Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34

Thread: Santa Clara County 'e' Check

  1. #1
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bad_ace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Cupertino, California, USA
    Posts
    328

    Post imported post

    After meeting with a bunch of open carriers in Sunnyvale for some coffee I went home and took my dog for a walk. Apparently there was a festival going on in my neighborhood. On this walk I passed two deputies going the opposite direction (same sidewalk). I'm glad to see that they used discretion and didn't stop me (a win for UOC in California). It wasn't until I tossed my dog's waste in the trash and headed back their direction that I noticed a woman stopping to talk with them. The woman pointed at me and then left the deputies. As I passed them the male deputy got my attention and asked to do an "e" check (PC12031 (e) ).

    Here is the video.

    http://www.opencarryradio.com/videos...74_trimmed.mov

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    "Hoity-toity" Palo Alto, California, USA
    Posts
    103

    Post imported post

    Wow., two stops for bay area uoc'ers in one day!

  3. #3
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    The video won't play for me (all I get is a totally white screen - doesn't seem like I'm evenconnecting).

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    Kudos to the police for handling it correctly. The officers were pretty respectful, as they should be. Just wish they realized that people who are scared don't approach you, so you don't get the opportunity to tell them that it's unloaded.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    "Hoity-toity" Palo Alto, California, USA
    Posts
    103

    Post imported post

    Great video, good work on keeping the lense pointed at the action.

  6. #6
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bad_ace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Cupertino, California, USA
    Posts
    328

    Post imported post

    For those of you having trouble playing .mov's here it is on youtube.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxP9y...e=channel_page

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    642

    Post imported post

    edit!
    When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    San Jose, , USA
    Posts
    1

    Post imported post

    The first link worked but took a few minutes to load for me. It does have more detail than the YouTube link though.

    Kudos on the LEOs for not approaching you until someone specifically asked about the guy carrying the gun.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    642

    Post imported post

    edit!
    When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

  10. #10
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Great job and attitude by the deputy! I do hope he reads this and is aware that "e" checks are not required on his part. He is choosing to do that and may also choose to not check.

    Sounds like he is a RKBA supporter. Just need to move him a little to the "don't have to check" side of "e".

  11. #11
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    Good job handling the encounter. I really liked the part wherehe said "Do it for me." and then smiles. That's funny. I wouldn't tell anyone my gun unloaded, that's just TMI.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California, USA
    Posts
    171

    Post imported post

    I agree. When folks start calling the cops because you may be wearing a knife or a gun, cops need to be careful, and tell folks about the constitution.

    Education is key, but usually if you choose to wear a weapon (your right) you will be reported as some lunatic needing to be shot on site.

    This truth inhibits me from going armed in public. The public, in general, is stupid.

    But police training seems to be improving. Maybe someday they can accept that any legal citizen can carry loaded weapons, open carry or concealed.

    But don't be drinking, see? Define a legal citizen? I think you all have the idea.

    First of all, the legal citizen is a sober citizen.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California, USA
    Posts
    171

    Post imported post

    I think that telling anyone "it's not loaded" is a waste of breath, because they will be running so fast to the nearest policeman ... well, we just as well should carry loaded guns, as the constitution says we can.

    And then say, "Of course it's loaded, you dummy!". Need I say more? What happened to that health care plan for everyone? Dummy.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California, USA
    Posts
    171

    Post imported post

    Let me comment - cops don't like anyone that carries a gun. They consider themselves as exclusive gun carriers, and resent anyone that has that right. That's the rub; we all resent a fool with a gun. Certain small localities have always attempted to restrict constitutional rights, usually prohibiting Johnny from bringing his guns to town. But it was alway about alcohol. Take your gun to town, Johnny, but do not get drunk.

    So, the wise fashioned laws that would not inhibit the just in any way. Wow, that was tough!

    Well, it just got too tough, so the so called wise decided to prohibit weapons .... and from there, it all went south.

    Here's an interesting fact: We live in the last country on earth when it comes to health care. It's not that we are last, it's just that we are too stupid to do anything about it.

    You are not going to get health care, because the insurance companies don't give a flying **** about you, they are driven by PROFIT. Guess whom gets screwed.

    And your politicians are getting rich, too, at your expense - I mean, who do you think is driving Wall Street?

    So, do you think it is time to dump the current government? This is what the constipation says - well, I can't remember all the flowery words, but you ******** better get off yours asses and and get to work.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Luis Obispo, California, USA
    Posts
    289

    Post imported post

    Dude...what?

    First, nobody has been shot by a cop for UOC. You silly rhetoric is old and tired.

    Second, your political rant is way off-base, full of holes, basically untrue, and most certainly does not belong on this forum.

    Go away.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Decoligny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rosamond, California, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    Lead Lobber wrote:
    But don't be drinking, see? Define a legal citizen? I think you all have the idea.

    First of all, the legal citizen is a sober citizen.
    Don't be drinking? What about having a glass of wine with my meal? That IS perfectly legal, even when armed.

    There is nothing in the California Penal Code that says that drinking is illegal. There is nothing in the Penal Code that says you can't take a drink (or two, or even three) if you are armed. In actuality, there isn't even a law on the books that makes it illegal to be armed when legally drunk.

    While there is a 100% VALID argument that it isunwise to be under the influence of alcohol while armed, it DOES NOT make you an "illegal" citizen because you are not 100% sober.

  17. #17
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    Army wrote:
    Dude...what?

    First, nobody has been shot by a cop for UOC. You silly rhetoric is old and tired.

    Second, your political rant is way off-base, full of holes, basically untrue, and most certainly does not belong on this forum.

    Go away.
    +1

    bad_ace: You have the most respectful leos ever. I would say I'm jealous but I honestly think you've both reached across the divide and have come to a mutually beneficial relationship. I hope you're sending out letters of commendation for all of these outstanding Sheriffs.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego County, CA, California, USA
    Posts
    1,402

    Post imported post

    Less than 2 minutes, most of that extraneous discussion. Pamphlet idea: "It's unloaded, because the government doesn't want US to be able to defend ourselves 100%."

    What was that about decocking? Since you had it in condition 4 before the slide rack he just wanted to return it to its original state?

  19. #19
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    You did a great job when you asserted your right to refuse unreasonable searches. However, when he declared, "I have a right to check that it's unloaded, and that's all I'm going to do," you replied, "that's fine."

    It's really a moot point, but that sounds an aweful lot like consent to me. We're probably not at this point yet, but some day we'll be challenging 12031(e) against constitutional muster. If you consent, you have no grounds to challenge.

    I recommend:

    "I do not consent to any searches or seizures of my person or property. Am I free to go?" If the officer insists on further detaining you and seizing your firearm (even for just 10 seconds); "I will not physically resist your search or seizure, but I have not consented. Let me know as soon as I am free to go about my business." Then say nothing else, except ask every couple minutes if you're free to go. Answer every question with silence, or a request for an end to the detention.

    A further benefit of this approach is they don't get to waste any of your time with what they can later call 'voluntary conversation'.
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  20. #20
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    Something I wanted to point out earlier was police officers have abilities, they don't have rights. Well, they have the same rights we have as citizens, but outside of those they just have things they can do. Semantics, but I think it's an important point to make.

    ETA: I just realized that pullnshoot25 said something similar in his 6-6 detainment audio. Big thumbs up to you sir.

  21. #21
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bad_ace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Cupertino, California, USA
    Posts
    328

    Post imported post

    bigtoe416 wrote:
    bad_ace: You have the most respectful leos ever. I would say I'm jealous but I honestly think you've both reached across the divide and have come to a mutually beneficial relationship. I hope you're sending out letters of commendation for all of these outstanding Sheriffs.
    I always treat LEO with respect, and I think that goes a long way with the relationship. I also find myself being extra polite to others while carrying (being an ambassador maybe?)

    I agree, this deputy did not overstep his bounds here. I had a commendation letter written and ready to go for another "e" check by Santa Clara County Sheriffs that only took 20 seconds. That letter was never mailed. Two things changed my mind.

    1. The day before the letter was to be dropped in the mail box I was confronted by another deputy from the same department, he made attempts to be friendly in his conversation only to get me to incriminate myself. He also threatened that I was "under investigation and that they were trying to get a warrant (for what I never found out). As advised by my attorney I posted nothing about the encounter. Instead the Sheriff got a letter from my lawyer.

    2. Any contact I have with bureaucrats is a waste of my productive time. Compliance is very important to them, they're willing to kill over it. I feel like writing a letter praising them for "not jacking me up too bad" is just validating their position and is compliance on my part for participating.

    I will not support any "service" provided at the point of a gun. Where, when, why and how did these armed men/women dress in costumes, doing-business-as Santa Clara Sheriff's deputies gain jurisdiction over me? Can they produce a contract that I entered into with them where I relinquish my rights? I don't think they can, so they only exist through coercion, threats of violence, actual violence visited on people, and our participation in the entire scam.

    (not leo bashing here) I support Police that investigate crimes with real victims (the "state" of California can not be a victim) and prosecute criminals that victimize. My activities have no victim, and so I will not praise them for only harassing me a little bit.

  22. #22
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bad_ace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Cupertino, California, USA
    Posts
    328

    Post imported post

    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    You did a great job when you asserted your right to refuse unreasonable searches. However [ ]

    I recommend:

    "I do not consent to any searches or seizures of my person or property. Am I free to go?" If the officer insists on further detaining you and seizing your firearm (even for just 10 seconds); "I will not physically resist your search or seizure, but I have not consented. Let me know as soon as I am free to go about my business." Then say nothing else, except ask every couple minutes if you're free to go. Answer every question with silence, or a request for an end to the detention.
    I get closer to this tactic each time I have an encounter. Trust me this is very hard to do, I'm a social creature and when someone talks to me I want to respond and start a dialog. My brain is also telling me that "if the cop just knew these pieces of information (what ever they are), he'd understand" It takes lots of practice to just keep your mouth shut. At one point I try and thank him for his time and leave but he continues.

  23. #23
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Sons of Liberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Riverside, California, USA
    Posts
    638

    Post imported post

    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    ...However, when he declared, "I have a right to check that it's unloaded, and that's all I'm going to do," you replied, "that's fine."

    ...I recommend:

    "I do not consent to any searches or seizures of my person or property. Am I free to go?"...
    I hear what you are saying, but I have found myself wondering what is that fine line of "refusal".

    PC 12031e "...Refusal to allow a peace officer to inspect a firearm pursuant to this section constitutes probable cause for arrest for violation of this section."

    I feel that somehow the answer to the request should start with a clear concise statement that "I am not refusing your request for inspection." Just so my words will not be misinterpreted to be a 12031e refusal. And, then, finish with a statement of not consenting to warantless searches.

    I imagine that if he is having "one of those days" and makes a request to inspect,and I say, "I do not consent to any searches or seizures of my person or property. Am I free to go?"; then he would slap the cuffs on me with a "No, you're under arrest for carrying a loaded weapon. We'll clear everything up at the station, with a warrant if necessary."

    I'd just as soon avoid that type of situation, if possible.
    Clinging to God & Guns: The Constitution Restoration Project

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California, USA
    Posts
    171

    Post imported post

    Thanks, Big Toe. I would love to go out in public with custom gun leather and Colt SSA replicas - unloaded, of course, to follow current laws.

    Unfortunately, police today are not governed by our long written laws - they just wing it, according to what ever political ******* is in power.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California, USA
    Posts
    171

    Post imported post

    Great post! It's important to adhere to current laws, say what's appropriate, and have an attorney and recorder at hand.

    I still lack the fortitude to venture out packing a side arm under UOC rules. Call me a chicken, but I still do not trust the educational or professional level of all LEOs.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •