• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

leo encounter documentation form?

dirtykoala

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
644
imported post

what do you guys think about having a form to request LEOs to read, fill out and sign prior to (e) checks? i think something like this could keep LEOs safe from law suits, and us safe from rights violations (beyond 12031[e])

example:

 

I, (officers name), representing (department name) will be performing a weapons inspection in accordance with P.C. 12031 (e). I assume all responsibility for the weapon in question while the weapon is in my possession. I understand that 12031(e) is merely an inspection of the firearm to ensure that the person in possession of the firearm is acting within the means of P.C. 12031. I further understand that any conversation or searches beyond P.C.12031 (e) are strictly voluntary unless reasonable articulable suspicion (RAS) has been established, detainment further than 12031(e) is not warranted. I understand that the legal possession of a firearm, including but not limited to "open carry" does not establish RAS. I understand that because "open carry" does not establish RAS, identification, while I can request it, does not have to be provided to me.

Print

Sign

Date
 

dirtykoala

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
644
imported post

Even if he looked at it then said "shove this up you small horse", he would know the guidelines.

This thought came up because I'm getting a kimber soon, if a cop drops my $1600 gun, I'm gonna be pretty mad.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

dirtykoala wrote:
This thought came up because I'm getting a kimber soon, if a cop drops my $1600 gun, I'm gonna be pretty mad.
One does not carry a $1600 anything unless he can afford to have it seized, much less ding-ed.

If you use it in genuine self-defense, odds are good the police will seize it as evidence until you are no-billed by the grand jury.

Ever been to a gun store and asked why the shotgun behind the counter is loaded. The first answer is to repel boarders. The second answer is because the store employees don't want their personal guns seized as evidence if they shoot back at a robber.

Why risk having some ham-handed klutz with a badge drop a nice gun during an (e)check? Especially since (e)checks areexpressly authorized, thusbypassing the need foreven reasonable suspicion by the cops. (E)checks seemto this non-resident to havean even higher likelihood than a detention.

Carry something beat-up but reliable'swhat I always say. :)
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

dirtykoala wrote:
what do you guys think about having a form to request LEOs to read,fill out and sign prior to (e) checks?
Cops is only interested in receiving one document from you--your ID.

They seem to have an allergy to accepting other papers. I've seen them turn down offered documents with hostility and no thanks.

But, you could always say, "Excuse me officer, but I just need to get some routineinformation for my report"reading the questions aloud, and writing downhis answers. When he says "no", you just reply, "Well, if you are doing nothing wrong, why do you object to answering a few questions?" :)
 

oc4ever

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
280
Location
, ,
imported post

All that form is going to do is make a bad situation worse by trying to make a LEO sign/agree to anything under your terms. Most street cops can't do much of anything without asking their supervisors permission; much less sign any kind of legal document holding them or the city liable for a action they take. That form is a pipe dream.

A recorder serves the same purpose, and you have no duty to inform the LEO it is running if in a public location, giving the OC'er some advantage if a violation of rights or property damage occurs.
 

bad_ace

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
327
Location
Cupertino, California, USA
imported post

DirtyKoala, I say go for it! It's YOUR detainment/inspection, have fun with it if you want. If an officer seems put off by the request he can opt to not stop you next time, his choice.

If these statists want to waist my time then I have no problem waisting theirs or at a minimum trip them up and get them off their game :)

I may try this the next time I'm 'e' checked (may be awhile, I've just gotten waves lately and I know others in San Jose are experiencing the same).

I'm queuing something up to say to them like "You're not admitting guilt by signing this, you're only acknowledging that you're received it"
 

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

dirtykoala wrote:
...if a cop drops my $1600 gun, I'm gonna be pretty mad.
Made me pretty sad when the cops molested my 2-week old Sig P220 (~$1200 gun) for an hour and then returned it with a gouge in the finish.

But now, it's like a battle scar... I've grown fond of it and it's a conversation-starter at the range.
 

IndianaBoy79

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
639
Location
Eagle, Idaho, USA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
dirtykoala wrote:
This thought came up because I'm getting a kimber soon, if a cop drops my $1600 gun, I'm gonna be pretty mad.
One does not carry a $1600 anything unless he can afford to have it seized, much less ding-ed.

If you use it in genuine self-defense, odds are good the police will seize it as evidence until you are no-billed by the grand jury.

Ever been to a gun store and asked why the shotgun behind the counter is loaded. The first answer is to repel boarders. The second answer is because the store employees don't want their personal guns seized as evidence if they shoot back at a robber.

Why risk having some ham-handed klutz with a badge drop a nice gun during an (e)check? Especially since (e)checks areexpressly authorized, thusbypassing the need foreven reasonable suspicion by the cops. (E)checks seemto this non-resident to havean even higher likelihood than a detention.

Carry something beat-up but reliable'swhat I always say. :)
That's a ridiculous thought, and amazingly the first time I've heard such "logic". What are the chances of you EVER having to discharge your weapon in self defense? Most of us will go through our entire life without even coming close to it...thank God! I have $1000+ on my belt every day I walk out of the house and I'm not what you call "well-off". If I ever do use it to defend myself, loosing my $1000 gun rig will be the last thing on my mind....minimizing emotional impact on my family and getting them the care they need will be foremost on my thoughts. I can always replace the gun eventually, no matter what I spent or how poor I am.

Worrying a cop is going to damage my gun during a check: legitimate concern. Worried that I'm gonna loose my gun after I use it? Who cares?
 

dirtykoala

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
644
imported post

ultra_covert_II.jpg


9 days left!

If the intent of the 10 day wait is so that you can't buy a gun and go shoot someone, shouldn't you be exempt if you already own a gun?
 

Sons of Liberty

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
638
Location
Riverside, California, USA
imported post

dirtykoala wrote:
9 days left!

If the intent of the 10 day wait is so that you can't buy a gun and go shoot someone, shouldn't you be exempt if you already own a gun?
You know, I have never thought about that! But, you have a great point!
 

Yard Sale

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
708
Location
Northern Nevada, ,
imported post

I printed out a form that said something to the effect of, "I, sworn CA law enforcement officer, prevented Yard Sale from entering this courthouse on this day and time, after having been shown his summons to appear." (This was at a courthouse that required illegal 4A searches of persons entering.) Of course it wasn't signed.
 

PincheOgro1

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
420
Location
Perris, Ca., California, USA
imported post

dirtykoala wrote:
what do you guys think about having a form to request LEOs to read,fill out and sign prior to (e) checks? i think something like this could keep LEOs safe from law suits, and us safe from rights violations (beyond 12031[e])

example:



I, (officers name), representing (department name) will be performing a weapons inspection in accordance with P.C. 12031 (e). I assume all responsibility for the weapon in question while the weapon is in my possession. I understand that 12031(e) is merely an inspection of the firearm to ensure that the person in possession of the firearm is acting within the means of P.C. 12031. I further understand that any conversation or searches beyond P.C.12031 (e) are strictly voluntary unless reasonable articulable suspicion (RAS)has been established,detainment further than12031(e) is notwarranted.I understand that the legal possession of a firearm, including but not limited to "open carry" does not establish RAS. I understand that because "open carry" does not establish RAS, identification, while I can request it, does not have to be provided to me.

Print

Sign

Date
HAH !!!!
 
Top