Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Open carry incident in Pacific

  1. #1
    Regular Member usmcbess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Labadie, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    195

    Post imported post

    I was walking in Pacific today OC when I was stoped by 2 city cops Officer Baccuss and Sgt.Locke. I had talked to Officer Baccuss face to faceweeks ago concerning OC. I will post a audio/video recording as soon as it uploads to youtube. At the beginning of the encounter Officer Baccuss told me to put my hand up. I began to walk toward his car at which time I began recording. As you will hear Officer Baccuss disarmed me to run my numbers to which I stated I did not consent. They asked me for my information to which respectfully declined. They told me that I must identify myself to which I asked them to cite the law requiring me to do so. They could not and told me that it was federal. They told me that there is a federal law stating that there is a age requirement to carry a firearm to which they could not cite again and told me to call the FBI on it. They told me if I didnt identify myself they would detain me, bring me to the police station, and hold me for up to 30 days until they could identify me. Officer Baccuss had a bit of an attitude but the Sgt. was very calm as they bent me over and did me Nazi style. I'm uploading the vid right now to youtube so it may take a few hours to process. I'll leave a link in a reply.

  2. #2
    Regular Member usmcbess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Labadie, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    195

  3. #3
    Regular Member Big Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    STL, MO
    Posts
    443

    Post imported post

    I don't know the federal laws.

    I will say this though, they were very nice.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Linn County, Iowa, USA
    Posts
    491

    Post imported post

    I would not have got all chatty with them. I would also have refused to give my name if they were unable to give a statute on the need to ID. There is no federal law, that I am aware of, that puts limits on the age to CARRY a weapon. There is a federal age limit on the transfer of weapons to a person from a FFL but not on person to person within a state.

    That whole "call the FBI" line from the cop is a steaming load. Tell THEM to call the FBI. If they can't recall the law then it must not be law. They do not NEED a name for a report. They are permitted to LIE to suspects to test compliance but if I feel I am given false legal information then I will ask for legal counsel. We have that right.

    I didn't catch it but did the officers explain why you were stopped? If it was only on the basis of openly carrying a weapon then your rights have just been violated. This video could make you some money.

  5. #5
    Regular Member cshoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    , Missouri, USA
    Posts
    687

    Post imported post

    IA_farmboy wrote:
    I would not have got all chatty with them. I would also have refused to give my name if they were unable to give a statute on the need to ID. There is no federal law, that I am aware of, that puts limits on the age to CARRY a weapon. There is a federal age limit on the transfer of weapons to a person from a FFL but not on person to person within a state.

    That whole "call the FBI" line from the cop is a steaming load. Tell THEM to call the FBI. If they can't recall the law then it must not be law. They do not NEED a name for a report. They are permitted to LIE to suspects to test compliance but if I feel I am given false legal information then I will ask for legal counsel. We have that right.

    I didn't catch it but did the officers explain why you were stopped? If it was only on the basis of openly carrying a weapon then your rights have just been violated. This video could make you some money.
    I tend to agree. I believe that if you have set your mind to not share your personal information with them, you should politely refuse to answer any questions, period. As it was, they were able to obtain every bit of information from you that they desired, regardless of the fact that you declined to show them ID. Furthermore, when they came out with that "federal law" nonsense, I would have immediately requested the presence of a shift supervisor on the scene at which point I would have filed a formal complaint against the two officers unlawfully detaining you and unlawfully running the numbers on your gun.

    Thanks for sharing the video. Very informative.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Jefferson City, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    396

    Post imported post

    - at the end of this conversation you told them that you appreciate it and told them to have a good one.

    For stop and identify in Missouri this is quoted under MO Rev Stat. 84-710

    They shall also have the power to stop any person abroad whenever there is reasonable ground to suspect that he is committing, has committed or is about to commit a crime and demand of him his name, address, business abroad and whither he is going.

    For the entire statute, go to this link.

    http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C000-099/0840000710.HTM

    I don't know of any other State statute that touches on this subject but would appreciate anyone pointing out anything more found within State code on this exact topic.



    For a detainment alike to this,

    If they can't give me something that is at least reasonable to me, I won't be complying. If I am then arrested for it, I will cooperate at some point so as not to further aggravate that situation by sitting in a jail cell as John Doe forwho knows how long.

    If they demand ID tocheck if I am a felon and have no reason whatsoever to believe I am one, then I'll take my chances and not comply. If they state that I resemble someone specific who is a known felon or afugitiveor something of that nature thatseems definitely reasonable, I will probably submit as I would expect a judge to possibly agree.

    As far as looking too young, I would possibly submit as well because I really don't know if that is reasonable or not so I would at least err on the side of caution. I don't think it would be too much of a stretch especially if I looked alot younger than my age. At my present age though, I would laugh my ass off and tell them to get real.

    Its an interesting stop though. You don't see too many police try to play the FBI card on you over a simple and possibly erroneous detainment.

  7. #7
    Regular Member cshoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    , Missouri, USA
    Posts
    687

    Post imported post

    After watching this video again, I did want to point out that it is, indeed, unlawful for a person under 18 years of age to possess a handgun, which, of course, would also mean it's unlawful for a person under 18 to open carry a handgun (except under very specific and limited conditions). The Federal Law in question can be found in Section 922 of the GCA which defines "Unlawful Acts":

    (1) It shall be unlawful for a person to sell, deliver, or otherwise transfer to a person who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe is a juvenile: (A) a handgun;or
    (B) ammunition that is suitable for use only in a handgun.
    (2) It shall be unlawful for any person who is a juvenile to knowingly possess:
    (A) a handgun;or
    (B) ammunition that is suitable for use only in a handgun.
    .
    .
    .
    (5) For purposes of this subsection, the term "juvenile" means a person who is less than 18 years of age.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Linn County, Iowa, USA
    Posts
    491

    Post imported post

    After watching this video again, I did want to point out that it is, indeed, unlawful for a person under 18 years of age to possess a handgun, which, of course, would also mean it's unlawful for a person under 18 to open carry a handgun (except under very specific and limited conditions).
    Another reason to get rid of the GCA68.

    Officer one: Don't you think those two over there look a bit young to be carrying a handgun?
    Officer two: You mean the bald guy wearing the sweater and the lady with the white hair?
    Officer one: Yep, we should investigate. Their parents might be concerned.

    I'm not saying that giving weapons to children is a good idea, I just think that making it illegal is a bad idea. It should be up to the parent to decide when a child is capable enough to carry a firearm.

    When laws are up for debate there needs to be more consideration on the potential for abuse. A youthful looking adult should not have to put up with being asked for proof of age just because they are carrying a self defense tool.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Richieg150's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Show Me State
    Posts
    433

    Post imported post

    If I understand the Missouri map,it says there is no age limit for open carry in this state.But there is a federal law that states you must be 18 or 21?hmmmmmmmmmmm the water seems to be getting murky...
    Psalm 144:1 Blessed be the LORD my strength, which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight:
    Psalm 144:2 My goodness, and my fortress; my high tower, and my deliverer; my shield, and he in whom I trust; who subdueth my people under me. Pro 14:15 The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.

  10. #10
    Regular Member cshoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    , Missouri, USA
    Posts
    687

    Post imported post

    Richieg150 wrote:
    If I understand the Missouri map,it says there is no age limit for open carry in this state.But there is a federal law that states you must be 18 or 21?hmmmmmmmmmmm the water seems to be getting murky...
    But there IS an age requirement. It's just that the limits are spelled out by federal law, rather than state law. Missouri uses very similar language to the GCA of 1968 in regards to transferring a firearm. As per RSMO 571.060:

    A person commits the crime of unlawful transfer of weapons if he: (1) Knowingly sells, leases, loans, gives away or delivers a firearm or ammunition for a firearm to any person who, under the provisions of section 571.070, is not lawfully entitled to possess such;
    (2) Knowingly sells, leases, loans, gives away or delivers a blackjack to a person less than eighteen years old without the consent of the child's custodial parent or guardian, or recklessly, as defined in section 562.016, RSMo, sells, leases, loans, gives away or delivers any firearm to a person less than eighteen years old without the consent of the child's custodial parent or guardian; provided, that this does not prohibit the delivery of such weapons to any peace officer or member of the armed forces or national guard while performing his official duty; or
    (3) Recklessly, as defined in section 562.016, RSMo, sells, leases, loans, gives away or delivers a firearm or ammunition for a firearm to a person who is intoxicated.
    2. Unlawful transfer of weapons under subdivision (1) of subsection 1 of this section is a class D felony; unlawful transfer of weapons under subdivisions (2) and (3) of subsection 1 of this section is a class A misdemeanor.

  11. #11
    Regular Member usmcbess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Labadie, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    195

    Post imported post

    Even though that may be the case the 10th amendment says all laws not entitled to the federal government are delegated to the states.

  12. #12
    Regular Member usmcbess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Labadie, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    195

    Post imported post

    It was sunday so the officer that stoped me sgt.Locke was the lead that day. I called to ask if there were any leutenants or captains.....etc but it was sunday so there were none.

  13. #13
    Regular Member cshoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    , Missouri, USA
    Posts
    687

    Post imported post

    usmcbess wrote:
    Even though that may be the case the 10th amendment says all laws not entitled to the federal government are delegated to the states.
    Be that as it may, that argument will likely fall upon deaf ears with our Judicial Branch of government.

  14. #14
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,924

    Post imported post

    usmcbess wrote:
    It was sunday so the officer that stoped me sgt.Locke was the lead that day. I called to ask if there were any leutenants or captains.....etc but it was sunday so there were none.
    At best they could use that age excuse, however, innocent until proven guilty still applies.

    They need to come up with very specific reasons they decided you were in fact underage not just "check and see" BS line they gave you.

    Since you had a fairly recent encounter with one of the officers, it would not hold water at all.


    John C. Eastman Associate Dean of Chapman University’s School of Law "the Second Amendment, like its sister amendments, does not confer a right but rather recognizes a natural right inherent in our humanity."

Posting Permissions

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