Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 210

Thread: NHP incudent

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The High Plains, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    134

    Post imported post

    No voice recorder so this is what I remember.

    Got pulled over on US 95 south bound about an hour ago. Trooper told me to keep my hands on the handle bars. Comes up on my left side and takes my .44 out of my cross-draw holster. I was riding my Harley. He takes my gun back to his car then comes back. He says he pulled me over for speeding and not signaling, which I didn't deny because I was and I did.

    "Why are you caring a gun?"

    "I always carry a gun."

    "Lets see so ID."

    I give him my DL. He goes back to his car and comes back a few minutes later.

    "Lets see some paperwork for the bike and you better have your blue card(Clark County Registration)for that gun."

    I hand over registration and insurance.

    "The gun is registered."

    "Wheres your blue card?"

    "I'm not required to carry it."

    "Could arrest you right now."

    :shock:Huh?

    It goes on like this for a few minutes. He wants to know how I'm going to prove that its registered, I keep telling him I don't have to prove it.

    He goes back to his car. He's back there for about 20 mins. Looked like he was talking on his phone. Probably trying to find out if I'm right or not.

    He comes back. Now he is telling my he could keep my gun and I would have to come pick it up later.(What? no arrest anymore, weird!)

    He keeps on about how does he know its register and theres no serial # on the gun.(Its covered up by the Hogue grips I put on it. I keep on with "I don't need to carry the blue card, I don't need to prove its registered, yata yata yata."

    "What if I wasn't a resident of Clark County?"

    "I would arrest you."(We're back to that? Which is it?!)

    "But I would have 60 days to register it."

    "You gotta have a blue card."

    "What if I bought it yesterday? I have 72 hour to register it."

    "I would arrest you. You still have to have the blue card."

    My head hurts by this point.

    "I need you to give me a reason not to take your gun."

    :shock:What?! I'm starting to lose it!

    "Sir, you do whatever you feel it necessary."

    Guess what? I got my gun back.:P

    "I need you to open those saddle bags. You stand over by that fence(about 40 feet away). I'll put your ammo in one and your gun in the other. After I leave you can come back and collect them."

    This is such a blatant ploy to look in my saddle bags that I almost laugh out loud! He is so stupid and my saddle bags were so empty so I just said whatever.

    He leaves, I get my gun back and a date to appear in court for not using my turn signal. Don't no why he didn't write me up for the speeding, maybe he thought I was cute. And who ever heard of going to court for not signaling. Seems like a waste of everyones time. Just let me pay the fine and be done with it.


    "A friend will help you move, a real friend will help you move a body."

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    , , LaGrande, OR.
    Posts
    74

    Post imported post

    Thanks for sharing your encounter with NHP. I ferquently ride my Harley and O.C.. I did call Washoe County Sheriff to make sure if I was good to go and was told I was legal. Reno area so far for me has been insodent free. I've even had L.E. pull up behind me at traffic lights. Sounds like the Trooper needs to bone up on some "stuff" or he was having a bad day.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Post imported post

    Another ridiculous encounter.

    I hope you write a "complaintive" letter to his superiors.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The High Plains, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    134

    Post imported post

    Welcome to the forum!

    This guy new it was legal, he just wanted proof that it was registered which isn't required. He just wanted to see how far he could push me. Not to far.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The High Plains, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    134

    Post imported post

    varminter22 wrote:
    Another ridiculous encounter.

    I hope you write a "complaintive" letter to his superiors.
    Oh I plan on it.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    Glad you got your gun back! This seems to be the norm on traffic stops - placing the gun out of your control till the cop leaves - ...did he take all the rounds out of your magazine, or just put the loaded magazine in a separate bag?

    Every report I've heard of similar incidents (minor traffic infraction in which the alleged violator was OC or CC) include these unlawful orders to open your private storage to inspection (aka SEARCH). Officer safety may be a justifiable reason to temporarily seize a weapon in some circumstances (the armed individual must be considered "dangerous" (cite please!) and the stop must be non-consensual), but treating every individual as DANGEROUS on every stop is IMHO abusive.

    I realize police officers are allowed to LIE to you, and it's considered an effective interrogation tactic, but why LIE to regular citizens as a matter of practice? Arrest you for not having your blue card? Maybe the officer simply doesn't know the blue card isn't required to be carried with you. Such intimidation should only be used when there is UNQUESTIONABLE AUTHORITY. The officer not knowing whether it's required to be carried is far from unquestionable authority. If the officer KNEW (wrongfully of course) the blue card must be carried, it's a major training issue that needs to be resolved immediately!

    To me, this officer safety intrusion only goes so far. What if you had refused to open your saddle bags to search? How would the weapon have been returned in a manner which made the officer feel safe? Hand you the unloaded weapon and place the magazine on the seat of your bike and order you not to move until he pulls away? Place a zip tie around the action of the firearm so he has time to pull away? Field-strip and remove the barrel? Any number of ways to handle it other than to demand an unlawful search of your bags.

    I don't drive a bike (though I'd like to learn - any suggestions on riding school?), and haven't been pulled over for a while now, I think mainly because I drive a throw-away economy car that doesn't like to go very fast. ;-)

    However, next time (and I know there will be a next time!) I get pulled over, I will take one for the team and refuse everything I am lawfully able to refuse. I know this is difficult for many people because of the intimidation factor, the hassle factor (this probably results in the stop being as long and painful as allowed under the law), and the threat of going to jail for a traffic infraction as a form of punishment for my noncompliance (which the Supreme Court upheld as permissible - see ATWATER et al. v. CITY OF LAGO VISTA).

    Ugh, I'm so frustrated. Reading these reports really inspire me to take another Strip walk, anyone else want to join me? I won't be carrying ID or anything else for that matter. I'll have socks, shoes, jeans, underwear, belt, shirt, holster, gun, voice recorder. No ID, no cash, no credit card, no blue card, nothing else other than what I listed. Maybe I'll stick my CCW and DL in my shoe just in case the cops try to lie and accuse me of concealing without a permit. I'm thinking November 2. That's the day AFTER the deadline for the mandatory OC training.

  7. #7
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    what the hell is "mandatory OC training?"
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

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

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

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

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum36/30420.html

    Every officer in the police department is required to undergo training that reinforces that OC is not, by itself, sufficient grounds for a terry stop.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The High Plains, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    134

    Post imported post

    timf343 wrote
    Maybe I'll stick my CCW and DL in my shoe just in case the cops try to lie and accuse me of concealing without a permit. I'm thinking November 2. That's the day AFTER the deadline for the mandatory OC training.
    Nov 2! Thats the last time a police officer took my gun from me. You might remember the incident at the Buffloo Wild Wings on Craig Rd? That was me and my roommate and another N. Las Vegas open carrier. I am down for whatever as long as I don't have to work the next day.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    , , LaGrande, OR.
    Posts
    74

    Post imported post

    After reading all the replies. I'm considering going back to O.C. with C.C. for a back up. Now that it's cooling off I think a back up concealed might throw them a curve. What do you all think?Nothing here is illegal!

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Lost Wages :), Nevada, USA
    Posts
    48

    Post imported post

    So many of your rights were VIOLATED!!!! Make a formal complaint on the NHP Officer that should be fired for not knowing his job. If your complaint goes nowhere! start taking these cops to civil court and sue their badges off.

    This is getting to be BS, you do not have to be a LEO to carry a gun and that is the mental stateof these officers.

    Dont get me wrong. I'm not degrading our law enforcement in our country. they need to respect law abiding people who chose to carry and protect their families and themself.


  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Lost Wages :), Nevada, USA
    Posts
    48

    Post imported post

    timf343 wrote:

    Ugh, I'm so frustrated. Reading these reports really inspire me to take another Strip walk, anyone else want to join me? I won't be carrying ID or anything else for that matter. I'll have socks, shoes, jeans, underwear, belt, shirt, holster, gun, voice recorder. No ID, no cash, no credit card, no blue card, nothing else other than what I listed. Maybe I'll stick my CCW and DL in my shoe just in case the cops try to lie and accuse me of concealing without a permit. I'm thinking November 2. That's the day AFTER the deadline for the mandatory OC training.



    I'll GO WITH YOU TIM. SET THE TIME DATE AND MEET PLACE. THE MORE THE BETTER!!



  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    195

    Post imported post

    Sheepdawg wrote:
    No voice recorder so this is what I remember.

    Got pulled over on US 95 south bound about an hour ago. Trooper told me to keep my hands on the handle bars. Comes up on my left side and takes my .44 out of my cross-draw holster. I was riding my Harley. He takes my gun back to his car then comes back. He says he pulled me over for speeding and not signaling, which I didn't deny because I was and I did.

    "Why are you caring a gun?"

    "I always carry a gun."

    "Lets see so ID."

    I give him my DL. He goes back to his car and comes back a few minutes later.

    "Lets see some paperwork for the bike and you better have your blue card(Clark County Registration)for that gun."

    I hand over registration and insurance.

    "The gun is registered."

    "Wheres your blue card?"

    "I'm not required to carry it."

    "Could arrest you right now."

    :shock:Huh?

    It goes on like this for a few minutes. He wants to know how I'm going to prove that its registered, I keep telling him I don't have to prove it.

    He goes back to his car. He's back there for about 20 mins. Looked like he was talking on his phone. Probably trying to find out if I'm right or not.

    He comes back. Now he is telling my he could keep my gun and I would have to come pick it up later.(What? no arrest anymore, weird!)

    He keeps on about how does he know its register and theres no serial # on the gun.(Its covered up by the Hogue grips I put on it. I keep on with "I don't need to carry the blue card, I don't need to prove its registered, yata yata yata."

    "What if I wasn't a resident of Clark County?"

    "I would arrest you."(We're back to that? Which is it?!)

    "But I would have 60 days to register it."

    "You gotta have a blue card."

    "What if I bought it yesterday? I have 72 hour to register it."

    "I would arrest you. You still have to have the blue card."

    My head hurts by this point.

    "I need you to give me a reason not to take your gun."

    :shock:What?! I'm starting to lose it!

    "Sir, you do whatever you feel it necessary."

    Guess what? I got my gun back.:P

    "I need you to open those saddle bags. You stand over by that fence(about 40 feet away). I'll put your ammo in one and your gun in the other. After I leave you can come back and collect them."

    This is such a blatant ploy to look in my saddle bags that I almost laugh out loud! He is so stupid and my saddle bags were so empty so I just said whatever.

    He leaves, I get my gun back and a date to appear in court for not using my turn signal. Don't no why he didn't write me up for the speeding, maybe he thought I was cute. And who ever heard of going to court for not signaling. Seems like a waste of everyones time. Just let me pay the fine and be done with it.


    "A friend will help you move, a real friend will help you move a body."
    This kind of stop seems to happening more often these days.

  14. #14
    inNV
    Guest

    Post imported post

    Although it sucks, and is a pain in the butt, no rights were violated. He took your gun as a precaution, which they are in their full rights to do. He hassled you a little bit, that's about it. As far as the "illegal search"..he asked you to open your bags, and you said yes. If you would have said no, and he did it anyway, that would be a different story. You got your gun back, and got a ticket for what he pulled you over for in the first place. Besides having to shell out money to the state for your ticket, and an officer who maybe did not know (or could have and was just messing with you) about the blue card, nothing really happened. Anyone who says your rights were violated clearly don't know what are rights actually are.


  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    Rights technically violated? NO.

    Rights effectively violated? YES.

    While the officer may have done nothing technically wrong, he used intimidation and bullying upon a law-abiding citizen (turn signal violation excepted) to get him to waive his rights.

    Several threats of arrest and confiscation of his gun, I'm sure this citizen felt cornered. "If I refuse to open my saddle bags, how much more painful is this guy going to make this incident?" or "Does this guy actually think he has enough to arrest me?"

    Every day citizens who find themselves dealing with law enforcement over such minor "crimes" should not be forced to make the decision "Do I want to be punished by exercising my right (to remain silent, to refuse a search, etc.), or do I want to just give in to the intimidation so I can be on my way?"

    I'm sure there are plenty of LAWFUL things an officer can do to make your life more difficult. For one, he can hold you for up to an hour. Technically, he can arrest you for an offense for which the maximum penalty is a fine. He can insist on a field sobriety test, and I'm willing to bet only 50% of you could pass it stone cold sober. Etc.

    And there's no harm in filing an official complaint. You don't like the way your situation went down, complain! If it's an isolated incident, probably nothing will ever come of it. Complaints start to stack up in this guy's jacket? You might just get something done.

    But if you do complain, stick to the facts and don't add in unnecessary details or emotion.

    Finally, just because the officer has the authority to temporarily seize a weapon, it does not necessarily mean he should do so every time. In Terry v Ohio, the Supreme Court said:
    Our evaluation of the proper balance that has to be struck in this type of case leads us to conclude that there must be a narrowly drawn authority to permit a reasonable search for weapons for the protection of the police officer, where he has reason to believe that he is dealing with an armed and dangerous individual, regardless of whether he has probable cause to arrest the individual for a crime. The officer need not be absolutely certain that the individual is armed; the issue is whether a reasonably prudent man in the circumstances would be warranted in the belief that his safety or that of others was in danger.
    So unless every armed citizen is considered DANGEROUS, confiscation on every stop does not meet legal muster.

    In North Carolina (http://www.jus.state.nc.us/NCJA/pear.htm)

    Notice that the law requires the LEO to believe the suspect is both armed and dangerous before the LEO may conduct a frisk. Thus, knowledge that a suspect is armed does not in and of itself[/i] justify a frisk. Suppose, for example, you stop a motorist for speeding. The motorist has a permit to carry a weapon concealed and, pursuant to law, informs you that he is in possession of a weapon and shows you the permit. May you frisk the motorist because you know he is armed? No, unless he says or does something you make you feel he is dangerous (of course, you may always request that the permit holder give you the gun during the citation process.)

    In Georgia (http://www.dca.state.ga.us/developme...p9_PurReg.html)

    To lawfully frisk an individual, the officer must have a reasonable belief that the person stopped is armed and dangerous. In the case of the self-protective search for weapons, the officer must be able to point to particular facts from which the officer reasonably inferred that the individual was armed and dangerous. The frisk must be limited to that which is necessary for the discovery of weapons which might be used to harm the officer or others.

    Read this article in Police Magazine:

    http://www.policemag.com/Channel/Pat...ns-Frisks.aspx

    Excerpt:
    The Supreme Court did not decide whether the facts known to the officer did or did not amount to a reasonable suspicion to believe Johnson was armed and dangerous. That question was to be answered by the Arizona court on remand. The Supreme Court did decide, however, that there is no requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion to believe that a passenger in a lawfully stopped vehicle is involved in criminal activity in order to perform a frisk where supported by reasonable suspicion of danger.
    And I found a Supreme Court case, Adams v Williams (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm..._0143_ZD2.html):

    Even assuming that the officer had some legitimate reason for relying on the informant, Terry requires, before any stop and frisk is made, that the reliable information in the officer's possession demonstrate that the suspect is both armed and dangerous. The fact remains that Connecticut specifically authorizes persons to carry guns so long as they have a permit. Thus, there was no reason for the officer to infer from anything that the informant said that the respondent was dangerous. His frisk was, therefore, illegal under Terry.
    While the majority of these cases allow a frisk of a suspect who may be considered armed and dangerous, no frisk is necessary in this case, since the man is openly carrying. In a frisk, the officer must have reasonable suspicion of being armed and dangerous. Since he's already passed the legal requirement of reasonable suspicion, thus his frisk, he therefore also has authority to temporarily seize the weapon. In the case of open carrying, his burden of suspicion is not reduced. He needn't frisk to determine the presence of a weapon, but he must have the same authority under the law to seize the weapon as if that weapon were concealed. Ask yourself this question: If the man wasn't OCing, would the officer have frisked him, or had the authority to do so? If the answer is no, it also holds that the officer lacks sufficient authority to seize the openly carried weapon.

    So during a traffic stop for allegedly not using a turn signal, and open carrying in a state where no permit is required to open carry, what other facts during the stop might have given the officer reasonable suspicion that this person was dangerous?

  16. #16
    inNV
    Guest

    Post imported post

    None of the case law you presented applies to this case. What you posted has to do with reasonable (or unreasonable) searches for weapons. The officer in this case did not violate the OP's 4th Amendments, he instead saw it, plain as day on his hip, and secured it. Therefore there was no need for a "reasonable suspicion" that the subject in this instance was dangerous in order for the officer to search the subject, because there was no search done to begin with. The case law you tried to apply to this situation is not case on point.

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    timf343 wrote:
    While the majority of these cases allow a frisk of a suspect who may be considered armed and dangerous, no frisk is necessary in this case, since the man is openly carrying. In a frisk, the officer must have reasonable suspicion of being armed and dangerous. Since he's already passed the legal requirement of reasonable suspicion, thus his frisk, he therefore also has authority to temporarily seize the weapon. In the case of open carrying, his burden of suspicion is not reduced. He needn't frisk to determine the presence of a weapon, but he must have the same authority under the law to seize the weapon as if that weapon were concealed. Ask yourself this question: If the man wasn't OCing, would the officer have frisked him, or had the authority to do so? If the answer is no, it also holds that the officer lacks sufficient authority to seize the openly carried weapon.

    So during a traffic stop for allegedly not using a turn signal, and open carrying in a state where no permit is required to open carry, what other facts during the stop might have given the officer reasonable suspicion that this person was dangerous?
    I do acknowledge the case law presented isn't exactly spot on. But reread these two paragraphs.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    timf343 wrote:
    Notice that the law requires the LEO to believe the suspect is both armed and dangerous before the LEO may conduct a frisk. Thus, knowledge that a suspect is armed does not in and of itself justify a frisk. Suppose, for example, you stop a motorist for speeding. The motorist has a permit to carry a weapon concealed and, pursuant to law, informs you that he is in possession of a weapon and shows you the permit. May you frisk the motorist because you know he is armed? No, unless he says or does something you make you feel he is dangerous (of course, you may always request that the permit holder give you the gun during the citation process.)
    I know we're not in North Carolina, but reading this is the reason I formed the logic and argument I presented.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Lost Wages :), Nevada, USA
    Posts
    48

    Post imported post

    Well said in all points Tim. Just because you are open carrying does not give a LEO the right to harass. thats what it was!!!





  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The High Plains, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    134

    Post imported post

    inNV wrote:
    Although it sucks, and is a pain in the butt, no rights were violated. He took your gun as a precaution, which they are in their full rights to do. He hassled you a little bit, that's about it. As far as the "illegal search"..he asked you to open your bags, and you said yes. If you would have said no, and he did it anyway, that would be a different story. You got your gun back, and got a ticket for what he pulled you over for in the first place. Besides having to shell out money to the state for your ticket, and an officer who maybe did not know (or could have and was just messing with you) about the blue card, nothing really happened. Anyone who says your rights were violated clearly don't know what are rights actually are.
    Of course I agree with Tim on all points. The officer had no reason to believe I was dangerous. And please don't start on this whole "secured for officer safety" junk. The reason people, including cops, carry guns IS for safety. He took my gun, now he has 2 guns and I have none. How safe do I feel? Not very. I don't know him anymore than he knows me. Just because he is a LEO doesn't mean I'm safe as long as he is around. Most of us on this forum carry because we know we can't count on cops to protect us.

    And something I left out in my OP, after he took my gun he asked me if I had any other weapons on me. I said no and he took my word for it. Don't ya think if he really thought I was dangerous he would have frisked me for other weapons. I think he would have.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The High Plains, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    134

    Post imported post

    timf343 wrote:
    Glad you got your gun back! This seems to be the norm on traffic stops - placing the gun out of your control till the cop leaves - ...did he take all the rounds out of your magazine, or just put the loaded magazine in a separate bag?

    It was a revolver, so he put the gun in one bag and the rounds in the other.

    Every report I've heard of similar incidents (minor traffic infraction in which the alleged violator was OC or CC) include these unlawful orders to open your private storage to inspection (aka SEARCH). Officer safety may be a justifiable reason to temporarily seize a weapon in some circumstances (the armed individual must be considered "dangerous" (cite please!) and the stop must be non-consensual), but treating every individual as DANGEROUS on every stop is IMHO abusive.

    I realize police officers are allowed to LIE to you, and it's considered an effective interrogation tactic, but why LIE to regular citizens as a matter of practice? Arrest you for not having your blue card? Maybe the officer simply doesn't know the blue card isn't required to be carried with you. Such intimidation should only be used when there is UNQUESTIONABLE AUTHORITY. The officer not knowing whether it's required to be carried is far from unquestionable authority. If the officer KNEW (wrongfully of course) the blue card must be carried, it's a major training issue that needs to be resolved immediately!

    To me, this officer safety intrusion only goes so far. What if you had refused to open your saddle bags to search? How would the weapon have been returned in a manner which made the officer feel safe? Hand you the unloaded weapon and place the magazine on the seat of your bike and order you not to move until he pulls away? Place a zip tie around the action of the firearm so he has time to pull away? Field-strip and remove the barrel? Any number of ways to handle it other than to demand an unlawful search of your bags.

    I knew I was waiving my rights by opening my saddle bags, but the stop was almost over and I just wanted to be on my way. I knew what he was up to and the bags were empty so I agreed. What bothers me is most citizens wouldn't know that they could refuse.

    I don't drive a bike (though I'd like to learn - any suggestions on riding school?), and haven't been pulled over for a while now, I think mainly because I drive a throw-away economy car that doesn't like to go very fast. ;-)

    Check out the Motorcycle Safety Foundation website. They should have some classes in the area. Its a great class for people who have never ridden. And after you pass the class you can take the card they give you down to the DMV and they will put the endorsement on your license without taking their written or road test.

    However, next time (and I know there will be a next time!) I get pulled over, I will take one for the team and refuse everything I am lawfully able to refuse. I know this is difficult for many people because of the intimidation factor, the hassle factor (this probably results in the stop being as long and painful as allowed under the law), and the threat of going to jail for a traffic infraction as a form of punishment for my noncompliance (which the Supreme Court upheld as permissible - see ATWATER et al. v. CITY OF LAGO VISTA).

    Ugh, I'm so frustrated. Reading these reports really inspire me to take another Strip walk, anyone else want to join me? I won't be carrying ID or anything else for that matter. I'll have socks, shoes, jeans, underwear, belt, shirt, holster, gun, voice recorder. No ID, no cash, no credit card, no blue card, nothing else other than what I listed. Maybe I'll stick my CCW and DL in my shoe just in case the cops try to lie and accuse me of concealing without a permit. I'm thinking November 2. That's the day AFTER the deadline for the mandatory OC training.

  22. #22
    inNV
    Guest

    Post imported post

    Tim,
    No we are not in NC and there wasn't a frisk involved, so again that does not apply here. But what you wrote in parentheses is pretty much what I am saying isn't it?

    Sheep,
    Your rights were not violated, a PO is well within the law to secure your weapon. It may not be fun, you may not like it, but it's the law. Your rights were not violated, he did not need to think you were dangerous to secure a weapon in plain sight. Lobby to change the law if you don't like it.

    It's funny how people we will agree with and stand behind someone that is completely wrong, just because it sounds right.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The High Plains, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    134

    Post imported post

    inNV wrote:
    None of the case law you presented applies to this case. What you posted has to do with reasonable (or unreasonable) searches for weapons. The officer in this case did not violate the OP's 4th Amendments, he instead saw it, plain as day on his hip, and secured it. Therefore there was no need for a "reasonable suspicion" that the subject in this instance was dangerous in order for the officer to search the subject, because there was no search done to begin with. The case law you tried to apply to this situation is not case on point.
    If having a gun on your hip automatically makes you dangerous, how do cops get away with it? Should I call 911 every time I see a cop because there is a "dangerous" man around?

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The High Plains, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    134

    Post imported post

    Double tap

  25. #25
    inNV
    Guest

    Post imported post

    When a PO initiates a stop, or approaches an individual WITH CAUSE he is well with in the law to secure any weapon the individual is carrying while he is in contact with the individual. It is for the PO's safety, if you consider the kind of people he deals with on a daily basis. He doesn't know the OP from Adam, and it is with in the law to make sure he is safe while conducting a traffic stop. Like I said, if you don't like it, lobby to change it. Good luck with that though. Stop building straw men Sheepdawg, and stop looking at Tim's lack of interpretation of the law, and invalid case on point for your answers. The officer did not have to believe that the OP was dangerous to secure his weapon.

Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •