Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 50

Thread: Not every LEO is a bad guy

  1. #1
    Regular Member fire suppressor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Kitsap County
    Posts
    872

    Post imported post

    I have been on this from for a little while now and often hear a common voice in discussions I do not care for. Honestly as a First Responder I sometimes take offense to it. I understand what this from is about and believe in that. I also understand many of theses posts are written after a negative LEO encounter and am ok this. I also understand because I work as a Firefighter and EMT my stereotype of police will be more positive than other and admit this. However I am sometimes sadend to see a common voice in this from is to label every LEO as a bad guy or some kind of evil in the world.
    Not every LEO is a bad guy, not every LEO thinks that OC is a bad thing, not every LEO is hell bent on making our day a living hell. Yes there are many of them who need to understand there job is the enforce the law and not what they think the law should be. There are many many of them who need to understand what exatcly the RCWs state before they initiate contact with us. And there just a lot of bad cops out there. But you know what, there are also bad Firefighters, bad EMTs, bad Doctors, bad garbage men, we have bad everything in this world. I hate to see us so quickly put everyone into one category so quicly.
    Police do not have a easy job, we all watch the news we should know this. I want to go on record for saying Thank you! to all of the brave Police Officers who may be reading this. Honeslty try and think about how much worse this wolrd would be with out them. And think if we all showed them a little more respect and helped them out once and a while like showing them a DL or carry permit when we dont legaly have to would go a long way in helping to bridge the gap between us. You can argue its your legal right not to show them them a peice of paper or have a freindly discussion with them unless you are beging detained, and you may very well be legaly corect to do so. Lets think about it from there side for a moment. Lets try and think about all the calls they have already been on that day and how much they may really appreciate a cooperative MWG. Show a Police Officer a peice of paper or stopping for a few moments to answer a few questions just isnt a big deal. I have not done anything wrong in my life, I do not have anything to hide or be afrade of.
    I apologise if you are offended by this or just want to lable me as wrong and I may take a lot of flak for this on the from but that is my personal opinion. And the great thing about living in America is I get to have it and voice it. I would love to see posts of peolpe who agree that notevery LEO is a enemy.
    "Fight like you train, train like you fight"

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575

    Post imported post

    fire supressor

    I agree with you that not all LEOs are bad people or bad LEOs. I think most people on OCDO would agree with me on this.

    The problem is that a lot of us have been talking in a friendly manner to a LEO and said the wrong thing at the wrong time orwere in the wrong place at the wrong time and that friendly LEO will cart you off to jail in a heart beat. Been there done that.

    I had a good encounter yesterday with a LEO he glanced at my weapon nodded and smiled and walked on by. That does not mean the next LEO wont put me on the ground and then cuff and stuff me.

    The problem is figuring out in the 1st 5 seconds if a LEO is good or bad, if youguess wrong you may end up with an expensiveproblem.

    In my mind 2 things need to happen that would solve a lot of this 1. all LEOs wear a recording device on duty all the time, after all they if they have nothing to hide why would they care. 2. Hold LEOs accountable when they make errors, ignorance of the law is no excuse should work both ways all the time.



    Orphan
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Illinois, USA
    Posts
    778

    Post imported post

    Most cops are not bad. A few are.

    The wrong encounter with a bad one can ruin your life.



  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Port Angeles, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    As a former prosecutor I can say that the vast majority of cops are good, decent, dedicated professionals.

    That doesn't mean I will engage in an unwanted consensual encounter with one if he/she sees me open carrying. That doesn't mean I willconsent toa search of my effects. That doesn't mean I will waive my right to remain silent. Professional officers will not be offended by any of these refusals. They may have the authority to approach me, but I have the right to refuse to play along.

    In my opinion, the main reasonthat many people, not just OCers, dislike and/or fear the police is because the police are tasked with enforcing way too many intrusive victimless crimes. The guy who works hard all week but wants to smoke a joint before he listens to his favorite band play Saturday night has a legitimate reason to fear the police. The guy who goes about his business like everyone else but who chooses to openly carry a sidearm has a legitimate reason to be wary of some of the ignorant officers out there. The guy who pays thousands of dollars in taxes, but who has a couple of questionable deductions has a good reason to fear the agents of the state. I could continue.



    If the police were only tasked with enforcing law against victimizing other people, then the respect for them would go up immensely overnight. But as long as they are the arm of the do-good, nanny-style, we-know-better-than-you-do-what-is-right-for-you-and-your-family government, they will continue to be viewed with suspicion, distrust, and yes, occassionally hatred, by freedom-loving Americans.



  5. #5
    Regular Member gsx1138's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington, United States
    Posts
    884

    Post imported post

    olypendrew wrote:
    As a former prosecutor I can say that the vast majority of cops are good, decent, dedicated professionals.

    That doesn't mean I will engage in an unwanted consensual encounter with one if he/she sees me open carrying. That doesn't mean I willconsent toa search of my effects. That doesn't mean I will waive my right to remain silent. Professional officers will not be offended by any of these refusals. They may have the authority to approach me, but I have the right to refuse to play along.

    In my opinion, the main reasonthat many people, not just OCers, dislike and/or fear the police is because the police are tasked with enforcing way too many intrusive victimless crimes. The guy who works hard all week but wants to smoke a joint before he listens to his favorite band play Saturday night has a legitimate reason to fear the police. The guy who goes about his business like everyone else but who chooses to openly carry a sidearm has a legitimate reason to be wary of some of the ignorant officers out there. The guy who pays thousands of dollars in taxes, but who has a couple of questionable deductions has a good reason to fear the agents of the state. I could continue.



    If the police were only tasked with enforcing law against victimizing other people, then the respect for them would go up immensely overnight. But as long as they are the arm of the do-good, nanny-style, we-know-better-than-you-do-what-is-right-for-you-and-your-family government, they will continue to be viewed with suspicion, distrust, and yes, occassionally hatred, by freedom-loving Americans.

    I have to totally agree with this. It seems that everytime someone does something another person doesn't like people feel the need to make a law about it. We do that with enforcing our view of morality on others. And on and on. You hit the nail on the head. Police have become the States military force for earning money and being stuck in a quagmire of stupid laws that hogtie them into being the resident assh0le for some politicians talking points.
    "Think lightly of yourself and deeply of the world." ~ Musashi

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    :celebrateI recently had an encouter (happened to be military police, Navy). I was trying to catch a hop from NAS Whidbey to Hickam AFB in Hawaii. I stopped at the main gate, told the guard on duty I had a firearm in my suitcase in the back of my truck in a purpose built case, but not lockedand no ammuntion. I told the guard that I was going to the terminal for the above reaon. He called his superviser over and the superviser asked me "was it in a hard case". I told him that it was in hard purpose case built case andthat I have no ammunition.I also told himwhere I was going and what I was trying to do. The superviser waved me on through. Here is where it gets spooky. When I checked in at the terminal and told the attendent about the firearm the attendent asked me if I hadchecked in at the gate and filled out "the form", of course I said "what form?'. He pointed to some seats away from anyone else and asked me to sit there (all nice and friendly). Shortly in came a navy policemen (I thought, oh geeze here it comes). Anyway the attendents (notice plural) brought him over to me and he asked what happened. I repeated the whole story as he wrote it down. Then he wanted the serial nomber, caliber, make etc. for "the form". During this time another navy policeman came in, but he just stayed out of the way. Anyway the navy policman I was talking to had me take the gun out of the case (Springfield Armory, .45, Ultra Compact, 3 1/2") barrel, had to throw that in. I locked the slide back to show him it was not loaded.But he did not know how to close it so I showed him. I also asked him to please do not chew on the gate guard to bad he didn't know, he laughed. I also asked him did dispatch come on with "man with a gun" he said they sure did. My comment was I wish they wouldn't do thatand he agreed.We chatted about guns and shooting in general. All in all a real good experience. I didnot make the flight,they came out andsaid no passengers??.Now the funny part sort of. There was a guy and his wife sitting behind me and he came over. He saidhe was listening to the whole thing and he mentioned he was retired military police and also a retiredLEO. he said you did everything by the book and it was just a normal SNAFU. All three of us chuckled over that. When we were retrieving our luggage, military policeman #2 came into the terminal (one of the attendentsmust have called them)saw me and said "I have to escort you off the base" again nice and friendly. Gave me a ride to my truck, escorted me off the base and we waved goodby to each other. Sorry for the long diatribe but it was interesting.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    376

    Post imported post

    I also understand because I work as a Firefighter and EMT my stereotype of police will be more positive than other and admit this.

    Did you see the video where the fire chief was arrested for not moving his truck? I hear they have a fire chief opening in Jericho, Arkansas, want to check it out?

    Police do not have a easy job, we all watch the news we should know this.

    What is so hard about their jobs? You seriously get your info from the MSM?

    Honeslty try and think about how much worse this wolrd would be with out them.

    I'm thinking....nope...still can't come up with anything.

    And think if we all showed them a little more respect and helped them out once and a while like showing them a DL or carry permit when we dont legaly have to would go a long way in helping to bridge the gap between us.


    Wait a friggin minute. Respect is earned, not given. Helping them out is not achieved by giving up my rights. Unless I am driving and comitted a traffic infraction, they don't need to see my license. Unless a law commands me to show them my permit, they don't need to see it, got it? If they want to bridge the gap, they can stop asking for things I don't need to provide and trying to coerce me when I don't give in.

    You can argue its your legal right not to show them them a peice of paper or have a freindly discussion with them unless you are beging detained, and you may very well be legaly corect to do so. Lets think about it from there side for a moment. Lets try and think about all the calls they have already been on that day and how much they may really appreciate a cooperative MWG. Show a Police Officer a peice of paper or stopping for a few moments to answer a few questions just isnt a big deal. I have not done anything wrong in my life, I do not have anything to hide or be afrade of.

    It is my legal right, and they better respect and understand that. I don't care about their side. A cop on the street is not my friend. I don't care if his coffee was cold and donuts were soggy. You always use these coded words such as "cooperative" and "respectful" when you really mean give up your civil liberties and waive your rights and protections. Why don't you really say what you mean. It IS a big deal, and regardless of you having done something wrong or not, you can still go to jail for decades and even be executed.

    I would love to see posts of peolpe who agree that not
    every LEO is a enemy.

    I agree. Several LEO's are good friends of mine. I know their kids, eat dinner with them when I can, laugh, and have fun with them, and I would be very upset if anything bad happened to them. That said, I am not naive enough to think that your average beat cop is officer friendly. Unless I know them, they ARE the enemy until proven otherwise.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Hilton Head, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    524

    Post imported post

    samaloney2006 wrote:
    :celebrateI recently had an encouter (happened to be military police, Navy). I was trying to catch a hop from NAS Whidbey to Hickam AFB in Hawaii. I stopped at the main gate, told the guard on duty I had a firearm in my suitcase in the back of my truck in a purpose built case, but not lockedand no ammuntion. I told the guard that I was going to the terminal for the above reaon. He called his superviser over and the superviser asked me "was it in a hard case". I told him that it was in hard purpose case built case andthat I have no ammunition.I also told himwhere I was going and what I was trying to do. The superviser waved me on through. Here is where it gets spooky. When I checked in at the terminal and told the attendent about the firearm the attendent asked me if I hadchecked in at the gate and filled out "the form", of course I said "what form?'. He pointed to some seats away from anyone else and asked me to sit there (all nice and friendly). Shortly in came a navy policemen (I thought, oh geeze here it comes). Anyway the attendents (notice plural) brought him over to me and he asked what happened. I repeated the whole story as he wrote it down. Then he wanted the serial nomber, caliber, make etc. for "the form". During this time another navy policeman came in, but he just stayed out of the way. Anyway the navy policman I was talking to had me take the gun out of the case (Springfield Armory, .45, Ultra Compact, 3 1/2") barrel, had to throw that in. I locked the slide back to show him it was not loaded.But he did not know how to close it so I showed him. I also asked him to please do not chew on the gate guard to bad he didn't know, he laughed. I also asked him did dispatch come on with "man with a gun" he said they sure did. My comment was I wish they wouldn't do thatand he agreed.We chatted about guns and shooting in general. All in all a real good experience. I didnot make the flight,they came out andsaid no passengers??.Now the funny part sort of. There was a guy and his wife sitting behind me and he came over. He saidhe was listening to the whole thing and he mentioned he was retired military police and also a retiredLEO. he said you did everything by the book and it was just a normal SNAFU. All three of us chuckled over that. When we were retrieving our luggage, military policeman #2 came into the terminal (one of the attendentsmust have called them)saw me and said "I have to escort you off the base" again nice and friendly. Gave me a ride to my truck, escorted me off the base and we waved goodby to each other. Sorry for the long diatribe but it was interesting.
    When I go to NWS Charleston (Goose Creek) I would have to "register" my firearm every time I got to the gate house. I did it so often that they just gave me a stack of registration forms to take home with me so I could fill them out beforehand. They also got used to me clearing my 1911 in the parking lot before bringing it in to go in the safe.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Hilton Head, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    524

    Post imported post

    To answer the OP:

    In my area, I have had extensive interaction with law enforcement at all levels, and my experience has taught me to have great respect and admiration for these guys. They do a tough job, for little pay, with daily headaches. The local LE here are truly out to serve the people, and I respect them for that.

    In contrast, the LE back home (where I grew up) in CT are generally self-righteous, elitist, and authoritarian, which is entirely in line with government there as a whole. They're better than the average commoner, and they want you to know it. Not all of them are like this, but many are. FYI - I come from a MIL/LE family.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,762

    Post imported post

    However I am sometimes sadend (sic) to see a common voice in this from (sic) is to label every LEO as a bad guy or some kind of evil in the world.
    Could you link to some specific examples, please?

    I also understand because I work as a Firefighter and EMT my stereotype of police will be more positive than other and admit this.
    It's got nothing to do with what work you do. I've been in the fire service since 1989. Worked with a lot of cops. I see them working in the field, contacting citizens. The general attitude I see from most of them is: We know that few citizens understand their rights or how to properly exercise them. We know that few citizens understand the limits of LE authority. We will combine these two facts and take advantage of them to the maximum (occasionally illegal) extent possible to get what we want. Cops that don't have this general attitude are seen as misfits by other cops.

    Cops don't play fair. They lobby the highest halls of government to pass laws so that they don't have to play fair. They have lobbied to pass laws that allow them to bypass basic due process. They legally seize personal effects and convert them to government use. They are not subject to criminal prosecution when non-commissioned people would be. In short, they play by a different set of rules when on duty than the rest of us, which holds them less legally accountable for their actions.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Machoduck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Covington, WA & Keenesburg, CO
    Posts
    566

    Post imported post

    Dean, you gave excellent responses to the OP but I disagree on one point. It does have something to do with the work he does. Compared to the ordinary citizen, he gets preferential treatment from the police because he is one of them, so to speak. He is "official", we are not. When he presents his papers to the police he's showing his membership card in that exclusive club known as officialdom. He also seems to have adopted the "unwritten dress code for the mind" that is political correctness, police variation.

    MD

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,762

    Post imported post

    Agree Duck, I guess my point was, I've been in the same business a lot longer than he has and I've developed a much different attitude about cops.

    Early in my experience, I may have agreed with most of what he says. Now I don't. Maybe he will come around too . . . .

  13. #13
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    fire suppressor wrote:
    I have been on this from for a little while now and often hear a common voice in discussions I do not care for. Honestly as a First Responder I sometimes take offense to it. I understand what this from is about and believe in that. I also understand many of theses posts are written after a negative LEO encounter and am ok this. I also understand because I work as a Firefighter and EMT my stereotype of police will be more positive than other and admit this. However I am sometimes sadend to see a common voice in this from is to label every LEO as a bad guy or some kind of evil in the world.
    Not every LEO is a bad guy, not every LEO thinks that OC is a bad thing, not every LEO is hell bent on making our day a living hell. Yes there are many of them who need to understand there job is the enforce the law and not what they think the law should be. There are many many of them who need to understand what exatcly the RCWs state before they initiate contact with us. And there just a lot of bad cops out there. But you know what, there are also bad Firefighters, bad EMTs, bad Doctors, bad garbage men, we have bad everything in this world. I hate to see us so quickly put everyone into one category so quicly.
    Police do not have a easy job, we all watch the news we should know this. I want to go on record for saying Thank you! to all of the brave Police Officers who may be reading this. Honeslty try and think about how much worse this wolrd would be with out them. And think if we all showed them a little more respect and helped them out once and a while like showing them a DL or carry permit when we dont legaly have to would go a long way in helping to bridge the gap between us. You can argue its your legal right not to show them them a peice of paper or have a freindly discussion with them unless you are beging detained, and you may very well be legaly corect to do so. Lets think about it from there side for a moment. Lets try and think about all the calls they have already been on that day and how much they may really appreciate a cooperative MWG. Show a Police Officer a peice of paper or stopping for a few moments to answer a few questions just isnt a big deal. I have not done anything wrong in my life, I do not have anything to hide or be afrade of.


    "Not every LEO is a bad guy"


    The cop-bashers would disagree with that statemtent. Violently and verbosely.

    There are several here, of a particular ilk, think Smokin357...think Citizen...who think that every cop, in every action, at every time is an enemy that needs to be removed. People like this make cutesy calls and intimations to "defend" (with force) against the police of America. They say, "It's time!"Others wish for a "revolution" of some sort. I wonder whose heads they willchop off after theyprevail.

    People who think like this have driven away the most prolific LEO who ever contributed to OCDO:



    I hope that ilk, with their teeny little collective mind...is pleased with itself...

  14. #14
    Regular Member Machoduck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Covington, WA & Keenesburg, CO
    Posts
    566

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    Agree Duck, I guess my point was, I've been in the same business a lot longer than he has and I've developed a much different attitude about cops.

    Early in my experience, I may have agreed with most of what he says. Now I don't. Maybe he will come around too . . . .
    Hey Dean, I think the key concept here is maturity; you have it. Not all young people do. They don't yet realize how maturity teaches us to take a more discriminating look at our surroundings. Your having started in 1989 means that you've seen a lot of water go under the bridge. This too, is part of the maturing process. By the way, I'm 68 and I see myself as still maturing.

    In my opinion, the fact that the OP came onto the forum and put his opinions out there for us to chop away at indicates a mature attempt to see what we really mean. I certainly hope he's beginning to see that it's more complicated than than simply bashing all LEOs.

    MD

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    fire suppressor wrote:
    [ the OP]
    Edited to delete my objection to the thread being off-topic. Don't worry, you will get to see my post in just a moment. Hanky was sure quote it, although for the wrong reason.

    Special thanks to the forum member who brought to my attention the on-topic nature of the thread, un-named here because he did it via PM.

    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.

  16. #16
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    fire suppressor wrote:
    [ the OP]
    Interesting commentary. However, this thread is off-topic. A thread defending LEOs can't possibly be any more on-topic that a thread bashing LEOs.

    From the forum rules:





    ******************


    NOTE: This is not a general discussion web site - even the thread for "general discussions" must be fairly related to open carry,firearms and gun rights. Please police your own posts before posting them and help keep OCDO strong and focussed. If you think the post is questionable, please don't post it. Thanks!




    ******************

    ...2) Since we are a site dedicated to open carry,firearms and gun rights, all posts should relate substantially to one of these topics, even if your comments pertain mainly to freedom andliberty. OCDO is not a general discussion forum on polticis, religion, the current President, etc. Take that somewhere else!



    What a great picture of you, Citizen:





    Or just building up your post count, Citizen?





    Hmm, or both!


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

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    What a great picture of you, Citizen:[flashing sign]

    Or just building up your post count, Citizen?

    Hmm, or both!
    Hahahahahahahaahaaa.

    Are more of Hanky's insecurities coming to light? Does he really object to me calling out an off-topic thread? Why would he be concerned about my post count? Jealous?

    Whatever it is, it bothered him enough to make an off-topic post to an already off-topic thread. His sole post was a criticism of me.

    Hahahahahahahahahaaa.

    Goof with a keyboard.

    Thread-lock, please. Before I die laughing at, Hank.

    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
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    67

    Post imported post

    olypendrew wrote:
    As a former prosecutor I can say that the vast majority of cops are good, decent, dedicated professionals.

    That doesn't mean I will engage in an unwanted consensual encounter with one if he/she sees me open carrying. That doesn't mean I willconsent toa search of my effects. That doesn't mean I will waive my right to remain silent. Professional officers will not be offended by any of these refusals. They may have the authority to approach me, but I have the right to refuse to play along.

    In my opinion, the main reasonthat many people, not just OCers, dislike and/or fear the police is because the police are tasked with enforcing way too many intrusive victimless crimes. The guy who works hard all week but wants to smoke a joint before he listens to his favorite band play Saturday night has a legitimate reason to fear the police. The guy who goes about his business like everyone else but who chooses to openly carry a sidearm has a legitimate reason to be wary of some of the ignorant officers out there. The guy who pays thousands of dollars in taxes, but who has a couple of questionable deductions has a good reason to fear the agents of the state. I could continue.



    If the police were only tasked with enforcing law against victimizing other people, then the respect for them would go up immensely overnight. But as long as they are the arm of the do-good, nanny-style, we-know-better-than-you-do-what-is-right-for-you-and-your-family government, they will continue to be viewed with suspicion, distrust, and yes, occassionally hatred, by freedom-loving Americans.

    I have a few problems with these examples. The guy who decides to smoke a joint has a reason to fear the police because he is BREAKING THE LAW! The guy who pays thousands of dollars in taxes and has a few questionable deductions has a reason to fear the agents of the state because he is BREAKING THE LAW! I like how you decided to throw open carriers in with these people. It is not against the law to open carry last time I checked. You may believe that these are victimless crimes but you are wrong and our society has decided such. I also have a hard time with the idea that respect is earned not given, my parents tought me that respect is given then lost or kept. I treat everyone I meet with respect, it is up to them keep it or loose it.

    Just my .02


  19. #19
    Regular Member Machoduck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Covington, WA & Keenesburg, CO
    Posts
    566

    Post imported post

    Citizen, I've been here on the forum enjoying the positive feedback I get from those whom I respect. I suspect that a negative response from someone of ill repute would serve that purpose as well, don't you think?

    MD

  20. #20
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    Thread-lock, please. Before I die laughing at, Hank.
    Please.....not so fast.....



    LEO 229 =7618

    Citizen= 7107 (and counting)

    I'm guessing October 27th....

    Citizen will become....



    ....what he's always wanted to be:Citizen No. 1.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Port Angeles, Washington, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    ElJefe1911 wrote:
    olypendrew wrote:
    As a former prosecutor I can say that the vast majority of cops are good, decent, dedicated professionals.

    That doesn't mean I will engage in an unwanted consensual encounter with one if he/she sees me open carrying. That doesn't mean I willconsent toa search of my effects. That doesn't mean I will waive my right to remain silent. Professional officers will not be offended by any of these refusals. They may have the authority to approach me, but I have the right to refuse to play along.

    In my opinion, the main reasonthat many people, not just OCers, dislike and/or fear the police is because the police are tasked with enforcing way too many intrusive victimless crimes. The guy who works hard all week but wants to smoke a joint before he listens to his favorite band play Saturday night has a legitimate reason to fear the police. The guy who goes about his business like everyone else but who chooses to openly carry a sidearm has a legitimate reason to be wary of some of the ignorant officers out there. The guy who pays thousands of dollars in taxes, but who has a couple of questionable deductions has a good reason to fear the agents of the state. I could continue.



    If the police were only tasked with enforcing law against victimizing other people, then the respect for them would go up immensely overnight. But as long as they are the arm of the do-good, nanny-style, we-know-better-than-you-do-what-is-right-for-you-and-your-family government, they will continue to be viewed with suspicion, distrust, and yes, occassionally hatred, by freedom-loving Americans.

    I have a few problems with these examples. The guy who decides to smoke a joint has a reason to fear the police because he is BREAKING THE LAW! The guy who pays thousands of dollars in taxes and has a few questionable deductions has a reason to fear the agents of the state because he is BREAKING THE LAW! I like how you decided to throw open carriers in with these people. It is not against the law to open carry last time I checked. You may believe that these are victimless crimes but you are wrong and our society has decided such. I also have a hard time with the idea that respect is earned not given, my parents tought me that respect is given then lost or kept. I treat everyone I meet with respect, it is up to them keep it or loose it.

    Just my .02
    In some states it's against the law to OC. So I guess it's not a victimless cime in those states? If it is a crime, because society has said so, and it is not victimless/has a victim, because society has said so, than who exactly is the victim? Who is the victim of the guy who wants to smoke a joint and walk down to the neighborhood tavern to listen to some music.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hoquiam, , USA
    Posts
    172

    Post imported post

    I love cops and what they do.I have never meet a bad copas we always talk about why we carry and if you treet them like as they aer people. So why not work with whem? We win they win I am All rof doing this right and leyts get the bad guy.





    I

  23. #23
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    fire suppressor wrote:
    [the OP]
    Theproblem is that the OCer may not know he is dealing with a bad cop until it is too late in the encounter. Ditto for a "good" cop who just misunderstands.

    We have audio of a not too long ago OC police encounter where the cops were talking to themselves out of earshot of the OCer trying to find a way to bust him. But the cop was all peaches and sugar when talking to the OCer.

    A genuinely professional cop will respect and be understanding of polite refusals (exercising rights). To say otherwise is to say that good cops don't respect rights.

    We have had more than one so-called good cop on this forum advocating against exercising rights, trying to persuade. A genuinely good cop would be advising us how to exercise our rights. We do have one or two member cops that have. That they do stands the other so-called good copsin stark relief.

    Remember that "good" cops will enforce bad laws. It has even been justified (poorly) on this forum by so-called good cops.
    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.

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

    Post imported post

    Here is a previous post of mine from another thread. It was in response to the OP of another thread:

    Police officers are human and do a tough, dangerous job. Theyemphaticallydeserve to be treated as fellow human beings with the respect due any human being. Thehonest ones deserve thanks for the tough job and the risks.

    Us-vs-them. The accusation is that some members of this board have such an attitude. It is criticized. However, onekey point is omitted.Here it is:when the police officer approaches to investigate, at the instant of contact IT IS THE POLICE OFFICER WHODEMONSTRATES AND CREATES THE US-vs-THEM SITUATION. TheLEO is investigating for crime. It is now the state against the suspected criminal.The LEO is saying you are now suspected of being amongst a class of people to whom he is opposed and who it is his sworn duty to take action against.It is the police officer manifesting theopposition, the us-vs-them attitude. It is theseactions ofcertain police officersthatcreate the us-vs-them attitude, by demonstrating their suspicion or opposition.To further illustrate, imagine thereverse. Ifcertain police did not harass OC'ers, skirt and/or violate 4A case law, seize guns, demand ID without authority--in short, if certain police manifested noopposition or suspicion,how could anybodyhave an us-vs-them attitude? There would be no "them" to versus.

    The preceding paragraphtalks with some generality. Andaddresses a momentaryus-vs-them attitude occuring during an encounter. Lets get out of generality and into some specifics.How does oneextend from the momentary us-vs-them attitude toan on-going,us-vs-them attitude? Just this way. Even the good cop, the respect-deserving cop, the thanks-deserving cop is treating the OC'er as a "them" when he contacts to investigate. It may be only inasmall degree, but it is still present.Theproblem for the OC'er is that he often will not know the degree oflegal jeopardy he is in.He may not know until it is too late that a false report was made to 911. Or even a true report of just a man with a gun, where the OCer doesn't realize he has otherwise committed some misdemeanor, discovered by the officer responding to the911 call about a gun.

    Even a good cop just making a consensual contact after nothing more than his own personal observation is at the very least manifesting that a lawfully carried gun is suspicious. An abusive cop is by definition a "them." So, for the foregoing reasons all police, when they are investigating an OC'er, aremaking themselves an "us." Thatcovers everyLEO-OCer encounter.Defensively preparing for a police encounter is wise.

    Further, the OPeressentially says that being the"them" to the police officer's "us", we should now go along withbeing the target of this attitude.Not only are we mis-assigned culpability for this attitude, we are recommended to cooperate in its abatement,forego exercisingcertain rights, and cooperate in andpossibly increase our legal jepoardy.

    Onelast point on us-vs-them. In case anybody feels a little shaky about being an "us". We have a number of Founders telling us through their writings to be suspicious of government. One, Patrick Henry I believe, tells us explicity to guard the public liberty and be suspicious of anyone who approaches that jewel. I suspect, dear reader, that you consider your personal liberty to be a part of the public liberty. What closer approach to your immediate liberty is there than a uniformed, armed agent of the government standing right in front of you askingadversarial questions, however polite the phrasing or sweet the tone? Is not the Founder-recommended suspicion an adoption of an us-vs-them attitude?Let me here include the 4th Amendment. Have we not seen certain police use arguments and deception to getOCers to waive their 4th Amendment protections? Have we not seen certain police use deception or falsehood to encourage OCers to suspend their OC. Are these not examples of public liberties, approachesagainst which we are recommended to be suspicious by the very men who risked life, fortune, and honor? The Founders recommended what amounts to an us-vs-them attitude with regard to rights. That would include 4A and 2A.

    A few comments in no particular order.

    The information in the Busted video by FlexYourRights.org applies. As does the information in Professor Duane's video from Regent law school. The detective in Professor Duane's video did not refute Duane's statement (paraphrase), "Never under any circumstances talk to police. It cannot help you. It may in fact hurt you." So, there we have a law school professor, a detective, and afederal judge cited in the videoall saying don't talk to police. Compare this to theimport of the other thread's OP.

    That OPchose the words"spout off"when discussing OCersrefusing theirconsent.I can't recall an OCer spouting off. More than one has posted his express intention to be polite when refusing or talking to an LEO.

    If it is totally legitimate (according to the courts, anyway) for a police officer to approach a citizen consensually to investigate suspected crime, how can it be any less legitimate for a citizen to politely decline totalk to the officer? To say otherwiseimplies anobligation to talk to the officer. Which of course violates the meaning of consensual.

    Yes, the officer is a human being and has feelings. However, when he is on the job, he is a special class of human being. The concept of consensual investigative contact was laid out by thejudiciary in response to a perceived need to define further the difference between a reasonable and an unreasonable seizure of the person. We have rights to give boundaries tothe officer'sspecial status as a human being. Nothing negative attaches to our exercising them. It can't be allowed. It would invalidate the right in question to a degree equivalent to the negative. The most that can be legitimately urgedis to exercise them politely. Whenforegoinga right is worked forwithout also a full acknowledgement ofthe complete legitimacy of exercisingthat right, the author is suspect.Ifa police officerthinkspoorly of a polite refusal, there issomethingdeeper going on. Something that doesn't sound good for 4A rights.

    I completely recognize your right totalk with a police officer who is investigating you. I completely recognize that there may be minimal legal jeopardyand you can weigh for yourself the risk you are willing to take. Also, I've said before we each have to decide how we wish to respond based on the totality of the 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.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    , Washington, USA
    Posts
    113

    Post imported post

    I've had a lot of encounters with LEOs because I used to work late at night to early in the morning most of the time. I live in a small enough town that I can bicycle or walk anywhere I need to go, so I don't bother with driving. Unfortunately, if you're walking around, you end up with a lot more LEO encounters...

    I'd like to share with you one that could have turned out badly, but in the end turned out just fine:

    I was on my way to work one night around 11pm and I was walking down the main avenue downtown. I was wearing my normal work clothes; camo pants, black shirt, black hoodie, etc. and carrying my pistol in my backpack at the time (normally I have it on my waist). Anyway, I started to notice a lot of police cars driving past me all of a sudden. Before I knew it, one pulled up in front of me and the officer jumped out. His first two questions to me were, "What is your name" (I told him) "Are you carrying a gun?" (Well, yes!?) and he responds with "Put your hands on your head!!!" So yeah, I was a bit freaked out at first. He cuffed me for the time being. I asked, "Is this standard procedure?" and he eyed me up and down a bit. "I have a CPL in my wallet if that's what you're worried about, my ID is in there too!" At this point about five other police cars show up. "Oh, well we know who we're looking for" he says. "Well it can't be me, what's going on?" I ask. "Well, someone robbed the auto-mocha and they fit your description." I'm a bit confused. "What did they look like?" I ask. "Black hoodie, camo pants, shaved head" he tells me as the other officers show up. At this point I'm kind of worried that I'll be explaining things in court or in the slammer, rather than on the street there. The officer tells me not to worry because he knows the guy they're looking for because he is a repeat offender. He runs my ID, checks my CPL but doesn't even touch my pistol in my bag. They didn't run the numbers or anything. I was there for maybe 10 minutes, which made me ten minutes late for work, but that was it. It was understandable in the situation. I was uncuffed and had a few jokes with them about how weird it was that I was in the same area, dressed the same. He told me that it was very good that I was honest about everything and complied because it was a very serious situation.

    Now, I've had bad encounters with cops that have tried to go out of their way to harass, search, intimidate me, etc. I could share a million of these, but I thought I'd share one where things turned out for the better. I agree, these guys are just doing their jobs and it's not easy at all. That is why it is so important for there to be communication and understanding between civilians and police officers and others that hold such authority. There is not reason we cannot work together.

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
  •