Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27

Thread: A Police Perspective

  1. #1
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532

    A Police Perspective

    There are some interesting gems in this thread. It seems the police in some states, and a few gun owners in our own, have some differing ideas about open carry and identifying yourself.

    http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=266201

    On another topic, how the heck do you url link with the new forum?!?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,026
    Quote Originally Posted by Mainsail View Post
    There are some interesting gems in this thread. It seems the police in some states, and a few gun owners in our own, have some differing ideas about open carry and identifying yourself.

    http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=266201

    On another topic, how the heck do you url link with the new forum?!?
    Enter a '=' symbol in the first URL bracket, then the url with no spaces, then enter the text to click on between the two URL brackets.

    Like so, only without the spaces around the '=' sign:


    [url = http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=266201] text to click on [/url]


    Doing so gets you this:

    text to click on

  3. #3
    Regular Member Mainsail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Silverdale, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,532
    Quote Originally Posted by Phssthpok View Post
    Enter a '=' symbol in the first URL bracket, then the url with no spaces, then enter the text to click on between the two URL brackets.

    Like so, only without the spaces around the '=' sign:


    [url = http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=266201] text to click on [/url]


    Doing so gets you this:

    text to click on
    I guess I should have been more specific. I know how to do the URL thing, I just don't see the button that does it for me. :-P

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,026
    AHHhh...gotcha.

    Yeah, I'm missing my cheat-sheet of bold, italic, and color change buttons too.

    I'm thinking they admins just need some time to iron out any major issues withthe new board before they start activating the minor options.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    123
    No real surprises in the referenced thread (by the way, the 1911 Forum is one of the better gun boards).

    The dude "OIF2" claiming to be a retired LAPD officer clearly articulates the California cop attitude toward open carry. "I'm the only one with a gun." Sheesh.

    Member "Bob-tail Command" goes off a a rant about the guys at his LGS who open carry Glocks and wear tactical pants while stating that all the open-carriers he's met are the "cockiest, most obnoxious a-holes" he's ever met.

    IMChuc9775, apparently a soldier from Ft. Lewis with local ties, is seemingly clueless.

    However, it's worth noting that more than a few of those (representing themselves as serving or former LEOs), especially those from enlightened states, generally seem supportive of open carry.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Settings | General Settings | Miscellaneous Options

    Message Editor Interface
    # Enhanced Interface - Full WYSIWYG Editing
    # Basic Editor - A simple text box
    # Standard Editor - Extra formatting con

  7. #7
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    I shoot at an LEO range...I would feel more comfortable with my shooting ability. At the end of the day, if I am called upon to defend self and family I know that I can effectively. Dialing 911 and relying on an LEO is a grab bag--I don't like grab bags...I do like LEO's, don't get me wrong, I just would not put my life in their hands when I could take charge and carve my own destiny.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylvia Plath View Post
    I shoot at an LEO range...I would feel more comfortable with my shooting ability. At the end of the day, if I am called upon to defend self and family I know that I can effectively. Dialing 911 and relying on an LEO is a grab bag--I don't like grab bags...I do like LEO's, don't get me wrong, I just would not put my life in their hands when I could take charge and carve my own destiny.
    Even though you'll probably see me defending them more than not, I have a strong dislike and distrust of LEOs as well, I don't think I would ever trust a LEO with my life more than I would a complete stranger unless I knew that LEO personally.

    I've had a lot of bad experiences in my life with LEOs and very few good experiences, and I realize that it's wrong to paint them all the same, but I just can not trust them.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    Even though you'll probably see me defending them more than not, I have a strong dislike and distrust of LEOs as well, I don't think I would ever trust a LEO with my life more than I would a complete stranger unless I knew that LEO personally.

    I've had a lot of bad experiences in my life with LEOs and very few good experiences, and I realize that it's wrong to paint them all the same, but I just can not trust them.
    Personally it is a lack of trust in the ability of whoever manages to show up. Like one of the officers at the range told me recently, "call us after you are finished."

  10. #10
    Regular Member SaintJacque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    139
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    Even though you'll probably see me defending them more than not, I have a strong dislike and distrust of LEOs as well, I don't think I would ever trust a LEO with my life more than I would a complete stranger unless I knew that LEO personally.

    I've had a lot of bad experiences in my life with LEOs and very few good experiences, and I realize that it's wrong to paint them all the same, but I just can not trust them.
    Police are like all other people: some are good, some are not. Some are ethical and obey the law and hold themselves accountable, some do not. I don't trust them until I meet them, either.

    That's not being anti-cop, it's just being rational. I know some great cops in the FWPD and the King County Sheriffs.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over run with mud(s)
    Posts
    791
    I am noticing that their seems to be quiet a few "armchair elitists" on there that seem to believe that cops are the end all be all and can do anything they want as long as they want to and screw everyone else.

    I fully support law enforcement, HOWEVER it should be noted that law ENFORCEMENT is there to do just that, enforce the friggin laws, not violate them.

    Everyone was ragging on Mainsail for his refusal to be drawn into a friendly encounter with LEO's whilst open carrying, yet yelling at him in the same sentence for "picking fights and looking for confrontations." Anyone care to explain to me how that works exactly?

    Wow that got to me just enough that I might need another cig or two before I can try and catch some z's now...

  12. #12
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by devildoc5 View Post
    I am noticing that their seems to be quiet a few "armchair elitists" on there that seem to believe that cops are the end all be all and can do anything they want as long as they want to and screw everyone else.

    I fully support law enforcement, HOWEVER it should be noted that law ENFORCEMENT is there to do just that, enforce the friggin laws, not violate them.

    Everyone was ragging on Mainsail for his refusal to be drawn into a friendly encounter with LEO's whilst open carrying, yet yelling at him in the same sentence for "picking fights and looking for confrontations." Anyone care to explain to me how that works exactly?

    Wow that got to me just enough that I might need another cig or two before I can try and catch some z's now...
    What the heck are you all worked up for? I walked back through the thread and read(e) the responses and did not see any "armchair elitist" responses.

    People merely pointed out that it is the responsibility of the citizen to assure their own safety. People also pointed out that for a fact there are good and bad citizens, and LEO's...and?

    There is a difference between picking a fight and declaring that you are aware of your fundamental rights to engage in a particular behavior. If I am walking through the grocer store buying food for a BBQ with my kids, and an LEO walks up to me, detains me, and attempts to disarm me, damn right I will ask some questions. We live in a system of laws, and those laws are to be followed by all citizens, including LEO's.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over run with mud(s)
    Posts
    791
    that is exactly what they were getting on Mainsail for.

    There were some of the opinion that you should obey without question.

    That is the thing that upsets me. and I honestly wasnt TOO upset, just ignorance gets to me at times...

  14. #14
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    If an officer insists that I allow him to disarm me, even if I am doing nothing wrong, Personally, I will do it. The last thing you want is to get into with an LEO, you might win the initial fight, but you will spend the rest of your life in prison.

    That is one thing that scares the heck out of me, is if an officer ever got physically out of line, it isn't like you could defend yourself and it be justified. They always have the benefit of the doubt, and you do not.

  15. #15
    Regular Member gsx1138's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington, United States
    Posts
    884
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylvia Plath View Post
    Personally it is a lack of trust in the ability of whoever manages to show up. Like one of the officers at the range told me recently, "call us after you are finished."
    That's pretty good advice. I wish more LEO's thought like this.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over run with mud(s)
    Posts
    791
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylvia Plath View Post
    If an officer insists that I allow him to disarm me, even if I am doing nothing wrong, Personally, I will do it. The last thing you want is to get into with an LEO, you might win the initial fight, but you will spend the rest of your life in prison.

    That is one thing that scares the heck out of me, is if an officer ever got physically out of line, it isn't like you could defend yourself and it be justified. They always have the benefit of the doubt, and you do not.
    I agree 100% with you sylvia. once it becomes confrontational or physical that is the time to quietly recite your lawyers phone number in your head and let them do whatever.

    The discussion was dealing with Terry stops and RAS and the majority of people on there were talking about how LEOs can detain you for carrying a gun because it is suspcious behavior, whether or not there is any other circumstances.

    Regardless of the fact that they were all quoted WA state law, they still affirmed that they would detain someone for carrying a weapon because it "looked suspicious"

    That is where they problem comes in. you have the right to not consent to searches, you have the right to not interact with the police on a "casual" basis (read they are trying to trap you into something)

  17. #17
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by devildoc5 View Post
    That is where they problem comes in. you have the right to not consent to searches, you have the right to not interact with the police on a "casual" basis (read they are trying to trap you into something)
    I ask right off the bat if I am being detained. The LEO's purpose is to gather evidence. I think people talk to much when approached by an LEO--they typically approach you to solely gather info for a possible arrest.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over run with mud(s)
    Posts
    791
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylvia Plath View Post
    I ask right off the bat if I am being detained. The LEO's purpose is to gather evidence. I think people talk to much when approached by an LEO--they typically approach you to solely gather info for a possible arrest.
    Again I agree with you 100% Sylvia. However, that question of if you are being detained is why everyone was getting on Mainsail in the first place...

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington, USA
    Posts
    226

    Rights, or conveniences?

    If a police officer demands your weapon, even if you've done nothing wrong, you'll comply? Specifically out of fear for what they might/will do to you? We appear to differ in some of our reasons for carrying weapons at all; I carry to protect myself from anyone seeking to visit harm upon me, uniformed or not. You'd rather sit in court/jail/prison, knowing you surrendered your means of defense despite your innocence, rather than jealously guard your rights, even with threat of force?

    Maybe I just misunderstood you both, Sylvia and devildoc5.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over run with mud(s)
    Posts
    791
    Quote Originally Posted by aktion View Post
    If a police officer demands your weapon, even if you've done nothing wrong, you'll comply? Specifically out of fear for what they might/will do to you? We appear to differ in some of our reasons for carrying weapons at all; I carry to protect myself from anyone seeking to visit harm upon me, uniformed or not. You'd rather sit in court/jail/prison, knowing you surrendered your means of defense despite your innocence, rather than jealously guard your rights, even with threat of force?

    Maybe I just misunderstood you both, Sylvia and devildoc5.
    see here is where the preverbial waters get muddied for me.

    LEOs have the law on their side, that whole innocent until proven guilty thing went away years ago now you are guilty until you can afford a good enough lawyer to prove your innocence.

    That being said I will NEVER EVER physically confront an officer of the law, all they have to do is state I had a gun and was being aggressive and boom I am dead with no reparations.

    However I will POLITELY and with confidence assert my rights to not be detained and to remain armed.

    If the LEO wants to ignore me I will take it up with either his boss or my lawyer depending on what happens next.

    once again I will NEVER physically try to prevent an officer from doing anything to me. That just opens you up to a quick death and an officer justified shooting. Unfortunately this is the life we (mostly pansy californians like myself) have made for our self.

    the reason for carrying is to preserve life. Specifically mine, but other as well if the need arrises. by physically resisting an officer while I have a pistol I will NOT do anything except get shot and there goes my whole protection of life reasoning for carrying in the first place...

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington, USA
    Posts
    226
    I see. I'm familiar with this line of reasoning, and perhaps on the average, the results of such situations substantiate those fears. It bears a striking resemblance to the theory of, 'Don't open-carry, you will only end up being a target of criminals', or 'I'll not resist if held up by a robber, he'll just harm or kill me'. My intention is not sarcasm, but has anyone heard of these type of situations occuring? Not that they don't, but to substantiate such concerns? It seems that anticipating your own demise, whether bleeding out on the pavement or rotting in a cell, as the most likely results of defending your liberty, flies in the face of standing up for it to begin with.

    Perhaps we simply draw the line in different places, you and I. I'm no more interested in a showdown with a cop than most anyone else. I've been in one, very unusual circumstances, and I realized I was up poop-creek before I knew it. I was abiding the law to the letter, yet there I was, on the wrong end of an officers sidearm. Since then, I pay much more attention to where and when my activities take me, thinking through consequences more, rather than simply intentions. But I digress.

    For the record, I did not disarm, and happily live to tell the tale, a little wiser for it.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by aktion View Post
    If a police officer demands your weapon, even if you've done nothing wrong, you'll comply? Specifically out of fear for what they might/will do to you? We appear to differ in some of our reasons for carrying weapons at all; I carry to protect myself from anyone seeking to visit harm upon me, uniformed or not. You'd rather sit in court/jail/prison, knowing you surrendered your means of defense despite your innocence, rather than jealously guard your rights, even with threat of force?

    Maybe I just misunderstood you both, Sylvia and devildoc5.
    If an LEO walks up to me while I am out shopping, minding my own business and demands that I give him my sidearm, I would ask if I am being detained, and why.

    All I am saying is that if it came down to self-defense and you painted yourself in a corner by denying the officer access to disarm you, you better have a lot of witnesses and a good lawyer if SHTF. An LEO almost ALWAYS gets away with excessive force, but you fight back you are going down either legally (if you defended yourself) or fatally.

    Dealing with others who are armed is a sensitive situation. You are both capable of dropping the other. A stand-off is a bad situation to be in.

    For example (I hope it wasn't someone on here)..road rage situation, both guys are armed, one shoots the other in the back and says that the man went for his waistband...I am sure he did, and the man didn't lie.

    When both people are armed, it becomes a volatile situation damn quick, and as a civilian the burden of proof will be on you, not the LEO.

    I do not think there are very many instances of lawfully armed citizen v. LEO, and the reason being, the firearm is the equalizer and both parties understand the consequences for uncivil behavior can be deadly, IMO.
    Last edited by Beretta92FSLady; 06-29-2010 at 09:33 PM.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over run with mud(s)
    Posts
    791
    Quote Originally Posted by aktion View Post
    I see. I'm familiar with this line of reasoning, and perhaps on the average, the results of such situations substantiate those fears. It bears a striking resemblance to the theory of, 'Don't open-carry, you will only end up being a target of criminals', or 'I'll not resist if held up by a robber, he'll just harm or kill me'. My intention is not sarcasm, but has anyone heard of these type of situations occuring? Not that they don't, but to substantiate such concerns? It seems that anticipating your own demise, whether bleeding out on the pavement or rotting in a cell, as the most likely results of defending your liberty, flies in the face of standing up for it to begin with.

    Perhaps we simply draw the line in different places, you and I. I'm no more interested in a showdown with a cop than most anyone else. I've been in one, very unusual circumstances, and I realized I was up poop-creek before I knew it. I was abiding the law to the letter, yet there I was, on the wrong end of an officers sidearm. Since then, I pay much more attention to where and when my activities take me, thinking through consequences more, rather than simply intentions. But I digress.

    For the record, I did not disarm, and happily live to tell the tale, a little wiser for it.
    I think you are misunderstanding my point here (no arguement intended btw)

    I would never WILLINGLY hand over my pistol to anyone (except friends and family at ranges or something similar)

    HOWEVER if an officer is reaching for my pistol, especially if he has me in a pat down position or even in cuffs I WILL NOT physically resist as the "tactical odds" (as well as legal) are with the officer.

    Now if a cop were to just walk up and try and grav my pistol without talking to me or without having a damned good reason I MIGHT turn my weak side to him and take a step back. However if the cop draws down or pulls the pepper or anything else that signifies force on his part, I will not resist as that is where legal and possibly life problems come in to play.

    I guess it is more of a tactical advantage assessment type thingamabobdealiething (registered trademark of DevilDoc Incorporated)

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666

    nope

    Quote Originally Posted by devildoc5 View Post
    I guess it is more of a tactical advantage assessment type thingamabobdealiething (registered trademark of DevilDoc Incorporated)
    NOPE! I have already registered this! LOL

    Verbally resist. Do not physically resist.
    Live Free or Die!

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington, USA
    Posts
    226
    devildoc5, no problem, I didn't take it as argumentative. We simply draw the lines in different places.

    For my part, I make decisions about what I am and am not willing to do or say in a given situation. We clearly can't imagine every possible situation, but nonetheless I choose to mentally train myself for those that I see as clearly possible in my daily life. While reserving situational discretion, the mental training, like physical training, aids me when something comes up I'm not anticipating. It happens. Notice when others say something to the effect of 'I didn't know what else to do', 'I wasn't sure how to respond, so I handed it over', 'I was in a hurry....' etc.

    There's a saying, from who-knows-where. 'Under stress and under fire, people generally don't rise to the occasion, they fall back on their training'. Now training may include a variety of different things, but the point is clear. When not mentally or physically prepared, many of us submit to perceived authority. If you're afraid you'll break the law if you don't comply with a direct order, even though you're 'pretty sure' you're right, you comply because, well, the officer was adamant that he was right, and that you were wrong.

    I can't help notice 'Verbally resist. Do not physically resist.' Then the signature 'Live free or die'. When does the risk of dying enter the equation, if not because of physical resistance?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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