dougwg
Regular Member
imported post
Then maybe the President of Michigan Open Carry should make a call?
Then maybe the President of Michigan Open Carry should make a call?
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Stopped in Warren...
- Thread starter FatboyCykes
- Start date
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
dougwg wrote:
dougwg wrote:
The President of MOC sent a letter to the Police Commissioner (They don't have a Chief listed) after hammeggs stop. I have not heard anything from him. I've beenwaiting until hammeggs works things out. I'm here if needed.
dougwg
Regular Member
mikestilly
Regular Member
dougwg
Regular Member
imported post
mikestilly wrote:
HAHAH....I was there!
I believe the score was 6-0 also
mikestilly wrote:
HAHAH....I was there!
I believe the score was 6-0 also
Veritas
Regular Member
imported post
Ethan_Frome wrote:
On to Ethan's question: I reloaded my pistol and racked the slide (before reholstering) after my arrest in Detroit.
After I did it, I had a moment of "Oh crap... was that brandishing?" But after I thought it over, I realized I was safe.
I wasn't being menacing or threatening. Frankly, it's no different than unloading your pistol outside your vehicle prior to entering it (when you're transporting) or reloading it after exiting.
An unloaded weapon does you no good. There is nothing that prohibits us from carrying a loaded weapon, nor are there any laws that tells us where must load and unload. If an officer tells you that you cannot reload your weapon until you get home, it completely defies the purpose of carrying a weapon.
If it were me, I'd kindly remind the officer(s) of these things and advise them that I would be reloading my weapon right then and there in a peaceful manner. I'd further advise them that if they saw fault in that, to go ahead and arrest me... and to be prepared to articulate, in court, exactly how I was being menacing or threatening by reloading the weapon that they illegally unloaded.
Ethan_Frome wrote:
First things first... congrats, FatBoy.
On to Ethan's question: I reloaded my pistol and racked the slide (before reholstering) after my arrest in Detroit.
After I did it, I had a moment of "Oh crap... was that brandishing?" But after I thought it over, I realized I was safe.
I wasn't being menacing or threatening. Frankly, it's no different than unloading your pistol outside your vehicle prior to entering it (when you're transporting) or reloading it after exiting.
An unloaded weapon does you no good. There is nothing that prohibits us from carrying a loaded weapon, nor are there any laws that tells us where must load and unload. If an officer tells you that you cannot reload your weapon until you get home, it completely defies the purpose of carrying a weapon.
If it were me, I'd kindly remind the officer(s) of these things and advise them that I would be reloading my weapon right then and there in a peaceful manner. I'd further advise them that if they saw fault in that, to go ahead and arrest me... and to be prepared to articulate, in court, exactly how I was being menacing or threatening by reloading the weapon that they illegally unloaded.
PDinDetroit
Regular Member
imported post
dougwg wrote:
dougwg wrote:
So, the Warren Police have their own version of COPS eh? Very Interesting...
T Vance
Regular Member
imported post
dougwg wrote:
dougwg wrote:
Wow...More people need to resist these officers asking "You don't have anything in the car I should know about? So you don't mind if I take a look in the car real quick then?".
T Vance
Regular Member
imported post
dougwg wrote:
Watch 8:28! "You were speeding OK. I didn'thave a chance to get a speed on you, but I know that you were speeding". :banghead::cuss:
That is outragous. Sure, you can tell when a car is going faster than is should down a certain road, but if you don't have positive EVIDENCE than how can he get pulled over and get a ticket? I hope he fought that ticket!
dougwg wrote:
Watch 8:28! "You were speeding OK. I didn'thave a chance to get a speed on you, but I know that you were speeding". :banghead::cuss:
That is outragous. Sure, you can tell when a car is going faster than is should down a certain road, but if you don't have positive EVIDENCE than how can he get pulled over and get a ticket? I hope he fought that ticket!
Veritas
Regular Member
imported post
Yeah I was watching those videos. So they stopped a bunch of people, patted them down, searched them, and found nothing to arrest nor charge anyone with.
How many people do they have to stop, pat down, and search in order to yield an arrest? Did they have reasonable suspicion in any of these cases? If so, you'd think maybe they'd have found something to charge someone with.
I guess if you just cruise around searching enough people that you're bound to find someone with something illegal. Sort of takes all the skill out of the job, eh?
By the way... I love the bit about "I can arrest you right now for not having ID or knowing who you are." If that's the case, then why didn't he? Maybe because the guy gave him name to the officers ON CAMERA. He even spelled it for them.
What sort of country do we live in when it becomes "illegal" to walk around without identifying papers? When did it become illegal to not memorize your address?
No doubt the officers were looking to jam him up with a drug charge. Too bad they had no evidence, probable cause, or reasonable suspicion to suspect nor charge him with such. For all we know, he's just a man tired of being harassed by the police and wanted to get away from the situation.
Not everyone who tries to avoid police, or are nervous around police, are guilty of anything. The woman who was pulled over for not using her blinker, for instance. The officers pulled her out of her vehicle and searched it. What did they find? Nothing. They even managed to confirm that her drivers license was valid. If the officers were REALLY after her for not using her blinker, then they'd have written her a ticket for it. By not writing her a ticket for the reason, they claim, they pulled her over for... well that just tells me that they were using the blinker as an excuse to pull her over so they could try to get her on something else. When they discovered that she was (gasp) a law abiding citizen, they just cut her loose with a warning for the blinker.
My thing is this: If you pull someone over for something, ticket them for that. Don't use excuses to pull someone over just so you can fiddle around inside their vehicle, or in the purse or pockets, trying to find something else.
If you want to catch a criminal, then try doing some actual POLICE WORK. Investigate crimes that are going unsolved... ticket people who violate the law... start walking beats to establish a presence in trouble areas. This business of throwing crap against a wall and seeing what sticks is nonsense.
I'm not quite sure what the Warren PD is trying to prove with these videos. All they're showing, to me, is how a bunch of innocent people are duped into being searched. Do they think these videos make them look good? What... 5 people searched and no arrests? Wow... good job guys.
Yeah I was watching those videos. So they stopped a bunch of people, patted them down, searched them, and found nothing to arrest nor charge anyone with.
How many people do they have to stop, pat down, and search in order to yield an arrest? Did they have reasonable suspicion in any of these cases? If so, you'd think maybe they'd have found something to charge someone with.
I guess if you just cruise around searching enough people that you're bound to find someone with something illegal. Sort of takes all the skill out of the job, eh?
By the way... I love the bit about "I can arrest you right now for not having ID or knowing who you are." If that's the case, then why didn't he? Maybe because the guy gave him name to the officers ON CAMERA. He even spelled it for them.
What sort of country do we live in when it becomes "illegal" to walk around without identifying papers? When did it become illegal to not memorize your address?
No doubt the officers were looking to jam him up with a drug charge. Too bad they had no evidence, probable cause, or reasonable suspicion to suspect nor charge him with such. For all we know, he's just a man tired of being harassed by the police and wanted to get away from the situation.
Not everyone who tries to avoid police, or are nervous around police, are guilty of anything. The woman who was pulled over for not using her blinker, for instance. The officers pulled her out of her vehicle and searched it. What did they find? Nothing. They even managed to confirm that her drivers license was valid. If the officers were REALLY after her for not using her blinker, then they'd have written her a ticket for it. By not writing her a ticket for the reason, they claim, they pulled her over for... well that just tells me that they were using the blinker as an excuse to pull her over so they could try to get her on something else. When they discovered that she was (gasp) a law abiding citizen, they just cut her loose with a warning for the blinker.
My thing is this: If you pull someone over for something, ticket them for that. Don't use excuses to pull someone over just so you can fiddle around inside their vehicle, or in the purse or pockets, trying to find something else.
If you want to catch a criminal, then try doing some actual POLICE WORK. Investigate crimes that are going unsolved... ticket people who violate the law... start walking beats to establish a presence in trouble areas. This business of throwing crap against a wall and seeing what sticks is nonsense.
I'm not quite sure what the Warren PD is trying to prove with these videos. All they're showing, to me, is how a bunch of innocent people are duped into being searched. Do they think these videos make them look good? What... 5 people searched and no arrests? Wow... good job guys.
Billy
Regular Member
imported post
Hello "Fatboy" -
I'm glad to read that the magistrate dropped the case quickly, however I was sorry to hear of how the police officers dealt with you in such a manner.
Thank you for your efforts as an active participant in the ongoing exercise of liberty.
Respectfully,
Billy
Merritt (Missaukee County)
"Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God. They are brought down and fallen: but we are risen, and stand upright. Save, LORD: let the King hear us when we call." Psalm 20:7-9 [AV]
The LORD JESUS be magnified --- "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12 [AV]
Hello "Fatboy" -
I'm glad to read that the magistrate dropped the case quickly, however I was sorry to hear of how the police officers dealt with you in such a manner.
Thank you for your efforts as an active participant in the ongoing exercise of liberty.
Respectfully,
Billy
Merritt (Missaukee County)
"Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God. They are brought down and fallen: but we are risen, and stand upright. Save, LORD: let the King hear us when we call." Psalm 20:7-9 [AV]
The LORD JESUS be magnified --- "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12 [AV]
T Vance
Regular Member
imported post
Here's a question....
The lady in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxg8BaLayfM&feature=PlayList&p=541C4A632D9578FE&index=0
was driving a car that didn't come back registered to her. The officer asked her if they could search the vehicle and she said "yes". If the car doesn't belong to you and the person who it belongs to you isn't in the car with you, can you still resist the search of the vehicle (as long as it doesn't come back stolen)?
Here's a question....
The lady in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxg8BaLayfM&feature=PlayList&p=541C4A632D9578FE&index=0
was driving a car that didn't come back registered to her. The officer asked her if they could search the vehicle and she said "yes". If the car doesn't belong to you and the person who it belongs to you isn't in the car with you, can you still resist the search of the vehicle (as long as it doesn't come back stolen)?
Veritas
Regular Member
imported post
T Vance wrote:
T Vance wrote:
Yes. Even if it's not hers, she has care, custody, and control of the vehicle. The same concept applies if you have a friend inside your home while you're sleeping and the cops show up at the door asking to come in. Even though your friend is not the owner, nor do they necessarily live there, they can still refuse entry.
T Vance
Regular Member
imported post
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccGxi3e_ecA&feature=PlayList&p=541C4A632D9578FE&index=1
at 1:55 the cop blows a stop sign. He should get stopped,searched, and a ticket for that!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccGxi3e_ecA&feature=PlayList&p=541C4A632D9578FE&index=1
at 1:55 the cop blows a stop sign. He should get stopped,searched, and a ticket for that!
T Vance
Regular Member
imported post
Veritas wrote:
Veritas wrote:
I have a friend that is going through school to be a LEO. He told me that if an officer doesn't have RAS, and you run away from them that can't legally detain you just because you ran.
CoonDog
Regular Member
imported post
dougwg wrote:
dougwg wrote:
Why do so many people consent to these searches?
T Vance
Regular Member
imported post
Sorry but I can't stop commenting on these videos!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5T8Uw6SfcBM&feature=channel
2:26 - look like you can see his "peeper"
Sorry but I can't stop commenting on these videos!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5T8Uw6SfcBM&feature=channel
2:26 - look like you can see his "peeper"
Veritas
Regular Member
imported post
.
.
T Vance
Regular Member
imported post
CoonDog wrote:
CoonDog wrote:
Because alot of people think that they probably have to let them search their vehicle.
Veritas
Regular Member
imported post
T Vance wrote:
Personally, I see no issue with how this was handled. They witnessed an issue, stuck to it, and handled it. That's police work.
T Vance wrote:
I think this one actually depicts officers doing what they should be doing. They pulled a guy over for weaving over the line. Upon pulling him over, they stuck to the reason FOR pulling him over. It wasn't like they got him for not using a blinker then trying to search his vehicle for drugs. They suspected him of being impaired, and upon administering a field sobriety test, determined that he WAS impaired.
Personally, I see no issue with how this was handled. They witnessed an issue, stuck to it, and handled it. That's police work.