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

Thread: Detained for OC and GATTTOP

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    678

    Post imported post

    We had our biweekly SCCC meeting tonight at I Love NY Pizza on Hillsborough street, which is directly across from campus.

    This all happened too fast for me to turn on my recording device, and I was unable to start it during the process. This is the gist of what happened.

    I ordered my food, and realized that I had left my notebook in the car. I walked outside to go back to my car, just as two RPD were about to enter the establishment two doors down. I gave them a nod with a smile, as is customary for me when someone looks at me. One of them saw my(Me) firearm and approached me (O1), with "keep your hands up and where I can see them", and the other officer (O2)quickly followed.

    O1: Keep your hands up. Keep them where I can see them. Do you have a badge to go with that gun?

    Me: No

    O1: federal credentials?

    Me: NO

    O1: Turn and place your hands on the wall.

    O1: What do you think you are doing carrying a gun on H' street?

    Me: Open carrying, which is legal in NC

    O1: What are you thinking?

    Me: Why am I being stopped?

    O2: Have you heard of GATTTOP?

    Me: Sir, I do not meet the qualifications for that charge.

    Me: (to O1, as he is obviously in charge) Am I being detained?

    O1: Yes, for GATTTOP

    O1: (approaches me) Is your gun loaded?

    Me: yes

    O1: Is there one in the chamber?

    Me: yes

    O1: (removes firearm, takes it to the side and proceeds to drop mag and rack slide)

    O2: Do you have any other weapons or anything we should know about on you?

    Me: I have a knife clipped to my pocket.

    --While O2 does the stuff below, I'm watching O1. He is trying to put the round from the chamber back in the mag, but can't. I tell him it is a full mag, but theholes don't quite line up with the rounds.--

    O2: (removes knife, terry pat) Do you have any ID?

    Me: yes, it's in my wallet

    O1: You can get it out and give it to me.

    --at this point I'm nervous and slightly concerned, but I feel I'm doing OK.--

    Me:Under NC law and the NC supreme court I am doing nothing illegal. Can we go next door an you pull out a witness for this event?

    O2: NO

    Me: Can I start me recording device, so I have an account of this?

    O2: No, you are being detained for GATTTOP

    Me: Can I get a witness for this event?

    O2: No, for all I know you have another gun in there, and you will get it and start blasting away.

    Me: I just asked if I could have a witness.

    O2: I just answered your question.

    O1: (goes to run my ID, and call his Sergeant), he isn't sure how to proceed.

    --At this point, I see SCCC members arriving for the meeting, and seeing me held up, were approaching, they kept a distance of 8' or so for the most part--

    Me: Those are people in the group that I'm with. Just to warn you ahead of time, theymay carrying as well.

    O2: (seeing one of the people(FF) OCing) Get your hands up and place them against the wall.

    FF: ~I am required to tell you that I am CCing as well. Am I being detained?

    O2: Yes, where are the other weapons

    FF: what for? There is a gun in the backpack.

    O2: GATTTOP, Is your gun loaded? Is there one in the chamber? (starts pulling on the gun)

    Me: That is a Serpa holster, you need to depress the button to release it.

    O2: (takes two tries to find the button and release the gun. Then proceeds to try and unload it, but fumbles with that for about 20 seconds till he figures it out) Where is the other firearm? (gets it out of backpack) Is there anything else I need to know about, any other weapons?

    FF: No

    Me: (to FF) Don't forget your pocket knife.

    FF:There is a knife clipped in my pocket.

    O2: (Removes knife and does a quick pat, very minimal) Do you have IDs, and a CC permit for this gun? (talking to FF and the person that was with him, who wasn't carrying.)

    At this point we are relaxed a little, strength in numbers and all. There are 3 witnesses watching us now. FF and I are on opposite sides of a door into an establishment. Families are entering and exiting during this ordeal.

    Me: (to O1)Im am the Director of NC for Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, and I am fully aware of the laws. (something led to this comment, but I don't remember what)

    O1: repeats this to his sergeant. Tells the Sg that he wants to verify what laws are being broken. Asks for Sg to text him any statute numbers. He asks me again what my title is. Talks to his Sg more, and says that I'm not bothering anyone, and he just wants to make sure I'm legal. O1 says he will get my info and they can charge me with something later if needed. This is where I stopped paying attention, and dealt with O2 again.

    Me: I give a grin and chuckle to FF for the " and charge him with something later" comment.

    O2: Are any of you armed? (to our witnesses. They reply no)(He goes to run the previously mentioned IDs "to make sure they aren't felons")

    Me: We have been having these meetings for almost a year, and have never had a problem. We have even had the Campus police here, and they don't have a problem with it either. We aren't on campus.

    --We stand there for a few minutes while O1 is on the phone--

    O1: Alright, it looks like you are not doing anything illegal. I have been doing this for 10 years and never seen anyone carry like that.You can understand why we need to check. You are so close to a school, and this isn't normal. (some more comments to us)

    Me: We carry like this all the time. It is legal and we dont ever have problems with it. You are the first.

    O1: I actually support what you are doing. I spent the last year in Iraq supporting your right to do this, and have only been back for three months. Like I said, I have never seen anyone carry like this, and I didn't know it was allowed. Iraq is very different than here. I really do like that you are carrying this way.

    O2: I support your right to do this as well

    Me: So, am I still being detained, even though you still have my gun.

    O1: No, your not being detained. Thanks for being so patient and understanding. (hands me my gun back)

    Me: (I slide the gun back into my serpa)

    O1: (hands me my FULL mag)

    Me: (I slide the mag into the gun, drop the slide (while holstered), pull the mag, insert my top round, and reinsert my mag.)

    O2: (gives back FFs guns and he does the same as I)

    O1: I now feel like and Idiot for not knowing that this was legal. I had not idea.

    --We talk for a short bit about Kerner and JL and how they can't stop someone for OC only. We shake hands, say have a good evening, and then procede inside for our meeting--





    Overall, it went well, even though it shouldn't have happened at all. My nerves were a little jumpy, and I had to 'calm down' but it wasn't a bad incident. He said I could call his sergeant if I had any comments or concerns. Of course, as soon as I got inside, I forgot the officers name. I still feel stupid for this.
    The detainment and subsequent interaction took about 20 minutes. When I finally got back inside, the lady I ordered from gave me a very confused look as she handed me my now cold pizza.
    FF may come on and comment and correct my story.




  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The south land
    Posts
    1,230

    Post imported post

    file a complaint against the officers. They are supposed to know the laws and if they don't, then they don't need to be police officers.


    O 1 said he actually supports what you are doing? Then why did he treat you like an enemy of the state?

    He no more supports what you are doing than a tree does--if he did he would know it is legal to OC and he would not have treated you or those with you the way he did. My advice is to file a complaint with the department against both officers.


    And it would not matter to me if he worked 10yrs as a police officer or 1--if he has taken the job of a police officer--he should be aware that OC is legal, and he should be aware of the laws--he just wanted to try and prove a point about who was in control.

    O 1 told you he was "in Iraq supporting your right to carry" in order to try and make you feel sorry for him and hoping you won't file a complaint against him, because he realized he was in the wrong for the way he treated, or should I say mistreated you--otherwise he would not have brought "spending a year in Iraq supporting your rights" up...So he spent a year in Iraq "defending your rights" only to return to the US and step on them? O1 knows he is in the wrong and is trying to make you feel sorry for him. My advice is to file a complaint and waste no time in doing it--and your witnesses can help with that.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    678

    Post imported post

    I have contacted the police department, and the Sergeant will be returning my call tomorrow.





    The Sergeant just returned my call.

    There were a couple of factors that led to our stop:
    1. OC, though accnolwedged not illegal
    2. The restraunt next door was robbed recently
    3. The proximity to NCSU (federal law?)

    The RAS for the Terry (justification pulled from their behind IMO) was proximity to NCSU, even though we were detained for GATTTOP.

    He has spoken with the officers, and they have been corrected in their miss-information.
    He agreed to address both GATTTOP and OC in their next meeting.

    He asked that we call (a number that he gave me) before we have our meetings, so that the officers assigned to the patrol of the area know and can respond accordingly, if needed.

    His call had an apologetic tone, though there was no actual apology. He said that under the circumstances, they felt they had cause for detainment. They now know, and will be reminded again, that OC is legal, GATTTOP requires much more than just carrying a firearm, and that Hillsborough is ok to carry on. He did give me his name and number to contact him if there were any other issues that I felt needed to be addressed.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Goldsboro, , USA
    Posts
    184

    Post imported post

    "O 1 said he actually supports what you are doing..."


    Covering his ass. Now you're his "buddy" and all so he hopes you won't file a complaint with his department.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,508

    Post imported post

    JDriver1.8t wrote:
    O1: I now feel like and Idiot for not knowing that this was legal. I had not idea.
    I really wish you'd had that recorder running.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Friendly, trained witnesses should be enough to sustain charges against the JBT, their department, civil authorities etc.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wallace, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    116

    Post imported post

    suntzu wrote:
    file a complaint against the officers. They are supposed to know the laws and if they don't, then they don't need to be police officers.


    O 1 said he actually supports what you are doing? Then why did he treat you like an enemy of the state?

    He no more supports what you are doing than a tree does--if he did he would know it is legal to OC and he would not have treated you or those with you the way he did. My advice is to file a complaint with the department against both officers.


    And it would not matter to me if he worked 10yrs as a police officer or 1--if he has taken the job of a police officer--he should be aware that OC is legal, and he should be aware of the laws--he just wanted to try and prove a point about who was in control.

    O 1 told you he was "in Iraq supporting your right to carry" in order to try and make you feel sorry for him and hoping you won't file a complaint against him, because he realized he was in the wrong for the way he treated, or should I say mistreated you--otherwise he would not have brought "spending a year in Iraq supporting your rights" up...So he spent a year in Iraq "defending your rights" only to return to the US and step on them? O1 knows he is in the wrong and is trying to make you feel sorry for him. My advice is to file a complaint and waste no time in doing it--and your witnesses can help with that.
    File a complaint because he didn't know a law? That is stupid. The complaint won't do anything for one reason. How are you going to remember every law on the books for NC? You're not, period. He did the right thing by calling his Sgt. to check before arresting. If he had not than you might be able to get somewhere with a complaint.

    Maybe because he can't get back to his normal way of life. Do you know how some people that go to war react when they get back to this country? I have many friends and family in the military. One (brother in-law) has changed since he got back from his deployment in the way that he is used to how things work over there. Many people that fight for us are like this when they get back and it is hard, even requires medical attention sometimes, to get back to the way things are over here.

    As I said, filing a complaint won't do anything and will be a waste of time. You need to realize just how many laws there are. I know you think that he should know this law, and there are other people that feel the same way about different laws. Who says what ones he should really try to memorize, he can't please everybody?

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    35

    Post imported post

    ^It's not nearly as much that he didn't know the law, as they whipped up some bullsh-- gatttotp, obviously having no idea what it was, just to detain and search us. It was an illegal stop, and more importantly, we were illegally searched, period. They can't just stop and search someone without consent because they might think you're doing something wrong.

    That's spot on. I had just pulled into the back parking lot, behind my g/f, who came over and says she saw someone that looked like Daryl being searched by a cop out front. I had a feeling that this is what was going on, so I walked right around there as fast as I could. I knew I'd probably get the same treatment too, but an extra set of eyes and ears there goes a long way toward keeping people accountable, so I just casually walked up and said hello. Carrying an XD-9 4" in a BH Serpa, 135gn. Fed. HydraShok, one extra mag.


    That's when O2 gave me the battery of questions:
    O2: "Is your gun loaded"
    Me: "Why wouldn't it be? It's not much use any other way"
    O2: "Is there a round in the chamber"
    Me: "Of course there is"

    He gets perturbed, puts me against the wall and fumbles with the Serpa until JD tells him there's a button. He still doesn't get it, so I point to it, and he manages to get it out. Once out, he couldn't get the slide back until I told him he had to hold the grip safety in. He then tries to lay it down on the sidewalk and I ask him not to do that because he'll mess up the bluing on my pistol. Unlike what he's thinking, I plan on getting that back. Then all the GATTTOTP jazz which elicits a :quirky.

    He asks me and my g/f(who already informed him twice that she wasn't carrying) for her license and CC permit. Even after O1 got off the phone, apologized for the trouble, and said we were gtg, O2 hung on to our stuff and kept calling it all in.

    Overall O1 seemed fairly professional from what I saw (I showed up after most of his interaction), and O2 was obviously let down that he didn't get to haul off a couple of folks last night. O1 was apologetic and at least conveyed that he had learned something new that night, where O2 just handed our stuff back after he ran all the numbers and didn't seem to care.

    We'll see about all that, but let me know when you get those guys' names. We can both file a complaint.

  9. #9
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    partemisio wrote:
    suntzu wrote:
    file a complaint against the officers. They are supposed to know the laws and if they don't, then they don't need to be police officers.


    O 1 said he actually supports what you are doing? Then why did he treat you like an enemy of the state?

    He no more supports what you are doing than a tree does--if he did he would know it is legal to OC and he would not have treated you or those with you the way he did. My advice is to file a complaint with the department against both officers.


    And it would not matter to me if he worked 10yrs as a police officer or 1--if he has taken the job of a police officer--he should be aware that OC is legal, and he should be aware of the laws--he just wanted to try and prove a point about who was in control.

    O 1 told you he was "in Iraq supporting your right to carry" in order to try and make you feel sorry for him and hoping you won't file a complaint against him, because he realized he was in the wrong for the way he treated, or should I say mistreated you--otherwise he would not have brought "spending a year in Iraq supporting your rights" up...So he spent a year in Iraq "defending your rights" only to return to the US and step on them? O1 knows he is in the wrong and is trying to make you feel sorry for him. My advice is to file a complaint and waste no time in doing it--and your witnesses can help with that.
    File a complaint because he didn't know a law? That is stupid. The complaint won't do anything for one reason. How are you going to remember every law on the books for NC? You're not, period. He did the right thing by calling his Sgt. to check before arresting. If he had not than you might be able to get somewhere with a complaint.

    Maybe because he can't get back to his normal way of life. Do you know how some people that go to war react when they get back to this country? I have many friends and family in the military. One (brother in-law) has changed since he got back from his deployment in the way that he is used to how things work over there. Many people that fight for us are like this when they get back and it is hard, even requires medical attention sometimes, to get back to the way things are over here.

    As I said, filing a complaint won't do anything and will be a waste of time. You need to realize just how many laws there are. I know you think that he should know this law, and there are other people that feel the same way about different laws. Who says what ones he should really try to memorize, he can't please everybody?
    Are you a NC cop parte? Every cop in NC has to go through basic law enforcement training, and it is explained MULTIPLE times throughout the training that carrying openly is not illegal. Based on that, ignorance is no excuse here. Law enforcement officers cannot be expected to be familiar with EVERY law on the book. That is not their job. But they do need to be familiar with the laws that they address on a regular, if not daily,basis. That includes traffic law, drug law, assaults, disturbances, and FIREARMS.

    Filing a complaint is exactly what should be done. Will that one complaint have any effect right now? Probably not. If those officers learned their lesson and go on with a professional career, great! But, if those officers CONTINUE to illegally detain people, that one complaint will be necessary evidence in showing a disturbing pattern.

    File your complaint, and the next time an officer does something that pleases you, send good words his way as well. They need feed back, both good and bad!

  10. #10
    Regular Member RoadKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Just outside Raleigh, , USA
    Posts
    32

    Post imported post

    Great read....thanks for sharing.

    but I need to ask what GATTTOP is/means?

  11. #11
    Regular Member Juggernaut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Triad, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    126

    Post imported post

    RoadKing wrote:
    Great read....thanks for sharing.

    but I need to ask what GATTTOP is/means?
    Going Armed to the Terror of the Public is acommon law charge. Statutory reference to Armed to the Terror of the Public:

    § 14‑288.3. Provisions of Article intended to supplement common law and other statutes.

    The provisions of this Article are intended to supersede and extend the coverage of the common‑law crimes of riot and inciting to riot. To the extent that such common‑law offenses may embrace situations not covered under the provisions of this Article, however, criminal prosecutions may be brought for such crimes under the common law. All other provisions of the Article are intended to be supplementary and additional to the common law and other statutes of this State and, except as specifically indicated, shall not be construed to abrogate, abolish, or supplant other provisions of law. In particular, this Article shall not be deemed to abrogate, abolish, or supplant such common‑law offenses as unlawful assembly, rout, conspiracy to commit riot or other criminal offenses, false imprisonment, and going about armed to the terror of the populace and other comparable public‑nuisance offenses. (1969, c. 869, s. 1.)

    There are 4 criteria that must be met:

    1) arming one's self with an unusual and dangerous weapon

    2) For the purpose of terrifying others

    3) goes about on public highways

    4) in a manner to cause terror to others.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wallace, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    116

    Post imported post

    fenderfreek wrote:
    ^It's not nearly as much that he didn't know the law, as they whipped up some bullsh-- gatttotp, obviously having no idea what it was, just to detain and search us. It was an illegal stop, and more importantly, we were illegally searched, period. They can't just stop and search someone without consent because they might think you're doing something wrong.
    I understand what you are trying to say. Like I said, they did the right thing by calling in before actually arresting. Being detained is enough to have a terry frisk legally done though, even if they were wrong for the reason of detaining. Some LEO's think that you can be charged with gatttotp anywhere, also. Most don't know it has to be on a public highway.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wallace, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    116

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    partemisio wrote:
    suntzu wrote:
    file a complaint against the officers. They are supposed to know the laws and if they don't, then they don't need to be police officers.


    O 1 said he actually supports what you are doing? Then why did he treat you like an enemy of the state?

    He no more supports what you are doing than a tree does--if he did he would know it is legal to OC and he would not have treated you or those with you the way he did. My advice is to file a complaint with the department against both officers.


    And it would not matter to me if he worked 10yrs as a police officer or 1--if he has taken the job of a police officer--he should be aware that OC is legal, and he should be aware of the laws--he just wanted to try and prove a point about who was in control.

    O 1 told you he was "in Iraq supporting your right to carry" in order to try and make you feel sorry for him and hoping you won't file a complaint against him, because he realized he was in the wrong for the way he treated, or should I say mistreated you--otherwise he would not have brought "spending a year in Iraq supporting your rights" up...So he spent a year in Iraq "defending your rights" only to return to the US and step on them? O1 knows he is in the wrong and is trying to make you feel sorry for him. My advice is to file a complaint and waste no time in doing it--and your witnesses can help with that.
    File a complaint because he didn't know a law? That is stupid. The complaint won't do anything for one reason. How are you going to remember every law on the books for NC? You're not, period. He did the right thing by calling his Sgt. to check before arresting. If he had not than you might be able to get somewhere with a complaint.

    Maybe because he can't get back to his normal way of life. Do you know how some people that go to war react when they get back to this country? I have many friends and family in the military. One (brother in-law) has changed since he got back from his deployment in the way that he is used to how things work over there. Many people that fight for us are like this when they get back and it is hard, even requires medical attention sometimes, to get back to the way things are over here.

    As I said, filing a complaint won't do anything and will be a waste of time. You need to realize just how many laws there are. I know you think that he should know this law, and there are other people that feel the same way about different laws. Who says what ones he should really try to memorize, he can't please everybody?
    Are you a NC cop parte? Every cop in NC has to go through basic law enforcement training, and it is explained MULTIPLE times throughout the training that carrying openly is not illegal. Based on that, ignorance is no excuse here. Law enforcement officers cannot be expected to be familiar with EVERY law on the book. That is not their job. But they do need to be familiar with the laws that they address on a regular, if not daily,basis. That includes traffic law, drug law, assaults, disturbances, and FIREARMS.

    Filing a complaint is exactly what should be done. Will that one complaint have any effect right now? Probably not. If those officers learned their lesson and go on with a professional career, great! But, if those officers CONTINUE to illegally detain people, that one complaint will be necessary evidence in showing a disturbing pattern.

    File your complaint, and the next time an officer does something that pleases you, send good words his way as well. They need feed back, both good and bad!
    I am actually going through BLET right now. In my case, the only reason my class was informed that open carry is legal is because I opened my mouth and mentioned it (now 19 more people know it to be 100% legal, only one knew about it besides me). We have not had one instructor think about mentioning it though. And the blocks of instruction it would have been mentioned in we have already finished, I only have about a month left. Each place is different. If BLET is taken through a department, open carry probably will be mentioned. But in my case I am taking it through a college and it was not mentioned. Open carry is not part of the instruction that is required by NC during BLET. So, it is up to the place that is holding the class to add it in.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Portsmouth, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    463

    Post imported post

    partemisio wrote:
    suntzu wrote:
    file a complaint against the officers. They are supposed to know the laws and if they don't, then they don't need to be police officers.


    O 1 said he actually supports what you are doing? Then why did he treat you like an enemy of the state?

    He no more supports what you are doing than a tree does--if he did he would know it is legal to OC and he would not have treated you or those with you the way he did. My advice is to file a complaint with the department against both officers.


    And it would not matter to me if he worked 10yrs as a police officer or 1--if he has taken the job of a police officer--he should be aware that OC is legal, and he should be aware of the laws--he just wanted to try and prove a point about who was in control.

    O 1 told you he was "in Iraq supporting your right to carry" in order to try and make you feel sorry for him and hoping you won't file a complaint against him, because he realized he was in the wrong for the way he treated, or should I say mistreated you--otherwise he would not have brought "spending a year in Iraq supporting your rights" up...So he spent a year in Iraq "defending your rights" only to return to the US and step on them? O1 knows he is in the wrong and is trying to make you feel sorry for him. My advice is to file a complaint and waste no time in doing it--and your witnesses can help with that.
    File a complaint because he didn't know a law? That is stupid. The complaint won't do anything for one reason. How are you going to remember every law on the books for NC? You're not, period. He did the right thing by calling his Sgt. to check before arresting. If he had not than you might be able to get somewhere with a complaint.

    Maybe because he can't get back to his normal way of life. Do you know how some people that go to war react when they get back to this country? I have many friends and family in the military. One (brother in-law) has changed since he got back from his deployment in the way that he is used to how things work over there. Many people that fight for us are like this when they get back and it is hard, even requires medical attention sometimes, to get back to the way things are over here.

    As I said, filing a complaint won't do anything and will be a waste of time. You need to realize just how many laws there are. I know you think that he should know this law, and there are other people that feel the same way about different laws. Who says what ones he should really try to memorize, he can't please everybody?

    Sorry; but, HE IS SUPPOSED TO KNOW THE LAW, IT IS HIS JOB TO KNOW THE LAW!

    Harlow vs Fitzgerald,457 U.S. 800. A government employee is required to know the law governing his/her conduct.

    ---"if the law is clearly established at the time the action occurred, a public employee is not entitled to assert the defense of qualified immunity based on good faith since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his or her conduct."


    In other words...he can't say "I didn't know the law."


    It was an illegal stop, an illegal search, and illegal detainment...plain and simple...and the cop should have known better.


  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    396

    Post imported post

    Truth be told nearly all cops hate carriers, open or concealed, because it impinges on their exceptionalism and affects the swagger factor.

    And what is GATTTOP?

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    35

    Post imported post

    Look about 4 posts up - Juggernaut explained it and why it was not valid RAS because we weren't violating that at all.

    Just read about McColley vs Alamogordo Police Department in another thread and it seems highly appropriate to this situation. The guy apparently won a settlement from the department and is pursuing the individual officers involved.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wallace, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    116

    Post imported post

    fully_armed_biker wrote:
    partemisio wrote:
    suntzu wrote:
    file a complaint against the officers. They are supposed to know the laws and if they don't, then they don't need to be police officers.


    O 1 said he actually supports what you are doing? Then why did he treat you like an enemy of the state?

    He no more supports what you are doing than a tree does--if he did he would know it is legal to OC and he would not have treated you or those with you the way he did. My advice is to file a complaint with the department against both officers.


    And it would not matter to me if he worked 10yrs as a police officer or 1--if he has taken the job of a police officer--he should be aware that OC is legal, and he should be aware of the laws--he just wanted to try and prove a point about who was in control.

    O 1 told you he was "in Iraq supporting your right to carry" in order to try and make you feel sorry for him and hoping you won't file a complaint against him, because he realized he was in the wrong for the way he treated, or should I say mistreated you--otherwise he would not have brought "spending a year in Iraq supporting your rights" up...So he spent a year in Iraq "defending your rights" only to return to the US and step on them? O1 knows he is in the wrong and is trying to make you feel sorry for him. My advice is to file a complaint and waste no time in doing it--and your witnesses can help with that.
    File a complaint because he didn't know a law? That is stupid. The complaint won't do anything for one reason. How are you going to remember every law on the books for NC? You're not, period. He did the right thing by calling his Sgt. to check before arresting. If he had not than you might be able to get somewhere with a complaint.

    Maybe because he can't get back to his normal way of life. Do you know how some people that go to war react when they get back to this country? I have many friends and family in the military. One (brother in-law) has changed since he got back from his deployment in the way that he is used to how things work over there. Many people that fight for us are like this when they get back and it is hard, even requires medical attention sometimes, to get back to the way things are over here.

    As I said, filing a complaint won't do anything and will be a waste of time. You need to realize just how many laws there are. I know you think that he should know this law, and there are other people that feel the same way about different laws. Who says what ones he should really try to memorize, he can't please everybody?

    Sorry; but, HE IS SUPPOSED TO KNOW THE LAW, IT IS HIS JOB TO KNOW THE LAW!

    Harlow vs Fitzgerald,457 U.S. 800. A government employee is required to know the law governing his/her conduct.

    ---"if the law is clearly established at the time the action occurred, a public employee is not entitled to assert the defense of qualified immunity based on good faith since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his or her conduct."


    In other words...he can't say "I didn't know the law."


    It was an illegal stop, an illegal search, and illegal detainment...plain and simple...and the cop should have known better.
    There is nobody that can memorize every law, period. Like I have mentioned, he did what he should have done, called to verify. If there is something that might be illegal going on you can be detained until proven otherwise(notice I said detained and not arrested). So, since it was a legal stop and detainment, it was a legal search. He proved that it was not in fact illegal to open carry by making a phone call, and then he let them go. And all that is needed for a stop and frisk is "reasonable suspicion." That means you don't need to know for a fact that something is wrong.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wallace, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    116

    Post imported post

    old dog wrote:
    Truth be told nearly all cops hate carriers, open or concealed, because it impinges on their exceptionalism and affects the swagger factor.

    And what is GATTTOP?
    Not true. Every cop I know likes concealed carry. Most don't mind open carry but would rather have you conceal it. Every cop I know says the same thing about why they like concealed carry, they know a person with a ccw is a law abiding citizen or they would not have taken the class and instead would have illegally concealed it.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The south land
    Posts
    1,230

    Post imported post

    JDriver1.8t wrote:
    I have contacted the police department, and the Sergeant will be returning my call tomorrow.





    The Sergeant just returned my call.

    There were a couple of factors that led to our stop:
    1. OC, though accnolwedged not illegal
    2. The restraunt next door was robbed recently
    3. The proximity to NCSU (federal law?)

    The RAS for the Terry (justification pulled from their behind IMO) was proximity to NCSU, even though we were detained for GATTTOP.

    He has spoken with the officers, and they have been corrected in their miss-information.
    He agreed to address both GATTTOP and OC in their next meeting.

    He asked that we call (a number that he gave me) before we have our meetings, so that the officers assigned to the patrol of the area know and can respond accordingly, if needed.

    His call had an apologetic tone, though there was no actual apology. He said that under the circumstances, they felt they had cause for detainment. They now know, and will be reminded again, that OC is legal, GATTTOP requires much more than just carrying a firearm, and that Hillsborough is ok to carry on. He did give me his name and number to contact him if there were any other issues that I felt needed to be addressed.
    SO, the Sgt. returned your call and stated that they had absolutely NO basis to stop you, or mistreat you--is that correct?

    Second--the Sgt. asked you to dutifully call the PD before you hold your SCCC meeting again just to make them aware of it, so they don't harass you? That is ridiculous. They should not be stopping you or any other gun owner without legitimate reason--RAS or PC. Stopping you for a lawful activity is harassment and serves to deprive you of your rights under the color of law--which by the way IS a crime I believe under federal law--yet another reason to file a formal, written complaint against the officers with their department as well as with the FBI.

    You now have them for acknowledged harassment of a perfectly legal activity--they intentionally targeted you and had absolutely no basis to stop you or your friends...

    A proximity issue to NCSU is not a federal law--there is only a law banning possession of firearms in a school zone, unless you are just driving through it, or dropping off or picking up your kids from a school--elementary, jr, high or high school--Post Secondary Campuses do not qualify and while having a gun ON campus itself might be illegal, and is in many states---having a gun near a post secondary institution is not a crime. Again--they lied to you.



  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    35

    Post imported post

    Reasonable suspicion is one thing, but there was nothing reasonable about his assumption, nor suspicious about our conduct. Whether he was aware of the law or not does not exculpate him from the fact that a detainment and search was done when clearly no law had been broken.

    If he wanted to call for backup, and follow us around while he verified it, that's fine, but you can't stop and frisk someone on the street for the simple act of carrying a holstered weapon. Case law supports both this and the fact that ignorance of the law is not an excuse to make one up. They made up an excuse to detain both of us before they ever had any "reasonable" suspicion.

    Any suspicion they had was completely fabricated from personal opinions and from neither our actions nor the law. Case law says the entire stop was unlawful from the start, regardless of how correctly they handled it after the fact. Ignorance is not an excuse - I can't go tearing down the highway at 100mph, then say after the fact, "Oh I'm sorry, I didn't know it was 35 here. I feel like an idiot." It doesn't make me any less responsible for what I did.



  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The south land
    Posts
    1,230

    Post imported post

    partemisio wrote:
    There is nobody that can memorize every law, period. Like I have mentioned, he did what he should have done, called to verify. If there is something that might be illegal going on you can be detained until proven otherwise(notice I said detained and not arrested). So, since it was a legal stop and detainment, it was a legal search. He proved that it was not in fact illegal to open carry by making a phone call, and then he let them go. And all that is needed for a stop and frisk is "reasonable suspicion." That means you don't need to know for a fact that something is wrong.
    I'm sorry--where was the legality for the stop again? OC is legal--therefore possession of a handgun is not a justification to conduct a stop or seizure. What justified the stop?

    The stop was illegal, the detainment was illegal, the search was illegal, and their claiming ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The south land
    Posts
    1,230

    Post imported post

    partemisio wrote:
    suntzu wrote:
    file a complaint against the officers. They are supposed to know the laws and if they don't, then they don't need to be police officers.


    O 1 said he actually supports what you are doing? Then why did he treat you like an enemy of the state?

    He no more supports what you are doing than a tree does--if he did he would know it is legal to OC and he would not have treated you or those with you the way he did. My advice is to file a complaint with the department against both officers.


    And it would not matter to me if he worked 10yrs as a police officer or 1--if he has taken the job of a police officer--he should be aware that OC is legal, and he should be aware of the laws--he just wanted to try and prove a point about who was in control.

    O 1 told you he was "in Iraq supporting your right to carry" in order to try and make you feel sorry for him and hoping you won't file a complaint against him, because he realized he was in the wrong for the way he treated, or should I say mistreated you--otherwise he would not have brought "spending a year in Iraq supporting your rights" up...So he spent a year in Iraq "defending your rights" only to return to the US and step on them? O1 knows he is in the wrong and is trying to make you feel sorry for him. My advice is to file a complaint and waste no time in doing it--and your witnesses can help with that.
    File a complaint because he didn't know a law? That is stupid. The complaint won't do anything for one reason. How are you going to remember every law on the books for NC? You're not, period. He did the right thing by calling his Sgt. to check before arresting. If he had not than you might be able to get somewhere with a complaint.

    Maybe because he can't get back to his normal way of life. Do you know how some people that go to war react when they get back to this country? I have many friends and family in the military. One (brother in-law) has changed since he got back from his deployment in the way that he is used to how things work over there. Many people that fight for us are like this when they get back and it is hard, even requires medical attention sometimes, to get back to the way things are over here.

    As I said, filing a complaint won't do anything and will be a waste of time. You need to realize just how many laws there are. I know you think that he should know this law, and there are other people that feel the same way about different laws. Who says what ones he should really try to memorize, he can't please everybody?
    Stupid? Stupid to expect those who work as police to KNOW the laws instead of making them up as they see fit?

    The complaint will serve a necessary purpose--it will get the incident on paper and hopefully into their jacket of the officers involved and maybe even lead to their termination from LE, which is what needs to happen.

    It makes no difference to me if he served in Iraq or Podunk--if he is unfit for police work because of Iraq--he needs to get out of police work then.

    There is no such thing as a waste of time when it comes to filing a complaint against the police--it is necessary to make the point that we just don't have to stand by and accept mistreatment just because they say we do.

    The complaint will move because (1) the stop was illegal (2) they admitted the stop was illegal (3) intentionally targeting a perfectly legal activity with the intent to deprive you of Constitutionally protected rights under the color of law is a crime--and it should hold up not because of the violation of the 2nd Amendment, but because of the violation of the 4th Amendment--which is well recognized as being incorporated to the states through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment.

    No legitimate complaint is a waste of time--and I would even go so far as to file one with the FBI for the illegal detainment and violation of the 4th Amendment.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Kent county, Delaware, USA
    Posts
    322

    Post imported post

    JDriver1.8t wrote:
    ...
    He asked that we call (a number that he gave me) before we have our meetings, so that the officers assigned to the patrol of the area know and can respond accordingly, if needed.

    ...
    Please call that number and let them know before you vote, attend (or not attend) religious meetings, any speech or discussion, ect. perhaps they will see how ridiculous that is

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Kent county, Delaware, USA
    Posts
    322

    Post imported post

    20 calls a day from various people saying
    " umm, I'm at dunkin dounuts and I'm walking to the piggly wigglie on 14th street, bye..."

    "umm... I'm at the PW and I'm walking to ____ bank on 29th street"

    maybe they would get the message

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Portsmouth, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    463

    Post imported post

    partemisio wrote:
    fully_armed_biker wrote:
    partemisio wrote:
    suntzu wrote:
    file a complaint against the officers. They are supposed to know the laws and if they don't, then they don't need to be police officers.


    O 1 said he actually supports what you are doing? Then why did he treat you like an enemy of the state?

    He no more supports what you are doing than a tree does--if he did he would know it is legal to OC and he would not have treated you or those with you the way he did. My advice is to file a complaint with the department against both officers.


    And it would not matter to me if he worked 10yrs as a police officer or 1--if he has taken the job of a police officer--he should be aware that OC is legal, and he should be aware of the laws--he just wanted to try and prove a point about who was in control.

    O 1 told you he was "in Iraq supporting your right to carry" in order to try and make you feel sorry for him and hoping you won't file a complaint against him, because he realized he was in the wrong for the way he treated, or should I say mistreated you--otherwise he would not have brought "spending a year in Iraq supporting your rights" up...So he spent a year in Iraq "defending your rights" only to return to the US and step on them? O1 knows he is in the wrong and is trying to make you feel sorry for him. My advice is to file a complaint and waste no time in doing it--and your witnesses can help with that.
    File a complaint because he didn't know a law? That is stupid. The complaint won't do anything for one reason. How are you going to remember every law on the books for NC? You're not, period. He did the right thing by calling his Sgt. to check before arresting. If he had not than you might be able to get somewhere with a complaint.

    Maybe because he can't get back to his normal way of life. Do you know how some people that go to war react when they get back to this country? I have many friends and family in the military. One (brother in-law) has changed since he got back from his deployment in the way that he is used to how things work over there. Many people that fight for us are like this when they get back and it is hard, even requires medical attention sometimes, to get back to the way things are over here.

    As I said, filing a complaint won't do anything and will be a waste of time. You need to realize just how many laws there are. I know you think that he should know this law, and there are other people that feel the same way about different laws. Who says what ones he should really try to memorize, he can't please everybody?

    Sorry; but, HE IS SUPPOSED TO KNOW THE LAW, IT IS HIS JOB TO KNOW THE LAW!

    Harlow vs Fitzgerald,457 U.S. 800. A government employee is required to know the law governing his/her conduct.

    ---"if the law is clearly established at the time the action occurred, a public employee is not entitled to assert the defense of qualified immunity based on good faith since a reasonably competent public official should know the law governing his or her conduct."


    In other words...he can't say "I didn't know the law."


    It was an illegal stop, an illegal search, and illegal detainment...plain and simple...and the cop should have known better.
    There is nobody that can memorize every law, period. Like I have mentioned, he did what he should have done, called to verify. If there is something that might be illegal going on you can be detained until proven otherwise(notice I said detained and not arrested). So, since it was a legal stop and detainment, it was a legal search. He proved that it was not in fact illegal to open carry by making a phone call, and then he let them go. And all that is needed for a stop and frisk is "reasonable suspicion." That means you don't need to know for a fact that something is wrong.
    Your definition of "reasonable" is MUCH different than mine...and the SCOTUS for that matter! The legal definition of probable cause is "A reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime...by that definition and that definition alone...the police better damn well know the law! ...the belief was not reasonable when 01 admits...



    "O1: repeats this to his sergeant. Tells the Sg that he wants to verify what laws are being broken. Asks for Sg to text him any statute numbers. He asks me again what my title is. Talks to his Sg more, and says that I'm not bothering anyone, and he just wants to make sure I'm legal. O1 says he will get my info and they can charge me with something later if needed. This is where I stopped paying attention, and dealt with O2 again."

    O1 being the officer that innitiated the stop. So, by your definition, and his...he can just randomly stop ANYONE and search them to make sure they aren't breaking any laws.



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
  •