Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Unknowingly walked into the aftermath or a bank robbery!

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Escondido, CA
    Posts
    50

    Unknowingly walked into the aftermath of a bank robbery!

    Went on my usual walk today. On the way I decided to stop and get a burger at McDonald's at the corner of College BLVD and Oceanside BLVD. I learned after this encounter with the OPD that a white male had just robbed the Chase Bank that is next to the McDonald's. So for this I think that I will let the fact that they did handcuff me briefly slide this time beings that I did fit the physical description of their suspect. However the officer did take out my mags and inspect them. All in all not too bad of an experience I have certainly seen much worse!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkQ-pbDhfHE
    Last edited by IYAOYAS; 01-25-2011 at 04:01 PM. Reason: typo in title
    "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Thomas Jefferson

  2. #2
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by IYAOYAS View Post
    Went on my usual walk today. On the way I decided to stop and get a burger at McDonald's at the corner of College BLVD and Oceanside BLVD. I learned after this encounter with the OPD that a white male had just robbed the Chase Bank that is next to the McDonald's. So for this I think that I will let the fact that they did handcuff me briefly slide this time beings that I did fit the physical description of their suspect. However the officer did take out my mags and inspect them. All in all not too bad of an experience I have certainly seen much worse!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkQ-pbDhfHE
    This is the first instance of the UOC check I have seen or read about where the citizen was handcuffed prior to the LEO checking the firearm. Is that allowed under the statute? Was it a case of the proximity of the bank robbery?

    "...Not too bad of an experience?" WTF!

  3. #3
    Regular Member mjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SoCal, , USA
    Posts
    979
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    This is the first instance of the UOC check I have seen or read about where the citizen was handcuffed prior to the LEO checking the firearm. Is that allowed under the statute? Was it a case of the proximity of the bank robbery?

    "...Not too bad of an experience?" WTF!
    Lol, there are 100s of instances of cuffs going on during an e-check here in CA. Luckily, its getting much more rare.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by mjones View Post
    Lol, there are 100s of instances of cuffs going on during an e-check here in CA. Luckily, its getting much more rare.
    Yeah james, where have you been?

  5. #5
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    Quote Originally Posted by IYAOYAS View Post
    Went on my usual walk today. On the way I decided to stop and get a burger at McDonald's at the corner of College BLVD and Oceanside BLVD. I learned after this encounter with the OPD that a white male had just robbed the Chase Bank that is next to the McDonald's. So for this I think that I will let the fact that they did handcuff me briefly slide this time beings that I did fit the physical description of their suspect. However the officer did take out my mags and inspect them. All in all not too bad of an experience I have certainly seen much worse!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkQ-pbDhfHE
    Ugh. It's pretty clear from the video that this unlawful detainment had nothing to do with the bank robbery nearby. At no point was the bank robbery mentioned and you were free to go immediately after the unloaded status of the firearm was verified. You and your property were seized without reasonable suspicion and thus your fourth amendment rights were violated.

    Now if the officer had initially said that you match the description of a bank robbery suspect so he is going to detain you in order to determine if you are the suspect, then he could handcuff you and verify the unloaded status of your firearm. He didn't do this though, so if the video captures the entirety of the interaction I would say this is an unconstitutional 12031(e) check (aside from the fact that 12031 is already unconstitutional). This PDF is somewhat instructive on the topic of handcuffing without arresting.

  6. #6
    Regular Member mjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SoCal, , USA
    Posts
    979
    Quote Originally Posted by bigtoe416 View Post
    Now if the officer had initially said that you match the description of a bank robbery suspect so he is going to detain you in order to determine if you are the suspect, then he could handcuff you and verify the unloaded status of your firearm. He didn't do this though
    There is no requirement that a LEO reveal RAS to a detainee; only that the LEO must have RAS in order to detain (Terry v. Ohio). The RAS would go in an arrest report.

  7. #7
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    Quote Originally Posted by mjones View Post
    There is no requirement that a LEO reveal RAS to a detainee; only that the LEO must have RAS in order to detain (Terry v. Ohio). The RAS would go in an arrest report.
    This is true, but based on the officers' behavior I sincerely doubt this stop had anything to do with the bank robbery. If it did then what did they accomplish by stopping the OP? No witnesses were brought to confirm or deny that the OP was the robber, no ID was checked, no questions were asked of the OP that could have developed probable cause that the OP had anything to do with the bank robbery.

    That being said, I think the OP did a good job asserting his rights, remaining mostly silent, and asking for the police to identify themselves.

  8. #8
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by pullnshoot25 View Post
    Yeah james, where have you been?
    NOT in California. I live in Virginia where LOC is recognized as a right. I just had not seen anyone cuffed during an UOC check. Really seems excessive to me.

  9. #9
    Regular Member XDSTEEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Las Cruces, New Mexico
    Posts
    216
    Quote Originally Posted by bigtoe416 View Post
    Ugh. It's pretty clear from the video that this unlawful detainment had nothing to do with the bank robbery nearby. At no point was the bank robbery mentioned and you were free to go immediately after the unloaded status of the firearm was verified. You and your property were seized without reasonable suspicion and thus your fourth amendment rights were violated.

    Now if the officer had initially said that you match the description of a bank robbery suspect so he is going to detain you in order to determine if you are the suspect, then he could handcuff you and verify the unloaded status of your firearm. He didn't do this though, so if the video captures the entirety of the interaction I would say this is an unconstitutional 12031(e) check (aside from the fact that 12031 is already unconstitutional). This PDF is somewhat instructive on the topic of handcuffing without arresting.
    +10.. Really great link. Great information.
    Patrick Henry didn't say "Give me safety , or give me death". Liberty is what America is about.

  10. #10
    Regular Member demnogis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orange County, California, USA
    Posts
    912
    Wow... sorry to hear your 4A rights were violated.

    Next time you're cuffed or told you're being detained (Always ASK once those bracelets come out) ask for one of these:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	06-19-2009-det-form.jpg 
Views:	136 
Size:	84.3 KB 
ID:	5050

    If you wish to pursue a case, these are monumental evidence that more than an "inspection" as proscribed by CA PC 12031 (e) and an unlawful detainment occurred. If they get evasive about it, demand one. Always get the "detaining" LEOs' info.
    Gun control isn't about guns -- it is about control.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Roseville, California, USA
    Posts
    486

    BigToe and Demnogis are right.

    This was a Terry hot stop, without RAS.

    An illegal search and siezure occurred.

    Delong, in part, states:

    "But if the examination may be called a search, it is not an unreasonable one; and only unreasonable searches are forbidden by the Fourth Amendment. (Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 [20 L.Ed.2d 889, 88 S.Ct. 1868].) It is, as we have said, limited to a single purpose. It does not have about it any except the slightest element of embarrassment or annoyance, elements overbalanced by far by the purpose of preventing violence or threats of violence. The minimal intrusion does not begin to approach the indignity of the frisk, as graphically described in Terry v. Ohio, supra, at p. 17, fn. 13 [20 L.Ed.2d at p. 903]. It is true that the frisk, as sustained in the Terry case, requires as justification something different than mere possession of a firearm in a proscribed place, but it requires a good deal less than cause for arrest."

    If a frisk requires "a justification", what do hand cuffs require?

    At the least, you must demand a Detention Certificate, it is your duty as an American!

    I am not joking.

    markm

  12. #12
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Sons of Liberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Riverside, California, USA
    Posts
    638
    I agree with BigToe. If the video captured the entire encounter, you were handcuffed and (e) checked. No questions with regard to robbery or determination as whether you were a suspect. Sorry that another LEO could care less about your freedoms and liberties, subjugated you to shackles of slavery, while he violated you.
    Clinging to God & Guns: The Constitution Restoration Project

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Harrah, Oklahoma
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    NOT in California. I live in Virginia where LOC is recognized as a right. I just had not seen anyone cuffed during an UOC check. Really seems excessive to me.
    No a helicopter is excessive.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...
    Stolen from ConditionThree because it can't be stressed enough.

  14. #14
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesCanby View Post
    NOT in California. I live in Virginia where LOC is recognized as a right. I just had not seen anyone cuffed during an UOC check. Really seems excessive to me.
    Yeah! To me too!

    All kidding aside, this wasn't a good e-violation. Just because he was quick, doesn't mean he didn't violate you, the Constitution, and his Oath.

    I especially liked the part where he said putting you in cuffs was for your safety! Spoken like a true tyrant.

    And I too don't see how this plays into the nearby robbery. What the hell...there is a robber on the loose in the area, perhaps an armed and dangerous, violent robber, and so for your safety you're cuffed?! Seems to me they put your life in needless danger.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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