Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
protias wrote:
[align=justify]There would have been nothing wrong, illegal or improperwith the Officer discretely talking to you inside or outside of the restaurant. He definitely did not have to be ajerkand disrupt the whole restaurant when he asked the employee about their firearm policy.[/align]
[align=justify]
protias wrote:
I agree Nik. There was still no reasonable suspicion to make a stop. I broke no laws and yet there is this concern that I "might shoot up the place?" Come on, what criminal open carries?
[align=justify]There would have been nothing wrong, illegal or improperwith the Officer discretely talking to you inside or outside of the restaurant. He definitely did not have to be ajerkand disrupt the whole restaurant when he asked the employee about their firearm policy.[/align]
[align=justify]
Finally, several law enforcement agencies have asked whether, in light of Article I, § 25, they may stop a person openly carrying a firearm in public to investigate possible criminal activity, including disorderly conduct. We say yes. An officer may stop and briefly detain a person for investigative purposes (known as an investigative or
[font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"][font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"]Terry [/font][/font]stop) if he has "reasonable suspicion," based on articulable facts, of criminal activity. [font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"][font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"]Illinois v. Wardlow, [/font][/font]528 U.S. 119, 123 (2000); [font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"][font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"]United States v. Sokolow, [/font][/font]490 U.S. 1, 7 (1989); [font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"][font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"]Terry v. Ohio, [/font][/font]392 U.S. 1, 30 (1968). The existence of reasonable suspicion depends on the totality of the circumstances, including the information known to the officer and any reasonable inferences to be drawn at the time of the stop. [font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"][font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"]United States v. Arvizu, [/font][/font]544 U.S. 266 (2002) (reaffirming "totality of the circumstances" test). Even though open carry enjoys constitutional protection, it may still give rise to reasonable suspicion when considered in totality. It is not a shield against police investigation or subsequent prosecution. [font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"][font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"]See State v. Anderson, [/font][/font]155 Wis. 2d 77, 84, 454 N.W.2d 763 (1990) (police officers not required to first eliminate the possibility of innocent behavior before making investigatory stop). [/align]
¶9. And "even when officers have no basis for suspecting a particular individual, they may generally ask questions of that individual, [and] ask to examine the individual's identification," as long as the police do not convey a message that compliance is mandatory. [font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"][font="Times New Roman,Times New Roman"]Florida v. Bostick, [/font][/font]501 U.S. 429, 434-35 (1991). The Fourth Amendment does not prevent police from making voluntary or consensual contact with persons engaged in constitutionally protected conduct.