Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35

Thread: Police encounter, asserting Rights, and minors

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

    Police encounter, asserting Rights, and minors

    I got a call from my little sister who is 16 years old who many of you guys have met at open carry meet ups. She called me and her parents informing us that she was being detained right outside of school in front of the Sam's club store. Myself and her parents went to the scene. I of course was OC'ing wearing my Nevada open carry shirt.. We arrived on the scene and my father walked up to her with me right behind him. The metro officer then saw my gun and informed me for his safety I would need to leave the gun in my car. I told him that was not an option. He then said I would have to stay back for "officer safety". I complied and stood about 15 feet away. My sister was being detained for jay walking.

    I had taught her whenever she encountered the police to shut the f@ck up and ask for her parents which she did. She refused to answer all of the cops questions including, what kind of grades she gets, who her friends are, and multiple questions like that. The cop did not like that at all and threatened her with everything from school expulsion to juvy hall. All she would tell him was her name and her student ID number. She was released to my parents and started crying at that point. The cop came over and started talking to me. The funny part was like a criminal who had done something wrong, he started telling me all about his point of view. I simply nodded and smiled. He went as far as stating which church he goes to, how many kids he has, and what church programs he runs for troubled children. The funny part was I felt like I was the cop interogating a suspect. I will post more details about this later but before we left he agreed to rip up the jay walking infraction and invite us to church. Bottom line is I remained calm, treated him like an adult, listened to him and we got what we wanted and my sister got a life lesson in police encounters. I treated the cop like a detective treats a criminal by just letting him tell me his story. In case they do skim these forums I will not post the officers name.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Harrah, Oklahoma
    Posts
    769
    Nice. She's a smart girl.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Creech AFB. NV
    Posts
    107
    Awesome.

    But Thought guns were not allowed within 1000 feet of a school?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, ,
    Posts
    120
    Good job! You taught her well.

    Quote Originally Posted by MilitaryMike View Post
    Thought guns were not allowed within 1000 feet of a school?
    The Gun Free School Zones Act of 1995 States:

    (A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.


    (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—

    (i) on private property not part of school grounds;

    (ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;

    (iii) that is— (I) not loaded; and (II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;

    (iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;

    (v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual;

    (vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or

    (vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.
    So, if he was either on private property or has a concealed carry permit, the 1000ft school zone prohibition does not apply.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas NV, ,
    Posts
    1,763
    Quote Originally Posted by greengum View Post
    In case they do skim these forums I will not post the officers name.
    I dont understand why not. These cops need to be exposed for the actions they take against citizens. I am tired of the mantra cops have that all citizens must be treated as crooks. I am tired of the cop mantra that "its for officer safety". Since when is his life worth more than mine?


    Good job though on standing your ground and teaching sis about her rights.
    Last edited by Vegassteve; 10-14-2010 at 01:44 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Sabotage70's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Fabulous Las Vegas, NV, ,
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by greengum View Post
    I got a call from my little sister who is 16 years old who many of you guys have met at open carry meet ups. She called me and her parents informing us that she was being detained right outside of school in front of the Sam's club store. Myself and her parents went to the scene. I of course was OC'ing wearing my Nevada open carry shirt.. We arrived on the scene and my father walked up to her with me right behind him. The metro officer then saw my gun and informed me for his safety I would need to leave the gun in my car. I told him that was not an option. He then said I would have to stay back for "officer safety". I complied and stood about 15 feet away. My sister was being detained for jay walking.

    I had taught her whenever she encountered the police to shut the f@ck up and ask for her parents which she did. She refused to answer all of the cops questions including, what kind of grades she gets, who her friends are, and multiple questions like that. The cop did not like that at all and threatened her with everything from school expulsion to juvy hall. All she would tell him was her name and her student ID number. She was released to my parents and started crying at that point. The cop came over and started talking to me. The funny part was like a criminal who had done something wrong, he started telling me all about his point of view. I simply nodded and smiled. He went as far as stating which church he goes to, how many kids he has, and what church programs he runs for troubled children. The funny part was I felt like I was the cop interogating a suspect. I will post more details about this later but before we left he agreed to rip up the jay walking infraction and invite us to church. Bottom line is I remained calm, treated him like an adult, listened to him and we got what we wanted and my sister got a life lesson in police encounters. I treated the cop like a detective treats a criminal by just letting him tell me his story. In case they do skim these forums I will not post the officers name.
    +1 Great job of your sis on standing up for her rights.

    I wish my oldest son would have done the same thing. I won't get into it here but my wife started a blog about it. Trust me, I DO NOT CONDONE WHAT MY SON DID, I just don't like how he was singled out and try and make an example out of.

    http://honestygetsyounowhere.blogspot.com/
    EDC=XDm40 16+1+16+16

    RED DRAGONS!!!!

  7. #7
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,713
    Quote Originally Posted by MilitaryMike View Post
    Awesome.

    But Thought guns were not allowed within 1000 feet of a school?
    In California they have that state law to that effect, but here there is no state law limiting it within 1000 feet. A federal law to the same effect exists however
    I can't see how it is constitutional after U.S. vs. Lopez. The congress changed the wording slightly afterwards, but I believe it is still unconstitutional for the same reasons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lopez
    Last edited by Felid`Maximus; 10-15-2010 at 12:26 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Remmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    296
    Good on your sister bro! and that had to have been an awesome sight seeing you come up with your NV OC shirt and your firearm, can you stand away for officer safety? hahhaha okay so 3 to 5 feet turns into 15 to 20 feet yes thats soooo much more safe!

    On a side note its good to see you post again!!

  9. #9
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    Quote Originally Posted by greengum View Post
    he started telling me all about his point of view.
    I thought Metro had a policy in place that essentially says officers are not permitted to to render or voice opinions during the performance of their duties? After all it doesn't matter what the officer thinks, only what the letter of the law says.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Nevada carrier View Post
    I thought Metro had a policy in place that essentially says officers are not permitted to to render or voice opinions during the performance of their duties? After all it doesn't matter what the officer thinks, only what the letter of the law says.
    Yes Metro does have that policy

    4/103.14 PUBLIC STATEMENTS ABOUT CONTROVERSIAL SUBJECTS A.S.26.1.1 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 discussions to the detriment of good discipline and shall not speak disparingly of the nationality, color, creed or belief of any person. (7/73)
    Last edited by DON`T TREAD ON ME; 10-16-2010 at 12:54 AM. Reason: sp of course

  11. #11
    Regular Member Sabotage70's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Fabulous Las Vegas, NV, ,
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by greengum View Post
    The metro officer then saw my gun and informed me for his safety I would need to leave the gun in my car. I told him that was not an option. He then said I would have to stay back for "officer safety".
    You should have told him, "don't make a furtive movement and we won't have a problem."
    EDC=XDm40 16+1+16+16

    RED DRAGONS!!!!

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,251
    I forgot to mention, I have a PDF formatted METRO IA complaint form in case any one would care to participate. PM me

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    Quote Originally Posted by Remmy View Post
    can you stand away for officer safety? hahhaha okay so 3 to 5 feet turns into 15 to 20 feet yes thats soooo much more safe!
    It was, for both of them.

    By moving away, he ceased being a part of the problem, and became an observer.

    That's why the cop got chatty afterward.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    Quote Originally Posted by Sabotage70 View Post
    You should have told him, "don't make a furtive movement and we won't have a problem."
    Before you tell a cop something like that, would you call me? I want to come and watch.

    That would qualify as "threatening or intimidating speech," and would probably win you an all-expenses-paid (by you) tour of the local law enforcement facility.

    In addition, it would be needlessly escalating tension between two guys with guns. This ranks real high on the "Stupid-O-Meter."

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Well done by your sister for exercising her rights.

    What a coward for a cop, intimidating a minor female with lies. A great example of a police officer trying to intimidate someone into waiving a right they've already invoked. I would make this a central point in any formal complaint. Utter lack of respect for rights, even unto lying (or threatening to do something underhanded) simply to get unnecessary information. Oh! Isn't there some case law around that says the questions must remain reasonably related to the reason for the stop?

    And, all that for jaywalking.

    I'm sorry to hear she was a bit traumatized by the experience. But, since she won, I'll bet the next cop that pulls some illegal stunt like this gets a cool, steady gaze from someone who is certain of her rights and his limits.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Remmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    It was, for both of them.

    By moving away, he ceased being a part of the problem, and became an observer.

    That's why the cop got chatty afterward.
    So if he had not had a firearm on his hip would it go down the same way? Officer safety is a ruse, I dont believe that by simply being armed, exercising your second amendment right, being completely legal within the state of Nevada. Next well be told to cross or walk 15 feet away from any officer while shopping or walking the strip all in the face of "officer safety" sorry but I dont buy it.

  17. #17
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,610
    Quote Originally Posted by MilitaryMike View Post
    Awesome.

    But Thought guns were not allowed within 1000 feet of a school?
    Quote Originally Posted by Felid`Maximus View Post
    In California they have that state law to that effect, but here there is no state law limiting it within 1000 feet. A federal law to the same effect exists however
    I can't see how it is constitutional after U.S. vs. Lopez. The congress changed the wording slightly afterwards, but I believe it is still unconstitutional for the same reasons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lopez
    No federal restriction if you have a permit -

    (ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to
    do so by the State in which the school zone is located
    http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=...PY8EvdSN7IZu0w
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    Quote Originally Posted by Remmy View Post
    So if he had not had a firearm on his hip would it go down the same way? Officer safety is a ruse, I dont believe that by simply being armed, exercising your second amendment right, being completely legal within the state of Nevada. Next well be told to cross or walk 15 feet away from any officer while shopping or walking the strip all in the face of "officer safety" sorry but I dont buy it.
    If you don't see the risk that the cop would see by someone responding to the scene with a pistol on, then you should probably run for Congress.

    If he hadn't been armed, he would still have been told to move away -- and, if he hadn't been armed, he might have argued with the cop about it, which wouldn't help anyone.

    One thing to keep in mind is that the cop will KILL YOU if he thinks that's what has to happen so that he can go home safely at the end of watch. Those of us who OC put the cops into Condition Orange, the same as a guy who looks like a gangbanger puts US into Orange. Until we give the cop some reason to trust us, we are "likely targets."

    By showing up armed, Green turned a simple jaywalking issue into something more dangerous. By refusing the cop's first request, but going along with the second one, he showed himself as reasonable and willing to accept a certain amount of direction, but not willing to just roll over for anything the cop said.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by DVC View Post
    If you don't see the risk that the cop would see by someone responding to the scene with a pistol on, then you should probably run for Congress.

    If he hadn't been armed, he would still have been told to move away -- and, if he hadn't been armed, he might have argued with the cop about it, which wouldn't help anyone.

    One thing to keep in mind is that the cop will KILL YOU if he thinks that's what has to happen so that he can go home safely at the end of watch. Those of us who OC put the cops into Condition Orange, the same as a guy who looks like a gangbanger puts US into Orange. Until we give the cop some reason to trust us, we are "likely targets."

    By showing up armed, Green turned a simple jaywalking issue into something more dangerous. By refusing the cop's first request, but going along with the second one, he showed himself as reasonable and willing to accept a certain amount of direction, but not willing to just roll over for anything the cop said.
    While it is hard to argue the point that the firearm "escalated things" I have to question where the officers authority came from to detain Green, my point is the officer has NO authority to order a citizen to do anything, "such as put your gun in your car". unless he is suspected of commiting a crime.
    if he indeed did make that command, the officer was breaking the law, and had zero authority to attempt to deprive Green of his weapon. Same goes for the second request, I do not know the law regarding the distance required between an officer doing his job , and the public. Yet as I understand it, unless Green was "hindering" in some manner he was lawfull and needed no correction from the officer. Given the description of how it all went down, I think Green did awsome and so did lil sis.

  20. #20
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by DON`T TREAD ON ME View Post
    SNIP I have to question where the officers authority came from to detain Green, my point is the officer has NO authority to order a citizen to do anything, "such as put your gun in your car". unless he is suspected of commiting a crime.
    if he indeed did make that command, the officer was breaking the law, and had zero authority to attempt to deprive Green of his weapon. Same goes for the second request, I do not know the law regarding the distance required between an officer doing his job , and the public. Yet as I understand it, unless Green was "hindering" in some manner he was lawfull and needed no correction from the officer. Given the description of how it all went down, I think Green did awsome and so did lil sis.
    I don't know about that.

    Terry only speaks to the admissibility of evidence from a pat-down during a stop-and-frisk. It does not specifically exclude other kinds of encounters that I recall.

    Also, remember that the crux of Terry, as regards the gun, was the reasonableness of the search for the gun. A gun that is already in view doesn't require searching for. No intrusion at all.

    I'm willing to bet courts would, or maybe have already ruled, that disarming even non-suspects under certain circumstances is reasonable under the 4th Amendment reasonableness doctrine.

    Think about a domestic disturbance where the husband has slugged the wife. The cops get there and the wife is holding a gun. She's not the suspect, the husband is. Would a reasonable and prudent person disarm the wife temporarily so an argument does not turn into gunfire?

    I think "officer safety" is too often a substitute for using judgement; but, I'll bet the courts would side liberally with police on this.
    Last edited by Citizen; 10-17-2010 at 08:46 PM.

  21. #21
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Well done by your sister for exercising her rights.
    What a coward for a cop, intimidating a minor female with lies.
    And, all that for jaywalking.
    +100
    Good for you to think to educate her before something happened, and good for her for remembering.


    I'll bet the next cop that pulls some illegal stunt like this gets a cool, steady gaze
    from someone who is certain of her rights and his limits.
    Oh, yeah. If there is a next time, it will be quite different.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    No federal restriction if you have a permit -

    (ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to
    do so by the State in which the school zone is located
    http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=...PY8EvdSN7IZu0w
    Nevada does not require a permit to open carry, nor does the state have a 1000 foot rule. Since the constitution does not specifically prohibit firearms within 1000 feet of a school, the tenth amendment leaves it up to the states to decide for themselves if they wish to create a defense free crime zone around a school. The Federal GFSZ has so many constitutional flaws I can't even begin to count them, but for an hourly fee I'm willing to bet a good layer could give it a try. If I'm not mistaken, the few instances where someone has been charged with violation of the federal GFSZ statute, the suspect in question was barred from owning or possessing a firearm by virtue of being a convicted felon or for some other reason.

    Also I doubt that Greengum was effecting interstate or international commerce walking to the scene of his sisters detention, unless he arrived there by way of a loaded commercial vehicle with goods bound for a destination out of state.

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Terry only speaks to the admissibility of evidence from a pat-down during a stop-and-frisk. It does not specifically exclude other kinds of encounters that I recall.

    Also, remember that the crux of Terry, as regards the gun, was the reasonableness of the search for the gun. A gun that is already in view doesn't require searching for. No intrusion at all.
    Terry addresses the detention of people suspected of committing a crime. If someone is suspected to have committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime a cop, with reasonable suspicion may pat down the individual for weapons.

    If the cop can't articulate valid reasonable suspicion for the detention the detention is illegal. Florida v. J.L. goes into this, there is also no exception in the Fourth Amendment for firearms. Absent other activity the mere presence of a firearm is not reasonable suspicion. Racine WI, Alamogordo NM, and who knows how many cities have paid out $$$ because their cops illegaly detain/arrest people.

    "Firearms are dangerous, and extraordinary dangers sometimes justify unusual precautions. Our decisions recognize the serious threat that armed criminals pose to public safety; Terry's rule, which permits protective police searches on the basis of reasonable suspicion rather than demanding that officers meet the higher standard of probable cause, responds to this very concern. See 392 U.S., at 30. But an automatic firearm exception to our established reliability analysis would rove too far. Such an exception would enable any person seeking to harass another to set in motion an intrusive, embarrassing police search of the targeted person simply by placing an anonymous call falsely reporting the target's unlawful carriage of a gun. Nor could one securely confine such an exception to allegations involving firearms." Florida v. J.L.

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by kwikrnu View Post
    SNIP Terry addresses the detention of people suspected of committing a crime...
    These are all valid points within their own universe.

    My point is that the universe is bigger. I know of no case law that prevents a police officer disarming a non-suspect third party who is involved. Just because Terry and subsequent detention/frisk cases focus on the reasonableness of searching for a weapon for officer safety, and temporarily seizing any found, and making them admissible, does not mean Terry, et seq. excluded thereby all other situations.

    You have to think your way through it carefully. The judges will; and they will come up with the finest distinctions.
    Last edited by Citizen; 10-17-2010 at 11:39 PM.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    These are all valid points within their own universe.

    My point is that the universe is bigger. I know of no case law that prevents a police officer disarming a non-suspect third party who is involved. Just because Terry and subsequent detention/frisk cases focus on the reasonableness of searching for a weapon for officer safety, and temporarily seizing any found, and making them admissible, does not mean Terry, et seq. excluded thereby all other situations.

    You have to think your way through it carefully. The judges will; and they will come up with the finest distinctions.
    I'm pretty sure Ybarra v Illinois covers that. They still need RAS of a crime being committed before they can search and seize.

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
  •