Police Misconduct and Lawsuit

imported post

Hello fellow UOCers. Please forgive me if I have posted in the wrong place or this has previously been discussed.



While I’m not new to firearms, I’m new to this site and the prospect of Open Carry. I live here in the Bay Area (Oakland) and Open Carry at times. From what I’ve read here on the site (the bad stories) is what amounts to Police misconduct. It seems as if the Police are intent on scaring law biding citizens and those who are brave enough to Open Carry with total impunity. They seem hell-bent on stifling this movement before it starts. I’m not saying all Police departments, but most of these stories are negative and unlawful.



I’ve read story after story on this site where a peaceful and law bidding citizen is simply exercising his or her rights. People cite case after case and state statutes after statute and keep reminding the Police of their rights and privileges as an American. I find it odd that we as a people have to remind the Police how to uphold the law even if they don’t agree. A violation of ones rights and the law is really quite serious, especially at the hands and discretion of the Police.



Are the laws not clear? Are the Police simply not complying with the laws? Evidentially, they seem to openly violate the laws and state statutes of California with no real fear or interest of upholding the law. Do the Police in your area decide which laws they feel like upholding and which ones they’ll violate; including the ones that govern your individual rights?



I can go on and on, I think you understand the point. My question is: If the laws on Open Carry are clear and not ambiguous, why do we tolerate Police misconduct? Have those who have been directly involved in an egregious act of Police misconduct in regards to Open Carry contacted a lawyer? Not any lawyer; a lawyer who handles rights violations; a lawyer who wouldn’t mind getting paid a million dollars. I know I’m playing Armchair General here but I’m just curious. Seriously, who here wouldn’t mind contributing to a central fund to really vigorously pursue a case against Police Department “X”? Because, in reality, civil punishment is the only way to make the Police listen.



If people are so certain that they are within the law and have proof that the law and their rights were violated by the police, it should be an open and shut case. The law is clear, the individual’s rights are clear, the event with the Police is clear. Let’s let judges uphold the laws that the Police seem to or choose not to get right. In the end, it will only take one case; one case that was legitimately pursued for the Police to really understand that we are many, not just one person individually plucked from the streets and harassed. One successful lawsuit and BAM! No more harassment. This is how it has always been. Bad cops and their behaviors are always going to continue until they are made to stop. Hitting a City in the moneybags will certainly make its Police STOP and think. Just some thoughts.



Maybe I’m just a fool, maybe you'll belive me to be crazy……your thoughts.

imported post

Because f&^# you, thats why.



No really, thats about the most succinct answer you will be able to find.

imported post

heliopolissolutions,

I'm not sure I understand your response, but thanks for you thoughts.

imported post

Having recently relocated from California, I feel I am still inclined to respond, because what you are saying is precisely correct.

From the beginning the power has always been inherently with "the people". However, with the growth of government, there is a lot of over-extension by said governing bodies or agencies that reaches clear across the "no-fly" zone.

What has repeatedly irritated me, is when you are stopped for even a minor infraction, and the police officer feels the need to berate you, or talk down to you. Perhaps it is my ingrained military self pouring out of my seams, but disrespect is something I absolutely abhor from a government agent.

I actually sent a letter quite a while ago to the CHP office in West Sacramento regarding a stop in which an Officer was blatantly out of line. In this particular incident he didn't have crap on me (probably because I was doing nothing wrong in the first place...), but felt the need to detain me for over an hour while he fished for something to bust me for.

To elaborate, I was driving a 1990 Mustang GT set up with a full Griggs GR40 Track Kit. It had aftermarket exhaust, and a ton of work done to it that was all painstakingly C.A.R.B. and C.V.C. legal. The previous owner even riveted the CARB plaques to the underside of the hood! He didn't like the burble of the exhaust (Way below C.V.C. requirements), or the lope of the cam (also C.V.C. approved). Apparently guys who own cars like mine are "street racers". (Mine saw time at Infineon, or Sacramento Raceway and was driven on weekends only, as my Ranger Edge was my primary commuter.)

Boy, he must have been bored...



I am not going to turn this into a LEO bashing session, because frankly the majority of them deserve better. However, whether through ignorance or a lack of material education, even the good ones occasionally eschew our constitutional rights as if it is some old rag they could use to wipe their posterior.

Enter the 2nd Amendment.

Nobody anywhere wants some silly civil war. Nobody wants our government overthrown. Nobody wants the "police to pay". It is nothing of that nature.

It is however, that people are tired of our monopolistic, monolithic government trying to slyly usurp everything that makes us American. Whether intentional, or not.

Every once in a while, ya just gotta slap a wrist or two, and say "Bad! No!".

It seems juvenile, but when government gets to the point where it thinks it can have everything its way and ignore the people, it's what we as those inherent with power, find necessary to do.

Even outside the boundaries of the 2nd Amendment, you see the blatant disregard of our rights as litigation and the politico erodes them away.

If lawsuits are what it takes, then that is what it takes.

imported post

heliopolissolutions wrote:

Because f&^# you, thats why.



No really, thats about the most succinct answer you will be able to find.

Click to expand...

While succinct, it is by no means accurate. There are acouple of reasons why some police seem to go to any length to discourage open carry.

1) The culture in California has not been adequately acclimated to the presense of firearms. Some police assert that because the population of California is largely comprised of dirty hippies, soccer moms, fruits, nuts, and granola grazers that multiple reports of a "man with a gun" will tax police resources- taking them from other more important crime fighting. I have found that this is something of a red-herring. Early open carriers such as myself and CA_Libertarian solo open carried for about a year before someone decided to drop a dime on us.

2) Some in law enforcement believe their job is about crime prevention. By providing false information, by intimidation, by threats, by making regular people feel uncomfortable about arming themselves, they believe they are preventing a possible future crime commited with a weapon. In the beginning, many of us (myself included) ask law enforcement about the law and how it would apply to someone who open carries. Most were told in ominous terms that bad things would happen. They asserted that this activity would result in arrest, detention at gunpoint, being thrown to the pavement, etc. That was until the memos started being published.

The problem that we are up against in California, is that the State Constitution and the Judiciary are not favorable for pro-gunners. There is no state ensconced right to keep and bear, and the judges have interpreted this as carte blanche to impair the 2A and persecute gunowners from the bench. Yes, we have two or three of us that have good standing for a 1983 case, but by virtue that we live in California, it isnt so simple to pursue. Challenging some of this bad behavior requires both the funding and the recognition of the right.

It is coming. Just not immediately

imported post

I think overall experiences and responses have gotten better. It has been a slow education process. Usually, after the first encounter with a UOCer, the PD responding will review how they handled the response and correct where they feel they are deficient. Subsequent encounters usually go better (e.g., Redlands PD).

The level of inappropriate conduct varies widely among police departments. Some departments are quick to do an e-check, while others call out the helicopters, multiple back up units, handcuff and illegally search your person (e.g., LAPD).

I would not generalize about the departments throughout the state and classify them as a bad bunch of bananas.

:celebrate:celebrate:uhoh::celebrate:celebrate

Criticism should be very specific to the department and the policy they use. This helps to target the problem so that corrective action can be effectively applied. IMHO.

imported post

Bad cops and their behaviors are always going to continue until they are made to stop. Hitting a City in the moneybags will certainly make its Police STOP and think.

Click to expand...

What you say is true. However, finding both an attorney and the cash to file a federal civil rights lawsuit is not something everyone can do, especially finding the cash. The "authorities" essentially have a free attorney to handle their side of the dispute. Do you? Do I? Do most OCers?

imported post

The simple answer is that there is no simple answer.

Don't forget that for every incident you see posted here of flagrant, or even borderline 'abusive behavior' by law enforcement, there are hundreds of incidents of 'proper' police conduct that goes completely unreported.

This isn't to say that such abuses shouldn't be litigated, but I believe that's for each individual to decide.

imported post

I think that is a great answer. Many, many police respond to UOC in California and outside of California OC, professionally and responsibly. Most police officers only contact with a citizen carrying a weapon in CA is unlawful criminals. Unfortunately, also, until recently, many of their departments also never told them that UOC is legal, so they are going out there under the assumption that it is illegal. This is the fault of the politicians.



mjones wrote:

The simple answer is that there is no simple answer.

Don't forget that for every incident you see posted here of flagrant, or even borderline 'abusive behavior' by law enforcement, there are hundreds of incidents of 'proper' police conduct that goes completely unreported.

This isn't to say that such abuses shouldn't be litigated, but I believe that's for each individual to decide.

Click to expand...

imported post

Statkowski wrote:

Bad cops and their behaviors are always going to continue until they are made to stop. Hitting a City in the moneybags will certainly make its Police STOP and think.

Click to expand...

What you say is true. However, finding both an attorney and the cash to file a federal civil rights lawsuit is not something everyone can do, especially finding the cash. The "authorities" essentially have a free attorney to handle their side of the dispute. Do you? Do I? Do most OCers?

Click to expand...

Thanks to all that read or responded to my post. I appreciate your interest and the discussion it has generated. However, I think this is something that should be addressed by all on this board/site. I think there are some who are so excited and “grateful” to be able to Open Carry that they are willing to put up with some flak from the Police. Remember folks, this is your RIGHT, not a handed out privilege that should be revoked by anyone. This is the law, and therefore your right as an American no matter who doesn’t like it or approve.



Also, please understand, I’m not some militant that wants to see the Government overthrown. I’m not someone who hates the Police or has a grudge. I’m simply an American that follows the laws of the land and expects those responsible for upholding that law, to respect it, respect me, and follow it as well. I’m an American that has the right to live peacefully, responsibly, and protected; and if need be, protect myself. You may think I live in a dream world, but these simple things are what I believe.



Yes, cash and an attorney are needed. How many people belong to this board/site? If everyone would be willing to give to a central fund, a lawyer could be retained. As I've stated before, it would only take one lawsuit and this complete and open disregard for the law would cease. Right now, we are individually pushed around and violated and the Police are not held accountable for their actions. I don’t know about everyone else here, but it unnerves me that my local Police Department may be guilty of not upholding the law and or violating it in the open. If our rights are clear, and we are clearly acting within the law, we should never be made to feel as if we have violated it in any way.

imported post

Joe Blow wrote:

Also, please understand, I’m not some militant that wants to see the Government overthrown. I’m not someone who hates the Police or has a grudge. I’m simply an American that follows the laws of the land and expects those responsible for upholding that law, to respect it, respect me, and follow it as well. I’m an American that has the right to live peacefully, responsibly, and protected; and if need be, protect myself. You may think I live in a dream world, but these simple things are what I believe.



Yes, cash and an attorney are needed. How many people belong to this board/site? If everyone would be willing to give to a central fund, a lawyer could be retained. As I've stated before, it would only take one lawsuit and this complete and open disregard for the law would cease. Right now, we are individually pushed around and violated and the Police are not held accountable for their actions. I don’t know about everyone else here, but it unnerves me that my local Police Department may be guilty of not upholding the law and or violating it in the open. If our rights are clear, and we are clearly acting within the law, we should never be made to feel as if we have violated it in any way.

Click to expand...

A few thoughts...

1. Those responsible for upholding the laws...don't.

2. I suspect many here believe in the same "simple" things.

3. I also believe it unnerves many others, both on and off this forum.

4. Theseus needed money for his trial, and now appeal, and despite everyone's generosityhere and on CGN there is a substantial shortfall of resources.

Just came across this video sent to me by email. Its long, about an hour, but I recommend watching it. The first part has a lot of video that you may have seen before. The remaining parts may not be so well known.A word of caution, I wouldn't watch it with young children around. Also, compilations like this one can easily take individual incidents out of context, but I think overall there is information herethat one should be aware of.

http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=7086&title=The_Largest_Street_Gang_in_America

imported post

I just realized, why carry outside of larger group carries if..

a) we are going to get harrassed by law enforcement and
b) there is not the right information available to us to file lawsuits when our rights are violated.. and
c) knowledge of an attorney, team of attorneys or firms that will pick up these lawsuits/cases.

obviously complaints and internal investigations isn't doing the trick. If we continue with this open carry bit, I would think that a plan needs to be set into motion to actually fight back against the LEO's that are violating our rights, and not just with the departments own procedures of these complaints.

Maybe I'm coming from a different standpoint because I have a CCW. But instead of just creating a headache for some of these departments, bad press, and increasing tension between citizens and police, why not actually hit em where it hurts... the pocket books.. of the officers and the departments.

I think some of the veteran carriers or the ones with more money and knowledge should set up a procedure, or at least have information compiled on how to start a suit process against the officers and departments, with attorneys to retain.