPL upon demand; it made it a law to present a CPL upon demand when required by law. It looks to me that some additional statute will be needed to show when it is actually required to present the CPL. Does additional statute delineate the times when a CPL must be presented?

    Nothing in the statute you link provides for a PO to demand a CPL without RAS. It doesn't state when it is required to be shown.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  22. #22
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    hey writeme, i have never been able to find that answer, "when required by law", almost all of my 2, 4, 5 A questions hinge on the RAS to demand your CPL.

    look at my topics and read the setup question in my first posts. they are all aimed at finding legal ways to avoid intrussive LEOs.

    my first OC was sterrile, so no ID, or CPL to display, but if i needed i could state my name.

    nest OC, i took my CPL, just in case, cause i was also CC, 2 guns.


    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
    hey writeme, i have never been able to find that answer, "when required by law", almost all of my 2, 4, 5 A questions hinge on the RAS to demand your CPL.

    look at my topics and read the setup question in my first posts. they are all aimed at finding legal ways to avoid intrussive LEOs.

    my first OC was sterrile, so no ID, or CPL to display, but if i needed i could state my name.

    nest OC, i took my CPL, just in case, cause i was also CC, 2 guns.

    The statute mentioned by citizen sure seems to lack the RAS mention, or reference to another statute that lists when you are required to display.

    Is this a topic that was covered or mentioned in the class?
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolender_v._Lawson

    http://www.wisbar.org/res/capp/2008/2007ap002731.htm

    the first post is the hypothetical situation, i cannot make it any mor clear.

    the 2 links above site cases that show, ID cannot be demanded by LEO, without RAS.
    OK. I won't ask for further clarification of your purpose.

    I think you are playing a little bit of a dangerous game. But, I might be wrong. So, lets talk it out and see where it leads. Anything that expands understanding can only improve tactics for an OC-police encounter. So, realize I am not arguing with you, I am exploring.

    Let me first say that, excluding the members who actually violate the forum no-bashing policy, I am about the strongest critic of police the forum has. I am probably this forum'soriginalpolice basher. I have no tolerance for even the slightest rights infringement by police. I always advocate at least aformal written complaint for even the slightest infringement. Also, I consider the whole CCW permit business an infringement of a basic human right.

    With that said, I've been reading court opinions on 4A regarding police encounters for a little over 2 1/2 years. One thing I've definitely learned is that appellate courts have a knack for finding every little possible point of differencewhich to squeeze a legal point. The lesson being that extrapolating from previous cases to determine the legal points of a given scenario can be really tricky. There may be more law, or other quirks in the law which lead to a whole different conclusion. For example, I've seen members argue over whether a certain circumstance gives RAS based on their own experience. Then along comes somebodyelse who quotes the part of Terry that allows an LEO to draw inferences based on his experience.

    Another example would be one that had me upset early on. Police seizing guns during traffic stops for officer safety. I was applying Terry. "No, police cannot search car!", I think was my position, "becauseTerry only allows search of the person." I was none too happy when a law student quoteda later court opinion that allowed police to search the passenger compartment forweapons forofficer safety.

    Regarding your legal analysis, first lets recognize that is what we are doing--legal analysis. Lets also recognize neither of us are lawyers. (True?)

    Next, since your conclusion hinges on an LEO needing RAS to demand a CPL, lets address just that one tiny little point. Nothing else, for the moment. Just that. Once we nail that down, we can explore further. I am interested in this also because my state, like yours, has no requirement to notify, but does have a requirement to exhibit the CCW license document upon LEO demand. If we can come up with something solid that says an LEO does need RAS, I'll drink a pint tonight in celebration.

    So, the question presented to our forumcourt is, "Does an LEO need RAS in order to demand to see aCPL?"

    You have given that Hiibel and Kolender require RAS for identity. OK. I agree. But, remember what I said about the courts finding differences, things that distinguish one case from another? Here arethe distinctions I see: identity is not a regulated activity. Nor is identity an exception to an otherwise illegal activity:

    (1)(a) Except in the person's place of abode or fixed place of business, a person shall not carry a pistol concealed on his or her person without a license to carry a concealed pistol.

    Also, Hiibel and Kolender are 5A cases. RAS is a 4A issue.

    A license is a regulatory matter. As I mentioned earlier, game wardens do not need RAS to demand your fishing or hunting license. And police can set up a roadblock to check to see if everybody is driving on a valid driver's license, no RAS needed.

    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.

  25. #25
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    im not taking any class.

    the best i can figgure, LEO could demand my CPL if he actualy sees my CCd gun.

    see my topic about oc becomes cc infront of a cop.

    he maybe could ask if he sees me get into a car or on a bus with my OCd gun (we cant carry a loaded gun in a vehicle without a CPL)

    see my topic about oc on a bus sterile carry.
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

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
  •