Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 83

Thread: My recent encounter with LEO's

  1. #1
    Regular Member Publius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Northern California Now NH soon
    Posts
    67

    My recent encounter with LEO's

    I am not on this forum nearly as much as I should be, but I thought I would share my recent encounter with Law Enforcement.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyA_Z69G5E0

    If anyone has productive criticism, I would be glad to take it.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Brent Evertz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    78
    Where did this happen? I think if they really wanted to be pricks, they could of been. Did they see you recording them? I think you handled the situation well but I'd advise catching their names and badge numbers without asking. Asking in that type of situation will only piss them off. While its important to put your foot down when flexing your rights, don't forget we don't need more enemies either. I'd rather see cops on our side more than any other person on the street.
    "What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms." -Thomas Jefferson

  3. #3
    Regular Member Publius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Northern California Now NH soon
    Posts
    67
    [Where did this happen?]
    Marysville, CA

    [I think if they really wanted to be pricks, they could of been.]
    I am grateful that they were not.

    [Did they see you recording them?]
    I have to presume that they did, as I was holding the my recorder out in front of me in my open palm. I was at least not concealing what I was doing.

    [I think you handled the situation well but I'd advise catching their names and badge numbers without asking.]
    I intend to verify their identity's first thing if I ever have an encounter again.

    [While its important to put your foot down when flexing your rights, don't forget we don't need more enemies either. I'd rather see cops on our side more than any other person on the street.]
    This happened in a neighboring town from where I live, LEO's where I live don't react negatively to people utilizing their rights and I have a good relationship with most of them.

    I am trying to get everyone on board with exercising and defending all of our Liberty's

  4. #4
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Please correct me if I am wrong about this but doesn't an LEO have to tell you his name if you ask? After all, he is our employee.

    BTW, you handled yourself very well.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    LEOs are not our employees. We do not directly pay them. We cannot fire them. We did not hire them and make none of the personnel decisions affecting them. They serve us. They don't work for us.

    Whether or not they must provide their names and badge numbers is a matter of local and State law and of departmental policy. However, as a matter of courtesy, they should be willing to do so, whether it is required or not.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,415
    Quote Originally Posted by Publius View Post
    [Where did this happen?]
    Marysville, CA
    Used to go to Marysville/Yuba City a lot.

    Surprised they didn't turn it into some fiasco. Marysville PD are kind of known for that...
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Personal responsibility is a facade created by religious people in particular...
    On "Personal Responsibility just after the previous, in the same exact thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Religion uses is as a tool, they did not create it.
    The wheels on the bus go round and round...round and round.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You think that I am ill-equipped...hit me with your best shot Einstein, I am calling you out.


    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Free will is only slightly a conscious exercise...

  7. #7
    Regular Member Publius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Northern California Now NH soon
    Posts
    67
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    Please correct me if I am wrong about this but doesn't an LEO have to tell you his name if you ask? After all, he is our employee.
    I asked a local Police Chief and according to him in California it is required by law for Patrol Officers to do so.

    So far the MPD has ignored my requests to file an incident report, as I want them to review their procedures with their Officers.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Publius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Northern California Now NH soon
    Posts
    67
    Quote Originally Posted by slowfiveoh View Post
    ...Surprised they didn't turn it into some fiasco. Marysville PD are kind of known for that...
    Back in April, I had my first encounter with LEO's and it was also in Marysville, it was a fiasco teetering on disaster : / as they were completely caught of guard, had no idea how to handle the situation, and ignored the California Police Officers Association memo that I gave them knowing they might otherwise not know what to do. 20 minutes later I was forced to give them ID, had my guns serial number run through their system, and instructed to conceal my weapon even though I don't have a CCW an instruction I ignored.

  9. #9
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    LEOs are not our employees. We do not directly pay them. We cannot fire them. We did not hire them and make none of the personnel decisions affecting them. They serve us. They don't work for us.

    Whether or not they must provide their names and badge numbers is a matter of local and State law and of departmental policy. However, as a matter of courtesy, they should be willing to do so, whether it is required or not.
    I disagree, but we can remain on good terms I trust.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    I disagree, but we can remain on good terms I trust.
    Of course. I was just stating facts, not perceptions.

  11. #11
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Of course. I was just stating facts, not perceptions.
    No you countered with more perceptions. Fact is we do pay for their employment and they do work for us, they work for the public as a "public" employee. So even if someone doesn't pay the taxes that go for their hiring they still work for them. Just because we don't directly hire/fire this does not mean they don't work for us.

    The only reason more don't get fired is their strong unions and the politicians they work for who believe they don't have to answer to the public.

    But do file complaints when LEO acts outside his duties, they do build up "jackets" that can get them fired if their bad behavior continue. I also recommend writing letters commending proper actions of LEO, this too goes into file and helps with positive reenforcement.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    No you countered with more perceptions. Fact is we do pay for their employment and they do work for us, they work for the public as a "public" employee. So even if someone doesn't pay the taxes that go for their hiring they still work for them. Just because we don't directly hire/fire this does not mean they don't work for us.

    The only reason more don't get fired is their strong unions and the politicians they work for who believe they don't have to answer to the public.

    But do file complaints when LEO acts outside his duties, they do build up "jackets" that can get them fired if their bad behavior continue. I also recommend writing letters commending proper actions of LEO, this too goes into file and helps with positive reenforcement.
    FACT: You do not pay them. Saying you do would be like saying you pay a Wal-Mart employee because the money he earns ultimately comes from you. The entity who "pays" a LEO is the entity on whose account the actual paycheck is drawn.

    FACT: You cannot fire a LEO. Saying you can would be like saying that you can fire a Wal-Mart employee by complaining about his behavior, bringing about his termination.

    FACT: You cannot take any personnel action on a LEO, not even indirectly.

    FACT: Just like the Wal-Mart employee does not work for you, LEOs do not work for you. LEOs serve you and work for the city or the county or some other government agency.

    These are facts, not perceptions.

    Moving on.

  13. #13
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    FACT: You do not pay them. Saying you do would be like saying you pay a Wal-Mart employee because the money he earns ultimately comes from you. The entity who "pays" a LEO is the entity on whose account the actual paycheck is drawn.

    FACT: You cannot fire a LEO. Saying you can would be like saying that you can fire a Wal-Mart employee by complaining about his behavior, bringing about his termination.

    FACT: You cannot take any personnel action on a LEO, not even indirectly.

    FACT: Just like the Wal-Mart employee does not work for you, LEOs do not work for you. LEOs serve you and work for the city or the county or some other government agency.

    These are facts, not perceptions.

    Moving on.
    No those again are your perceptions...Wal-mart is a privately owned company, LEO are public officials. I can choose not to shop at Wal-mart. Wal-mart can trespass me for any reason whatsoever from their property, the police cannot. Who makes up the "City, County, etc?" who pays for those entities to exist? (Sheriffs are directly elected officials) The bottom line is they are our "servants" we pay for them to be there.

    And yes you can have an effect on LEO employment. I have seen it happen.

    They do work for us otherwise they wouldn't be considered "public servant".
    Part of the problem is too many people feel like you do and that there is nothing that can be done....which continues to add to the problem.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    FACT: You do not pay them. Saying you do would be like saying you pay a Wal-Mart employee because the money he earns ultimately comes from you. The entity who "pays" a LEO is the entity on whose account the actual paycheck is drawn.

    FACT: You cannot fire a LEO. Saying you can would be like saying that you can fire a Wal-Mart employee by complaining about his behavior, bringing about his termination.

    FACT: You cannot take any personnel action on a LEO, not even indirectly.

    FACT: Just like the Wal-Mart employee does not work for you, LEOs do not work for you. LEOs serve you and work for the city or the county or some other government agency.

    These are facts, not perceptions.

    Moving on.


    I can reference a number of cases where "actions" have been taken against police officers, departments, supervisors.

    http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...199ea29f8.html

    Regular viewers of "Perry Mason" know that you can also sue a government employee who deprives you of your civil rights while acting "under color of law".

    A police officer arresting someone while on duty is clearly acting "under color of law".
    In order to successfully sue persons with qualified immunity you will have to prove their conduct violates clearly established rights which a reasonable person would have known about. Police officers generally have qualified immunity. Qualified immunity protects public officials from being sued for damages unless they violated “clearly established” law of which a reasonable official in his position would have known.

    State laws provide that citizens can sue the police for wrongful death, assault, battery, false arrest, breaking and entering, and false imprisonment. In addition to state laws, Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 [now 42 U.S.C. 1983] allows citizens to sue public officials for violations of their civil rights.

    I'm not into games of semantics. However, accurate information can be as useful as a handgun in some situations. Can you reference something to clarify this "FACT"?

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by jtrider View Post
    I can reference a number of cases where "actions" have been taken against police officers, departments, supervisors.

    http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...199ea29f8.html

    Regular viewers of "Perry Mason" know that you can also sue a government employee who deprives you of your civil rights while acting "under color of law".

    A police officer arresting someone while on duty is clearly acting "under color of law".
    In order to successfully sue persons with qualified immunity you will have to prove their conduct violates clearly established rights which a reasonable person would have known about. Police officers generally have qualified immunity. Qualified immunity protects public officials from being sued for damages unless they violated “clearly established” law of which a reasonable official in his position would have known.

    State laws provide that citizens can sue the police for wrongful death, assault, battery, false arrest, breaking and entering, and false imprisonment. In addition to state laws, Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 [now 42 U.S.C. 1983] allows citizens to sue public officials for violations of their civil rights.

    I'm not into games of semantics. However, accurate information can be as useful as a handgun in some situations. Can you reference something to clarify this "FACT"?
    What has to be cited? Personnel actions are taken by the HR department or equivalent of any organization, not by those outside the organization. If you think otherwise, nothing anyone can say will ever convince you of reality.

    Moving on from you too.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    What has to be cited? Personnel actions are taken by the HR department or equivalent of any organization, not by those outside the organization. If you think otherwise, nothing anyone can say will ever convince you of reality.

    Moving on from you too.

    I think it would be hard to maintain a position that can't withstand scrutiny or challenge, wouldn't you agree?

    And I did not present you with either. I was looking for clarification. There are many ways to skin a cat. We are not limited to your understanding of the process. Were that indeed the case, this forum would become a blog and re-named "As eye95 sees it". While it is apparent to a reasonable person that we cannot take "personnel" actions against law enforcement officers, we can take "personal" actions. In the end, the cat is skinned. My need to be right is far outweighed by my desire to help dispense true useful information.
    Last edited by jtrider; 09-08-2010 at 01:48 PM.

  17. #17
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524
    Quote Originally Posted by jtrider View Post
    I can reference a number of cases where "actions" have been taken against police officers, departments, supervisors.

    http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...199ea29f8.html

    Regular viewers of "Perry Mason" know that you can also sue a government employee who deprives you of your civil rights while acting "under color of law".

    A police officer arresting someone while on duty is clearly acting "under color of law".
    In order to successfully sue persons with qualified immunity you will have to prove their conduct violates clearly established rights which a reasonable person would have known about. Police officers generally have qualified immunity. Qualified immunity protects public officials from being sued for damages unless they violated “clearly established” law of which a reasonable official in his position would have known.

    State laws provide that citizens can sue the police for wrongful death, assault, battery, false arrest, breaking and entering, and false imprisonment. In addition to state laws, Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 [now 42 U.S.C. 1983] allows citizens to sue public officials for violations of their civil rights.

    I'm not into games of semantics. However, accurate information can be as useful as a handgun in some situations. Can you reference something to clarify this "FACT"?
    You must be careful. I'm afraid that you are awfully close to being put on eye95's ignore list, as is sudden valley gunner. I was one of his first and it is a terrible place to be, I mean , imagine being ignored by the mighty eye95. It's really been hell for me since. I wish there were something I could do about it but, I fear that I am stuck here for eternity, Woe is me, oh, woe is me.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Publius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Northern California Now NH soon
    Posts
    67
    For the record, I do not wish to see any LEO involved in my incident to be fired. I am seeking that the MPD train their officers better on Open Carry and to remind Officers of their legal obligation to ID themselves when asked to do so. So far my requests to talk to a superior within the MPD have been ignored.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Publius View Post
    For the record, I do not wish to see any LEO involved in my incident to be fired. I am seeking that the MPD train their officers better on Open Carry and to remind Officers of their legal obligation to ID themselves when asked to do so. So far my requests to talk to a superior within the MPD have been ignored.
    What a healthy approach. Sometimes contention only causes the police to retrench.

    My experience with the Montgomery PD in Alabama was that being reasonable with them (which includes not trying to get officers fired or insisting that they "work for us") illustrated how much can be accomplished when you work together. As a result of my stop, MPD changed its policy and training on the issue (as I found out again indirectly from an officer who was quoted as saying, "I heard about that incident. Now we know the rules.")

    My recommendation is that you keep doing what you are doing. Don't get contentious unless they won't move on the issue.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by rodbender View Post
    You must be careful. I'm afraid that you are awfully close to being put on eye95's ignore list, as is sudden valley gunner. I was one of his first and it is a terrible place to be, I mean , imagine being ignored by the mighty eye95. It's really been hell for me since. I wish there were something I could do about it but, I fear that I am stuck here for eternity, Woe is me, oh, woe is me.
    COMMENTS REMOVED BY MODERATOR: Personal attack

    Dog ate my OC.org starter kit, so I'm kinda winging it.

  21. #21
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524
    Quote Originally Posted by jtrider View Post
    I'll quote you as often as I can to let the Tin God in on what he's missing. Unless I'm on ignore already, then I'm like you, on a path of ever lasting ignorance and social unsuitability....

    So. See if I got this straight....Tin God speaks, peons gobble and swallow. Naysayers are banned to the Land of Nod, East of Eden. That how it works? Dog ate my OC.org starter kit, so I'm kinda winging it.
    Uh, that's pretty much it.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Brimstone Baritone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Leeds, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    786
    Wow, I didn't realize eye had got under your skin so bad. Can we try to get this thing back on topic? And I don't mean the "Do cops work for us?" rabbit trail, I mean helping Publius with his situation.

    I think you handled it just fine. I don't know that I would have been as blatant about the recording device, but Alabama is a one-party permission state, so I don't have to let them know I am recording. YMMV. I'm glad you live somewhere you have a good relationship with the local PD. That's got to be a great advantage when trying to OC in California.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Montmorency Co, MI, ,
    Posts
    34
    Discretionary power.. They love it.

    In the Deleware post-they will nail you with disorderly conduct to keep you in line..

  24. #24
    Regular Member sultan62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Clayton, NC
    Posts
    1,319
    Guys, this is pretty cut and dry, and eye95 is right. Do you have hire/fire authority on LEOs? Can you make the decision to cut or raise pay? Are they obligated to do what you say, and follow your orders and commands?

    No?

    Then they are not your employees, and do not work for you. As eye stated, they are supposed to serve you.

  25. #25
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by sultan62 View Post
    Guys, this is pretty cut and dry, and eye95 is right. Do you have hire/fire authority on LEOs? Can you make the decision to cut or raise pay? Are they obligated to do what you say, and follow your orders and commands?

    No?

    Then they are not your employees, and do not work for you. As eye stated, they are supposed to serve you.
    roll eyes.....

Page 1 of 4 123 ... 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
  •