Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Another police encounter

  1. #1
    Regular Member greengum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    330

    Post imported post

    So this is the fifth time I have encountered the police in Nevada while open carrying. Coming from California I spent most of my adult life hating cops. I had long hair and was always stopped and threatened with searches and seizures, or having the police dogs called on me when I refused, even though I haven't done drugs since around high school. Every single time I encountered the police I was treated like a criminal or treated like a 4 year old who didn't know any better and needed a nanny. Then I moved to Nevada.

    I came here with the same stereotypical views I had from before. I was super defensive and avoided cops whenever I could. The first 4 times I have encounter the police here have been rather positive. Here I am with a loaded firearm on my hip not being thrown to the ground at gun point, or being insta tazed like what happens in the PRK. I have Tim and Tread to thank for that for their efforts to inform the cops and community as well as others.

    So to my story, I needed to get a pack of smokes and stopped by the circle K and saw a metro car parked in front. Before I would have just went to another store to avoid a confrontation. That day I strolled in. Walked to the counter, placed my order and the cop was standing right next to the clerk. I made eye contact with him and said hello. He responded with, "thanks for arming yourself, and be careful out there." I responded with a " thanks man, you too."

    So once again thank you to the OC community here in Nevada and to the police who know their role.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297

    Post imported post

    Last night I was talking to two metro cops who come into the casino I work for to assist our plain clothed metro liaison security officer.

    I asked them "What's up with this Open Carry group?" They told me "it's a bunch of radical civil rights advocates who attempt to bait metro officers into violating their civil rights so they can sue for profit." He went on to say, "we've been trained to identify who they are and to leave them alone, once they realize there is no money to be made from law suits, they will disappear."
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  3. #3
    Regular Member flagellum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    North Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    385

    Post imported post

    "it's a bunch of radical civil rights advocates who attempt to bait metro officers into violating their civil rights so they can sue for profit." He went on to say, "we've been trained to identify who they are and to leave them alone, once they realize there is no money to be made from law suits, they will disappear."

    "You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence."
    -- Charles A. Beard
    XD(m) 9mm

  4. #4
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297

    Post imported post

    And here I thought I had my magic invisibility cloak on the whole time...
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    flagellum wrote:
    "it's a bunch of radical civil rights advocates who attempt to bait metro officers into violating their civil rights so they can sue for profit." He went on to say, "we've been trained to identify who they are and to leave them alone, once they realize there is no money to be made from law suits, they will disappear."
    I thought that was kind of funny too...

    I'm not aware of a single lawsuit having been filed, and I fail to see the "baiting" aspect of anything. Merely walking down the street on a public sidewalk is hardly baiting.

    And of course I don't mind if others form opinions of me, positive or negative, but I find it especially disgusting that some Metro officers continue to demonstrate their disregard for the law and their department policies so blatantly by making their opinions known while they're on duty.

    LVMPD Policy 4/103.14 states:

    While on duty or under "color of law" members shall not publicly express an opinion on racial, religious, political, or controversial subjects, and shall refrain from public discussion of the demerits of any law, unless it is the expressed opinion of the department. Members shall not engage in political or religious discussion to the detriment of good discipline and shall not speak disparagingly of the nationality, color, creed, or belief of any person.

  6. #6
    Regular Member greengum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    330

    Post imported post

    As long as they leave me alone it's all good. But like a lot of people the cops do need to save face and make comments like that.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    927

    Post imported post

    flagellum wrote:
    "it's a bunch of radical civil rights advocates who attempt to bait metro officers into violating their civil rights so they can sue for profit." He went on to say, "we've been trained to identify who they are and to leave them alone, once they realize there is no money to be made from law suits, they will disappear."
    What a crock ...

    Disappear? Yeah, disappear into the crowd, going on our merry way.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297

    Post imported post

    I'm assuming he's been trained on how to handle open carriers, but not fully trained in his departments PR policy. I figure that he felt safe since he was talking to a casino employee and confident that I was not a member of the media. One thing is for certain, there would be no metro officers on the street if they where all 100% versed and proficient at every single department policy on their books. They would spend their first 10 years in classrooms attending DBPP lectures.

    Don't get me wrong, I do respect cops; good cops! we DO need them in our lives. We just need them to operate under the presumption of innocence absent RAS, as well as trust that there are law abiding citizens capable of policing themselves until they can arrive and assume responsible authority over any given situation. We know they cant be all places at all times.
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    1,413

    Post imported post

    I just want them to stop the hypocrisy. Perhaps that view seems a bit extreme, but think about it this way.

    A common police tactic is to detain citizens committing minor offenses, such as jaywalking, or driving with a burned out tail light. They use these stops as opportunities to fish for evidence of more serious offenses and check for warrants, getting bad guys off the street.

    As a pedestrian, I'm expected to know the laws and regulations for using a cross walk. JUST the state law for using crosswalks is this long:
    NRS 484B.283 Right-of-way in crosswalk; impeding ability of driver to yield prohibited; overtaking vehicle at crosswalk; obedience to signals and other devices for control of traffic. Except as otherwise provided in NRS 484B.287, 484B.290 and 484B.350:

    1. When official traffic-control devices are not in place or not in operation the driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way, slowing down or stopping if need be so to yield, to a pedestrian crossing the highway within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is upon the half of the highway upon which the vehicle is traveling, or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the highway as to be in danger.

    2. A pedestrian shall not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield.

    3. Whenever a vehicle is stopped at a marked crosswalk or at an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, the driver of any other vehicle approaching from the rear shall not overtake and pass the stopped vehicle until the driver has determined that the vehicle being overtaken was not stopped for the purpose of permitting a pedestrian to cross the highway.

    4. Whenever signals exhibiting the words “Walk” or “Don’t Walk” are in place, such signals indicate as follows:

    (a) While the “Walk” indication is illuminated, pedestrians facing the signal may proceed across the highway in the direction of the signal and must be given the right-of-way by the drivers of all vehicles.

    (b) While the “Don’t Walk” indication is illuminated, either steady or flashing, a pedestrian shall not start to cross the highway in the direction of the signal, but any pedestrian who has partially completed the crossing during the “Walk” indication shall proceed to a sidewalk, or to a safety zone if one is provided.

    (c) Whenever the word “Wait” still appears in a signal, the indication has the same meaning as assigned in this section to the “Don’t Walk” indication.

    (d) Whenever a signal system provides a signal phase for the stopping of all vehicular traffic and the exclusive movement of pedestrians, and “Walk” and “Don’t Walk” indications control pedestrian movement, pedestrians may cross in any direction between corners of the intersection offering the shortest route within the boundaries of the intersection when the “Walk” indication is exhibited, and when signals and other official traffic-control devices direct pedestrian movement in the manner provided in this section and in NRS 484B.307.

    (Added to NRS by 1969, 1492; A 1981, 669, 1918; 2003, 364)—(Substituted in revision for NRS 484.325)


    NRS 484B.287 When pedestrian must yield right-of-way to vehicle; when crossing at crosswalk is required; crossing diagonally. Except as provided in NRS 484B.290:

    1. Every pedestrian crossing a highway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the highway.

    2. Any pedestrian crossing a highway at a point where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the highway.

    3. Between adjacent intersections at which official traffic-control devices are in operation pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.

    4. A pedestrian shall not cross an intersection diagonally unless authorized by official traffic-control devices.

    5. When authorized to cross diagonally, pedestrians shall cross only in accordance with the official traffic-control devices pertaining to such crossing movements.

    (Added to NRS by 1969, 1493; A 1981, 670, 1919)—(Substituted in revision for NRS 484.327)



    NRS 484B.293 Direction of movement on crosswalk. Pedestrians shall move whenever practicable upon the right half of crosswalks.

    (Added to NRS by 1969, 1493)—(Substituted in revision for NRS 484.329)
    So I don't necessarily expect cops to be versed on 100% of the 500+ page policy and procedure manual, but why are citizens accosted with lines such as "ignorance of the law is no excuse", just look how long the CROSS WALK law is! Why don't citizens use the same tactic?

    If you violate NRS 484B.293 and cross on the LEFT half of the cross walk, you could be cited for a violation of this law. If you're a bad guy, perhaps the stop to cite you will reveal an outstanding warrant and they'll get you off the street. If you're a good guy, the citation is minimal, you'll learn from it, and no harm, no foul.

    In the same way, every time a cop is observed violating the rules, citizens should make an effort to formally file a complaint with the officer's superiors. If he's a good cop, the complaint will be trivial, and won't go very far. If he's a bad cop, it's just one more complaint on his jacket that can be used as evidence of his poor performance.

    Consider that during the course of the Citizen Review Board investigation into my stop, testimony by the Sgt who stopped me revealed he did not understand the rules regarding Terry stops. This Sgt does not understand when he may or may not detain a person who is not under arrest. Not just one who is open carrying, but in general. He may not be a bad cop, he may just need some retraining. But if after the retraining he continues to show he is not a good cop by getting similar complaints, my complaint will just be one of the formal steps necessary to prove as much.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, ,
    Posts
    217

    Post imported post

    This shows me that probably most of the police officers don't get it! Why would I waste my time to sue if you didn't waste your time to bother me. I love the comment "Yah we will go away.. and disappear in the crowd". I'm glad they have been "trained" to leave us alone.. Now if they could stand up for us and give us our rights back... But now thats asking too much.

    GoDSpeeD

Posting Permissions

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